Sony Shoulder HDV cam

[Phil Bloom]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

In May of 2007, a major broadcaster air a program that was 100% shot in HDV and delivered in HDCAM

Here in the UK there are currently no channels will take HDV for more than 15% of the program, in fact 15% is what they say for SD stuff in the HD broadcast, so they seem to classify it the same!!

I was at an HD meeting on Monday for series 2 of a docudrama show that was hugely popular last year. It is co funded by the History Channel HD and the HDV issue came up. The post prodcution company were there and they reiterated the 15% thing as we want to use the sony V1 as a second camera for some of the reconstructions. Even though the images will be heavily treated to look like 8mm it doesn't matter. They are so strict. Everything is checked thoroughly by the HD broadcasters before TX, cant see how they can tell to be honest on something so heavily graded and messed around with!

The JVC 201e is a Europe specific model due to daft tax laws meaning any camera with firewire in is classified as a video recorder and therefore the tax is much higher. The 200 only has DV out.

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Phil Bloom

Here in the UK there are currently no channels will take HDV for more than 15% of the program, in fact 15% is what they say for SD stuff in the HD broadcast, so they seem to classify it the same!!

I didn't HDV was used to deliver HDV programs. The re-compression should be very bad for image quality.

AFAIK you had two options in editing: downsizing to DV or going full HD. Discovery is using it a lot for HD.

Do still UK people have to pay a tax to have a TV? The reason was to pay for public television, but I thought now BBC was just another program maker, and UK TV becoming mostly private. Then there wouldn't be any reason for that tax. Better go for cable-TV then.

Carlos

[Phil Bloom]

HDV not for delivering, just for recording. They can tell in the compression. Even when converted to a different format.

We don't pay tax as such, it is called a licence fee. The BBC is still officially state funded even though they make enormous revenue from selling their progs. Unfortunately the BBC is still an enormous inefficient entity so they need all the money they can get.

Whether you have Satellitle or cable or just use your tv to view your dvds you have to pay the licence fee. Whenever you buy a tv your details are forwarded to the licence office (unless you buy one privately of course). Naturally the licence office assume every house has at least one tv, even if that isnt correct. So if there is no licence for your property they assume you have a tv and are being naughty.

One day it will change, but not for many years. In fact it has just got more expensive, the been wanted it to be even higher to help pay for the digital switchover.

Because of the licence fee the Beeb dont show commercials which is lovely, especially if you are used to watching tv in the US! Though now with DVRs I never watch commercials on anything now. I just start watching 15 minutes after it starts and fast forward!

[Phil Bloom]

Originally Posted by Carlos E. Martinez

AFAIK you had two options in editing HDV: downsizing to DV or going full HD. Discovery is using it a lot for HD.
Carlos

How are Discovery talking material originally shot in HDV if there is the 15% rule?

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Phil Bloom

Here in the UK there are currently no channels will take HDV for more than 15% of the program, in fact 15% is what they say for SD stuff in the HD broadcast, so they seem to classify it the same!!

I didn't HDV was used to deliver HDV programs. The re-compression should be very bad for image quality.

AFAIK you had two options in editing: downsizing to DV or going full HD. Discovery is using it a lot for HD.

Do still UK people have to pay a tax to have a TV? The reason was to pay for public television, but I thought now BBC was just another program maker, and UK TV becoming mostly private. Then there wouldn't be any reason for that tax. Better go for cable-TV then.

Carlos

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Phil Bloom

How are Discovery talking material originally shot in HDV if there is the 15% rule?

I don't know about that 15% rule. But I do know that a South America big producer is recording stuff for one of their programs in Z1 and sending it to them.

I don't know what Discovery does after that.

In fact I don't see why any production company wouldn't take HDV duly processed to HD.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Guys, let's not turn this into a discussion of taxed television, etc. please. We're already venturing far from the OP, I'd like to keep this thread on focus; it's a good one.

[Phil Bloom]

Originally Posted by Douglas Spotted Eagle

Guys, let's not turn this into a discussion of taxed television, etc. please. We're already venturing far from the OP, I'd like to keep this thread on focus; it's a good one.

