Just bought a Canon mv750i Mini DV, although i have now been told that to reach sort of broadcast quality your camera needs to be 3 chip? 3CCD (i think) But mines 1/6CCD...does anyone know how to translate this camcorder jargon?

Also it seems to be very grainy and orangy, why?

[MarkE19]

Hi Cinnamon and welcome to the forum

Don't worry about 'broadcast quality'. TBH it is a lot more to do with the way you use the camcorder than just getting the best money can buy. As you learn to use the features you should start to get better quality recordings. All but the cheapest of DV cams can give excellent results.
Besides, you are very unlikely to be getting your footage shown on TV - are you?

Right the CCD thing.
A CCD is the bit of the camcorder that converts light to the digital signal that is recorded to the tape. 3 CCD's are better than 1 because each 1 of the 3 is used for an individual colour. A 1 CCD cam has to do all the work with the single CCD and therefore colours tend to be less sharp and vivid.
But saying the above a single CCD can often be bigger than those of a 3 CCD cam. This has the advantage of the cam being better in low light conditions as the CCD can pick up more light giving a less noisy image.

Mark.

thanks Mark, actually my footage may well be used on TV which is why i probably need a 3ccd! My lecturer at uni just told us we need 3ccd argghhhh. So which models am i best with? bearing in mind my budget is quite tight!

[MarkE19]

I think you might be better off getting further advise from 'Roy Mallard' on this forum as he is a professional videotographer. He has posted in the past saying that very few TV companies will accept MiniDV footage for broadcast. As he has direct experience of getting footage to a TV broadcaster he can almost certainly be of more help than me. If he is not around or does not spot this post then you can always send him a PM.

Mark.

Marks dead right, a single chip camera used properly is superior to a 3ccd cam used by an idiot.

The BBC are very snooty about the format issue, not because miniDV is a poor quality format, just that because the cameras are cheap (in broadcast terms) anybody can set themselves up as a filmmaker for a few hundred quid.

You tend to find that if a production has spent money on a digibeta camera then the person working it is likely to know what they are doing, I've seen rich kids with pd-150's getting footage that you've been framed would be emabarrassed to show.

Apart from the optical benefits of a 3ccd cam, you tend to find that these models are almost always aimed at semi-pro or low-end broadcast users and so have a fair greater degree of control than cheaper single chip cams.

Your canon 750 suffers from noise at low level light, on a pro cam you have direct control over the aperture and gain (picture signal amplificiation) on your cam it cannot be controlled manually.

Having said that I used to use a sony trv120 (digi8 single chip) for reccies, especially in difficult or dangerous situations, and found that it could cut in ok with the footage from my broadcast cams.

I would spend any spare cash you have on a good tripod and a half decent mic. Just get out there all the time you can with your cam, always focus and white balance manualy, lay off the zoom during takes and you are most of the way to having broadcastable results.

Folk get hung up on what cams have and do what and forget about the basics of crossing the line & shot compostion. It's true that the better your cam the better your footage, but if you don't know the basics of camera technique no camera is going to save your footage.

Broadcasters will automatically knock back footage which isn't broadcast safe, ask your tutor to demonstrate and explain a wavefrom monitor and a vectorscope and do a googe search yourself, if you are using final cut, avid or premiere you can add broadcast safe flters in post production.

Ah right, cool. Well I'll have to use the uni's cameras then instead of my own (if we use our own they have to be 3ccd) Waste of money buying mine...:-(.