Anyone here plan to submit a V1U-based project for TV broadcast? at DVinfo.net

Greg Quinn · February 7th, 2007, 01:25 AM

I asked a question in the "Techniques for Independent Production" forum that no one has answered about whether there are any TV channels at all that accept HDV format as the primary format for a project (I believe that Discovery channel does accept HDV but for no more than 15% - DVCPro HD is more highly regarded, but not that much more). Is anyone here working on a V1U-filmed project that's aimed at national/regional TV broadcast, or is the minimum expected standard still an XDCam production?
Thanks
Greg

Chris Hurd · February 7th, 2007, 07:32 AM

This has been discussed and answered extensively before. Not in Techniques for Independent Production though, but in HD / HDV Acquisition.

It all depends on which Discovery you're talking about... plain ol' standard definition Discovery, or Discovery HD? If it's Discovery HD, then yes there is a 15% cap on HDV originated material (but if it's a one-time submission and the cameras aren't seen, how would they ever know if it was shot on HDV). But if it's for plain ol' standard definition Discovery, then no there is no such restriction on HDV.

See http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=80922 for one of those previous discussions.

Greg Quinn · February 7th, 2007, 08:51 AM

Chris thanks for the link. I'm still curious whether anyone plans to use the V1U for a TV project.

Zsolt Gordos · February 7th, 2007, 12:53 PM

Hi,

I do plan that, however I am aware that most HD channels do not accept HDV as source. What Chris told above made me think though.... Is there any way for them to figure out that the original shot was taken by a HDV cam? Lets say the edited movie would be printed on a HDCAM tape - is there any way to figure that the original was taken by HDV? (ok, original color space is different...but will they check that?)

Greg Quinn · February 7th, 2007, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zsolt Gordos

is there any way to figure that the original was taken by HDV?

MPEG2 artifacts?

Alex Amira · February 7th, 2007, 01:55 PM

Zsolt,

A few months ago (September 06) when I still lived in Maryland.

I used to go to Communications Televideo, Ltd on Georgia Ave in Silver Spring.
This is located .5 miles from Discovery Channel World Headquarters and Discovery buys quite a lot of items from that Broadcast store.
This is a very well known 2 story PRO Video and Broadcast store (pro/ prosumer HDV and DV sttuff like FX1 HVX 200 and such on the first floor and the broadcast stuff upstairs DVCPRO and HDCAM and other Broadcast HD (XDCAM) stuff).

One day I oveheard a conversation. It seemed that someone had recentley talked to a Discovery person who had something to do with QC.

That person said that there were quite a few people putting HDV on HDCAM tape and trying to pass it as HDCAM. He said that QC could spot this (I have no idea how) and they would reject it. This is very reliable and credible info since it came from one of the senior guys in the brodcast department.

My take on this is that the MPEG 2 compression (as mentioned by Greg mentioned) could be what they go on.

I also believe that a lot of users in DC metro area were submitting stuff to Discovery HD since it is pretty much the biggest game in town for HD material to air on TV.

I think that Discovery was used to watching HDCAM in their production studios and when a lot of people sent FX1 and V1U (and others: XL-1H HVX200) footage the compression was a bit noticeable and they went to QC to find out why and the QC figured it out.

I guess the other outlets are local news stations (all the locals are broadcasting in HDin the DC metro are: ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, PBS, etc.). But with the local news the footage may be a bit different in content. It seems that in the US all the local news channels are on HD in the majority of the areas. In Maryland I could get the ABC...FOX...NBC...PBS...CBS in HD...some of them have multiple channels (since HD gives you more channels) so I would get CBS in standard, 720 and 1080...

Hope this helps.

Stu Holmes · February 7th, 2007, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zsolt Gordos

"Steadycam Merlin "

Zsolt.... it's actually "Steadicam" and not "Steadycam". just thought i'd mention it..

Greg Quinn · February 7th, 2007, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Amira

My take on this is that the MPEG 2 compression (as mentioned by Greg mentioned) could be what they go on.

There's probably also a noticeable difference to the experienced eye in respect to sensor chip size used by these cams (i.e. half inch chip in the XDCam, two thirds in the HDCam compared to a quarter or one third inch chip in the prosumer HDV cams). I must say that now I've gotten a usable 24P workflow with the V1U on the Mac, I'm absolutely delighted with the picture quality, but prom a professional perspective, I probably need to start aspiring to an XDCam plus lens - time to remortgage the house again....

Zsolt Gordos · February 7th, 2007, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stu Holmes

Zsolt.... it's actually "Steadicam" and not "Steadycam". just thought i'd mention it..

