View Full Version : Varicam and HDX900
Looks like half of my ESPN work as well as some from other clients is now going the HD way and it’s mostly Varicam. Fortunately I can get some great rental deal locally. I was under the impression that the HDX900 was going to be fully acceptable as a substitute for the Varicam at about a very convenient $19,000 saving and I was considering getting an HDX, but looks like it might not entirely be the case. Many at ESPN are not accepting the HDX (although we were told that they would). The main problem from what I hear is that the post houses that they use claim that it takes too long to load (capture) audio/video and also some producers that have used both say that the quality is not as good as the Varicam. This is putting me back to square one.
The average difference in the daily crew rate from the HDX to Varicam is about $300/400 ($2000 for HDX and $2400 for Varicam). Apparently the saving is not enticing enough to accept the cheaper camera. Has anyone heard of such problem or have any real experience?
CrewU
10-01-2007, 12:25 PM
I have been working for some post houses that will accept HDX and Vari with no problem. It seems that getting your hands on a Vari has been easier until recently because of the rental houses having the HDX available. I have heard of a difference of quality but I would imagine with a proper set up the camera could compete and could be used in a setting like ESPN where the "vari" part of the Varicam may not be used to its full potential. Tape size is different but as far as ingesting the video I will ask some of the editors I know to see if there is a difference.
Run&Gun
10-01-2007, 12:35 PM
I bought my VariCam in December at the request of ESPN and they have been keeping it and me very busy. They specifically asked for a VariCam, not an HDX-900. They have recently started a new show in HD and they are specifically asking for and using the VariCam and have stated that they are NOT accepting footage from the HDX-900 because of post issues.
But let me say also, the VariCam's are not being used anywhere near to their full potential.
Flaca Productions
10-01-2007, 12:47 PM
i have had contact with bristol as well on the subject of HD gear. i have very easy access to an HDX900 and was told by espn that they want Varicam. i have access to that as well - just not as convenient. seems like they are being consistent on their desire for the varicam over the HDX.
ED Scott
10-01-2007, 01:51 PM
I've been somewhat amazed by the lack of support for the HDX. I got a call from NBA Productions, they wanted Varicam. Mine was not available and I asked if an HDX900 would work, they specifically said they only wanted Varicam. Go figure.
freedom
10-01-2007, 02:10 PM
HMMMM, I have a friend who bought an HDX specifically for NBA Entertainment and worked it all summer shooting for WNBA.
Max Girth
10-01-2007, 02:56 PM
Post issues? The only one I can think of is that there's a couple DVCPRO HD decks that don't read the (smaller track pitch) tapes.
Other than that, it's functionally the same as a Varicam.
ED Scott
10-01-2007, 03:01 PM
HMMMM, I have a friend who bought an HDX specifically for NBA Entertainment and worked it all summer shooting for WNBA.
Well, WNBA. Nuff said.
freedom
10-01-2007, 05:00 PM
Well, WNBA. Nuff said.
same production co., so I find it hard to picture they want hdx for one and vari for the other. not enough difference to set up 2 different operations. SD vs HD I could see but...
joecam147
10-01-2007, 09:02 PM
Well, leave it to some idiots in 'post' to rain on a camera man's parade. Nino with all due respect to your friends @ ESPN, I think that the ingest excuse is pure bullsh**. The HDX is a great camera and I find has an easier menu setup than the Varicam, more akin to the SDX900. It does not do over or under like the Varicam and the looks are limited but it does shoot 1080, although not native. Your post is surprising but if there is anything that gets post in a tizzy it's if they have to push a few more buttons or do some more math while their butts become one with a chair. Consider the source of complaints from people that sit down for a living as opposed to those of us who have achieved the ability to be upright. As far as a producer being able to even tell the difference between product from either camera, well HELL must have frozen over because I've worked with about two producers in my life who could even differentiate anything involving pictures from a camera. How could they tell ? Did they see them side by side ? come on... if its true, we're all in trouble. I thinks its more of a case of the producer having to listen to the editor whine incessantly to the point of where it has become fact so they don't have to listen to the editor whine. Not accepting HDX generated material and only Varicam is just one of those blanket bullsh** (my favorite adjective in this case) statements that become rule but are not based in any fact. I can say that because I do not work for ESPN, I'm sorry you do. Good Luck with the Varicam, soon they will be as cheap as the HDX and you can buy one.
