(Television) Broadcast Engineering?

[synaptiX]

Hi all,

Long-time lurker, first-time poster. Quick show of hands: how many BEs inhabit the EEVblog forums? I'm a wannabe BE due to start the Advanced Diploma of Electronics and Comms at RMIT, Melbourne this year, after an Associate Degree in TV production at CSU - needless to say, whilst technical directing is great and all, I wanted something with a little more job security and figured that BE-ing would do that.

[Richard Crowley]

Well, I am the Chief Engineer at a couple of broadcast channels in my city. But that isn't my day job.

[SL4P]

Broadcast Engineering has diverged from Desktop Video Systems... all the way through to RF/transmission systems over the last 20 years... (since AVID desktops and others arrived)

Originally, there was a lot more end-to-end (baseband) technology awareness required, but with the advent of digital video in particular, the whole discipline has shattered into a melee of high-skill, very narrow disciplines that have to work together.  Digital cameras, encoding, recording, editing, streaming, storage, presentation, post-presentation, multiplexing, and distribution.

The only way to get across all of these is to work in a couple of disciplines for a few years, and migrate up to a system design role -- effectively designing some aspect of whole facilities from the ground up against a spec.  You'll still engage with the specialists, but will also have a chance to fill in gaps.  It won't be easy, as the digital domain and multi-casting has reduced the number of facilities operating... (Here in Australia at least, and I know a product I developed ten years ago is in use across the world - so I guess that problem exists everywhere).

Also video system project managers are often freelancers now - so they can find (almost) continuous work (internationally), as the large system houses have downsized dramatically in the last ten years.

The good news is that if you can land a gig at any level in broadcast systems engineering, you'll be paid well for the hours you work.

I talk from a bit of experience - I can PM my background if it's important(Richard...  no surprise!  From reading your posts in the past, I figured you were tarred with a similar brush!)

[synaptiX]

Well, I am the Chief Engineer at a couple of broadcast channels in my city. But that isn't my day job.

I get that there's no real full-time jobs in television these days, so I'd be curious to know your engineering/other split.

The only way to get across all of these is to work in a couple of disciplines for a few years, and migrate up to a system design role -- effectively designing some aspect of whole facilities from the ground up against a spec.  You'll still engage with the specialists, but will also have a chance to fill in gaps.  It won't be easy, as the digital domain and multi-casting has reduced the number of facilities operating... (Here in Australia at least, and I know a product I developed ten years ago is in use across the world - so I guess that problem exists everywhere).

Also video system project managers are often freelancers now - so they can find (almost) continuous work (internationally), as the large system houses have downsized dramatically in the last ten years.

The good news is that if you can land a gig at any level in broadcast systems engineering, you'll be paid well for the hours you work.

Thanks for the insight, SL4P. I had a feeling it was a little like that, but forever being an outsider looking in, (I didn't enter the workforce upon graduating) I couldn't appreciate just how separate the departments are. If I was to design my ultimate career, I'd work selectively in colour correction, TD live whenever I could, and fill in the rest with systems design/something else. I love the industry and all, but some days I feel I was born just a fraction too late to fully appreciate television as television was, before the advent of streaming media and the Internet.

If nothing else, I'm bound to find people at RMIT in their spare time perpetually scanning large, open swathes of sky with their C-band dishes, in the hope of finding a wild feed.

[george graves]

I started in video production back in the early 90's. Grass Valley switchers and 3/4 - then BetacamSP.  Moved to just editing, and then to AVID for commercial and docs. I was the forum host for AVID for years.

Now...So much has changed.  One of the things I see (not surprisingly) is all the mistakes you see on even network TV, not to mention local stuff.  And forget youtubers - ha!   (and yes, Dave is guilty of so many of them)

My advice is that you have a real understanding of the old standards.  The new stuff is easy - and when you mess up, so forgiving.

Setup, and black level, interlacing, lighting, sound and such. The very basics. So many guys new to video don't get it at all.  How can you not understand setup/pedestal!?!?!?

