Incidently, not to belabor a point, but I took a quick look at your website.
It's well-intentioned, but has a fair amount of incorrect information.
Specifically:

1.  Premiere is capable of time-code based scene detection on capture.
You're wrong when you say it can only import entire clips.  It also will run
on less than 512 meg of RAM.

2.  Capture can be done within a video editor, but can also be done with
specialized tools, e.g. Scenealyzer Live.  These are capable of optical
scene detection, as well as time-code-based scene detection, and can also
preview a tape to allow clip-specific captures.

4.  AVI and mpeg are particularly poor choices for sending video over the
internet.  High-compression formats, e.g. Apple's .mov Quicktime or
Microsoft's .wmv are much better.

5.  "Most people have a VHS recorder, but DVD can present problems"?  That
may be true in Britain, I don't know.  It's certainly not true in the US,
where you can buy DVD players for as little as $25.

6.  What set-top DVD players do you know that will play DVD-RAM?

7. Most miniDV camcorders do NOT provide the highest quality video.
Contemporary consumer camcorders are dismal kludges that produce grainy,
noisey video.  Most Hi8 camcorders will produce higher-quality video.

6.  "Movies" shot in low light are not grainy, etc. unless shot with
poor-quality consumer camcorders.  My camcorder is a VX2000 miniDV and it
produces brilliant, sharp, saturated non-grainy video by the light of a
single candle.  There's nothing inherent in either digital formats,
generally, or the miniDV format, specifically, that results in poor
low-light performance.  The effect that you describe is the result of
deliberate design compromises introduced by camcorder manufactures in their
lower-end consumer machines.

7.  "Nightshot" is simply infra-red sensitive videography.  It is not
limited to 3 feet and produces wonderful results with good camcorders.

8.  PAL camcorders are available from reputable dealers in the US at good
prices, e.g. B&H and Adorama, both of which are extremely ethical, reliable
and will readily accept returns and exchanges.

9.  Neither Digital8 nor MiniDV support component video as part of the spec.

10.  You wrote: " You should also be aware that shooting in low light (no
matter what the manufacturer claims) results in a substantial loss of
quality."  That's utterly and completely wrong.  Have you ever seen the
output of a decent miniDV camcorder?

11. AVI isn't "uncompressed."  AVI is nothing more than a file wrapper which
can accomodate a variety of codec-encoded video formats.  HuffyUV-encoded
avi is compressed, but non-lossy.  DV-25, i.e. miniDV and Digital8, encoded
avi is most definitely encoded in lossy format at a ratio of about 5 to 1.

I don't have time to review everything else on your website.  I appreciate
your interest in helping other amateurs, but jumping in with misleading or
simply erroneous information does more harm than good.

In message <3etep1F4tfq***@individual.net>, PTRAVEL
<ptravel88-use***@yahoo.com> writes
Only in versions later than V6.5.

If you run with 256M with (for instance) Norton AV you'll be dropping
frames by the dozen. Adobe themselves recommend 1G of memory.
True. But will you point me to where I say otherwise?
You obviously missed the "or other video formats depending on your video
editor" - or are your comments here merely sour grapes?
You're beginning to show cluelessness as well as showing sour grapes.
I'd suggest you browse through http://www.videohelp.com/dvdplayers (to
which I give a link on the section in question). Many, many people have
legacy DVD players that won't play either DVD+R or DVD-R (some won't
play either).
Asking the question demonstrates your cluelessness.

