BBC Scotland audio report on the AF101 - EDIT - it's BBC-approved for HD!

Well the oddest thing about the approved list is the inclusion of Panasonic HCK10 / HMR10 which is a a small POV 1/4" chip set camera with AVCHD recording the very codec that they say cannot be used on the AF100. What I am gathering here is that the requirements at the BBC are similar to those presented by Discovery. They are inflexible in their guideline for quality and workmanship. But if you can attain that quality of workmanship with something that isn't on the list, they will accept it, but it had better be good. As an example, the spec says that HDV can only be a fraction of the show, and yet, the first season of Ice Road Truckers was shot on HDV, all of it. But the quality of the show was very high.

Best,

Jan
 
BBC requirements are quite complicated and regulated by several documents, the main one "TV Delivery to Network Programmes" linked on the same page as the cameras' list. Generally any HD programme can have up to 25% non-HD content such as in par.2.7 of that document (updated 10th of March 2011):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/dq/contents/television.shtml#HDSummary

"2.7 Use of Non-HD material
Some high definition programmes will contain some material from standard definition originals, and sources which are not considered to meet HD broadcast standards, such as domestic camcorders. This material is all called ‘non-HD’ in this document.
To maintain a high standard and meet audience expectations the amount of non-HD material is limited to25% of the programme’s total duration. Non-HD material must not be used for large uninterrupted sections ofthe programme, unless agreed by the broadcaster. This includes archive material.
2.7.1 Non-HD material
Material acquired using the following methods or formats is considered to be below the high definition standard and will therefore be treated as non-HD:
• HDV from all manufactures
• Most cameras with image sensors under 1/2”
• Frame based (intra-frame) recording formats below 100Mbs
• Inter-frame based recording formats below 50Mbs
• 720 line equipment
• Film not meeting the requirement for HD in section 2.8 below"

Notice that eg. all 720-line equipment is considered non-HD. Technically any camera that is not on the HD-list can fill in the 25% quota, including the minicams which are routinely used for special shots /sequences. I haven't seen any mention of EX1-3 and/or nanoflash official approval on BBC pages. Maybe I just missed that or all of that falls into the 25% non-HD quota. The famous "caveats" in Mr Roberts and BBC Scotland appraisals. BTW from April BBC accepts only HD submissions on HDcamSR tapes. Anyway, soon the blanket approvals and exceptions will be replaced by the EBU point system.
 
Last edited:
And my point nugat, was that one of the cameras on their approved list was an AVCHD camera. Frankly I am not really sure of your overall agenda here, there is no way that you can prove today that it has or has not been approved based on the stuff you are digging up and posting. Bringing out the list of approved cameras that have been in place and not updated because the announcement was only a few days ago, what is the point of that? What is the point of the little back-handed stabs at the camera? This will all reveal itself in due time and from the sources I have which I trust very much, this is simply a matter of large corporations getting things done. I know that when I want a change on my website, it takes several weeks. So I say this again, it will all prove itself out and regardless of what the lists say today, it is a matter of time for updating.

Best,

Jan
 
"Agenda"? "backhanded stabs"?
Noel Coward was to fill out the US immigration questionnaire once. There used to be (and there still is a similar one) question there: "Have you ever contemplated the violent overthrow of the government of the USA?".
"Sole purpose of the journey", he supposedly put in.
A manufacturer's rep chasing would-be subversives across various fora is peculiar marketing.
I have twelve Panasonic cameras in my company (two Af101) yesterday I just put in order for two more hpx3100. I return two hpx371 which I am not satisfied with. My dealers are happy to oblige with my agenda. The next move with the AF101s depends on the tests scheduled next week. Nothing more to reveal from my "agenda".
Good night and good luck.
 
Last edited:
nugat said:
"Agenda"? "backhand stabs"?
Click to expand...


Read your post, are you sure that you have no agenda? how about ...with the modifications begging to be made; better OLPF/sampling and onboard AVC100--

We all know that AVC100 is not possible. So the point of this little stab? This is what I mean by my comment.



A manufacturer's rep chasing subversives across various fora exceeds the boundaries of the ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I only post in this forum at this point and on the CML, which is vastly more rare. And since I am not a manufacturer's rep, I am a product manager, vastly different in the job description, I have a very large investment of time and energy in the AF100 series. And I don't think my postings are ridiculous. I am just trying to say that when the BBC makes this a publically written word, it will likely be exactly the way this group has interpreted it. The fact that you keep bringing out lists of cameras that are approved and that the AF100 is not on this list proves nothing but the way you present it is that it is supposed to mean something. How could it?

I have ten Panasonic cameras in my company, two Af101, yesterday I just put in order for two more hpx3100. I return two hpx371 which I am not satisfied with. My dealers are happy to oblige with my agenda. The next move with the AF101s depends on the tests scheduled next week. Nothing more to reveal.
Good night and good luck.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it is a cultural difference in the way I am perceiving your words. I see your words as being negative, and saying that the BBC is not going to accept the camera, perhaps that is not what you really mean and I am just being an American. So let's call it cultural differences and let this go until the BBC puts it into the printed word.

Best regards,

Jan
 
Agree. And therefore this thread entitled "it's BBC approved for HD", with misquotes from the audiorecording, should be mercifully put to sleep until.
PS. Sorry for the "riduculous". I edited it out, your answer was faster.
 