I wouldn't suggest you focus on one area (BE or a technical director) - you'll need to be a jack of all trades to get a good job.  The job you want is where you know 99% of everyone's job, and keep the balls in the air, while a bunch of $10/hour people do most of the work.  That's how most TV stations run these days. There is *one* guy that knows his stuff, and the rest are college students. Sad but true. 

Directing is an art form, and once you get into your groove, you'll be amazed at how fun it is.  Same with mixing audio for large venues.  It's a huge kick in the pants.  Heck, even large venue AV stuff is fun. Take over a venue, run a few miles of cable, lights, audio. I did that for a while, and it's so fun.  If you're young and single, join a road show for a summer - it will blow your mind.

Again, you want to me multi-talented.  You should know how to edit, and how to mix live - just knowing the tech stuff, you'll be replaced by a cable someday with a new standard.  Having a talent, then you'll have a job.

[NiHaoMike]

My advice is that you have a real understanding of the old standards.  The new stuff is easy - and when you mess up, so forgiving.

Setup, and black level, interlacing, lighting, sound and such. The very basics. So many guys new to video don't get it at all.  How can you not understand setup/pedestal!?!?!?

Old school analog stuff is irrelevant to modern video production unless you need to import old material. (Interlacing only exists because it was a necessary evil back in the days.) Lighting and sound, however, are relevant and will remain relevant "forever".

The most common mistake I see in video production (especially amateur) is not steadying the camera. It's hard to enjoy a video that makes you dizzy.

[Brumby]

The most common mistake I see in video production (especially amateur) is not steadying the camera. It's hard to enjoy a video that makes you dizzy.

+1 on that ... plus I'll add my own dislike for frustrating, fuzzy, foggy focus.

[rx8pilot]

I have been in broadcast engineering since the early 90's and of course watched as it has dramatically changed. The field has been widely varied for many decades, not just recently.

You had the transmission engineer. The facility engineer. The production engineer. Integration engineer. etc. etc. My experience started in the audio department of a post facility where I edited and mixed programs. I became friends with the facility engineer and ended up being an assistant engineer. This was in the analog days where you needed a solid foundation in the signals and how they are related. You had to know how to critically time align the signals as well. Not exactly an exotic set of skills needed, but there are a ton of details and very few options to learn the ropes.

I went through various other jobs but ultimately landed in the camera world for broadcast and film production. As an engineer, I was responsible for making sure the images were made and delivered to the right place at the right time and looked the way they are supposed to. It is a mess of a world because you don't find any consistency in the way things are done. Terms are loose and change with geography. Lots of intellectual protectionism. Rapidly changing technology. On top of all that, the engineer has to satisfy the creative team with look and feel of the images - which is the opposite of any scientific method. A facility engineer is essentially a maintenance role with occasional upgrades. In a modern setting, you have to learn all the details of broadcast signals and routing as well as having very solid IT skills. You sill likely need very solid skills in Linux, MAC OS, Windows, advanced network design and troubleshooting, and a whole host of strange proprietary OS's found on obscure equipment. A system integration engineer requires constant skills updates since you design a build new facilities that need as long a life as possible.

There are some great and exciting jobs in the field, bot not many of them and there is a giant barrier to entry. In general, TV and Film at the higher levels is a closed industry. Newcomers have to pay some serious dues to get enough respect. Lower end job and opportunities are out there, but the money plummets RAPIDLY.

You can work at a little TV station maintaining old gear, you could be the EIC for the Super Bowl, or you could design post facilities from scratch. It's a huge field, but with only a handful of gems.

[Richard Crowley]

I started in video production back in the early 90's. Grass Valley switchers and 3/4 - then BetacamSP.  Moved to just editing, and then to AVID for commercial and docs. I was the forum host for AVID for years.

Now...So much has changed.  One of the things I see (not surprisingly) is all the mistakes you see on even network TV, not to mention local stuff.  And forget youtubers - ha!   (and yes, Dave is guilty of so many of them)

My advice is that you have a real understanding of the old standards.  The new stuff is easy - and when you mess up, so forgiving.