Nino with all due respect to your friends @ ESPN, I think that the ingest excuse is pure bullsh**.
Joe, if they were friends I can talk them into using the HDX, but they are clients and I can only do what they want me to do. It doesn't make any sense to me either. As long as they are willing to pay the higher price of the Varicam it's okay by me because I don't own either one. I've been unsuccessfully bugging them for the last two years to let us know what HD format they'll settle with, no luck there, even thou they are using mostly Varicam nothing is yet official, but I must assume that its Varicam. At least they told what they are not going to use, that's a start. At this pace and thru a process of elimination in another two years we'll know for sure.
Run&Gun
10-01-2007, 10:36 PM
...I can say that because I do not work for ESPN, I'm sorry you do. Good Luck with the Varicam, soon they will be as cheap as the HDX and you can buy one.
Not wanting to speak for Nino, but he is one of their go-to-guys in FL, just as I am one of their go-to-guys up here(NC) and I'm sure as hell not sorry I work for them. If they were paying you the $$$ they've paid me for VariCam work this year and they asked you to get one, you'd run out and buy it and never have a second thought about an HDX-900.(not a knock on the 900)
No, they aren't a perfect client, but I've never had a better one...
Tv Shooter
10-01-2007, 11:07 PM
I've been using the HDX900 alot lately.As for "problems in post"...the HDX tapes cannot be played on an older DVCpro 100mb deck. It uses a different codec and therefore only plays on a 1200 or 1400 series deck.
So if you already have a deck using Varicam,you cannot play 900 tapes.
Found that one out the hard way.
Skipcam
10-02-2007, 04:16 PM
Does ESPN require you to use the Varicam in the FILM REC mode? If you are shooting in the VIDEO REC mode, these cameras should look pretty comparable. The 900 has a 14 bit front end, compared to the Varicams 12 bit (although they both record to 8 bit tape). The Varicam is a higher end camera, but it outta be pretty close! Has anybody who owns the Varicam H done a two camera shoot and match a 900? What did you think? (I do not own a Varicam, but rent them, I DO own an HDX900.)
joecam147
10-02-2007, 04:53 PM
Run, I wasn't knocking ESPN, I'm sure my comments will have zero effect on their operations. I'm sure that they are very good to you and others, Sure, I'd love to have them for a client and a Varicam to boot but I dont. My point was just the lame excuse for not accepting HDX generated material as if it was a law of physics when its really about something totally irrelevant...IMHO they bought a passel of the wrong tape machines or somebody in post is too lazy to flick a switch, I've heard this excuse before and its just that... an excuse, a lame one too.
With all the talk of networks more interested in saving money that producing quality work, having one of the big ones like ESPN insisting on better equipment and willing to pay more is not really a bad thing.
dinosaur
10-02-2007, 09:16 PM
Why is it that some of the ESPN "contract" photogs (like Mickler) are buying the HDX900?? Bristol sure is sending mixed signals about what's on their "acceptable" list.
Canonman
10-02-2007, 10:35 PM
With all the talk of networks more interested in saving money that producing quality work, having one of the big ones like ESPN insisting on better equipment and willing to pay more is not really a bad thing.
Nino, I got the impression from reading the last few posts in this thread that it may have more to do with existing post facility infra-structure than actual camera quality.
The Varicam, nice camera that it is, is starting to get long in the tooth. If ESPN has a large investment in decks that won't play back HDX900 tapes, then of course they won't accept it... for now.
cm
Nino, I got the impression from reading the last few posts in this thread that it may have more to do with existing post facility infra-structure than actual camera quality.
That's exactly what it is but there's very little we can do. ESPN use many outside post houses.
Well to throw oil on the fire I just shot for ESPN, It was for their new high end show and I shot it on a............Z1U, go figure. But another part of the segement I was working on was shot on a Varicam.
I know another segement for the show was shot on a F330, its a crazy world.
Why is it that some of the ESPN "contract" photogs (like Mickler) are buying the HDX900?? Bristol sure is sending mixed signals about what's on their "acceptable" list.
