BBC HD Acceptability Guide
 

Here's the latest BBC guide to clients delivering HD content to the BBC....makes interesting reading especially if you were are hoping to submit HDV material. I have a feeling this approach is common amongst other broadcasters.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/dq/p...ery_v01_08.pdf

Regards,

Jonathan

Hmmm... seems they're getting tough on 720p (Varicam) as well. I thought that was just Channel 4.

Not just HDV, but all cameras less than 1/2" and at 35 Mb/s, the EX1 mightn't be acceptable either.

I'd take Andy's paper with a pinch of salt. BBC productions and productions companies submitting to them break so many of these regulations or at least bend them that the BBC wouldn't have anything to broadcast on the HD channels if this paper was followed to the letter. Simply the use of Z1's on numerous productions breaks numerous regulations outlined in this paper.

The Z1 currently gets used on SD productions. However, you can use these cameras up to 15% of the HD programmes, which does cover a lot of situations. I suspect this applies to BBC commissions for their HD channel and these productions will have the budgets to cover them. Of course, bought in programmes, will be shot on whatever, but the BBC does tend to commission UK productions, rather than buy in.

There will always be exceptions, but I rather suspect that new cameras like RED Scarlet (assuming it matches the much talked about possible specs) will be used rather than the Z1 and other HDV cameras in the future.

z1 is also used on some hd shows in hdv mode, though from what I've seen they are well within the 15% margin.

Section 2.1 appears to rule out footage from pretty much any video camera costing under $20K or so, plus many commonly used editing solutions. And calling something which doesn't meet their HD criteria "standard definition" is a bit silly, but it's their document.

The BBC are huge hypocrites though and will often blatantly break their own rules for this sort of thing.

They rejected the 25p modes of Sony cameras, yet they will happily deinterlace interlaced footage for flagship shows like Top Gear, even though there are HUGE jaggie edges as a result. Their policies and reasoning are often truly bizarre. I know of a few instances I could talk about but it would fall foul of forum rules to post them here.

Like most management and engineering things in the BEEB I feel this has been written by engineers who sit in offices and have very little to do with programme making.

At the end of the day the content is the important factor and in a world where BBC resources are reducing these sort of documents written by the old school dinosaurs are out of date with the real world.

There has never been more opportunity to shoot good quality programming at a reasonable cost and the BEEB like all broadcasters will have to live up to this in the even more competative market that they live in.

I understand BBC post production is closing down and with more being outsourced they will have little control over what is happening in the shooting of programmes.

I can't understand why they seem to be ruling out XDCAM HD at 35Mb/s, since cameras like the EX1 would be pretty suitable for those programmes that have been using the Z1 and the Mini DV cameras.

Personally, I believe those cameras have been at their best on those productions on which the filmmaker has been working with the subjects for long periods. Unfortunately, they've also been used on quite a few mediocre daytime and regional programmes.

I always work on the basis that the Beeb is a surreal place and to never be surprised by the unexpected.

At least they're pitching high on the technical front and having worked with an artist on a video installation, who had to defocus projected DVCAM material shot on a DSR570 on one screen to match a PD150 shot being projected on another, I can understand that.

3rd party producers will make programmes using XDCAM HD, but the delivery is on something else such as HDCAM.

The BBC themselves won't use XDCAM HD because it doesn't fit in with what they want from tapeless. They want to use solid state, period.

That could be part of this server system that the BBC is installing.

I hear our local BBC has bought some HDW 790's I expect they'll be used on programmes. However, the rumour was that they were going to get the Infinity for their news and current affairs.

Just try and air MythBusters on the BBC now... it's entirely in XDCAM HD and HDV and AVCHD. All rejected formats for their guidelines.

Last time I saw MythBusters on the BBC it was on a SD channel, so there's no problem there.

What happens if the BBC co-produces with Discovery and wishes their HD specs to be in place for screening on their HD Channel another matter. I suppose they could shoot on XDCAM HD 4:2:2 and have the other formats making up 15%.

If it's just a bought in programme, I expect they'll either accept it or reject it, if it doesn't look up to a HD broadcast standard.

The Infinity is an interesting situation, GV have really screwed up on that one. About 18mths ago I was chatting to Reuters senior cameraman in London and he told me that they were testing the Infinity as a replacement for dvcpro 25. He said the camera became extremely hot when in normal operating mode (unacceptably so)and that the fan to cool it blew a blast of icy cold air out of the back of the unit straight down the back of your neck! It was sent back.
Reuters decided to go with P2 and are now equipping with HPX2100's as are Sky News in the UK.

My own feeling is that this document is (as labelled) GUIDELINES - not laws or rules, and not never to be broken. Some (such as for delivery) may be absolute, regarding caption safe areas, placing of audio tracks etc, whereas others (such as acquisition format) may be more flexible.