Setup, and black level, interlacing, lighting, sound and such. The very basics. So many guys new to video don't get it at all.  How can you not understand setup/pedestal!?!?!?

Indeed.  I started out in audio in the 1960s and then video in the 1970s (but rarely as my regular "day job").

Old school analog stuff is irrelevant to modern video production unless you need to import old material. (Interlacing only exists because it was a necessary evil back in the days.)

Yeah, we've seen video from people who think the basics are irrelevant.  Gotta agree with Mr. Graves on this one.

I wouldn't suggest you focus on one area (BE or a technical director) - you'll need to be a jack of all trades to get a good job.  The job you want is where you know 99% of everyone's job, and keep the balls in the air, while a bunch of $10/hour people do most of the work.  That's how most TV stations run these days. There is *one* guy that knows his stuff, and the rest are college students. Sad but true.

   
Or, if the operation is small enough, you are BOTH the guy who knows his stuff AND the guy who makes and repairs cables and cleans filters.

I have to do everything from explaining technical issues (like satellite transmission) to the GM to making video, audio, and network cables, aiming parabolic antennas, configuring Emergency Alert systems, and monitoring the four channels on our transmitter.  Including middle of the night support sessions with the automation system vendor in Sofia, Bulgaria.

Directing is an art form, and once you get into your groove, you'll be amazed at how fun it is.  Same with mixing audio for large venues.  It's a huge kick in the pants.  Heck, even large venue AV stuff is fun. Take over a venue, run a few miles of cable, lights, audio. I did that for a while, and it's so fun.  If you're young and single, join a road show for a summer - it will blow your mind.

Yeah, if you have decent camera operators.  If your camera operators are amateurs or aren't good at detail, or have no eye for composition, then directing is a nightmare.  Which is the reason I have automated 4 of my 6 cameras, both for lower-profile location capture, and also because it is too expensive/difficult to find that many decent camera operators at the same time.

Again, you want to me multi-talented.  You should know how to edit, and how to mix live - just knowing the tech stuff, you'll be replaced by a cable someday with a new standard.  Having a talent, then you'll have a job.

And these days you practically need to be an IT expert as well.  It would be much easier for someone with IT/computer networking experience to transition into broadcast engineering than vice-versa.  The operation I am responsible for is essentially 100% IP.  The satellite receiver grabs all 13 video channels and 5 audio channels from G19 transponder 6 and delivers the entire combined data stream to the automation system over the network through an ordinary Cat5 network cable. 

The automation system picks stream ID numbers 201 and 202 and puts them through two instances of the automation application, inserts the local content (interstitial and long-form programs) and then sends the output streams IP through the public internet up to the transmitter where a pair of quite tiny boxes convert IP to ASI which feeds into the transmitter multiplexer along with the other two channels from another provider.  There isn't a baseband (analog or digital) signal/wire in the entire operation.  If it weren't for the air monitors, you couldn't tell it wasn't just another computer serving web pages or exchanging email messages

We discovered that some viewers using antique digital to analog converter set-top-boxes and old CRT TV receivers can't hear the audio.  Apparently modern TVs can receiver either MPEG or Dolby AC3 audio, but old equipment can only handle Dolby AC3. So now we have to buy a licence to encode the audio into Dolby AC3.

[Richard Crowley]

I get that there's no real full-time jobs in television these days, so I'd be curious to know your engineering/other split.

My careers have alternated between doing computer-related (hardware and software) jobs and audio/video/broadcast related jobs.  As it worked out, I have always been involved in both. While working at computer-related jobs, I have been involved part-time/volunteer with media/broadcast,etc., and vice-versa.

My day job is a systems analyst, programmer, designer, developer for internal systems (mostly training, badging, security access, etc.) at the research and development fabs for the semiconductor company that probably made the CPU chip your computer is using as you read this sentence.