Apex AS-1500, Denver DVD-158, Denver 188, JVC DR-M10S, JVCDR-M1SLE, JVC
MV1, LitOn LDV-2002, Mintek DVD-1600, Pacific DVD-1002, Panasonic
DMRE100HS, Panasonic DMR-E30, Panasonic DMR-E50, Panasonic E55S,
Panasonic DMR-E80H, Panasonic DMR-E85H, Panasonic DMR-E95H, Panasonic
DMR-ES10, Panasonic DMR-HS2, Panasonic S25, Panasonic S31, Panasonic
S35, Panasonic S47, Panasonic S75, Panasonic S97, Panasonic SC-HT850,
Tevion DVD-4000, Toshiba RD2, Toshiba RDXS32, and Toshiba SD3900.
You're now talking bollocks. While miniDV is inferior to the DV
professional and HD formats, miniDV will give 520 line resolution, while
analogue Hi8 only reaches 400 line resolution.
Again bollocks. Now you're beginning to sound as if you are terminally
clueless, blind, or both. If you are not, then put up a frame-grab shot
by a single candle to prove your absurd assertion.

Not true. It is a characteristic of (even latest technology) CCDs.
There's a knee in the response curve of CCDs which starts to linearise
at about 6 lux. The noise is introduced by the signal processor that
tries to amplify the signal to give a usable picture - resulting in
Schott and Johnson noise being amplified, resulting in poor picture
quality.
Again, you're talking bollocks and showing your cluelessness. You are
correct in your reference to infra-red, but infra-red light doesn't just
"happen". You have to have an infra-red source to allow it to be used.
Most camcorders (even your VX2000) claiming "0 lux" have an infra-red
lamp on the front of the camcorder - but it is only "strong" enough to
illuminate up to about 3 feet from the camcorder. Further, infra-red
shots give only monochrome pictures. Anyone who's used their "low-light"
camcorder feature will well know this.
On special order, perhaps. But I'd challenge you to walk into any
camcorder retail outlet in the US and purchase a PAL camcorder off the
shelf. It's the same here with NTSC - you can buy them but you have to
pre-order - with about a three week lead-time.

Again you're talking bollocks. And to answer your question - yes. Most
people here in the UK have seen night-time OB footage shot on VX1000
(and more recently VX2100) camcorders (which are used by the BBC OB
units). And we've seen a lot of documentary footage originating from the
US of traffic chases/arrests which demonstrate that you are talking
rubbish.
I'd suggest you read http://www.camcord.info/formats (specifically the
para titled "AVI - A Special Case".

Snipped "smoke" which fails to impress :-)

So you're claiming to be a reviewer now? It would help if you weren't so
clueless.

How f*cking condescending from a clueless pratt. Next thing you'll be
claiming to be a professional... LOL

Pot... Kettle... black... ???

Apart from not contributing anything, you've well demonstrated *your*
cluelessness here.

Tony Morgan <tonymor***@rhylonline.com> writes:
I think the point is that current consumer miniDV cameras have crappy
optics and electronics, which means lousy video regardless of the
recording format.  The hi-8 cameras of a few years ago were able to
make better video than today's low-end mini-DV despite hi-8's
disadvantage in recording format.

The VX2000 is a 3-ccd camera and as such does not and cannot support
Nightshot.  Which ccd would the beamsplitter send the infrared to?
Nightshot is only found on 1-ccd cameras.

It's very easy to buy PAL camcorders in the right type of big-city
retail store in the US.  The stores sell PAL cameras all the time to
foreign visitors since because of differing tax systems or whatever,
the cameras are cheaper here than in the visitors' home countries.

Paul Rubin wrote:

Interesting. If you point an infrared remote controller at a 3-ccd
camera and press the buttons, does this mean you cannot see the IR leds
flashing?

BTW, as you snipped "uk.rec.video.digital" off from the newsgroups line,
Morgan probably will not see your comments at all.

I have a TR-600 Hi8 machine that I used to use.  On a good monitor, it's
resolution is noticeably less than the TRV-20 which replaced it, though just
barely.  However, unlike the TRV-20, it was artifact-free (no stairsteps, no
"swimming" lines when panning, etc.).  It also had more saturated and
accurate color and, of course, the TRV-20 couldn't hold a candle (pun
intended) to its low-light performance.

So which camera produced "better" video?  It's a question of what someone
considers "better," I suppose.  If I wanted to shoot indoors, there's no
question that the TR-600 was better.  In bright sunlight, shooting subjects
without strong horizontal lines, the TRV-20 did pretty well.