I feel I'm going round in circles here

Back in the day... we were told DV was not broadcast quality...then the BBC bought a few thousand PD150's and they were used for local and national news and programmes.
At one point a certain BBC region was using Z1's for its HD acquisition.

Watch this space, the recording was a internal presentation to BBC staff, not a formal announcement to the outside world, listen again and tell me where they say "its not suitable and will not be used when hooked up to an external recording device".
 
Last edited:
Put it to cultural differences. EBU and BBC walk hand in hand in establishing standards. Their pronouncements are watched across TV Europe. If they say a camera X is good, other broadcasters follow and accept it. If not, it's doomed and limited to the industrial/corporate market.
Business or no business. Simple as that.
 
Nugut... the Sony EX3 did not make the grade/list, yet its used extensively for BBC 100% HD content with a nanoflash.
Regarding the recording ...look at the camera used for comparison, a high end Sony. This was a serious presentation i put it to you if the AF101 had have failed its evaluation, the presentation would never have been held wasting BBC resources.

Yes it vital we keep pushing the technical envelope and the BBC has said AF101 codec is not up to their requirements but with an external recorder yes it is.

Tell you what this time next year - if the AF101 has not been used for BBC HD work I will send you a bottle of black bush whisky, if it is used you can send me something form Poland
 
PM me with an address and with pleasure I'll send you something from Poland without betting. And will appreciate good Irish black bush in exchange. I don't want to drown in this argument on other people's opinions. I'm conducting my own test on Af101 next week and that will be decisive if I return the cams or keep them. The key to me is NOT resolution, 700TVL give or take 100 according to various sources. In my intended use in multicam studio soap shoot it doesn't matter. But poor rendition of movement in 25p would ( excessive judder or not). I also don't like the codec/SD cards, fortunately SDI can be tapped for prores in the studio easily. I should stop here indeed until I learn more. This cam has already caused more closed threads and forums, bad blood and vitriolic language --than necessary. It's only a cam and television, not an emergency ward.
PS. I'm not going to make my decision public for the same reason. Anybody interested PM me in April. Now really good bye AF101 forum activity for me.
 
nugat said:
The actual words there are:

"Let's go back to the list...[..]...HD channel approval...with some caveats, for the right kind of programme...it's looking pretty good..."
Click to expand...

Thanks Nugat for actually listening to the actual words I actually used in my talk.
For those who just read the (misleading) headlines or who want to jump let this as some definitive statement let me spell it out.
There has been no official announcement, but based on testing by various teams within the BBC it is likely (but not definite) that the BBC will approve the AF100 for some types of productions (I.e. Ones that play to the camera's strengths, and mitigate it's well known weaknesses) if used with an external recorder using a minimum of 50Mbps 422 recording.

Clear enough?

P.S the poster also mis-spelled my surname!

Dave
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Well the oddest thing about the approved list is the inclusion of Panasonic HCK10 / HMR10 which is a a small POV 1/4" chip set camera with AVCHD recording the very codec that they say cannot be used on the AF100. What I am gathering here is that the requirements at the BBC are similar to those presented by Discovery. They are inflexible in their guideline for quality and workmanship. But if you can attain that quality of workmanship with something that isn't on the list, they will accept it, but it had better be good. As an example, the spec says that HDV can only be a fraction of the show, and yet, the first season of Ice Road Truckers was shot on HDV, all of it. But the quality of the show was very high.

Best,

Jan
Click to expand...

Actually Jan if you read the details the HCK10 is approved as a CAMERA only and you have to use an external recorder with it like a Nanoflash.

Dave
 
First off, Dave thank you for taking the time and spelling it out clearly

DRC_ONLINE said:
it is likely (but not definite) that the BBC will approve the AF100 for some types of productions (I.e. Ones that play to the camera's strengths, and mitigate it's well known weaknesses) if used with an external recorder using a minimum of 50Mbps 422 recording.
Click to expand...

This is what everyone should be aiming for - using the right camera for the right job.
 
DRC_ONLINE said:
Actually Jan if you read the details the HCK10 is approved as a CAMERA only and you have to use an external recorder with it like a Nanoflash.
Click to expand...

Hi Dave, Thanks for chiming in, I was only going off the above posted list that said it was okay for indy production. I only have my idea of what that means, like low budget, yet expected standards, so no issue with your clarification. Makes a more standardized response.

Best,

Jan
 
Come on guys with all due respect, if the camera is approved for use with BBC that only makes it a kinda novelty option to the tech crews that regularly use gear, its certainly not an indicator that you mister indie filmmaker now have a transparent gateway to commissions for BBC HD.

See, that is the kinda impression we create with this falsified obsession with broadcast acceptance - at least over here in the UK anyway. If there is gonna be any deal... then the choice of camera is going to be one of convenience not an opportunity of circumstance. I do applaud any technical recognition of the af100, its awesome, but its the naive interpretation of spin that gets tiring.
 
Sure. I don't see why it would be any other way. If a production needed an ENG camera with a high quality codec, there is no reason for them to pick an AF100, an F3, or a Red. As far as obsession goes, I guess it is what it is. Some owner/operators get excited by seeing acceptance of their gear. Why not? If your gear is accepted as high quality, it may help you get some work.

I am not interested in a debate about skills versus equipment. If someone doesn't have the skills to get quality work out, that person isn't going to get much work anyways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top