And on the side I have a ultra-portable HD video production system with six Sony EX5 cameras, a couple of video switchers, recorders, and other assorted gear. Including full pan/tilt and lens zoom, focus, iris, white balance, etc. remote control for four of the cameras.  Plus I work with other entities on their video systems, including taking a couple weeks of vacation last year to install all the gear, make all the cables and wire everything up in a 20 foot video production mobile unit.

[george graves]

Nice list of equipment.  Last bit of advice - never, ever, ever get involved into the "wedding videography" side of the business.  It seems like a easy way to make a quick buck on the weekend - but it's a pit of despair.

Old school analog stuff is irrelevant to modern video production unless you need to import old material.

So is old school analog electronics irrelevant too? 

Yes, the histogram may have replaced the waveform monitor, but that's only a tiny part of the puzzle.  There are so many DSLR "video guys" out there that don't even understand why their pans looks like jello?  CTO vs CTB? Or what causes a moire pattern?  How to increase or decrease their DOF?  Or text scroll speed vs resolution? I could go on and on.

[SL4P]

As Richard Crowley said, the opportunities and horizon are shifting dramatically.
 
The two areas guaranteed to stay around, but will also shift around a bit...
 
-- Production:  Still needs cameras, lighting, and in the case of studio productions, the control room and recording/playback facilities
These are drawing ever closer to (digital) film production - as they use essentially the same tools and skills.
Production is a lot of fun (and you can rub shoulders with the on-screen celebs!), but remember that not every day is sunny, dry or in a studio!  You will be shooting at 3am on rainy mountain tops and the gear doesn't get there and back by itself!  Includes studio audio, CCU operation, vision mixing etc.
 
-- Post-Production was my bag for many years, but changed entirely by AVID and the other non-linear players.  The new tools are great - don't get me wrong - but the visual standards have generally fallen in favour of small, low-cost platforms that can be fixed after the event.
'Post' also overlaps with the audio industry to accommodate various tracks and voice-over requirements etc.
 
In these areas - modern Film & TV 'post' are virtually identical - other than the camera / encoding formats and codecs / media used.
(First hint: learn the difference between containers and codecs… both words often used incorrectly)
 
SFX, Compositing and 3D effects are generally regarded as a close cousin to the post-production workflow chain.
 
The recording, contribution, storage, archiving and distribution channels are all IP based nowadays.
If you know *EVERYTHING* about desktop/web video & media, you’re about 20% of the way toward understanding and being productive in broadcast media processing and handling. (at best!)
 
The two most common paths into the production and post industries - are hands-on if you can get a lowly paid grip/TIT or other role through a contact… or attend a two year technical course - preferably a well-recognised technical college.

[synaptiX]

My advice is that you have a real understanding of the old standards.  The new stuff is easy - and when you mess up, so forgiving.

My TV technology classes were my best, and got the most from, at least in terms of the classroom. Knowing *why* certain things are the way they are, and why we have to put up with all of their eccentricities helps frame understanding.

I wouldn't suggest you focus on one area (BE or a technical director) - you'll need to be a jack of all trades to get a good job.  The job you want is where you know 99% of everyone's job, and keep the balls in the air, while a bunch of $10/hour people do most of the work.  That's how most TV stations run these days. There is *one* guy that knows his stuff, and the rest are college students. Sad but true. 

Well, if I was to print business cards, I'd put TD/prospective BE, but I can edit. It's (obviously) just not where I'd derive the most enjoyment from.

Directing is an art form, and once you get into your groove, you'll be amazed at how fun it is.  Same with mixing audio for large venues.

I remember watching that Academy Awards BTS video of the director in the OB truck - amazing, inspiring work. I might need to practice my directing chops, but I can do that in my own time. (Thanks, RMITV!) I was never really all that good at it in uni.

Again, you want to me multi-talented.  You should know how to edit, and how to mix live - just knowing the tech stuff, you'll be replaced by a cable someday with a new standard.  Having a talent, then you'll have a job.