Of course, neither remotely approaches what I get from my VX2000, but you
get what you pay for. ;)

Show quoteHide quoteJust for kicks, I slapped an infrared filter on my VX2000 to see what it
could do (I had the filter for my Canon 10D still camera).  The VX2000's
sensors are clearly filtered to eliminate infrared, but they do have some
sensitivity.  In very bright sunlight, with the lens wide-open and using a
1/30th of a second shutter speed, I can get infra-red images.  They're
pseudo-colored -- evidently each of the sensors has slightly different
infra-red response (or, perhaps, it's a function of the beam splitter).
It's an interesting effect, but not one that has much use, I think.


Show quoteHide quote

Well, yes, so?  Premiere Pro has been out for quite some time now, and is
the current, supported version of Premiere.


I ran 6.5 perfectly well with 386 meg, and see no reason why Pro 1.0 and 1.5
wouldn't run as well.  All it means is that the program will use the swap
file more.  As for using Norton AV, that's a different problem altogether
and unrelated to memory.  If you're editing on a low memory machine you
should disable as many background programs as possible, including firewalls,
anti-virus software, anti-spyware, etc..  I do this even on my 512 meg
machine.


Well, of course.  "Recommended" is not the same as "required."

Your website is intended for beginners.  It gives the incorrect impression
that capture can only be done within an editor package.

You recommended avi or mpeg for web transmission of video.  Again, you
website is intended for beginners.  This information is not only wrong, but
will discourage beginners who don't understand why it takes several hours to
transmit a 5 minute video to someone else.

My comments are not sour grapes, but are less tempered than they might have
been.

Virtually all DVD players manufactured in the last few years will play
DVD-R.  That, however, is not the point.  You recommended VHS as a preferred
distribution medium because "most people" had them, but didn't have DVD
players.  As I said, I don't know how things are in Britain, but most people
in the US have DVD players.  Indeed, many of our video rental stores (you
have Blockbusters in Britain, too, don't you?) don't even rent VHS tapes
anymore.

However, that, too, is not the point.  As your own material indicates, VHS
is limited to 240 lines of resolution, less than half of what any decent
miniDV camcorder can produce.  Why in the world would anyone want to use
such a limited delivery vehicle?

Let's see -- DVD is a bad delivery vehicle because, according to you, most
players won't play DVD-R, but DVD-RAM, which is supported on a handful of
DVD machines is okay.

Have you seen the output of consumer camcorders, lately?  Most anything
priced under $500 (and probably priced under $1000) will produce garbage
compared to a comparably-priced Hi8 machine.

What is "DV professional"?  Do you mean DV-50?  Do you know any consumer
machines that use that?

miniDV is DV-25.  Calling it "inferior" to DV-50 (if that's what you meant)
without reference to an application is meaningless.  DV-25 exceeds what is
commonly accepted as "broadcast quality," at least here in the US (I know
considerably less about PAL standards).

I'm not talking about the miniDV standard vs. the Hi8 standard, but about
consumer miniDV cameras vs. consumer Hi8 cameras.  Most consumer miniDV
camcorders do not approach 520 line resolution.  Some don't even reach VHS
resolution.  Their images feature washed out color, chroma noise, and
considerable grain.  Most significantly, the have little to no low-light
capability. Do you think your readers might like to know that they won't be
able to use their brand new miniDV camcorder to shoot junior's birthday
party, whereas they might have gotten quite usable video if they bought a
comparably-priced Hi8 machine?


www.ruyitang.com/venice at nigh - 9.wmv
www.ruyitang.com/florence.wmv
www.ruyitang.com/las vegas.wmv


Take a look at the Venice video.  Not a single candle, but equivalent.

Nope.  Not even close.  It's the result of three things: tiny CCDs (so that
manufacturers can produce ultra-small camcorders), single CCDs (so that
manufacturers can save money) and high-density sensors (so that manufactures
can load up camcorders with gimmicky digital still capabilities).

It's simple physics.  Do you want me to explain why?