I get the impression that this HDX/Varicam decison is producer's call more than a network policy. From conversations that I had with assignment editors in the past few months they were more interested to know what HD format I had or I had access to and as long as it was DVCPRO it was supposed to be acceptable, I was almost fearfully thinking that they might even go P2. We have a small e-mail group of a dozen of shooters that works mostly for ESPN and most bought the HDX and are quite PO right now.
Run&Gun
10-04-2007, 12:52 AM
Joe, I wasn't trying to argue with you, I was just trying to convey that they asked me for a certain camera and they are making it worth it. The "post" excuse isn't really valid, unless the post houses have certain older decks that can't play back the slower tape speed/different track pitch. But, they aren't the same camera non-the-less... I was on an ESPN shoot Tues.(VariCam) and a friend was there shooting some behind the scenes stuff for another ESPN shooter that couldn't be there and he was shooting with his HDX-900. And I just heard a very interesting rumor that came out of the P2 workshop in DC about ESPN and P2 and MNF.
FILM REC...?! Most people at ESPN wouldn't know what that was if it bit 'em on the @$$. They pretty much know 24P and 60P, and some of them don't fully understand that. There's a lot of ignorance by TV people when it comes to HD, which is very scarry. Besides, FILM REC only really comes into play if you're doing a filmout and/or there can be HEAVY posting. The majority of what I do with my Vari is 60P "Video"(like I said, they don't use these to anywhere near their full potential).
WTV, to be fair, if you're talking about E:60, the "mini" HD camera isn't the primary camera, it's supposed to be a lockdown on the reporter with a VariCam on the subject and another Vari as a "rover".
That's interesting about Mickler, Roach has a VariCam, the staff guys have VariCams, and me and another shooter were asked to buy Vari's...
cameragod
10-04-2007, 02:40 AM
I turned down a job recently, some of the details just didn’t square… mostly rates, how the payment would be coming and there was no listing for the company on the net but maybe the alarm bells should have rung because the producer was claiming that ESPN would accept all footage being shot in HDV.
Stoney
10-05-2007, 07:20 PM
Well, leave it to some idiots in 'post' to rain on a camera man's parade. Nino with all due respect to your friends @ ESPN, I think that the ingest excuse is pure bullsh**. The HDX is a great camera and I find has an easier menu setup than the Varicam, more akin to the SDX900. It does not do over or under like the Varicam and the looks are limited but it does shoot 1080, although not native. Your post is surprising but if there is anything that gets post in a tizzy it's if they have to push a few more buttons or do some more math while their butts become one with a chair. Consider the source of complaints from people that sit down for a living as opposed to those of us who have achieved the ability to be upright. As far as a producer being able to even tell the difference between product from either camera, well HELL must have frozen over because I've worked with about two producers in my life who could even differentiate anything involving pictures from a camera. How could they tell ? Did they see them side by side ? come on... if its true, we're all in trouble. I thinks its more of a case of the producer having to listen to the editor whine incessantly to the point of where it has become fact so they don't have to listen to the editor whine. Not accepting HDX generated material and only Varicam is just one of those blanket bullsh** (my favorite adjective in this case) statements that become rule but are not based in any fact. I can say that because I do not work for ESPN, I'm sorry you do. Good Luck with the Varicam, soon they will be as cheap as the HDX and you can buy one.
Well said. The problem extends to the lack of uniformity in the HD realm. Nobody agrees on anything and opinion matters more than fact. Just ask the guys who own the XDHD F350 cameras...
If any client provides me with enough good paying work, I will shoot on whatever they want. It's all about return on investment. My HDX900 got three weeks of work off the bat, that allowed me to invest in it.
What is up with the HDX900 not being backwards compatable with the Varicam decks? Who is the genius behind that one. Let's make our top-end stuff (Varicam) incompatible with similar lower-tier products (HDX900) that get used together. Man, it screws us all and it is hurting the HDX's penetration into broadcasting.
The man is keeping us down.
Tv Shooter
10-06-2007, 10:29 AM
"What is up with the HDX900 not being backwards compatable with the Varicam decks?"