Mm... Maybe. I'm hanging onto the belief that irrespective of what pipes are being used, the meat and potatoes behind the engineering of such a solution is still going to have a job.

The most common mistake I see in video production (especially amateur) is not steadying the camera. It's hard to enjoy a video that makes you dizzy.

+1. That and vertical video syndrome. Ugh.

You had the transmission engineer. The facility engineer. The production engineer. Integration engineer. etc. etc. My experience started in the audio department of a post facility where I edited and mixed programs. I became friends with the facility engineer and ended up being an assistant engineer.

Perhaps one of the biggest issues I'd found in talking to people was that there was a vacuum of skills shortages within the engineering/TDing circles - they'd stay with a network for 50 or so years until they fell off the perch, but didn't have anyone to succeed them, and so those sorts of skills and the ability to see around corners went with the retiring engineers. Sad, really.

This was in the analog days where you needed a solid foundation in the signals and how they are related. You had to know how to critically time align the signals as well. Not exactly an exotic set of skills needed, but there are a ton of details and very few options to learn the ropes.

Most certainly one of the more 'romantic' sides of BE-ing.

It is a mess of a world because you don't find any consistency in the way things are done. Terms are loose and change with geography. Lots of intellectual protectionism. Rapidly changing technology. On top of all that, the engineer has to satisfy the creative team with look and feel of the images - which is the opposite of any scientific method. A facility engineer is essentially a maintenance role with occasional upgrades. In a modern setting, you have to learn all the details of broadcast signals and routing as well as having very solid IT skills. You sill likely need very solid skills in Linux, MAC OS, Windows, advanced network design and troubleshooting, and a whole host of strange proprietary OS's found on obscure equipment. A system integration engineer requires constant skills updates since you design a build new facilities that need as long a life as possible.

I've often wondered what would happen if an 'Open Broadcast Hardware Alliance' - a la Android - would help smooth these sorts of things over?

There are some great and exciting jobs in the field, bot not many of them and there is a giant barrier to entry. In general, TV and Film at the higher levels is a closed industry. Newcomers have to pay some serious dues to get enough respect. Lower end job and opportunities are out there, but the money plummets RAPIDLY.

You can work at a little TV station maintaining old gear, you could be the EIC for the Super Bowl, or you could design post facilities from scratch. It's a huge field, but with only a handful of gems.

It's funny how this industry has so many parallels with medicine. Aside from the money.

[synaptiX]

And on the side I have a ultra-portable HD video production system with six Sony EX5 cameras, a couple of video switchers, recorders, and other assorted gear. Including full pan/tilt and lens zoom, focus, iris, white balance, etc. remote control for four of the cameras.  Plus I work with other entities on their video systems, including taking a couple weeks of vacation last year to install all the gear, make all the cables and wire everything up in a 20 foot video production mobile unit.

Very nice. Are you using multicore or fibre adapters for control?

The automation system picks stream ID numbers 201 and 202 and puts them through two instances of the automation application, inserts the local content (interstitial and long-form programs) and then sends the output streams IP through the public internet up to the transmitter where a pair of quite tiny boxes convert IP to ASI which feeds into the transmitter multiplexer along with the other two channels from another provider.  There isn't a baseband (analog or digital) signal/wire in the entire operation.  If it weren't for the air monitors, you couldn't tell it wasn't just another computer serving web pages or exchanging email messages

The public Internet?! I've heard of stations using a DMZ and dark fibre, but the public Internet? Hmm.

The recording, contribution, storage, archiving and distribution channels are all IP based nowadays.
If you know *EVERYTHING* about desktop/web video & media, you’re about 20% of the way toward understanding and being productive in broadcast media processing and handling. (at best!)
 
The two most common paths into the production and post industries - are hands-on if you can get a lowly paid grip/TIT or other role through a contact… or attend a two year technical course - preferably a well-recognised technical college.

So... What about satellites? I know they aren't going anywhere any time soon, but how much program delivery is done with them?