Sure, gain = garbage.  Which is why cameras like the VX2000/2100/PD-150/170,
which use three large sensors produce high-quality low-light video.

Obviously, but you keep missing the point.  Infra-red sensors don't have a
3-foot range.  Period.

My VX2000 doesn't claim 0 lux, doesn't have a "night shot" mode, and is
barely sensitive at all to infra-red.

And it doesn't have an infra-red lamp on the front (or anywhere else).

Camcorders with nightshot are sensitive to infra-red, and they don't care
where it comes from.  As long as there is an infra-red radiator, which can
be the built-in light, but can also be an accessory or an environmental
source, they'll do just fine.  If what you meant was, "The built-in
infra-red source on consumer camcorders results in limited range," then say
so.  Do not, however, say that, "night shot is limited to 3 feet."  It's not
true, and extremely misleading.

Yes, so?

Well, of course (I have TRV-20 that has this feature).  What difference does
that make?

But that's not what you said.  You said that mailorder camera vendors should
be avoided because of return problems.  I don't know any British mailorder
vendors.  I do know B&H and Adorama -- very, very well, as I've bought tens
of thousands of dollars of gear from them.  Have YOU heard of them?  Do you
know their reputation within the US?

B&H, at least, stocks PAL equipment.

Go look at the videos at the websites that I listed above.

The VX1000 had medicore low-light performance -- no where near as good as
the VX2000.

And why do you think the BBC uses them for ENG?

Whereas in the US, they're not routinely used for ENG.  What has that got to
do with good-quality miniDV camcorders?

Then why did you say otherwise?

Get out your dictionary and look up the meaning of the word "review."

I'm nothing more than another amateur.  I don't, however, pretend to more
knowledge than I have, and I don't lash out at someone who gives me a
correct answer that I may not like. I also admit when I'm wrong.

More than a few lessons there for you to ponder.

Nope, though I do claim to be civil and courteous which, evidently, are
qualites that have eluded you.

I don't post erroneous information on websites.  Mine isn't open to the
public, yet, but it's there and you're welcome to look at it.  More to the
point, when I ask questions on these newsgroups, which is often, I listen to
the answers and thank the responders.

So, after all this, the answer to your original query remains exactly the
same:  the problem with the camcorder that you sold is almost certainly an
alignment problem (though, as another poster pointed out, it might be an
alignment issue for the camera on which the buyer had sourced his test
video).  Sorry you don't like the answer, but there it is.

Oh, I don't think I haven't contributed anything.  I did, after all, point
out your many errors and, perhaps, helped some newbies in the process.

Show quoteHide quote

I download mpeg all the time and it works fine.  It doesn't take
hours.  It's a published standard and it's viewable by all kinds of
programs that can't view those proprietary formats.  This is a peeve
of mine, I don't use Windows or Macintoshes and don't want to be
locked into any company's software to be able to view the files.  So
MPEG is what I also advise everyone to use, even if it means the files
are bigger than they'd be with some other formats.

I think he means DVCAM which is DV25 at a higher tape speed than mini-DV
(fewer dropouts/alignment probs/etc.) and with better sound sync.

Hate to say it but the VX2000/etc. uses three small sensors (1/3"),
not large ones.  By comparison, a consumer digital SLR camera (about
1/4 the price of a VX1000) has the equivalent of a single 1.4" sensor,
or 17x the sensor area of the VX2000.  Making 3-ccd cameras with large
sensors is extremely expensive because of alignment issues, but I
don't understand why nobody makes consumer camcorders with single 2/3"
or larger sensors as are common in digicams.

It depends on what you're doing.  I download mpeg as well when I'm
travelling and want to pull a show off my Tivo.  Everything depends on the
video quality -- full DirectTV mpeg (which is a weird, proprietary format)
takes me 12 hours for a 1 hour show over an average DSL line.  For most
purposes, though, wmv or mov are better choices -- you'll get equivalent
quality in a far more compact file.

