Mastering to HDCAM vs. HDCAM-SR

[Shane Ross]

You ca, but going directly to HDCAM SR would be better. Because HDCAM has a 3:1:1 colorspace, opposed to your nice 4:2:2 color space of DVCPRO HD. HDCAM SR has the 4:2:2 color space, so your colors will be preserved. But going from DVCCPRO HD to HDCAM to HDCAM SR will lose a lot of color information.

PLUS, the SR deck has 12 channels of audio, eliminating the need for that DA88…you can layback all tracks to tape.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Cheyenne Pesko]

Hi Shane.

Damn. I’d hate to throw away all that color data simply because I lack the resources. The more digging I do, the more I realize I have no alternative. In the end the delivery calls for all mix elements on the tape (in addition to DA88s), so that totals as ten tracks of 24 bit audio (beyond D5 capabilities, even). Thanks for the response. Time to conjure up some post-magic.

cp

As above, so below.

[Shane Ross]

Regular HDCAM decks only have 4 audio channels…FYI

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Cheyenne Pesko]

Many thanks for taking the time, Shane. See you around the forums.

[Michael Gissing]

I really don’t understand the desire to put audio mix elements on 12 channels of HDCam SR. Audio post facilities don’t have HDCam SR machines. They want files. Even DA-88 is a waste of time as the audio has be converted to files. Please join the push to banish non file formats for audio deliverables.

Truth is most broadcaster use HDCam machines for broadcast so it is likely that the SR is just your master and standard HDCams will be struck from that for broadcast distribution (assuming it is a broadcast show).

If you have to deliver HDCam SR, then I suggest you take a Quicktime in the DVCProHD codec to a facility that can strike a tape if hiring a machine at a reasonable rate isn’t viable.

[Shane Ross]

[Michael Gissing] “I really don’t understand the desire to put audio mix elements on 12 channels of HDCam SR.”

So we don’t have to deliver two elements…we deliver one tape and we are done.

[Michael Gissing] “Audio post facilities don’t have HDCam SR machines.”

Some do. And those that don’t, rent. Or, like in our case, they output mixed stems as AIFF files and I drop them into my timeline and do the final output, finished video and audio, in one pass.

[Michael Gissing] “They want files.”

No network I have delivered to wants that. All my specs say either DA88 (if we deliver HDCAM or Digibeta) or full mix on HDCAM SR.

[Michael Gissing] “Even DA-88 is a waste of time as the audio has be converted to files.”

Well, when they stop asking for this and asking for other formats, then we will stop doing it. We send what they ask for.

[Michael Gissing] “Truth is most broadcaster use HDCam machines for broadcast so it is likely that the SR is just your master and standard HDCams will be struck from that for broadcast distribution (assuming it is a broadcast show).”

That is a BROAD assumption. WHile History requires HDCAM or D5, Discovery wants HDCAM SR…the major networks all want HDCAM SR. Depends on the network, so making broad statements like this is pointless.

[Michael Gissing] ”
If you have to deliver HDCam SR, then I suggest you take a Quicktime in the DVCProHD codec to a facility that can strike a tape if hiring a machine at a reasonable rate isn’t viable.”

Yup…good suggestion. If you can’t do it, find a place that can. Don’t waste that color space! HDCAM SR decks to rent for a day are $1000…but to output a show at a facility might cost you half to a third of that…depending on the place.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Michael Gissing]

In my experience, I have yet to have HDCam SR as a deliverable. We do about 30 docos each year sound post with picture post on about 15 of them. If I am reversioning, I would require the producer at some cost to transfer the HDCam SR tracks to files. As they originally come from a sound post facility, they should be available as files anyway and in fact not once have I needed to source HDCam SR tracks. Nice to have them there but really not required.

As a sound facility, I threw my DA-88 in the bin a year ago and refuse to support this format further. It is a shocker and belongs in the 20th century.

Given that the broadcasters then stuff your HD signal into an mpeg2 transport stream, I am looking forward to the day when we deliver that file electronically to broadcasters. We really must move on from tape. Sony have done well out of selling tape machines but that era really should end. Sorry to hijack this thread with a rant but I want to spend my money on creative things, not tape machines that almost never pay for themselves.

[Cheyenne Pesko]

Believe me, there is nothing I would like more than be able to roll out of bed tomorrow morning and deliver all my projects on a compact solid state drive – no tapes, no moving parts, no nonsense. And while this wondrous tomorrow is sure to come in some shape or form, the reality remains that there is indeed a living, breathing standard in place that works in semi-harmony with today’s broadcast technology. I have two separate lists of delivery elements in front of me, each outlining identical items that include both HDCAM-SR masters (inc. 10 channels of mix elements) and DA88s with separate stereo, M&E, and 5.1 elements. While I certainly don’t have to like it, I can at least have the confidence that this movie will look its best while reaching the widest audience possible. If this is what makes my movie accessible in far off territories, so be it.

Progress is anything but stagnant. While most of us do look forward to how this medium will evolve, we just as passionately cling to what already works because that’s what makes a standard (even if it is always changing).

I’ve leaned a tremendous amount today. Thanks again.

[Mark Raudonis]

Michael,

Most networks are settling in on HDCAMsr as the master delivery format of choice, for the reasons mentioned earlier (12 ch audio and 4:2:2 color space). I’ve noticed that the old “DA88” requirement is changing slightly to include “or digital file on DVD”.

I too would love to see totally digital delivery, but I don’t see that happening very soon for the simple reason that a digital file must be archived in some way, and currently, for long form programming, it’s hard to beat videotape.

By the way, while I appreciate a good rant, you’re preaching to the choir on this forum. A more appropriate (effective) approach would be to speak to your contact at the network you’re delivering to, and bend their ear. Good luck!

Mark

[Michael Gissing]

[Mark Raudonis] “A more appropriate (effective) approach would be to speak to your contact at the network you’re delivering to, and bend their ear.”

Actually one of the reasons why the deliverables are changing is because my colleagues and I have been refusing to supply DA-88s. I went through the same process with sprocketed stereo 16mm mag, DAT and DA-88 so I will continue to push things with broadcasters and distributors.

I understand the argument for tape and SR is obviously better but I am just not going to buy another tape machine that won’t pay for itself. This seems like Sony’s last hurrah in tape but I am not spending.

I also find it easier to get broadcasters to move with the technology in Australia & Europe. For some reason there is greater inertia in the US and UK.