What do you think of the TTOC in North Sydney? Assuming they still exist, that is.

[SL4P]

The recording, contribution, storage, archiving and distribution channels are all IP based nowadays.
If you know *EVERYTHING* about desktop/web video & media, you’re about 20% of the way toward understanding and being productive in broadcast media processing and handling. (at best!)
 
The two most common paths into the production and post industries - are hands-on if you can get a lowly paid grip/TIT or other role through a contact… or attend a two year technical course - preferably a well-recognised technical college.

So... What about satellites? I know they aren't going anywhere any time soon, but how much program delivery is done with them?

What do you think of the TTOC in North Sydney? Assuming they still exist, that is.

Haha!  I actually *started* doing TVOCP at North Sydney in 1974, but only lasted a year before I was working on stuff about 10 years ahead of the curriculum, an dropped out...  it was about 35 years later that I thought it may have been useful as a bit of paper - but no tears shed.
That was a different era though - and would be hard to break into the industry the same way as I did - today.  Certainly TTOC is an extremely valuable ticket to hold, AFTRS and others can be better - depending where you want to go... I have a friend that did AFTRS - and is now senior tech/animator in Europe for one of the major international gaming animation houses.

Satellite is a small subset, and as far as TV goes - geting in to that specific field is completely separate and like the 'links' team - they have a communications ticket rather than a broadcast background.   When I worked on a large multi-channel satellite channel - the RF/uplink guys spoke a completely different language than we did, and neither understood the other - that we simply provided them with data and audio/video feeds... how it got up and down was their problem!
To be honest - in that project, the BE guys were far more 'across the system' than they were - and we picked up several major issues in their design as it came together in front of our eyes.

In general the best broadcast engineers are extremely fast thinkers, wide areas of competency, able to communicate and improvise on short notice.  Management hate them, and would get rid of all of them in a heartbeat - because the best guys earn in excess of AUD300K pa

[synaptiX]

In general the best broadcast engineers are extremely fast thinkers, wide areas of competency, able to communicate and improvise on short notice.  Management hate them, and would get rid of all of them in a heartbeat - because the best guys earn in excess of AUD300K pa

*duly noted*

[Richard Crowley]

Very nice. Are you using multicore or fibre adapters for control?

I'm using separate RG6 for video and Cat5 for camera and P/T control.
Replacing with "Siamese" cable for convenience, and working on fiber-based. Except that tactical-grade fiber is still so stupid expensive.

The public Internet?! I've heard of stations using a DMZ and dark fibre, but the public Internet?

Yes, and we are replacing the satellite delivery of the network with public internet delivery as well.

[rx8pilot]

Except that tactical-grade fiber is still so stupid expensive.

Fiber was a specialty for me and used vast quantities of tactical fiber. The take away is that the fiber is cheap, the terminations cost a little more, but the electronic interfaces were the stupid expensive part. A single camera fiber adapter that could send/receive any/all signals is $12k to $20k. One approach is electronic muxing, another is optical CWDM. For an electronic mux, all analog had to be digitized and muxed with incoming digital signals. That mux is shot down the pipe and has to be reconstructed on the other end. Among the challenges is that that incoming signals are not all synchronous and the timing has to be preserved on the other end. This also has to happen in both directions at the same time. Aggregate bandwidth of around 6-9 Gbps was typical but could easily go way higher than that. The specialty use was using an 8k camera outputting 4k in RGB at 120fps. Just the image payload was 12Gpbs and then have to add various other paths for return video, control, audio, ethernet, etc. That camera was (still is) used for sports playback allowing a digital zoom and slow-motion capability. The operator can shoot wider than normal to improve the chances they will capture some exciting moment that can be digitally re-comped for playback. All this can happen over a 10Km fiber link.

I designed a few systems that are still in use today in addition to some infrastructure gear. Not sure how marketing has held on to the fat margins - maybe there are no copy-cats in the market yet.

[Richard Crowley]

... the fiber is cheap, the terminations cost a little more, but the electronic interfaces were the stupid expensive part.

