OT: Some cameras do not get full acquisition...?

Jay Gladwell wrote on 4/25/2007, 7:43 AM

I just read an article that stated:

"Discovery HD finally approve XDCAM HD as an acceptable HD format for Discovery HD Channel; it came up to their very high standards. By full 100% acquisition, I mean you can shoot a documentary for Discovery HD channel entirely on an XDCAM HD camcorder alone as it meets their HD format quality standards. Other formats/camcorders do not get full acquisition approval from Discovery HD, these include HDV camcorders like Sony’s own Z1, the Canon XL H1, even Panasonic’s P2-based HVX200 doesn’t make the grade. These cameras can only be used for 15% of the entire programmes duration and never more than 60 seconds shown at any one time i.e. the majority (85%) of the programme must be shot on a higher professional format such as XDCAM HD or HDCAM."

What exactly does all this mean, "100% acquisition"?

Thanks!


Comments

Coursedesign wrote on 4/25/2007, 8:57 AM
Discovery understands that sometimes specialty cameras are needed for unique situations, such as lipstick cameras in tight race car cockpits and "disposable" cameras where you wouldn't risk a high price HD camera.

Still, you wouldn't want to spend an hour watching a show shot on a lipstick camera, or on any substandard camera for that matter. Whatever that standard happens to be.

Discovery has set the bar high, because they want to be sure to look appealing also to bigscreen owners and the future of their archives.
Jay Gladwell wrote on 4/25/2007, 9:32 AM

That doesn't explain "full acquisition" and the other cameras mentioned (nothing was said about lipstick cams).

TheHappyFriar wrote on 4/25/2007, 5:27 PM
I'm curious too. Is this another "full = 1080p" thing?
farss wrote on 4/25/2007, 5:37 PM
"Full 100% acquisition" means 100% of the content can be shot with that camera. I think the "Full" bit is just a redundant term, "100% acquisition" would have been adequate but maybe scanned badly.

Bob.
Coursedesign wrote on 4/25/2007, 5:53 PM
100% acquisition means that it meets their picky production standards, so that you may have 100% of your footage from this source.

Discovery understands that there are situations where a substandard picture is better than no picture, so they allow brief interludes shot with other cameras (max. 60 seconds at a time, no more than 15% total). This typically is used for crash cams, lipstick cameras, etc.

Clear?

Jay Gladwell wrote on 4/25/2007, 7:08 PM

No, it's not clear. The other cameras mentioned--"Sony’s own Z1, the Canon XL H1, even Panasonic’s P2-based HVX200"--are neither lipstick cameras nor crash cams.

What is the XDCAM HD doing that the others aren't?


Coursedesign wrote on 4/25/2007, 7:50 PM
The XDCAM HD cameras offers better CCDs, lenses, better DSPs and better media recording than these mentioned HDV/P2 cameras.

CCDs? Yep, they were allowed to cost a LOT more in the XDCAM HD cameras, and the difference shows in the output.

Lenses? Neither of those cameras hold up in wide shots with detail especially.

DSPs? Those three aren't bad, but they can't hold a candle to what's in the XDCAM HD cameras.

Media recording? XDCAM HD has been PROVEN to be a really good format, quite a bit better than HDV or DVCPROHD.

I mentioned lipsticks and crash cams only as two examples of why somebody would set aside their regular large high quality camera. For another example, see the flying cameras so popular in today's studio programs such as Dancing with the Stars or America's Funniest Home Videos. Only a year ago, ABC used mediocre flying cameras that offered a really pathetic picture. In the current season, these have been much improved.

Clearer?
TheHappyFriar wrote on 4/25/2007, 7:52 PM
so what they're saying is that this camera fits EVERY situation they can come up with, right?
if so, then that makes sense.
John_Cline wrote on 4/25/2007, 7:56 PM
"What is the XDCAM HD doing that the others aren't?"

XDCAM HD camcorders have measurably (and noticably) better image quality, primarily as a result of better quality camera using 1/2" chips, plus much better lenses, plus a higher data rate.

Discovery Channel has chosen to set a minimum standard. Much lower down on the food chain, I will no longer use VHS in any of my productions. For any broadcast work, I rent XDCAM HD or Varicam cameras. No matter how impressed I am with the Z1 or my V1u, they just don't hold a candle to the "professional" cameras. I'm pretty sure Discovery will add the new XDCAM EX to their list.

John
richard-courtney wrote on 4/25/2007, 8:02 PM
John_Cline said: "I'm pretty sure Discovery will add the new XDCAM EX to their list."

If so, then I might have a chance to have my work seen. :)
farss wrote on 4/25/2007, 8:20 PM
That's about it. You can use any other lower standard camera for no more than 15% of the finished production. If you read any of the blogs from guys shooting serious work with the F330/350 I'd really have to ask why you'd NOT want to use something of at least that standard. It's not snobbery. Spend the money to get on locations like Antartica or put your butt on the line in a war zone and the cost of these cameras is pretty small change. It's not just the resolution part of the image quality. It's low light and latitude, easy of use and reliability of both the camera and the recording medium.

Bob.
farss wrote on 4/25/2007, 8:22 PM
Bottom line is if you've got something they want it doesn't matter what it was shot on. I think whet they're referring to is when they underwrite your shoot. Even Hollywood has restrictions on what the DP can do, some contracts forbid the use of filters on the lens for example.

Bob.