Electronic Media 

Published: 11-21-94 





CLEARING UP SOME HI-8 MISCONCEPTIONS



Byline: By Joe Fedele



  Over the last several years, TV news professionals have

debated whether Hi-8 is a viable substitute for Betacam.

  I'd like to add my two cents worth: I don't like Hi-8 as a

replacement for Betacam.

 What's more, I discourage its use as a primary format for any

major market TV station serious about competing in news

gathering. 

 Now I should add that this column isn't meant to be a character

assassination on Hi-8. Rather, my intent is to clarify some of

the misconceptions floating around the industry.

  Hi-8 is, in fact, an excellent specialty format. It's a high

quality, compact and easy-to-use medium whose standards approach

3/4-inch SP.

 Sony classifies Hi-8 as a ``professional'' series and not part

of its ``broadcast'' line of equipment. The distinction is that

the broadcast line is designed to meet a much higher standard.

 I use the word specialty to signify instances where it's

impractical or financially prohibitive to use a high-end format

such as Beta.

 During Operation Desert Storm, some of the networks took

advantage of Hi-8's portability. With its low cost, it was

considered by some to be a ``throw away'' camera, good for being

on the road.

 Although the pictures that came out of the Middle East looked

just fine, you'll notice that these same networks have not

abandoned Beta as their primary news-gathering format.

 Hi-8 proponents will tell you that the average person can't

tell the difference between it and Beta. This is true for

equipment that is right out of the box or correctly aligned and

maintained.

 But how many of us have equipment that is perfectly aligned all

the time? The fact is, Hi-8 equipment requires much more overall

maintenance time than Beta. What's more, it goes out of

alignment much faster than Beta.

 Beta is much more forgiving of tape path mis-alignments, head

wear and dirty parts. Hi-8 wasn't designed with many of the

high-level error correction or dropout compensation circuits

that make Beta such a quality format.

 Although Sony suggests that you perform head changes on Beta

machines every 1,000 hours, the reality is that most maintenance

shops wait until 2,000 hours or more.

 Hi-8 machines need to be changed every 1,000 hours, period.

There's no margin for error.

  Then there is Hi-8's look.

 A station that uses Hi-8 as its primary format is very easy to

spot on the air, compared to an all-Beta facility.

 To put it bluntly, the picture quality at Hi-8 plants looks

second rate.

 Pieces edited on Hi-8 machines have more of a tendency to show

extreme changes in both luminance and chrominance. The picture

dropout rate is higher and a smearing or delay of the chroma can

make it annoying to watch.

 Now let's talk about money.

 There is no question that the capital cost of Hi-8 equipment is

far and away lower than Beta. However,  what you save in capital

expenses can be eaten away over the life of the equipment in

added labor costs.

 So I offer a final word to the wise: Hi-8 isn't for every

station. Don't buy something you may regret later.#