Camcorder user

Yes it's exactly the same for me!

The latest and last copy of Camcorder User, #200, states the mag is changing its name to Digital Video and the 1st edition is due on newstands on 10th March. Blurb says "Camcorder User and Digital Video Made Easy are joining forces" - now that is a worry, the last bit! If it is dumbing down, let's hope it is not too far down!

My copy arrived today.

Don't know about dumbing down Alan - there's a half page advert for G-spot vibrators/dildos part way thro the magazine - make your own mind up.

Gavin

Mine came this morning at first I thought it was Computer Video Editing.
Had the familiar DVD on the front, the first page called “Opening shot” nearly the same as the familiar “Opening Scream” Same format, same advertisers just deferent people writing it.
Not had time to really look at it but see its £1 cheaper!
What do others think about it?

Mine came this morning and as i'm thinking about a mac the piece on iMovie will be an intresting short read.

Mine came as well.
Do you get a notification when your subs run out as the swop over has put every thing out of sync.
Can't see a month on it either.

Ray Maher.

Ray you’re right, but I guess it’s the April edition they usually come out a month before.

FWIW my copy went into the bin after 30 minutes. I used to find useful information in both Camcorder User and Computer Video Editing but this new "hybrid" doesn't do a lot for me at all.

Hi,

I have always liked Camcorder User, it's OK in my book.

Jim Bird.

I was in Highbury's offices on Friday (for a leaving do for Lisa Keddie - CV's former editor - who was leaving to join Real Networks) and managed to get hold of a copy of the first revamped "Camcorder User".

And, since they had issues in the office, I'm presuming that most people on the UK subs list who have not got issues will be getting theirs on Monday or Tuesday.

So my suggestion is that anyone in the UK who hasn't got theirs by Tuesday probably should chase the subs people to find out what is going on.

Bob C

Would anybody have the contact details to moan about the crap replacement. I thought I'd give the new mag a go, but it's by no means a relplacement for CV.

as far as I'm concerned, the mag will be binned. It's just too basic for me - not to say there isn't a place for such a mag but it's misleading to suggest that it's a suitable replacement for the old mag.

I have always liked Camcorder User, it's OK in my book.

So did I but this new one seems to be "dumbing down" and looks to be willing to do the same as "What Camcorder" and "Digital Video Made Easy" by repeating articles which are very basic. Definitely will not replace CV (will there ever be another one?).

I now find that I have more time on my hands to read novelswith no Mags. available.

Harry

Bought the "New" mag today-first reactions.....
BIG DISSAPOINTMENT as Harry has said DUMBED DOWN to the level of Digital Video Made Easy.
Gone is the informative read that was Camcorder User the DVD adds nothing,(except another two quid on the price).
I am generally very unimpressed with the replacement for what were two quality magazines.
I will probably use this forum to find out whats new in the world and give the magazines a miss.
Rick

I have bought CU since issue 1 (apart from a period of around two years when I lost interest in it). The last few issues were beginning to look better and had more relevant articles in them. Then came the latest one. BIG disappointment, definitely a mag for beginners with a so called advanced section tagged on at the back. I'll pick up the next issue at the news stands to see if it was just a one-off to attract the Digital Made Easy readers, but if this is the way of the future, then Highbury have done a whole tranch of readers to CV and CU magazines a gross dis-service, and I will not be purchasing it again.

It's hard to see exactly who DV is aimed at - it seems to consist chiefly of DVME with a hint of CU and CVE - and is likely to end up appealing to noone. I don't think it will last long like this.

Pity, I quite enjoyed CU. As a relative novice, CVE was more challenging - but how else can you advance?

Now there's just DV Doctor - but at least I'm saving the not inconsiderable monthly cost (and hectares of Scandinavian forest!).

Hi Philip b.

I have to agree with you regarding CU, it had got its act together and it was a good read.

Cliffxm2, I gave a copy of CVE to a friend of mine who had began video editing and creating DVD's, he read it and said he did not enjoy it as it went straight over his head.

I guess video mags are a bit like training courses, they are either too challenging or not challenging enough. It must be extremely difficult to hit the correct balance.

Jim Bird.

I must confess to being a C.U. fan.

Out of curiousity, open to everyone here, what were the bits in Cam User you liked? and what should be carried over into Digital Video?

I'm assuming that some people from Digital Video might be looking into this forum to see what Bob C.'s up to.

