BBC Regions using domestic camcorders?

Yes I know on the continent they move quite regular, is this the case with Sly UK too?

Yep - but they are designed to domestic quality standards - both in construction and picture quality stakes. To describe them as "high-end production" models is a bit ambiguous - they are only just about semi-pro (i.e. wedding video) level in reality.

They can be "OK" when used by people who know how to get the best out of them (avoiding on-shot zooms, ensuring decent light levels and white balancing correctly) - however they still aren't nearly as good as many in the industry seem to believe. Their pictures still have an unmistakeable "domestic" look almost universally.

If their use allow programmes to be made that otherwise would have been impossible - then the quality drop can be seen as a trade-off - however if they are used just to save money then that is a different matter. If you start using this kit as a replacement for decent news crews, rather than an addition, then questions need to be asked. I don't pay my licence fee to have sub-broadcast quality pictures forced on-me. (Granada's production guidelines certainly veto-ed the use of such kit for mainstream productions - only allowing DRS500s to be used...)

Cheap cameras also have another major disadvantage these days - the pictures are noisier, and softer, both issues which can cause problems with MPEG compression later in the transmission chain.

Low bit rate MPEG2 actually requires higher quality - cleaner, sharper and noise-free - pictures than previously would have been the case to get decent results on transmission. If you put garbage in these days, you get even worse garbage out! (This is one of the reasons that HDTV transfers are often used for DVD transfer these days - you get better compression results the more decent picture information you start off with)

but will the cheapo cameras get better in quality over time?

Yes - the PD-150 is much better quality than the previous high-end domestic models based on Hi8/S-VHS recording, or Betamax/VHS before that. Domestic stuff has improved, and continues to improve, but only in some areas. Different factors drive the domestic market - with decreasing size being a major domestic requirement - but not a broadcast aim. (Very lightweight cameras are more difficult to hold steady and operate handheld than slightly heavier ones for example)

However lens technology doesn't develop as quickly, and drop in cost, as quickly as electronics - and the lenses on cameras that are as important in the picture quality stakes.

Also - broadcast cameras have many more adustments (that in the right hands can massively improve picture quality) that aren't ever likely to appear on domestic units, as they a) cost money to include, b) won't be missed by almost all the domestic users who wouldn't know what to do with them anyway!

I've noticed on Ground Force that the bulk of the programme is shot on a broadcast quality camera, in other shots it looks like a big thing too so I can only presume it's the real deal.

However there are cutaways that look pretty awful, especially during the "reveal". These are surely sub-broadcast quality and this sort of cheeky cost cutting should be avoided in my opinion!!

I noticed it a lot on the last series of Pop Idol too, during the corridor shots outside the audition rooms and places like that. The picture is pretty bad in comparison to the proper machines, but the sound is absolutely terrible; the second some annoying teenager screams at getting through there's distortion-a-plenty.

Speak of the devil...tonight's Look North (hull edition) contained more of the nasty video. This time a report from a bird sanctuary in Boston. People were interviewed centre of the screen, instead of to the left or right. Their faces were a sort of reddish-purple. All the shots very over exposed. Just awful. Sorry if I am whinging about this, but it is sending me insane! Someone buy this lot a decent camera!

Hull seem to be using quite a lot of "PDP-quality" material on their 1830 show. I suspect they don't have a large budget - but even so it is the thin end of the wedge when this poor quality material is used for normal news output.

I think Ground Force use both broadcast camcorders and sub-broadcast quality DVCam/miniDV - this allows them to capture more angles simultaneously within their budget, and also allows them to film unobtrusively. (The latter being a stronger argument for their use if they are trying not to blow the reveal early)

Well, Boston never deserved decent quality, did it?

If it had been anywhere else...........

god I hope not. I would rather have less news in good quality than more news in poor quality

It's hardly a thriving hub of activity...... we discovered an invention called the wheel last week!

perhaps they knew they'd have to get in and out. a bird sanctuary (i'm sure they have owls there) in boston is like a holding red rag ... or maroon owl embroidered sweater to a bull