DE
Yes, the gate to the BP Garden is often open and while it isn't technically somewhere staff are encouraged to go, it's not out of bounds either (unless it's being used of course!). I used to eat my sarnies in there occasionally. When CBBC pres was full studio based (before this current blue-screen single camera lark) it was harder to find it open with nothing going on becuse the CBBC Pres studio was next to the BP garden and had french doors that opened into it...
FI
So, to get back to the talk of HD...
What are the extent of changes needed for HD to be put into a studio such as TC1? Do Cameras, lighting and lots of other bits need to be changed or does one little thing make a studio HD ready?
Also, if a studio has fully converted to HD, does that mean every programme coming into it will have to be shot in HD? e.g. independent productions in the BBC which arn't shown on HD channels.
What are the extent of changes needed for HD to be put into a studio such as TC1? Do Cameras, lighting and lots of other bits need to be changed or does one little thing make a studio HD ready?
Also, if a studio has fully converted to HD, does that mean every programme coming into it will have to be shot in HD? e.g. independent productions in the BBC which arn't shown on HD channels.
NG
For HD video you replace the entire video infrastructure :
cameras + lenses
router
vision mixer
graphics
VTRs
monitoring
and sometimes even the camera cables (replaced by fibre)
Lighting is one of the few things you might not need to change.
However HD also often requires 5.1 sound - which will require a new sound desk and monitoring.
Basically - a new gallery and cameras - but the studio floor may be relatively change-free.
noggin
Founding member
fishyfish posted:
So, to get back to the talk of HD...
What are the extent of changes needed for HD to be put into a studio such as TC1? Do Cameras, lighting and lots of other bits need to be changed or does one little thing make a studio HD ready?
Also, if a studio has fully converted to HD, does that mean every programme coming into it will have to be shot in HD? e.g. independent productions in the BBC which arn't shown on HD channels.
What are the extent of changes needed for HD to be put into a studio such as TC1? Do Cameras, lighting and lots of other bits need to be changed or does one little thing make a studio HD ready?
Also, if a studio has fully converted to HD, does that mean every programme coming into it will have to be shot in HD? e.g. independent productions in the BBC which arn't shown on HD channels.
For HD video you replace the entire video infrastructure :
cameras + lenses
router
vision mixer
graphics
VTRs
monitoring
and sometimes even the camera cables (replaced by fibre)
Lighting is one of the few things you might not need to change.
However HD also often requires 5.1 sound - which will require a new sound desk and monitoring.
Basically - a new gallery and cameras - but the studio floor may be relatively change-free.
IS
and sometimes even the camera cables (replaced by fibre)
AIUI often there might also be the need to change some of the cabling to shorten the routes or add repeaters as HD signals can struggle to cover the same distances that SD ones can.
Basically - a new gallery and cameras - but the studio floor may be relatively change-free.
Although the programmes that use the studio might need to 'pimp up' their sets a bit, HD will show up any shabbyness, dirt or cut corners!
noggin posted:
and sometimes even the camera cables (replaced by fibre)
AIUI often there might also be the need to change some of the cabling to shorten the routes or add repeaters as HD signals can struggle to cover the same distances that SD ones can.
Quote:
Basically - a new gallery and cameras - but the studio floor may be relatively change-free.
Although the programmes that use the studio might need to 'pimp up' their sets a bit, HD will show up any shabbyness, dirt or cut corners!
NG
AIUI often there might also be the need to change some of the cabling to shorten the routes or add repeaters as HD signals can struggle to cover the same distances that SD ones can.
If you're using existing triax for HD cameras in a very large studio set-up then possibly, though HD over triax should hold up over most studio length cable runs AIUI (though not on OBs where Triax can be used for SD over long distances) However many HD installs are replacing triax with fibre.
However cable length IS an issue if you are running HD-SDI rather than SDI (not used for studio cameras from head to CCU)
noggin
Founding member
Inspector Sands posted:
AIUI often there might also be the need to change some of the cabling to shorten the routes or add repeaters as HD signals can struggle to cover the same distances that SD ones can.
If you're using existing triax for HD cameras in a very large studio set-up then possibly, though HD over triax should hold up over most studio length cable runs AIUI (though not on OBs where Triax can be used for SD over long distances) However many HD installs are replacing triax with fibre.
However cable length IS an issue if you are running HD-SDI rather than SDI (not used for studio cameras from head to CCU)
IS
If you're using existing triax for HD cameras in a very large studio set-up then possibly, though HD over triax should hold up over most studio length cable runs AIUI (though not on OBs where Triax can be used for SD over long distances) However many HD installs are replacing triax with fibre.
However cable length IS an issue if you are running HD-SDI rather than SDI (not used for studio cameras from head to CCU)
Ahhh I mainly have experience of HD-SDI, the distance thing has caught me out on a couple of occasions - trying to put it down a tie-line and finding that it won't reach the other end!
It has taken things back somewhat when you consider that distance was a factor when it came to analogue, especially in the early days.... and with HD it is too
noggin posted:
If you're using existing triax for HD cameras in a very large studio set-up then possibly, though HD over triax should hold up over most studio length cable runs AIUI (though not on OBs where Triax can be used for SD over long distances) However many HD installs are replacing triax with fibre.
However cable length IS an issue if you are running HD-SDI rather than SDI (not used for studio cameras from head to CCU)
Ahhh I mainly have experience of HD-SDI, the distance thing has caught me out on a couple of occasions - trying to put it down a tie-line and finding that it won't reach the other end!
It has taken things back somewhat when you consider that distance was a factor when it came to analogue, especially in the early days.... and with HD it is too
NG
If you're using existing triax for HD cameras in a very large studio set-up then possibly, though HD over triax should hold up over most studio length cable runs AIUI (though not on OBs where Triax can be used for SD over long distances) However many HD installs are replacing triax with fibre.
However cable length IS an issue if you are running HD-SDI rather than SDI (not used for studio cameras from head to CCU)
Ahhh I mainly have experience of HD-SDI, the distance thing has caught me out on a couple of occasions. It has taken things back somewhat when you consider that distance was a factor when it came to analogue, especially in the early days.... and with HD it is too
Yep - don't forget that apart from a few Thomson SD cameras - triax is still analogue - even for HD signals. Good quality analogue - but still analogue!
noggin
Founding member
Inspector Sands posted:
noggin posted:
If you're using existing triax for HD cameras in a very large studio set-up then possibly, though HD over triax should hold up over most studio length cable runs AIUI (though not on OBs where Triax can be used for SD over long distances) However many HD installs are replacing triax with fibre.
However cable length IS an issue if you are running HD-SDI rather than SDI (not used for studio cameras from head to CCU)
Ahhh I mainly have experience of HD-SDI, the distance thing has caught me out on a couple of occasions. It has taken things back somewhat when you consider that distance was a factor when it came to analogue, especially in the early days.... and with HD it is too
Yep - don't forget that apart from a few Thomson SD cameras - triax is still analogue - even for HD signals. Good quality analogue - but still analogue!
IS
Yep - don't forget that apart from a few Thomson SD cameras - triax is still analogue - even for HD signals. Good quality analogue - but still analogue!
Hadn't occured to me, but it makes sense I suppose for the CCU to be the business end. Is SD and HD triax the same?
noggin posted:
Yep - don't forget that apart from a few Thomson SD cameras - triax is still analogue - even for HD signals. Good quality analogue - but still analogue!
Hadn't occured to me, but it makes sense I suppose for the CCU to be the business end. Is SD and HD triax the same?