I bought Digital Video - and I must echo the views of the majority here - it really is not a fit replacement. Teaching multimedia we're in desperate need of basic adffordable good advice - and I;m afraid that tis just does not hang up. If I were to give a student this type of pubication then they'd run out of steam during the first lab session. I have them, from experimentation, making short movies using basic lab equipment.

And as for the DVD - no depth or anyting I could use - the backgrounds on offer could have been constructed in about 10 mnutes by any of my stduents using any graphics packsge. With CVE thet wree at least decent and usable.

A great pity - and an opportunity wasted.

Next month I'll save the fiver.

No Digital Video in my local WHS (Although there seems to be a nearly £12 book from highbury on display with the same name) so I can't even look at it!

I wrote to the editor of Digital Video, explaining why I thought that the mag wasn't a suitable replacement and got a reply that I forwarded to Bob.

The editor disagreed with my comments that the mag that I was sent was far too low a level compared to CV and thought that his mag was more inclusive.

I suppose that I might buy a mag of the shelves now and again, but couldn't recomend anybody subscribing.

I write for the new "Digital Video" magazine (having written for CU since 1997) and I have three contributions in the launch issue. I'm sure Bob will agree with me when I state that at no time has "DV" ever been seen as being a replacement for "CV" - it's aimed fairly and squarely at the newcomer. CU and its sister publication, "What Digital Camcorder", have been orientated at this sector of the market for a long time, and with or without the incorporation of DVME the titles would have maintained this focus anyway. Whenever I'm asked to put together a piece (whether it's my Video View column, a review or a tutorial) I always bear in mind the newbie. That's very often the brief I'm given. Why? Because that's the magazine's primary target market. Why? Because if it weren't it wouldn't sell. Simple.

Given that I contributed to CV as well (Bob was kind enough to rely on me for the mag's in-depth user profiles as a means of putting a "human face" on the magazine's contents), I know that each title had entirely different readerships - CV attracted more knowledgeable readers who wished, in the main, to use the medium more seriously and to (perhaps) a more critical standard and to get under the hood of the systems they were using. CU and WDC have always existed to provide a starter-guide to newbies who didn't want to tinker down in the engine-room or to engage in complex processes. The fact that editor Rob Hull has recently had to consider the inclusion of some more in-depth reviews and tutorials of digital video post software and hardware is simply because room was made available to do it, and was actually specified by the publisher following the closure of CV. So, when its writers write basic stuff for beginners it's because that's what the majority of its readers expect of it.

We also have to be mindful of the fact that the whole field of what we've been calling "computer video" has changed in the lifetime of CV magazine; in its early days, the task of editing video reliably on a computer was a domain into which only users of Avid Media Composer and Lightworks dared to venture - yet today we can edit video to a professional standard on a cheapo PC or laptop. In fact, I can do with a low-cost system some jobs which required a £200,000 VT edit suite in Soho only 15 years ago. That's how things have changed - and the availability of such systems is right there on the shelf in high street stores. OK - so they won't be all-singing and dancing, and they might not work 24/7, but they're efficient enough for the average home consumer and they're cheap. So, where does that put an increasingly niche publication like CV? As I mentioned in another post, the market will decide.....

As for "Digital Video", time will tell as to whether it can sustain its position in the market - and it'll be a struggle for all of us, both those on the staff and the rest of us who are freelance. People are moving away from print-based publications in general, and it's an incredibly risking field to be in. That's why it would be folly for DV to try and be a substitute for CV. There's no point whatsoever.

Colin

Colin

Digital Video isn't in my local WHS, which used to stock Camcorder user, I have serious doubts about WHS & their capability to efficently stock/display/barcode price mags.

Regards

Well my copy of DV landed on my mat on Wednesday.
At first glance I thought it was 'not too bad' but yes it is dumbed down compared to CV, but I don't think that is all bad as not everybody is as up on NLE as many on this forum obviously are.

Then I actually started to read through the mag, where as before I was only thumbing quickly through. I came across a readers letter asking if there was a broadcast quality DVD camcorder, or when one would be likely to come available. The reply started ok by saying DVD cams were not broadcast standard and unlikely to ever be - good so far, but then went on to say that DVD camcorders are as good quality as a DV camcorder.

Oh well, I'll keep getting DV until my subscription runs out, but I doubt I wil renew the sub.

Mark.