Have you ever considered that it’s the concept of persistence of vision that makes video possible–the most basic building block of all? “Persistence of vision” is caused by the brain holding an image even after that image has been removed from sight. The phenomenon has been around forever: imagine cavemen waving a burning stick in the darkness and seeing the trail of light behind it. But the concept of persistence of vision led to some of the first optical illusions as well.
In video terms, persistence of vision is what makes video technology work. In the 1800s, it was discovered that a light that flickers quickly enough appears to be continuous to the human eye. How quickly does it have to flicker? That measure is termed the “fusion frequency,” and it usually depends on how well-lit a room is. At low light, the flicker only needs to occur 50 times per second (50 Hz) in order for the image to appear continuous; this is the frequency used in movie theaters and in European televisions (where some people do notice it). American TVs use 60 Hz, which is a better figure for well-lit living rooms, and computer screens use 72 Hz or higher to minimize eyestrain.
In the 1820s, revolving-picture toys were invented that used the concept of persistence of vision, and are the earliest precursors to modern video technology. These toys were included the fancifully-named zoetrope, fantascope, and phenakistiscope. In creating these toys, inventors learned that if a stream of pictures is too continuous, the eye only sees blurry motion. Each image must appear just long enough for the brain to process it, in order for persistence of vision to work correctly.
Most of these toys featured a slit through which the image was briefly viewable before revolving. Even today, movie projectors still use this same technology–a slit or shutter–to show each frame of a movie, one at a time. A diagram of a zoetrope and how it operates is shown above right.
Headed over the river and through the woods for Thanksgiving? If so, you might want to consider adding another device to your load: power!
We’re all attached to our electronics these days, from phones and iPads to camcorders and the all-important portable DVD player for the kids in the car. But these devices require battery juice to run–which isn’t always easy to track down when you’re away from house circuitry.
Luckily, there a number of portable power generators available that can recharge your devices. These compact, lightweight gadgets can power up cell phones, iPods, laptops, digital cameras, camcorders, and more. Products vary, from car-accessible to airplane adapters, so you may have to do some checking to see what type of generator fits your travel needs.
Here are a few portable power generators to start with:
The Trent iDual-Port Pack IMP50D is an Apple-friendly device, and can charge a iPhone up to 3 times. It even has two ports so two devices can be charged simultaneously. It’s a great solution for recharging USB devices of all kinds, and gets high customer praise. New Trent offers a variety of other battery solutions as well.
The Stitchway UltraPower Battery Charger is the largest-power iPhone battery in a compact size, capable of fully recharging a dead phone in less than two hours. It can be recharged up to 400 times. At $10 or less, it’s also one of the cheapest options available.
The ReVIVE Series Solar ReStore External Battery Pack is one of many solar-recharging options available. It can recharge up to 1,000 times either by solar energy, AC, or USB power, and can charge up phones, MP3 players, and other USB devices.
Don’t get caught powerless this holiday season! Adding one of these little devices may save you from a constant refrain of “Are we there yet?”
Yes, you read that right. The death of the compact disc, or CD, is widely anticipated to happen in 2012.
According to a few websites (primarily the Side-Line.com music magazine), the major recording labels plan to discontinue releasing albums on CD by the end of 2012. Music will thereafter be released via downloading and streaming platforms, such as iTunes and other services. Some CDs will still be introduced, but they will be of the limited and special edition variety, and distributed mostly through Amazon (currently the world’s largest CD retailer).
This news first broke a few weeks ago, but Side-Line.com couldn’t get official comments from EMI, Universal, or Sony on the story. Since then, they have received tips from informants associated with multiple labels who confirm that 2012 is indeed the planned CD end-date. (Nothing has been officially announced or confirmed.)
Granted, this news is not surprising. The CD format has been struggling to hold on for over a decade, beginning with the fight against Napster in the late 1990s.
The simple truth is that CDs cost money. Beyond the obvious manufacturing and printing concerns, there are also the issues of physical storage space for retailers and the money that recording labels pay whenever a CD is returned due to lack of sales. By comparison, releasing music digitally eliminates all stock and distribution issues, allowing the label to focus simply on the music and its marketing. But this change will spell the end for most physical music stores–especially ones that only sell CDs.
What impact does this impending change have for DVD releases? One big difference is that videos still have a strong physical presence. While DVD itself is a declining format, Blu-Ray is improving slowly each year. And while video streaming is growing as well, the physical size of video files mean that they can’t be downloaded nearly as easily as a single MP3 (which is usually just a few MBs). Plus, home videos still require a physical medium for the easiest viewing and archiving security. Music is simply an easier format to adapt to the purely digital realm than video. But it’s a possibility that when CDs go the way of the dodo, DVDs may someday follow.