Stu - you are right, those folks might have issues with the right spelling :)
Nevertheless I corrected my signature.

Paulo Teixeira · February 7th, 2007, 09:02 PM

Since the camcorder does have HDMI output, you can use this to bypass HDV and store your footage on the DVCPRO-HD codec.
http://www.decklink.com/products/intensity/
Not a portable solution by any stretch but it’s the best way to get your stuff accepted.

Mikko Lopponen · February 8th, 2007, 05:11 AM

It is possible to eliminate a lot of the mpeg2 artifacts by shooting wisely and eliminating them with smart filters. But it does need time and care to do properly. Mpeg2 with the Sony encoders is pretty easy to spot, Canons a1 seems to do better in that regard.

Brett Sherman · February 8th, 2007, 11:40 AM

I've had some ideas of PBS or cable documentary-style pilots I might do at some point. I wouldn't shoot the bulk of the material on a V1. If I ever get to the point where I want to do it, I'd buy an XDCAM HD camera. It just wouldn't be worth the risk shooting on a V1. A PDW-330 with an SD lens would run around $20,000, if you're serious about producing for HD broadcast that's the minimum I'd be comfortable with. That being said, the V1 would come in handy because the size might allow you to do things with it that you simply can't with a bigger camera. So long as it's used in a limited capacity.

I'm also guessing Discovery HD has had a lot of stuff submitted that was shot on the HVX-200 that they've also had to reject.

Paulo Teixeira · February 8th, 2007, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

I'm also guessing Discovery HD has had a lot of stuff submitted that was shot on the HVX-200 that they've also had to reject.

Your footage still has a much better change of being accepted originating from the HVX200 than any other camcorder under 10,000 dollars. That is why I’ve always wanted one to shoot my stock footage in. I think the acceptance rate for the HVX200 is up to 25 to 30 percent of a program verses 15 percent of HDV although they may be more liberal now concerning footage coming from the HVX200.

Zsolt Gordos · February 8th, 2007, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira

I think the acceptance rate for the HVX200 is up to 25 to 30 percent of a program verses 15 percent of HDV although they may be more liberal now concerning footage coming from the HVX200.

Then there is a burning question popping up: why are these cameras called as "professional"? They are HD, they are called professional, yet in professional broadcasting they are not recognized.

Douglas Spotted Eagle · February 8th, 2007, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paulo Teixeira

Your footage still has a much better change of being accepted originating from the HVX200 than any other camcorder under 10,000 dollars. That is why I’ve always wanted one to shoot my stock footage in. I think the acceptance rate for the HVX200 is up to 25 to 30 percent of a program verses 15 percent of HDV although they may be more liberal now concerning footage coming from the HVX200.

I'd like to see credible evidence to support this statement. I am in possession of internal documents from more than one national broadcaster that places the HVX either on par with, or in a lesser capacity to, HDV. Having had personal discussions with many of these broadcast engineering teams, the same thing is voiced, both in Canada and the US.
On the other hand, I'm also aware of those same broadcasters having Sony and JVC camcorders in-house, being used for production in several situations.
Certainly not a primary cam, but...
Additionally, the shootouts by all parties biased and non-biased have placed all of the camcorders on par with each other, with very small subtleties between them.
Since the HVX is not a primary cam for us in any event other than needing overcrank, it's not fair for me to say that we've only had one HVX piece go to national vs dozens of HDV pieces, but we've had a LOT of HDV pieces going to air, part of a Superbowl spot being one of them, and an upcoming commercial being one of them.

February 7th, 2007, 01:25 AM	#1
Greg Quinn Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 505	Anyone here plan to submit a V1U-based project for TV broadcast? I asked a question in the "Techniques for Independent Production" forum that no one has answered about whether there are any TV channels at all that accept HDV format as the primary format for a project (I believe that Discovery channel does accept HDV but for no more than 15% - DVCPro HD is more highly regarded, but not that much more). Is anyone here working on a V1U-filmed project that's aimed at national/regional TV broadcast, or is the minimum expected standard still an XDCam production? Thanks Greg

February 7th, 2007, 07:32 AM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	This has been discussed and answered extensively before. Not in Techniques for Independent Production though, but in HD / HDV Acquisition. It all depends on which Discovery you're talking about... plain ol' standard definition Discovery, or Discovery HD? If it's Discovery HD, then yes there is a 15% cap on HDV originated material (but if it's a one-time submission and the cameras aren't seen, how would they ever know if it was shot on HDV). But if it's for plain ol' standard definition Discovery, then no there is no such restriction on HDV. See http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=80922 for one of those previous discussions. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