That's an issue, though.  I have video clips on my website.  Storage is
limited, so I want the most "bang for the buck."  I assume you're running
Linux -- I can't afford the extra space to accomodate a relatively small
potential audience.  I do hope, though, that Linux grows to become a
dominant OS.  I've fooled with it some, and like it a lot more than either
Windows or Mac.

If that's what he meant, then the video quality is exactly the same as
miniDV -- as you noted, it's the DV25 spec.

Everything's relative. Three 1/3" sensors equals 1" of light grabbing
surface.  Compare that to 1/6" single-CCD sensors which are used in many of
the newer consumer camcorders -- that's 600% more surface area.

It's a function of market and marketing, I think.  If the consumer demand
was there, they'd make it.  Most consumers, though, think smaller is better,
higher-density is better and, of course, cheaper is better.

In message <3evbceF56rp***@individual.net>, PTRAVEL
<ptravel88-use***@yahoo.com> writes
Do read what I said. Your powers of comprehension are approaching those
of a lobotomised wood-louse.

You immediately discount *anything* you might say, when you invent
things that I might have said, or take them out of context.
You clearly haven't.

More rubbish. The limiting factor with Hi8 is not intrinsically the
analogue signal, but the limitations of the recording medium.

Show quoteHide quoteYes you were - in fact you just have. You not only don't know what
you're talking about - you don't even know what you have just said..
LOL.

Indeed they do. Get hold of a line-res test card and look for yourself.
Since they introduced their 16-bit DSP nearly three years ago across
their miniDV range, Sony come in at 520 line resolution. Pannys are a
little behind at about 510. I haven't tried others (my video friends all
have Sonys or Pannys) but I'd speculate that they are much the same as
the Pannys.

You amaze me that you seem to believe the rubbish you come out with. Not
borne out with fact - but that clearly doesn't trouble you.
Show quoteHide quoteDo you know what a lux is? Or a candela? Try getting marginally clued up
about the stuff you're babbling about - you might then stop talking such
rubbish.

Show quoteHide quoteYou couldn't explain how to punch your way out of a paper bag. I've
never encountered anyone who consistently comes out with such complete
rubbish and actually believes it.

CCDs comprise semiconductor junctions, and putting (say) 2Mpx on a
substrate of one-third of an inch square is insignificant when compared
with the construction of (say) a modern CPU where several million
junctions are masked onto a substrate of about one-tenth of an inch
square.
The knee in larger CCDs doesn't disappear on larger CCDs. And there's
exactly the same fall-off in sensitivity as on smaller CCDs.

In zero light (visible or IR) you have NO range whatsoever. Unless of
course you have some IR illuminations. If you're read a little more
carefully you'd have read the reference to the IR lamp on the front of
the "zero-lux" consumer camcorders.
Show quoteHide quoteYou're now turning into a nit-picking pedant when you have been shown to
be talking rubbish (and now are beginning to realise it).
Are you terminally stupid? You're certainly trying hard.
Show quoteHide quoteYes, but how many items have you had to return? It amuses me when
clueless folk praise the service they get when all they're doing is
box-shifting. The real test of "service" in this context is the response
you get when things go wrong. I can, however, give an example of (an
attempted) NTSC purchase here in Europe. I recently bought at nearly-new
TRV80 from a US serviceman. He tried for three months to purchase an
NTSC camcorder (in Germany where he was based) prior to his return to
the US - with no result.
Show quoteHide quoteGo read up on what a lux is, what a candela is - and equate that with
the lighting in your examples. You claimed that you get good results by
the light of a candle.... LOL.
Show quoteHide quoteYou're putting words in my mouth (or on my website) again. If you're
going to quote me than don't be an idiot and quote me out of context.
You've here demonstrated that you have little knowledge.

I'm waiting with bated breath for a "correct answer". So far you've
continued to talk utter bollocks.

You haven't so far. You've both invented things that I've said, and
taken things I've said out of context. Simply to avoid admitting that
you are wrong.
If I don't suffer fools gladly - then I hold up my hand. Start talking
sense then you'll get civility and courtesy.

