Hvx200 vs XH-A1 lowlight

Just some information from a Canon rep who is in contact with Discovery. I believe it's actually Sony HDV that is discouraged for the most part, although Iconoclasts was all Z1U and it's a full hour long show on Discovery HD.
 
I as well can concur with Barlow that Canon are accepted acquisition cameras for Discovery HD.........


Pappas

Elton said:
I have it on pretty good authority that the H1 and XH cams are accepted acquisition cameras for Discovery HD...even from mere HDV.

What is critical is the post process and basically delivering an uncompressed master from HDV footage. In other words, don't recompress HDV. With FCP it's just a matter of outputting via SDI or component analog HD to, say, D5 from a Kona/Blackmagic etc, rather than "conforming to HDV" and outputting to HDV tape.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Again though, I ask for proof. The printed documentation is really clear. It never spells out anything about Canon or not Canon, the only thing it does is specify 1080 HDV (as in, it doesn't even appear to acknowledge 720). And 1080 HDV is most definitely not approved for content origination beyond the 15% restriction.

If there's some formal statement or change of policy -- some press release or something -- please point to it. The public documents saying that it's not accepted are very easy to find, so if something's changed it would be important news.
 
OK, I'll see what I can find out "officially".

I think it's fair to say though that there are official producer guidelines, and then there are productions that get made and broadcast despite not adhering entirely to the rules.

'Iconoclasts' on Discovery HD is a perfect example: Shot on the Z1U in CineFrame 30, (yeesh) and broadcast entirely from HDV acquired footage.

I won't be surprised in the future to see shows shot entirely from the whole spectrum of "affordable HD" cameras...and Discovery HD won't be so special in the future as HD becomes more the norm than the novelty format for production.

It really is more a matter of how the program looks after delivering a master and going through their encoding process. I think Disjecta's many HD pieces are easily proof enough that Canon HD can in fact be worthy of meeting Discovery HD quality standards.
 
Last edited:
But no, it isn't, because Discovery HD quality standards are a specific published set of rules. People can cheat around 'em, or get special permission, but that doesn't mean that those cameras are approved for acquisition.

People make a big deal out of Discovery specifically because they have published guidelines. You can't just say that something that's specifically disapproved of is now approved, without some manner of documentation to support it. I mean, DVCPRO-HD is on their approved list for completely unrestricted acquisition (HDV isn't) and DVCPRO-HD is on their approved list for editing (and HDV is specifically disallowed from editing), but the HVX is only approved with the same limitation that HDV cameras have imposed on them (15% max) because they consider the optical performance to be in the same class as the HDV cams. And HDV itself is *not* on their list for unrestricted acquisition. So if the optical performance is the same, and the format is worse, how could Canon HDV suddenly become "approved"?

People make business decisions based on these lists. That's why I say, if something has changed and there's an official announcement that says so, it would be of interest to our membership.
 
What we're talking about is that if you were to ask the Discovery channel to fund your production, they have requirements as to what you have to shoot and edit on.

So far, their guidelines say they will not approve a production if it's intended to be shot on any HDV camcorder or on the HVX. There are certain formats that are approved for "unrestricted use", such as HDCAM or DVCPRO-HD, and there are certain formats that are only allowed for very limited use (no more than 15% of the final footage in the total project). Those limited formats include 1080 HDV, and also the HVX.

Barlow and Michael are saying that "no, you can use the Canon, it's approved" and I'm saying "says who? The documents certainly don't say that." If it was possible to do unrestricted acquisition on a $4,000 camcorder that would be big news, of significant interest to our membership. But without explicit supporting documentation from Discovery saying so, I'm afraid that it's at best just a rumor, and at worst it could lead an uninformed someone to spend cash and make plans on shooting something with the idea that it will be approved when, according to their published documentation, it certainly wouldn't.
 
How would discovery know the difference if someone shoots with HDV and converts it to DVCPRO100 after words?

I know that the color space is different and you can't 'gain' quality or reclaim color space, but isn't the format war too subjective and getting to be beuratractic B.S? I have seen great HDV, poorly shoot HD and the other way around as well.

I am not trying to change Discoverys high quality production standards, but doesn't come to a point of being subjective as to the point were negligable differences in color space are prioritized to the 'inferior' hdv codec.

The way that I have have seen it, the pure HD signal can get so compressed in the end, the consumers only see a fraction of the originating resolution anyway.
 
I understand where Barry's coming from, and I will see if I can get an official position. I don't know how often the producer's guidelines are updated, but the contact I have at Canon wouldn't have told me this if he hadn't personally been informed by Discovery that their engineering/testing dept. had put their cameras through the wringer and found them to be acceptable for full acquisition.

I'll bring up the subject again when I've spoken to Discovery.
 
magichristopher said:
The way that I have have seen it, the pure HD signal can get so compressed in the end, the consumers only see a fraction of the originating resolution anyway.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Good HDV is so far ahead of the actual quality of current HD broadcast in general that if the post production process is meticulous enough, and the broadcast encoding is good enough, it can pretty much look as good as any other HD program to the end viewer.
 
Nobody's arguing whether it looks good or not. I'm talking about whether it's allowed. Doesn't matter "why", what matters is "is it"...
 
Hi. I wonder if anyone can explain how you can get more than 540 lines V resolution with only 1080 lines of scan (the limit according to nyquist theory)?
 
I do not want to interfere but last week (on the biggest doc festival in the world IDFA), Discovery claimed that HDV generally and the HVX200 particulary was not an acquisition 'format' for HD programs. It is max. 15% participation only. DVCPROHD 100 and the Sony HDcam formats are aloud completely. I don't think this is changed in the last 4 days. P2 recording is -obvious- no point either.
 
Thats all well and good. Most HD broadcasters I have really looked into lately stipulate moreso than anything a delivery method, and have very little if any mention of aquisition.
 
Well said NCJE. Sorry if my previous posts came across as rumor-mongering, but I wanted to simply say that Discovery HD has tested the H1 and XH cameras according to Canon, and found them acceptable for full acquistion, with the caveat being the post process. (keeping it uncompressed until they encode for broadcast)

I think the published guidelines have a bit of a political purpose too. It's more about ensuring quality production by requiring expensive equipment, or at least keeping the perception in place that Discovery HD produced shows are shot with high-end HD gear. To be honest, I'm not sure how enthusiastic they are about democratized HD in general. It may affect their business model in the future.

I'll see what I can find out next week. Suffice it to say that the continued improvement of "affordable HD" has made for some gray areas when it comes to acceptable production cameras for HD broadcasts.
 
Last edited:
thanks magichristopher, I think I am missing something (re- reading resolution charts:)) can you suggest a thread or redirect me somewhere that might help?:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top