February 7th, 2007, 12:53 PM	#4
Zsolt Gordos Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Budapest, Hungary Posts: 414	Hi, I do plan that, however I am aware that most HD channels do not accept HDV as source. What Chris told above made me think though.... Is there any way for them to figure out that the original shot was taken by a HDV cam? Lets say the edited movie would be printed on a HDCAM tape - is there any way to figure that the original was taken by HDV? (ok, original color space is different...but will they check that?) __________________ Sony XDCAM EX1r, Canon 5DMkII, Røde NTG2, Røde NT1000, Røde Stereo Videomic, Sachtler DV6 SB on Gitzo 1325V, Steadicam Merlin, Omnitracker, Hackintosh 3.5Ghz Quad 8Gb RAM

February 7th, 2007, 09:02 PM	#10
Paulo Teixeira Trustee Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 1,773	Since the camcorder does have HDMI output, you can use this to bypass HDV and store your footage on the DVCPRO-HD codec. http://www.decklink.com/products/intensity/ Not a portable solution by any stretch but it’s the best way to get your stuff accepted. __________________ https://www.youtube.com/user/PhotoVi...esEtc/featured https://www.pond5.com/artist/paulot Last edited by Paulo Teixeira; February 7th, 2007 at 09:45 PM.

February 7th, 2007, 08:51 AM	#3
Greg Quinn Major Player Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 505	Chris thanks for the link. I'm still curious whether anyone plans to use the V1U for a TV project.

February 7th, 2007, 01:55 PM	#6
Alex Amira Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Muncie, IN Posts: 74	Zsolt, A few months ago (September 06) when I still lived in Maryland. I used to go to Communications Televideo, Ltd on Georgia Ave in Silver Spring. This is located .5 miles from Discovery Channel World Headquarters and Discovery buys quite a lot of items from that Broadcast store. This is a very well known 2 story PRO Video and Broadcast store (pro/ prosumer HDV and DV sttuff like FX1 HVX 200 and such on the first floor and the broadcast stuff upstairs DVCPRO and HDCAM and other Broadcast HD (XDCAM) stuff). One day I oveheard a conversation. It seemed that someone had recentley talked to a Discovery person who had something to do with QC. That person said that there were quite a few people putting HDV on HDCAM tape and trying to pass it as HDCAM. He said that QC could spot this (I have no idea how) and they would reject it. This is very reliable and credible info since it came from one of the senior guys in the brodcast department. My take on this is that the MPEG 2 compression (as mentioned by Greg mentioned) could be what they go on. I also believe that a lot of users in DC metro area were submitting stuff to Discovery HD since it is pretty much the biggest game in town for HD material to air on TV. I think that Discovery was used to watching HDCAM in their production studios and when a lot of people sent FX1 and V1U (and others: XL-1H HVX200) footage the compression was a bit noticeable and they went to QC to find out why and the QC figured it out. I guess the other outlets are local news stations (all the locals are broadcasting in HDin the DC metro are: ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, PBS, etc.). But with the local news the footage may be a bit different in content. It seems that in the US all the local news channels are on HD in the majority of the areas. In Maryland I could get the ABC...FOX...NBC...PBS...CBS in HD...some of them have multiple channels (since HD gives you more channels) so I would get CBS in standard, 720 and 1080... Hope this helps.

February 8th, 2007, 05:11 AM	#11
Mikko Lopponen Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 393	It is possible to eliminate a lot of the mpeg2 artifacts by shooting wisely and eliminating them with smart filters. But it does need time and care to do properly. Mpeg2 with the Sony encoders is pretty easy to spot, Canons a1 seems to do better in that regard.

February 8th, 2007, 11:40 AM	#12
Brett Sherman Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mount Rainier, MD Posts: 428	I've had some ideas of PBS or cable documentary-style pilots I might do at some point. I wouldn't shoot the bulk of the material on a V1. If I ever get to the point where I want to do it, I'd buy an XDCAM HD camera. It just wouldn't be worth the risk shooting on a V1. A PDW-330 with an SD lens would run around $20,000, if you're serious about producing for HD broadcast that's the minimum I'd be comfortable with. That being said, the V1 would come in handy because the size might allow you to do things with it that you simply can't with a bigger camera. So long as it's used in a limited capacity. I'm also guessing Discovery HD has had a lot of stuff submitted that was shot on the HVX-200 that they've also had to reject.