As do I. But when responses are clueless, I'll say so. And I'm sorry if
that upsets you - but that's Usenet.

LOL... Dream on...

Morgan. You are a c**t.


I've never used that word on a newsgroup before, and almost never in the
'real' world, but if there ever was a person that the word was made for it's
you.



Why don't you take you and your fragile little ego and just f*ck off. Do
what you like, go take some novocaine, Quaaludes, Cerapax, morphine, dope
whatever. I hold you pretty much responsible for the demise of this once
vibrant newsgroup through your poisonous vitriol you dispense as you see
fit.


So once again if I may reiterate. On behalf of humanity I would like to say
f*ck OFF YOU BORING, FRAGILE EGOED c**t!









<snipped a very small selection of Tony's considered replies>

Do read what I said. Your powers of comprehension are approaching those
of a lobotomised wood-louse.

You're now talking bollocks.

Again bollocks.

Show quote Hide quote Whilst I am not going to take sides in this little discussion, you must've
led a very sheltered newsgroup life if Mr Morgan is the first person you
want to call a c***.

On the contrary I have an exceptionally high, though not limitless,  level
of tolerance.

One of the main tenets of newsgroups is a free discussion of ideas. People
will always disagree with each other, although most do it with humility and
their dignity intact.  The moment someone dare question Tony's Authority on
any subject he will attempt to belittle, humiliate and embarrass the poster
in the most condescending tone.

Thus a simple discussion becomes a 150 post flame war because he is not a
big enough man to put his view out there and be happy with that.

*Most* other people are happy to enter into a rational, friendly debate with
the end goal of finding 'what' is right and not 'who' is right.

A straw poll of this newsgroup on any given day would find that most people
would not piss on Morgan if he was on fire,  and most would be pouring on
any accelerant they could find.






Show quoteHide quote

In message <428b59c3$0$22501$7b0f0***@mistral.news.newnet.co.uk>, Grumps
<gra***@pikachupark.fsnet.co.uk> writes
Show quoteHide quotePoor chap seems to be an example of the reason why "care in the
community" doesn't work.

I can't help but wonder whether his foul language is a result of poor
parenting, or of the influence of bad company.

My language however foul varies only in degree to yours, and aside from one
word does not deviate from anything you'll find on television,  post
watershed. Your language in the post I responded to, talked of male
genetalia and mine of female. All parenting and company being equal then
perhaps it says more about you than you think.


I am many things, though frightened of being wrong is not one of them, in
fact I relish the opportunities to learn that being wrong brings. My self
worth is not tied to the acceptance of my comments as gospel on a newsgroup.
Though I would never speculate on the origins of your problems I suspect
it's nothing to do with bad company. Perhaps you were never paid enough
attention as a child or had a father that was never satisfied with whatever
you achieved - whatever it was it's not for me to judge. Though I really
honestly believe you do need to seek help.






<snip>

Show quoteHide quote

In message <428b3f3***@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, Steve Franklin
<hon***@lips.com> writes
Show quoteHide quoteROFL...

Any YOU talk about "poisonous vitriol" ?

At best you need counselling for your attitude problem and foul language
[1], at worst you're in serious need of psychiatric help.

[1] You might like to consider that youngsters sometimes
     read this newsgroup. I trust you don't have or aspire to
     have children. If you do then obviously don't care about the
     model of language and social skills that you present.

Now do go away and play with your social equals where such language is
accepted and expected of you.

<snip>

Any YOU talk about "poisonous vitriol" ?

At best you need counselling for your attitude problem and foul language
[1], at worst you're in serious need of psychiatric help.

[1] You might like to consider that youngsters sometimes
     read this newsgroup. I trust you don't have or aspire to
    have children. If you do then obviously don't care about the
    model of language and social skills that you present.

Now do go away and play with your social equals where such language is
accepted and expected of you.
--
Tony Morgan
http://www.camcord.info



Tony....I do not for one minute imagine you actually Rolling on the floor
laughing. I can not imagine you even laughing.