You know that Best Buy commercial where a guy is having his new 3D TV delivered, only to see “now available: 4D TV!” on a billboard? (His daughter runs around the yard yelling “You bought the wrong TV, silly head!”) That’s a good preface for today’s story.
Have you just bought a HDTV? Well, guess what’s coming next: Ultra HDTV!
The main difference lies in the pixel count. Regular HDTV has a screen resolution of 1920 x 1080 pixels, while Ultra HDTV packs a whopping 7680 x 4320 pixels. That’s 16 times the screen quality of HDTV, and equal to IMAX resolution. To put it another way: if you’re familiar with digital camera resolutions, that is essentially a 33 megapixel image! So UHDTV should have a refresh rate high enough to enable 3D viewing without glasses (just like in the Best Buy ad, heh), and will likely feature full-quality, uncompressed audio options as well.
Keep in mind, however, this is currently just an experimental format. NHK, a Japanese public service broadcaster, has been working on this technology for awhile under the name “Super High Vision,” and it was only recently that the International Telecommunications Union’s Study Group on Broadcasting Service worked out the technical specifications. NHK demonstrated its UHDTV about a month ago, and in September a trial broadcast was made from London. The current plan is to show parts of the 2012 London Olympics in UHDTV.
However, UHDTV is likely a decade away from consumer release. After all, HDTVs were originally demonstrated in the late 1980s, but did not become widely available for more than a decade later. But we’re probably getting a preview of what the next major television format will be.
It’s no secret that DVD is on the wane, at least for Hollywood and film releases. But is the delivery of movies and television over the Internet the only way to turn around the 40% decline in home entertainment revenue?
According to the Los Angeles Times in a recent article, that is exactly what movie studios believe. Over the next few years, there will likely be an explosion of options in streaming video, including everything from web-connected TVs to movie-sharing tools on Facebook, as the studios try desperately to reverse their declining fortunes. As the LA Times puts it, streaming may cause the biggest shift in home entertainment since the launch of DVD in the late 1990s (over a decade ago!).
But while streaming movies is undoubtedly growing, revenue hasn’t even begun to compensate for the drop in DVD sales. Most analysts believe the main reason is that while many movies are available on DVD, far fewer are available for streaming. And customers simply aren’t used to paying for streaming; witness the recent outcry over the Netflix price hikes. Studios are delusional if they think that streaming a new movie will someday earn the same dollar amount as a DVD or Blu-Ray purchase.
Finally, when you compare the ease of DVD to streaming, there is an important contrast as well. DVD was adopted quickly because it was simple: purchase a DVD and play it in your DVD player. DVD was essentially a videotape in a CD shell–an easy concept for consumers to understand and buy. But streaming a movie can be incredibly complex, because there are simply too many confusing options, not to mention the question of how to get the movie from your computer to your den’s 40″ TV. And even if you get the movie downloaded, you’re usually limited to playing it on a single device, which is far less convenient than a disc that can be taken from the living room, to the computer, to the DVD player in the minivan.
The article also addresses the 28-day new release rental delay, as well as the new premium video-on-demand system, both of which we wrote about in a 2010 blog post. In short, some studios may begin imposing longer wait times for DVD rentals and streaming options for new movies, in an effort recoup slowing theater and DVD sales. (Disney, Paramount, and Sony still allow rentals the same day a film is released, and Sony also recently began making some new movies available for streaming purchase two weeks before the DVD release.)
Ultimately, the Hollywood studios want customers to begin using a cloud service, where you can access any movie or show you own from any digital device you have. It’s a great idea, but you are still limited by your Internet connectivity to access movies that you own. Personally, I vastly prefer having my favorite movies only dependent upon my DVD player.
At Timeless DVD, our main thoughts on this situation revolve around how the growth of streaming and the wane of DVD will impact home video transfer. It’s fine to download a movie that a million other people want to download as well. But what is the best and most convenient way to access the digital transfers of your home video tapes? For the foreseeable future, DVD will probably still be the best option for family home movies–but we’re keeping our eye on it.
The Lion King notwithstanding . . . there is no better evidence of the slowdown in 3-D than this bit of news.
Sony Pictures Entertainment has sent a letter to movie theaters stating that as of May 2012, the company will no longer foot the bill for glasses for its 3-D movies. It’s estimated that studios spend $10 million for 3-D glasses for a blockbuster movie, and about $2 million for smaller flicks. In other words, glasses cost about 50 cents per movie ticket. So it’s not hard to see why Sony is trying to pass on this cost.