I have been told it's due to the codec used in the 900. It is a different codec that allows for better q
Necktie Boy
10-06-2007, 11:37 PM
Isn't it something to do with the tape speed?
dhart
10-07-2007, 10:41 AM
What is it now, 62 different flavors of digital video...and more on the way (I saw "double" high def at NAB). The days of 640 X 480 are long gone. As screen resolutions increase so will the specs for "High Def". If you have a couple really good clients and can pay off your camera in a couple of years go for it, if not I'd rent. Which is exactly what I've been doing.
joecam147
10-20-2007, 10:18 PM
...Or buy or lease a tape machine that plays back tapes from whatever you have and offer it as an incentive low budget price so they can't say 'No we can't injest that', for a couple of hundred bucks rental, give them the capability, it's worth it. Thats what I did, no choice and worth every penny.
freedom
10-22-2007, 11:36 AM
...Or buy or lease a tape machine that plays back tapes from whatever you have and offer it as an incentive low budget price so they can't say 'No we can't injest that', for a couple of hundred bucks rental, give them the capability, it's worth it. Thats what I did, no choice and worth every penny.
Joecam
That just won't work for many clients. They want to leave the shoot and travel back to their home state with the tapes they use.
I have a client that will ONLY accept HDCam 1080i. They refuse the HDX900 1080i. I have another client that refuses to accept the HDCam tape but insists on the HDX900 1080i. They leave location at the end of the shoot with tapes in hand.
I might get 10% of my clients to accept your solution. Most of my local clients edit in multi-format suites and so they don't necessarily need a deck for playout. But they have a pretty stiff requirement as to which camera they will accept.
Here’s the latest of ESPN Varicam vs. HDX900
I spoke with many decision makers at ESPN and even thou no firm commitment was made on either camera, the overwhelming sentiment is that most assignment editors will feel safer hiring crews with Varicams.
For acquisition ESPN owns 4 Varicam cameras, 3 in Bristol and one heading to LA. For most of their stand-alone shows they will accept the HDX900 but because of compatibility concerns on multi cameras shoots or on shows that have to be done on various locations across the country, crews with Varicam are preferred.
The new E:60 show is strictly Varicam.
Well to throw oil on the fire I just shot for ESPN, It was for their new high end show and I shot it on a............Z1U, go figure. But another part of the segement I was working on was shot on a Varicam.
I know another segement for the show was shot on a F330, its a crazy world.
Most of the interviews for ESPN new E:60 show is shot with 3 camera, 2 Varicam and one small HDV.
One Varicam is the subject camera, this is on tripod but creative movements as appropriate are encouraged. The second Varicam is "the rover camera" to get different funky and fun angles. The third is the small "reporter" camera, that's mounted on a tripod and fixed on a 2 shot, subject and reporter.
Cameradude
11-23-2007, 10:40 PM
Trust me when I say this; ESPN has and continues to use video from the HDX900 in all of its programs...and with that I will bite my lip and move on.
Problem #1 with HD and ESPN; the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing in Bristol.
Problem #2 with HD and ESPN; only a handful of people are capable of making an educated decision on HD and they fall victim to rule #1.
Furthermore, and this is true with about any network or production company, the folks on the assignment desk only know what they have been told. Most of the time this consists of a couple of phrases like "we only use Varicam for HD", and "we can't use the blah blah blah camera", and anything more than that is over their heads. Thats no offense to the folks on the desk, because they have enough to deal with without having to try to figure out a half dozen formats of HD.
Anyone who owned a Sony D600 back in the 90's knows what is really going on...hehehehehehe...wink wink!!!
The owners of the first "600's" did a great job of convincing the assignment desk folks back in the 90's that the D600 was the "only camera to use". Assignment desks around the country booked crews based on whether or not they had a D600. All the menu's and set-up card options were awesome, but for the majority of the folks who were knocking out liveshots for the evening news never touched these functions and you could not distinguish between the 600 and a properly set-up 400.
The same is true today for the Varicam. Those folks that bought them early on have done a good job to convince the folks who do the booking that the camera is superior to other cameras. The argument of the supremacy of the Varicam always comes down to a few function that only it has, and that are rarely if ever used. They are protecting their property just as anyone here would in that situation.
Ride it for what it is worth, because anyone who has been in this business long enough knows that paradigms eventually shift and the train comes to the end of the tracks.
The bottom line is that if ESPN is your only client then buy a Varicam and don't worry about it because you will make your money back in a timely manner. If you are doing 1-2 HD assignments for them a month, then rent the format that works for you.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.