Tony....take a look at the number of people that have pointed out your
foibles over the last few years, wake up and smell the coffee. If you can't
get the professional care in Wales I suggest you petition the WHO to donate
a professionals time, or apply for further EU aid, or go to London, please
get it sorted.


Youngsters will have to deal with people like you soon enough, lets not
shelter them eh? Let them decide what they can and can't handle. I realise
you are from another generation and that it's hard to understand, but my
language is least of their troubles/concerns.  You live in a world of where
playing the spoons at the Rhyl social club passes for entertainment. The
rest of us live in the year 2005 in developed countries, where my comments
don't even register a blip on the social radar.


So I will return to my world Tony, if you promise to return to yours - fair
enough? Now...here are your spoons....and here's your music....you like Tony
Bennett don't you?, come on Tony leths not cause a kafuffle. I've got your
blanket for you. Now before I go...isth there anything else you need?

<snip>
Although not sharing your choice of words I must agree that Mr Morgan
has all but killed the uk.video.digital group.

I don't know the stats, but I don't know anyone who doesn't have one
nowadays.  They're about £40 ($25) in supermarkets these days, and play
everything.

Yes, plenty of BB stores, although last time (last year) I looked there
was a small section of VHS tapes.  For sure DVD is the main player.

I wish 40 uk pounds was $25 sometimes! :)

Rob


Show quoteHide quote

use***@yahoo.com>
Whoops, did my maths wrong there. :)  That should read around $70-75 I
guess.

In message <3f0fgnF5ar4***@individual.net>, RSD <rob***@hotmail.com>
writes
Indeed... I must confess that I didn't spot it until you responded :-)

In message <Xns965A5C7F1629Fdavernospam@130.133.1.4>, Dave R
<m*@privacy.net> writes
Show quoteHide quoteWhen I've had the need to distribute a video to a number of people, the
choice of medium is not as simple as you suggest. As you state, you can
buy a very inexpensive DVD player that supports most variants (DVD-R,
DVD+R etc), but a lot of people have purchased their DVD player one, two
or three years ago - when universal DVD-variant playing was very much
the exception rather than the rule. Only a couple of months ago I gave
away (what was) a very expensive LG DVD player that didn't play DVD-R or
DVD+R. And most folk take the position of "if it ain't broke, then don't
replace it" - unless of course they themselves are into home video. And
I'd estimate that four out of every five miniDV camcorder owners never
transfer their movies onto DVDs so the issue of replacing their legacy
DVD players never comes up. In fact if my memory serves me correctly,
there have been a substantial number of enquiries on this newsgroup
about transferring VHS onto DVD - and often these people have to have
the issues regarding DVD-R/DVD+R explained to them. They often don't
know what (if any) of the "home-burned" DVD media types will play on
their own DVD player - let alone friend's and relative's DVD kit.
There's a current thread of "Converting VHS to DVD" to illustrate my
point.

To illustrate the issues, a friend who's daughter was recently married
engaged a "professional" video outfit to shoot the wedding and
reception. It may be different in other locations, but this guy (who
does a lot of weddings in my area) only provides VHS in the "standard
bundle". "Extras" on DVD are charged extra, and must be ordered
specifically as either DVD-R or DVD+R.

It's an eye opener BTW, to check on what these "professional video
services" charge for weddings. I'd suggest that you use the Yellow Pages
and contact your local "Video Wedding Services", ring up and enquire
about what's on offer, and the cost. And if you're asked anything about
particular DVD variants play dumb - I'd speculate that you're quite
likely to be offered a "standard VHS" delivery package.

Re: problem of head on camcorder, help
Hard drive help needed
problem of head on camcorder, help
way old stuff on people's shelves...
sony camcorders.. dcr55 vs hc80 vs hc40
Camcorder Battery
A full list of all models of panasonic camcorders geing back to 1998?
TiVo function?
Need photo book app for TV
Canopus AVDC-100 with Pinnacle Studio 9 software