Studios–most notably, Disney–originally covered the cost for glasses in an effort to entice theaters to convert to 3-D technology. But they now say that this deal was never a long-term plan.
Will movie theater owners absorb the cost? They haven’t been too keen on the idea in the past. In fact, in 2009, Fox decided it would not cover the cost of glasses for its release of Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs. Regal Cinemas, the largest theater chain, responded by saying it would not show the film in 3-D at all. Fox changed its mind quickly.
From their perspective, theaters have already paid a hefty price to start showing 3-D, period. They have had to convert screens to have 3-D capability, and many had to purchase new digital projectors in order to fully show all the features–which employees had to be trained to run correctly. And theater owners already pay RealD–the company that produces the 3-D glasses–a royalty fee for each pair.
So who’s going to pick up the cost if both the studios and theaters continue to balk? Yes, that leaves YOU. Actually, this type of system is the norm in many other countries. Moviegoers already have to pay for their own glasses in the U.K., Italy, Spain, and Australia. In the U.K., for instance, patrons spend about $1.50 to buy a pair of glasses for a 3-D movie. Theaters point out that once you buy a pair of glasses, you can bring the glasses to the theater the next time and avoid another fee. But for Americans used to getting the glasses for free, this might be a hard behavior to change.
Sony has two huge movies opening in May 2012–The Amazing Spider-Man and Men in Black III. It will be interesting to see if moviegoers will be willing to cough up the dough for 3-D glasses, or if they will be content to see the films in regular 2-D. Remember, 3-D movies already carry a $3-$4 surcharge, and many consumers justifiably believe a cheap pair of 3-D glasses should come with that surcharge. So this situation could have a significant bearing on how 3-D grows in 2012, both in theaters and in the home market.
I have been a member of Netflix since 2004. It’s been a great service, enabling me to plow through many TV shows and movies I wouldn’t have been able to afford to buy. My parents have likewise benefitted from their large library of British television titles (since for some unknown reason, BBC America hardly ever actually airs British TV anymore). The service was easy to use and the website was clean and simple, and the business became a classic example of how to give the public exactly what they wanted.
In August 2011, Netflix decided to split its DVD and streaming services into separate subscription plans. No biggie–this didn’t really affect me, since I never watched the streaming anyway, and you still could subscribe to both if you wanted. And since I’m on one of the higher “DVD-out” plans, my subscription price actually went down (unlike many other subscribers). So I was still cool with Netflix, although many subscribers who used both services (rightly) felt blindsided.
But then things got worse. On September 18, Netflix announced that they were spinning off their DVD rental service into a new company called Qwikster. Holy cow…let’s just start with that name. The first thing I thought of was Nestle Quik (naturally, as a child of the ’80s). But the suffix also evokes unhelpful memories of the now-dead Napster and Friendster. The CEO claims that the name is supposed to emphasize quick delivery. But you could call quick delivery of any product “Qwikster”–and moreover, I would argue that this name shouldn’t be used in combination with the USPS at all.
More importantly, Netflix’s decision splits DVD and streaming into two separate companies. Customers must now subscribe to both–separately–and maintain two separate queues. No interaction whatsoever between the two. So basically, Netflix believes that their DVD and streaming customers are two separate groups of people, with no overlap–because otherwise, how would this make sense? Maybe their market research does bear this out…who knows. But it sure does make life much more difficult for the people who did rent DVDs and stream movies.
Plus, by choosing to use its well-known name “Netflix” for its streaming service, and a crappy new name for its DVD rentals, Netflix is obviously banking on streaming over physical media. Is streaming content likely the wave of the future? Absolutely. We are moving away from physical media and into cloud-based solutions. For popular content, there is no arguing this point.
However, streaming and downloading 100% of our entertainment content is not here yet. First, the broadband infrastructure in the United States is nowhere near the level it’s at in most of the world. As more businesses, such as Netflix, push streaming options, bandwidth usage is going to grow and grow–and eventually, someone is going to have to pay for it. In that light, Netflix’s August pricing decision to raise prices for customers who prefer streaming does make sense. But as we saw with the public outcry from that change, consumers might not be so apt to stream movies and TV if doing so costs as much as a DVD.