Just responding to a question, be rude to ignore! ;-)

I think the discussion as to whether HDV can be accepted worldwide is key to whether Sony will ever bring in a DSR 450 type camera that can shoot HDV. If HDV is not accepted globally for HD acquistion it is highly unlikely they would ever bring out such a camera.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

HDV is just as accepted for acquisition as DV has been, and will continue to be. Delivering HDV on an HDV tape will likely not be a commonly accepted method, any more than delivering on a DV tape used to be, and still is not accepted by many facilities. HDCAM is the standard and will be for a while longer, just as Beta in one format or another has been the standard.
It's one thing to read/recite the rules, and another to actually practice and experience the craft.
I'd recommend a study of the HDV spec to fully understand what it is. Even broadcasters are completely flummoxed as to what HDV really is, thanks to very clever marketing, plus some early weak experiences with HDV.
As I'd mentioned in yet another of these somewhat silly discussions; it's all commensurate with your target audience. If you're creating media with the sole purpose of selling to BBC, Discovery, or other high end broadcaster, you're not going to get there on the cheap. Period. If you could, then we'd see no more HDCAM, Varicam, or other high end camcorder, and we'd see the quality of programming take a deep downward turn as a result of the too-affordable HD cams and the folks that can afford them. It's "Pay to play" all the way in the high end, with very few exceptions.

[Phil Bloom]

Douglas you are confusing me...

"HDV is as accepted as DV for acquisiton" by whom and for what? I am not talking about delivery, as that would be HDCAM as DIGI is for SD here. As someone who shoots HD for UK Broadcasters I know for a fact that I cannot shoot more than 15% of a programme in HDV it I intend it for HD broadcast. They just will not accept it.

[Christopher Witz]

exceptions to the rules being compelling and original content like being eaten by a bear on camera? (i.e grizzly man on discovery)

Budget is as budget does right? If the project is grandiose enough for broadcast... then I'd hope one would plan for HDCAM.

The great thing about the affordability of HDV is that allows people to cut their teeth on HD... If their ability and commitment to the craft has legs... then they will eventually afford to move up to HDCAM.... like you have Phil.

[Phil Bloom]

Originally Posted by Christopher Witzke

exceptions to the rules being compelling and original content like being eaten by a bear on camera? (i.e grizzly man on discovery)

Budget is as budget does right? If the project is grandiose enough for broadcast... then I'd hope one would plan for HDCAM.

The great thing about the affordability of HDV is that allows people to cut their teeth on HD... If their ability and commitment to the craft has legs... then they will eventually afford to move up to HDCAM.... like you have Phil.

I'm actually just on XDCAM HD. I wish HDV was more accepted. It would make things a hell of a lot easier! But the one good thing about it is it will stop a lot of these self shot docos with awful camerawork going out when HD broadcasts become the norm, they will need to be shot by a cameraman.

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

DV was originally not accepted as being more than XXX% of the program acquisition as well. That went away once engineers pulled their heads out of the sand about DV. Some broadcasters have the 15% rule, others don't. You can't universally apply it as a hard rule. TLC, TNT, Court TV, Discovery, Food channel, National Geo, ESPN, MTV, MTV2,VH1, CMT, Outdoor Channel, Sundance Channel; all have aired programming and/or segments 100% acquired in HDV, just as they've aired projects 100% acquired in DV.
Either the programming meets spec or it doesn't.
Having been the person that either shot or edited pieces for the aforementioned broadcasters, I'm pretty comfortable not worrying about the 15% "fact" as I am about making the content meet spec, while matching what we shoot with our F700.
As I've also mentioned in another thread, sometimes 1/2 or 2/3 cams simply cannot be used, due to safety of the operator or space restrictions. In these situations, the content may be compelling enough to warrant the entire program being shot in HDV, and has been in more than a few instances.
Either way, your point is made, heard, and understood. I don't happen to agree with it.

[Phil Bloom]

My point is not my opinion but what I have been told by HD broadcasters in the UK. As I have said before I want HDV to be accepted by them, currently here, and i stress the here as in the UK it isn't. That's a fact and I can't change it. I am sure it is different in other countries as you have pointed out.

[Christopher Witz]

so.... if one would want to have their HDV ( let's say it's from a Z1 to keep it in thread ) footage accepted, they'd need to have it put/converted to HDCAM tape?