[RNLD] RE: Archivist Question re: Video - Handycam or Zoom Q3HD

Tue Mar 11 05:26:59 UTC 2014

Hi,

I've been using a similar model to Margaret the Sony HXRNX30P

http://pro.sony.com.au/product/hxr-nx30p

I have been using this in conjunction with two lavalier sennheiser mics to
record young children who move about a lot. The audio records at 16 bit
44.1khz, which is below standard. This camera also has a special little
lens that adjusts to aid stability when being used without a tripod. I have
been been very satisfied with the quality of recordings this has been
producing.

This type of setup however seems to be a step up from what you are talking
about.

Using two recording devices obviously complicates the recording process but
it is manageable.I have made recordings in the past with a handycam and the
zoomH4N and the quality has been quite good. Just don't forget to make a
'clap' sync point. Although if you are lucky enough to be using some decent
video editing software such as Adobe Premiere Pro this will sync media
files based on audio from the zoom and handycam in a flash. Once you figure
out how to do it of course.

In terms of buying handycams I would just be careful about which consumer
grade handycam you buy. You'll want to consider things such as durability
and in particular how wide is the lens. The wider the better. For some
handycams you are able to buy wide angle conversion lenses and these work
great although are often quite costly. Also be wary of what FULL HD means,
this is just a marketing term.

Cheers,

Bill Forshaw

On 11 March 2014 13:33, Margaret Carew <margaret.carew at batchelor.edu.au>wrote:

> Hi
>
> Just for interest's sake, here is the camera that we use (Sony HXRNX70P)
>
> http://pro.sony.com.au/product/hxr-nx70p
>
> We paid $2909AUD (exgst) as part of a kit (in late 2012). The lavalier mic
> system was $504AUD (ex gst) - and all the bits, tripod, case, SD cards etc
> do add up.
>
> The camera is dust proof, wind proof and doesn't over heat! Great in low
> light. The solution to handling motion is a good tripod and control over
> shutter speed.
>
> Cheers
>
> Margaret Carew
> Project Linguist
> Desert Peoples Centre, Alice Springs
> Research, Teaching and Learning Division
> Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education
>
> tel: 08 8951 8344 | fax: 08 8951 8311
> email: margaret.carew at batchelor.edu.au  | www.batchelor.edu.au
>
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are solely intended for the
> use of the addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential
> and privileged. If you receive this email in error, please advise us by
> return email immediately. Please also disregard the contents of the email,
> delete it and destroy any copies immediately.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Hiram Ring [hiram1 at e.ntu.edu.sg]
> Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2014 11:36
> To: Margaret Carew
> Cc: Nicholas Reid; Stephen Morey; r-n-l-d at unimelb.edu.au
> Subject: Archivist Question re: Video - Handycam or Zoom Q3HD
>
> Unfortunately for archivists the problem with a lot of these camcorders is
> that they record in a 'lossy' format, at a bitrate less than 16 bit 44.1
> khz. The Canon HD100 camcorder that Nick Reid uses records at Dolby Digital
> 2ch (AC-3 2ch) - the bitrate is 320 kbps, much lower than the CD-quality
> standard. Margaret's Sony camcorder sounds like it's probably better (after
> spending 5,500 aud it should be). This is what Stephen's Zoom Q3HD is
> designed to overcome. As a company that has made one of the best solid
> state recorders around, the audio of the Q3HD recorder can be up to 24bit
> 96khz, which is well above the CD-quality standard. And it doesn't break
> the budget.
>
>  Stephen, are you finding that the video doesn't handle movement very
> well? Are you asking whether anyone knows of a good full-function video
> camera that records sound at least at 16 bit 44.1 khz and handles fast
> motion? I think the ones that do that tend to be rather expensive (Sony's
> HDR-SR12 is $1,300 or so). I'd recommend just using a tripod for all your
> video work with the Q3HD, and try not to move it around very much. It still
> might not help if people are moving quickly in a dance or something, but
> the audio will be fine. Alternatively, get a handycam for cultural events
> and record audio with the Q3HD, which can be synced up later.
>
> I think this brings up an interesting point, though. I like the use of
> lavalier/shotgun microphones with HD handycams because you don't have to
> sync the audio later and you get very clear recordings. Which begs the
> question of archivists:
>
> Which of the two options is better?
> 1. A CD-quality recording with lots of background noise and quiet speech.
> 2. A les-than-CD-quality recording with minimal background noise and clear
> speech.
>
> Ideally these wouldn't be your only options, but unfortunately we don't
> live in an ideal world.
>
> My two cents.
> Hiram
> _______________
> Hiram Ring
> PhD Student, Grammatical Description and Documentation
> Nanyang Technological University
> http://linguistics.hss.ntu.edu.sg
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY: This email is intended solely for the person(s) named and
> may be confidential and/or privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please delete it, notify us and do not copy, use, or disclose
> its content. Thank you.
>
> Towards A Sustainable Earth: Print Only When Necessary
>
> On Mar 11, 2014, at 6:28 AM, Margaret Carew wrote:
>
> > I agree with nick about wireless lavalier mics. I use a sennheiser set
> with a Sony camera and am very happy with the results.
> > I also have an on camera shotgun mic and use this to record to one
> channel via the cameras xlr adapter. The UHF receiver mounts on top of that
> and plugs into the other channel, making it a neat setup. The result is a
> mix of close in speaker and ambient sound, and levels can be adjusted later
> if need be. Another reason for doing this is insurance- the on camera
> shotgun also records speech very well within a close range just in case the
> UHF unit fails. Sometimes there's interference with a lab mic when it's
> worn on the body (such as a hand or clothing brushing the mic) and in this
> case we can replace that with the shotgun audio.  For multiple speakers
> I've also mounted the lab mic on a mini tripod on occasions and this works
> pretty well.  This whole unit cost about 5,500aud but included a tripod and
> some other accessories (can send model numbers if that's useful).
> >
> > I carry a small edirolr09 around with me which records as good audio
> through its built in mics as any of the zooms etc. I often have this
> rolling as well for extra backup and sync that audio in separately when
> editing, for extra ambient sound.
> >
> > The main issue with the wireless mic setup is battery life. I've given
> up on rechargeables and buy the best lithium batteries for the base units.
> >
> > Cheers Margaret
> >
> > On 11/03/2014, at 7:33 AM, "Nicholas Reid" <nreid at une.edu.au<mailto:
> nreid at une.edu.au>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Stephen,
> >
> > I've gone the camcorder route and can say I'm very happy with the
> results I'm getting. I mostly pair wireless Sennheiser lav mics with a
> Canon HD100 camcorder, and I've been as impressed by the sound recording as
> I am by the image quality. I've used shotgun, boom and other mics, but have
> to say that for narrative I'm a huge fan of good quality lavs for their
> ability to foreground a voice and background everything else. I've had
> situations where someone's been telling a story, and some interference has
> occurred (rain on a roof, a truck pulling up close by, etc) and I assumed
> the recording was ruined, but on playback discovered that what was loud to
> my ears barely registers with the lav mics. Quality is so good this way
> that I've felt no need to make independent audio recordings. Camcorders
> usually also offer a good range of video output ratios (16:9, 4:3, etc) to
> suit different needs. My camcorder+wireless lav setup cost close to AUD$2K,
> no doubt a lot more expensive than the Zoom, but worth every cent in my
> opinion.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Nick
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9 Mar 2014, at 7:07 pm, Stephen Morey <S.Morey at latrobe.edu.au<mailto:
> S.Morey at latrobe.edu.au>> wrote:
> >
> > Dear RNLD list,
> >
> > I am at present in North East India, where members of the language
> communities are busy making recordings. Up to now we have preferred to use
> the Zoom Q3HD for video, rather than buying a commercial Handycam, because
> the sound is supposed to be much better. However the picture doesn't seem
> to be, and the shape of the Zoom is not necessarily the best for taking
> video of events (though fine if you set it on a stand for video of a story!)
> >
> > So I am wondering what people on the list think about the option of
> purchasing a handycam of similar cost to the Zoom Q3HD and making a
> simultaneous audio recording on the Zoom H4n? Or is there a better option
> available?
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> > Stephen Morey
> > Australian Research Council Future Fellow
> > Centre for Research on Language Diversity
> > La Trobe University
> > Website:
> http://www.latrobe.edu.au/humanities/about/staff/profile?uname=SMorey<
> http://www.latrobe.edu.au/rclt/StaffPages/morey.htm>
> >
> > Language data website: http://sealang.net/assam
> > Dictionary websites: http://sealang.net/ahom;
> http://sealang.net/singpho; http://sealang.net/phake
> >
> > Linguistic data archived at::
> > DoBeS:  http://www.mpi.nl/DoBeS and follow a link to projects, then
> Tangsa, Tai and Singpho in North East India
> > ELAR: http://elar.soas.ac.uk<http://elar.soas.ac.uk/>
> > PARADISEC:  http://www.paradisec.org.au<http://www.paradisec.org.au/>
> >
> > North East Indian Linguistics Society: http://sealang.net/neils
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/resource-network-linguistic-diversity/attachments/20140311/d52b476e/attachment.htm>