Go to them with a programme made solely on 1/3" cameras, and I'd expect to be asked "why did you shoot it on those?" If you could make a good argument (observational documentary and small cameras essential, say) it may be deemed acceptable. If it was a drama, and you answered "because they're cheaper", I doubt you'd get very far. At least it gives potential contributors a starting point.

I think there's a typo in the document, and suspect it means "Inter-frame based recording formats below 50Mbs" are counted as SD (not Intra-frame). In which case, the new PDW700 will presumably be fully acceptable?

The BBC document appears to abruptly bring us back to the "good ol' days", when so-called managers & engineers ruled the show: DV & DVCAM were considered "unacceptable" (at least at the TV station I used to work for). Then good stuff shot in those formats popped up - and it was aired as an "exception to the rules". Then the managers discovered that it was cheaper (and often more sensible) to shoot DV, and even BBC (if I'm not mistaken) dispatched a dozen crews around the world with PD-150s or 170s - and the engineers had to keep quiet. Now they seem to be back. Not for long, I suspect (unless they really think that people care more about pixels than about programs).

Just my two cents
(after 25 years in the business)

Vasco

Not only that, the BBC issued training guides for those cameras:

http://www.bbctraining.com/onlineCou...=5160&cat=2781

Unfortunately they've also made quite a few poor programmes with these Mini DV cameras. Reminds me of a saying that one top cameraman used with directors with little visual sense: "be careful what you ask for, you might actually get it".

There have been good documentaries with them, especially in situations where you wish to keep a low profile. However, DSR 500 or DSR 570s do produce better pictures if you're going the DVCAM route.

There has been quite a few poor programs shot with ANY type of camera - including the latest state-of-the-art whatever-they're-called 100% pure HD cameras. On top of that, some stations seem to compress the signal in a way that just kills whatever flavor of HD you were supposed to get on your screen. But it's probably just my personal bias... (coming from the "producer-reporter-director" department...)

Best

Vasco

Seems the mpeg4 that the BBC are using has difficulties with certain aspects of HDV and 500 ASA Super 16. However, given the way technology is going, I can see little reason to shoot most HD programmes on 1/3" HDV cameras. I don't know why there's a reason for not having 35mb/s in the BBC guidelines. I haven't seen their tests, perhaps once it's gone through a post of less than the highest quality there are issues with the transcoding through various codecs involved in the chain.

Since when HDV=SD?

It's for the purpose of defining quotas as in paragraph 1.3 of that document:
These are guidelines, and may be varied if the case was good enough. Other examples may be for using more than 25% archive (hence SD or 16mm film) if the programme justified it. Otherwise, everybody is clear what's permissible without obtaining special exemption - which includes 25% max HDV.

I believe movement like trees blowing in the wind shot on HDV are causing problems in their chain - it's a similar problem to the grain on 500 ASA Super 16, although you can de-grain that. Discovery HD apply a restriction of 15%.

Posted today on The Reel Show is a segment "Reel Time #1, part 4" where Andy Benjamin from the "DV Mentor" dept. at the BBC talks about how they asses camera's and specifically about the EX1 and a little bit on how/why the 35Mb/s is not enough for the HD channel.

The "Reel Time #1" show is cut a bit strangely as Andy Benjamin is announced at the very end of "part 3", so if you just watch "part 4", he's not introduced at all.

George/

Basically, on the BBC's single HD channel they've set a high quality threshold and 50 Mb/s just passes. I'd imagine they see it as a flagship channel for their high end productions. You can see picture quality (and production values) on these HD productions even when transmitted on the SD channels.

Perhaps, if they get more HD channels, what is technically acceptable will come down.

The Z1 was described as half way between SD & HD, which I guess is fair enough given the resolution figures I've seen in published tests.

I nearly Shatnered myself when I saw ALL HDV cams were out... I just bought an HDV cam (XH-A1). I know that many show like Top Gear have used Z1U's in the past! I don't live in the UK but I do watch some of their content on BBC America, very nice and professional, especially compared to most of the trashy TV we have here in the good ol; US.

The Z1 is a common piece of kit in the BBC, that's used a lot on SD programmes (like Top Gear). Strangely, often as a Mini DV camera rather than HDV for downconversion, although that latter workflow seems to be increasing - the HD post being a limiting factor. I know one freelance cameraman who's done a lot of documentary work on BBC commissioned productions using a Z1 and I last time I spoke to him he'd never shot any HDV.

The HDV restriction only applies to BBC Hi Def productions.

Hi All,

Ivan Snoeckx just posted a link to Nigel Coopers "One day in Belgium" review of the EX3, which ends in the quote:

How about that?

George/

And note it's not just the HDV format that restricts the use of this type of camera, but also (from the original link) "Cameras with image sensors under ½” ". The image sensors of the EX may be as important as recording codec in gaining it broadcast acceptance.