And there’s nothing wrong with still preferring DVDs and other physical media over ephemeral options. I personally prefer the assured quality of a disc over the network-dependent, stop-and-start nature of streaming. And I like having a disc physically present in my home to watch whenever I want. I don’t want to rely on a server “somewhere out there” to watch a favorite movie. Doing this makes me entirely dependent on that server, rather than my own equipment. And when you compare Blu-Ray to a streaming movie? There is just no comparison in terms of quality. Maybe someday there will be, when and if broadband infrastructure gets up to snuff. But not yet.
The bottom line is, Netflix is consigning its DVD rental customers–who deserve better–to a “lesser”, separate service, with a terrible name, which is clearly designed to be disposed of as soon as possible. Netflix’s decision probably makes sense to their CFO and shareholders. But from a PR and customer service standpoint, why would you want to annoy your customers even more–only a month after a huge price increase? It’s this decision that baffles me as a business owner. It seems as if Netflix believes they have a monopoly on both DVD and streaming, so they can do whatever they want–and that’s classic corporate arrogance and greed. Maximize profits at the expense of the consumer–even loyal customers like me.
Customers often ask us what type of camcorder they should purchase. Often, they want a new camcorder to replace a tape-based model, such as VHS-C or 8mm. Most camcorders today do not use classic videotape, but one of a few tapeless options. And making it more confusing, models range from Flip-style cams to complex HDTV video cameras. Figuring out which level of camcorder is right for you is half the battle to purchasing a new unit that will serve you well for years. In general, there are four basic levels of camcorders:
1. Flip-Style (around $200)
Named for the now-discontinued but hugely popular Flip camcorder, this type of cam is your entry-level option. A Flip-style video camera looks like a phone or MP3 player. It generally has a “record” button, a basic microphone, the ability to record to Flash memory (internal or external), and possibly a zoom lens. You can download the videos you shoot to your computer using the built-in USB port, and then easily upload them to YouTube (usually with included software). Best Buy’s website calls these cameras “shoot and share,” which provides a good idea of their intended function. Flip-style camcorders can be standard-definition or high-definition, although most have HD capabilities these days.
Pros: Small and portable. Simple to pull out and shoot. Easy uploading to the web. Cons: Very few features. Very poor zooming and microphone abilities.
2. Standard-Definition ($300-$600)
Most people think of standard-definition (SD) when they think of consumer camcorders. VHS, VHS-C, 8mm, Mini DV–all of these are SD camcorders. Tape-based SD cams have been joined by Flash, Mini DVD, and hard drive SD camcorders as well. These units have great features: the flip-out LCD screen, amazing optical zoom lenses, decent microphones, and myriad extra features. The quality from SD cams can be excellent, and for bargain shoppers, a SD cam may provide more functionality than a Flip cam while avoiding the steeper cost of HD. Mini DV camcorders are still available, and produce wonderful results as well as easy computer connectivity.
That said, this is becoming a high-definition world. Everyone from cable providers to TV networks is moving to widescreen, high-resolution video. If you don’t already have an HDTV, it’s likely your next TV set will be one. Will you be happy with the results from a SD camcorder in five years?
Pros: Excellent price for a great-quality, feature-laden camcorder. Cons: Every year, SD cams become more of a relic as HD becomes the norm.
3. Basic High-Definition ($300-$1,000)
Simply put: A basic HD camcorder should be the starting point for the average person who is looking to buy a new camcorder. “Basic” means that the camcorder is fairly automatic: it can focus, adjust audio, and handle white balance by itself. (In other words, a regular consumer camcorder, but in HD.) While any HD cam generally costs more than SD video cameras, an HD cam will shoot excellent images, provide great optical zoom, and can be quickly connected to your computer for editing and uploading (although editing HD video does require a fast computer with large storage capacity). HD cams record to Flash media, hard drives, and HDV tape (HD Mini DV).
Pros: The current standard in home video. Great features and picture quality. Cons: HD requires a fast computer for editing. Difficult to watch without an HD-capable TV.
4. Premium High-Definition ($1,000+)
The best HD camcorders naturally cost the most, and are therefore intended for serious hobbyists who want real control over their shooting. These video cameras allow manual control of settings, provide many extra features or optional add-on capabilities, and use multiple CCD/CMOS image sensors to achieve better-quality video. In this way, the shooter gains exceptional control in selecting light levels and techniques.
Pros: More features and settings than you’ll ever need. Cons: Expensive. Overkill for most consumers.
So which should I buy?
The best way to select from the four levels of camcorders shown above is to ask “What will I use it for?” The ideal video camera for you meets your unique requirements as well as fits your skill set and your hand.
Here are a few sample questions:
– Do you want a camcorder that’s super-easy to use–one you can slip into your pocket like a phone? Are you into uploading to YouTube? If so, look into Flip-style camcorders.
– Do you value cost above anything else? Would you be satisfied with a well-featured camcorder that has a decent price? If so, look into standard-definition camcorders, particularly Mini DV.
– Do you have an HD TV? Do you want to combine the amazing quality of HD video with standard camcorder features, such as a zoom lens and a good microphone? If so, look into the basic HD models.
– Are you already into editing your SD videos? Do you like to adjust your white balance and add different lenses to your camcorder? If so, look at professional HD models.
Once you know what you’re looking for, research and shop around. Camcorders offer different features and come in a wide array of prices. Keep in mind that no one regrets spending extra cash on good quality, but if you cut corners to save, you may regret it later on when your camcorder can’t do what you want. Examine and literally hold different camcorders in a store to see which one feels comfortable to you. And then buy from a company you trust, either in person or online.
Part 2 in this series will examine the different types of recording format options, including Mini DVD, Flash memory, hard drives, and digital tape–so check back here soon!
The earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster in Japan are heartbreakingly terrible–and are proving to have widespread impact beyond the Japanese shores. It’s no secret that much of the U.S.’s electronic equipment has been produced (at least in part) in Japan since the 1980s. And that doesn’t include just DVD players and DVRs, but any machine that has an electronic component, such as refrigerators. Even U.S.-made cars often have many parts that were originally manufactured in Japan.
Japan is dealing with electricity shortages and transportation nightmares, which will lead to lower production and fewer units shipped–of everything. Eventually, this situation will impact electronics in the United States. It’s likely that rebates will disappear and stock will dry up for certain items.
Even the news business is worrying, since Japan-based Sony and Panasonic are two of the largest suppliers of technology to the networks. In addition to video cameras and general video equipment, Sony and Panasonic also make the HDCam tape used in network newsgathering. But Sony’s recording media factory is located in the Sendai region of Northern Japan–not the best place for a factory right now. Other Japanese recording media companies such as Fuji and Maxell will also likely experience severe shortages.
We received an e-mail today from one of our disc suppliers warning of potential price hikes and possible shortages in blank DVD-R discs, which we use for our customers’ projects. (Timeless DVD uses JVC Taiyo Yuden discs, which prominently read “made in Japan” on the packaging.) So we have stocked up! But if you’re planning to buy some electronic equipment in the future, it may be better done sooner rather than later.
We recently discussed the future of DVD, and analyzed Blu-Ray’s benefits and drawbacks. While Blu-Ray may or may not become the next mainstream consumer video format, it’s worth remembering that it has already triumphed once: over HD-DVD.
The Blu-Ray/HD-DVD format war occurred between 2006 and 2008. Both formats featured a larger-capacity DVD disc that could display high-definition video. The battle began when the blue laser diode was invented, which Sony developed into a new DVD format that it chose to call Blu-Ray.
While some companies allied with Sony to back the new disc, others, such as Toshiba and Microsoft, were vocally wary of the format’s price tag. These tensions came to a head when the Blu-Ray coalition turned down Microsoft’s interactivity feature, HDi, in favor of a different technique called BD-J (based on Java code). Shortly thereafter, Toshiba and Microsoft announced they were developing an alternative high-definition disc, which they dubbed “HD-DVD.”
Both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were released to consumers in 2006. Blu-Ray scored its first major victory when Sony added the technology to its popular Playstation 3. By the time Toshiba and Microsoft had included HD-DVD in the Xbox 360 as well, Blu-Ray already had growing acceptance by Playstation users. But during the next few years, both formats grew slowly, as consumers waited out yet another format war.
Finally, Warner Brothers–one of HD-DVD’s most important backers–defected to Blu-Ray in 2008. Within the next few weeks, other manufacturers and studios abandoned HD-DVD as well. Toshiba eventually discontinued the format in February 2008.
Like all format wars, this one largely came down to smart marketing by Sony–same as JVC with VHS, all those years ago. But can Blu-Ray continue its success in a marketplace that’s moving to digital delivery? We’ll see.
The Timeless DVD Blog covers video transfer, movies, technology, DVDs, VCRs, and much more. It is written by Jennica Musselman, the owner of Timeless DVD. We welcome relevant comments on our posts!
In the 1820s, revolving-picture toys were invented that used the concept of persistence of vision, and are the earliest precursors to modern video technology. These toys were included the fancifully-named zoetrope, fantascope, and phenakistiscope. In creating these toys, inventors learned that if a stream of pictures is too continuous, the eye only sees blurry motion. Each image must appear just long enough for the brain to process it, in order for persistence of vision to work correctly.
