They are going through a transition period w/ new leadership and some layoffs.

Supposedly, the XDcam source material is acceptable (1/2" chip, HDV compression).

You would think that allowing quality video from the JVC200 series would allow them to continue to pursue other cost saving avenues.

However, there is a bit of Sony snobery that is ingrained in the system.

My friend worked for the company that produced Rides & Overhaulin for Discovery and I have seen their content submission guidelines:

YES, yo do have to give them ALL the masters. If you shoot P2 you transfer to tape (althought they may have since started to accept hard drives).

No more than 15% HDV (or HVX200), ALTHOUGH they do accept XDCAM HD (because the bigger chips, better glass and higher bitrate).

It will be interesting to see what they say about XDCAM EX (which WILL feature 35mbs compression but with a fixed lens), but I do not think they wil accept our JVCs as primary cameras (again, low bitrate and noisier 1/3 " chips).

Yeah, and uprezzing MiniDV to 1080 gives you an HD picture.

Not to be a "nit" but:

"using the camera's HD/SDI link to transfer all the FOOTAGE to HDCAM, then use that as their editing master."

And, 720p is HD1 not HD2. And the Z1 shoots HD1.

Well, actually JVC 24P is even less bandwidth when your workflow throws out the repeated frames eg when you record direct to HD on camera.
60p is 19Mbs with 12 GOP.

HDV2 is by definition 1080i (Sony/Canon) which is what the monster garage ref was about.

Pedantic, yes but keeping it clear! Plus the compression is simply far more effecient than any previous digital camera.

I would guess that standards based on certain formats are up for review on a regular basis. A great cinematographer, a great subject, an HD200 with the HZ prime lens converter - irresistable!

Claiming the original footage. there are some pretty tough deals out there, and sellers are invariably hungrier than the buyers. Plus the buyers sharks have more teeth. Just recently I had an associate tell me about the hard time he had gettiing his own footage back to use and cleared from a doc sold to Miramax years ago. It was a sicko original contract, but he wanted the deal real bad back then.

To update the info on the Lifetime show, called "Lovespring International," they "clone" the HDV video to HDCAM (via HD/SDI), so I assume they mean they transfer it to HDCAM to make an editing master source tape, correct?
The show is aired in standard def, but shooting it in HDV makes it look a lot better, or so says the DP, Laura Merians. Rule of thumb, people; always start out with the best acquisition you can.
Here's a link, and remember, she chose the Canon H1 before the HD250 came out:

http://www.studiodaily.com/main/tech...dies/6788.html

Still, proof positive that an episodic network program was made with HDV.

Depends on how they are 'cloning' to HDCAM. If they are taking the live camera feed out of HDSDI straight to an HDCAM deck, there is NO compression and true 4:2:2 chroma sampling. If they make dubs of the HDV tape to HDCAM after the fact, then the HDV compression and colorspace reduction has already happened. Using the first method allows for a high fidelity image with a lesser priced camera head. The only limitation being dynamic range in f-stops of the smaller imagers. That dynamic range is easier to manage on a set with proper lighting.

-gb-

Since the original post used the word "footage" I'm assuming it was from tape.

Clone means a bit-for-bit copy -- like copying a disk file. HD-SDI to "any VTR" is not a clone of HDV. There is a decode and then a recompression. Only FireWire supports cloning.

Which raises the question IS IT possible to clone, via FireWire, HDV to XDCAM HD at 25Mbps? If one can, then that's a better option than going to HDCAM. But, I suspect the HDCAM choice was made because many many more folks have a HDCAM VTR than an XDCAM HD VTR.

PS: "Well, actually JVC 24P is even less bandwidth when your workflow throws out the repeated frames eg when you record direct to HD on camera." There are no repeated frames with 24p. There are REPEAT FLAGS that require no compression. So there are only 24 frames to compress. Everything else are flags.

A year ago I did a comparison of 720p24 verses 24N. Mathematically, the 720p24 uses lower compression than 24N. Despite this, Panasonic continues to quote 100Mbps when they talk about quality -- and then when pressed about limited storage on P2, they quickly switch to talking about 24N. Drives me crazy when they do this in public and not one person objects. Keeping it clear it important because there's so much intentional FUD as well as simple missinformation about HDV. Especially 720p.

You would be correct. The HDV tapes are "cloned" to HDCAM. There is no direct H1 camera-to-HDCAM workflow, via live feed.

As far as the original question of this whole thread - will Discovery HD accept the HD200 for full acquisition?
The final answer is a definite - not sure. But more than likely, no.

Forrest, if you're set on shooting a doc for D-HD, I'd play it safe and use at least an F330 XDCAM HD. I believe that's the cheapest option out there.
If you want a light, easily portable, user-friendly HD-capable camera that takes beautiful pictures regardless of D-HD's guidelines, then the HD200 is a fine choice. It is for me, anyway. I plan on shooting my own docs with it.

Thanks, Glen. I've also been looking closely at the 330/350 cameras as an option for this project because of their acceptance by D-HD. First of all, the project has to come through along with a budget, now doesn't it?. Right now it's in the "possible" stage.

I do have my own docs that I'm considering, and the 200 would fit the bill nicely, as well as for my corporate clients. As I noted early on in this thread, I'm getting a hands on demo from JVC later this week, so we'll see how it strikes me.

I've been working in HDV since the FX-1 hit the market, and it's served me well...allowing me to make a living without breaking my bank account. Treated correctly, you can produce nice material in HDV.

But, I've been quite intrigued by the XDCAM EX since I saw it at NAB. It appears to be a camera, with its higher bit rate and more forgiving codec, that can take many of us small independents to a higher level...both in video quality and client base. Will it initiate the demise of HDV (at least on the Sony side) in the professional ranks? That's a big question, and we could go around and around about that, with opinions across the map.

There are many routes to take, with excellent equipment made by the major manufacturers. It makes things all the more difficult when considering capital expenditures. But, thanks to the people on this, and other forums out there, we're able to gather the information we need before taking the plunge.

Thanks to all that have responded to this thread. Your input is greatly appreciated.

Forrest

glen pretty much nailed it here....

all of the sub-10K HDV cams are fine for shooting your own docs or for SD broadcast purposes. i think we're all holding out hopes for yet-to-be-released XDCAM EX to meet the minimum HD broadcast standards at an affordable price. i could get two of those for less than the price of a RED....dang.

it's a great time to be in video, but it would be even greater if some of these promised land cameras could be released soon! can't wait to see what's over the horizon...

News today from Discovery Communications:

Discovery Communications has changed its official policy for HD content delivery because of it (. Up to now, the Atlanta-based company had a strict policy that no HD program could take more than 30 percent of its source footage from an HDV camera. With the JVC ProHD cameras enhanced with the LoLux software and an 18X Fujinon lens, Discovery now allows certain programs to be shot 100 percent with JVC’s ProHD (19.7 Mbps) equipment.

Wow, that's good news for many folks.

-gb-

Eric,

How did you find out about this? Was there a press release or something? Is there a link you could provide? I did a google search and couldn't find anything.

Thanks...

So no love for the stock lens. Makes sense.