But that appears to be changing.  I got a couple of "pro-sumer" grade (plastic box) HDMI->fiber and fiber->HDMI converters for US$300...
http://www.markertek.com/product/cmx-hdmif/camplex-cmx-hdmif-hdmi-to-fiber-optic-converter-extender
They use "ST" optical connectors and claim to be good up to 14KM (with the proper optical fiber). 

The basic product will handle sending IR remote control "upstream" back to the transmitter, and I am making an adapter to send LANC back to my Sony EX5 cameras (and to my pan/tilt heads)

My only problem is that tactical-grade fiber is so expensive still. Because that's apparently what the market will bear regardless of how inexpensive it is to manufacture.

I'm slowly learning what all the different connectors are and single-mode and multi-mode, etc. etc.

[rx8pilot]

... the fiber is cheap, the terminations cost a little more, but the electronic interfaces were the stupid expensive part.

But that appears to be changing.  I got a couple of "pro-sumer" grade (plastic box) HDMI->fiber and fiber->HDMI converters for US$300...
http://www.markertek.com/product/cmx-hdmif/camplex-cmx-hdmif-hdmi-to-fiber-optic-converter-extender
They use "ST" optical connectors and claim to be good up to 14KM (with the proper optical fiber). 

The basic product will handle sending IR remote control "upstream" back to the transmitter, and I am making an adapter to send LANC back to my Sony EX5 cameras (and to my pan/tilt heads)

My only problem is that tactical-grade fiber is so expensive still. Because that's apparently what the market will bear regardless of how inexpensive it is to manufacture.

I'm slowly learning what all the different connectors are and single-mode and multi-mode, etc. etc.

OCC is a big manufacturer of TAC cable and I think it's around $1/ft for TAC-4 (maybe a bit higher). A huge part of that market is military and broadcast where cost of cable is in the noise floor of the expenses. That will keep the price in a place where you really have to 'need' it rather than just want it.

ST is common for field use where it is constantly plugged/unplugged. They are still fragile and should have heavy duty boots. I made a special technique to terminate single and multi fiber tactical to ST's for very rough handling. ~$15/ea terminated

LC is used for internal patches generally because it is so fragile, but it is also very cheap. ~$10/ea terminated

For serious work, expanded beam, OpticalCON, and SMPTE are common. The OpticalCON and SMPTE styles are hybrid which allows power to be sent in parallel - one cable for each camera chain powered remotely. The OpticalCON is a low (<60VDC) design and the SMPTE can see >300v AC allowing VERY long runs to remote camera positions.
SMPTE ~$350+/ea terminated
OpticalCON ~$225/ea terminated.

Single mode is dominant because of performance. By single mode, it means the light takes a single path through the fiber and therefore has low loss.

Multi Mode is cheaper but has much higher loss. The light takes multiple paths to the other side making is lossy. It great for short runs like data center patches, but not so great for long run broadcast use.

[george graves]

Nothing will protect your cable when your shooting a multi cam for a stage show...when the stage prop is a old US car 200 pound sharp edged bumper that a stage hand throws down after a bit, right on to your cable bundle - mid show, cutting it in half.

[Richard Crowley]

Nothing will protect your cable when your shooting a multi cam for a stage show...when the stage prop is a old US car 200 pound sharp edged bumper that a stage hand throws down after a bit, right on to your cable bundle - mid show, cutting it in half.

Back when I was in school, I had an 8-pair snake cable for mic audio. It was running across the front of the orchestra and one of the cellists decided it would  make a nice place to stick the spike on the bottom of their instrument.  But I had already learned to make my own cables, so it wasn't a terribly difficult repair.

[rx8pilot]

When using the Tactical fiber cable, I have had forklifts, cars, heavy trucks run over them without a problem. There are limits, but these things are crazy durable.

[synaptiX]

Seeing as we've broken out into campfire lore and stories from the trenches... I was wondering if anyone had any particularly embarrassing moments they've put to air, a la: