Intensity HV20 Footage

[David Newman]

Frank,

Aspect HD v5.0 includes all the features of NEO HDV.
Prospect HD v3.0 includes all the features of NEO HD.
So unless you want 10-bit, Aspect HD will be fine.

However, the Sony A1U doesn't have HDMI, although you should be able to use the analog connection via an Intensity Pro card.

As data is delivered at presentation speed, the requirement for real-time is the same as the requirement for quality -- unless you only want to shoot timelaps.

PCI express or PCI-e is the new common bus, quickly replacing the old PCI/PCI-X slot.

[Frank Howard]

Originally Posted by David Newman

However, the Sony A1U doesn't have HDMI, although you should be able to use the analog connection via an Intensity Pro card.
.

That's precisely what I was thinking of doing.

I guess I should have clarified about the real time thing. I was saying that I would be glad to sacrifice real time for quality if need be which I found has given me some good results in After Effects so far.

The one question that remains if I don't have the PC express bus, does that mean I am SOL with the Intensity Pro unless I buy a new machine with the PCI/e bus action?

[David Newman]

Frank,

Yes, you will need PCI-e.

[John Yamamoto]

I m a bit confused that other post say HV20 doesn;t work well with intensity
pls anyone can confirm that is working now or only sometimes working??


thanks
JY

[Ray Bell]

At present the Black Magic card works sporadiclly... works for some folks
doesn't work for most folks...

The people over at Black Magic have an HV20 cam in hand and are working on
the fix and they are broadcasting that they are close to a fix...

The Intensity Pro card should start shipping very soon...

[Andreas Wittenstein]

Originally Posted by Wayne Morellini

More interested in lossless performance

SheerVideo IS lossless. Mathematically, absolutely, perfectly, bit-for-bit lossless.

Andreas Wittenstein
BitJazz Inc.
http://www.bitjazz.com/

[David Newman]

Andreas,

It might be lossless, but Wayne wants 4 to 6:1 lossless for this noisy source. That no one can do.

[Wayne Morellini]

Originally Posted by Wayne Morellini

I should point out, the existing wireless HDMI solution is just an link, but their is the possibility there for somebody to make it more. I have heard of them demonstrating it with something like 70mb/s, from memory, and it was not so impressive, but the chip and the link is capable of an much higher data rate (so remember this if you see one being demoed).

Hmm, maybe I was wrong, that 70mb/s was an camera stream that was being compared.

[Wayne Morellini]

Originally Posted by Andreas Wittenstein

SheerVideo IS lossless. Mathematically, absolutely, perfectly, bit-for-bit lossless.

Andreas Wittenstein
BitJazz Inc.
http://www.bitjazz.com/

Took me an while to find what you guys are referring too. I was not referring to sheervideo, but that I was more interested in the lossless performance than the processing requirements in Microcosm, which David would know.

Whale I respect your work David, even promote it, I do not think that the compression industry is anywhere near it's max efficiency or potential, their is much gain left to be gained in new approaches. The problem with industries is they go down paths and start to perceive they can't see much more improvement, and refinement of the existing becomes harder and harder. But despite that, I still think that an bunch of pixels that is 50% accurate according to the original pixels is better than an bunch of pixels that is 20% accurate because of noise. I appreciate your comment about how much can be done in post, and realise that better processing techniques can deliver that on camera in future. The discussion was originally an comparison with Microcosm (in quality and compression). So, it is probably best to get away from this circular debating on compression philosophy.

[Thomas Smet]

Microcosm may be able to get the file sizes a little bit smaller but it is ultra slow and will never be able to capture video live. It was intended as a perfect format for archive reasons and isn't even recommended to edit with let alone capture to. Sheervideo on the other hand can sometimes run faster then even uncompressed codecs. Microcosm works great for high quality film sources and computer rendered graphics.

Some say a 2:1 compression rato isn't very good but I think it is much better in terms of bandwidth. Using Sheervideo can mean getting by with a 2 drive raid-0 or even a cheap raid-5 compared to uncompressed needing a 4 drive raid-0.

Beyond that Cineform really is the next best option because the quality is pretty darn near uncompressed and visually lossless and it is fast and the file sizes are even better to deal with. Cineform really is the ultimate balance between ease of use, quality and speed.

[Daymon Hoffman]

Originally Posted by Daymon Hoffman

I would like to know a bit more about this to. Any owners care to clarify? I have the vision of it being very similar to an analog capture card (only digital :P), thus allowing me to select any codec's for a/v i want (and even the software i use to capture). Is it not like this?

Any owners of the Intensity able to shed some light for me on this? not sure what to expect. Will be getting the Pro versions things go as planned.

Thanks

[Wayne Morellini]

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

Microcosm may be able to get the file sizes a little bit smaller but it is ultra slow and will never be able to capture video live. It was intended as a perfect format for archive reasons and isn't even recommended to edit with let alone capture to. Sheervideo on the other hand can sometimes run faster then even uncompressed codecs. Microcosm works great for high quality film sources and computer rendered graphics.

Some say a 2:1 compression rato isn't very good but I think it is much better in terms of bandwidth. Using Sheervideo can mean getting by with a 2 drive raid-0 or even a cheap raid-5 compared to uncompressed needing a 4 drive raid-0.

Beyond that Cineform really is the next best option because the quality is pretty darn near uncompressed and visually lossless and it is fast and the file sizes are even better to deal with. Cineform really is the ultimate balance between ease of use, quality and speed.

The rate of processing power increase, soon Microcosm will be able, even on small systems, at the moment maybe large systems, and if they converted to use powerful GPU. But I don't plan on using last generation processing, but next. With cineform, I noticed softness and lower contrast, has this been improved in the last couple of years? I am still happy with cineform (particularly the Raw Bayer) but to me uncompressed still looks an bit more pleasurable. But if cinemas stream digital cinema in highly compressed formats, the difference will be even more away from uncompressed.

However, the noise removal debate is an future debate, I plan of instituting techniques to reduce the noise to an minimum while filming anyway, so I would expect the max out of whichever codec. Just picked up an Sony Bayar mount lens the other days fro around $4US (they wanted to sell it to me for around $1.5US, but I gave them $5 Australian). Quiet good, might see how it goes for resolution in an adaptor. Aperture of 1.4:1 zoom lens, their was an better one somebody took off with before I got there.

[Anmol Mishra]

There is a post on the wearable post thread about Adjusting quality on the MJPEG codec
http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.ph...ity#post723318

>>>>>>>
The cpu, T7200 with 667 MHz RAM, has enough power to record 60i without dropping frames using BM MJPEG. The data rate seems to be 13 MB/s. What most people may not know is that BM supplies a second MJPEG codec that isn't used with their recording app and has selectable quality values. Upping the bit rate to 20MB/s makes a noticeable difference in visual quality. They number used is similar to JPEG compression quality numbers, where 100 is supposed to be lossless, and 80 is default. 20 MB/s is 92 on the scale.
>>>>>>

Kevin seems to have disappeared - just wondering if someone knows how to do this.. Perhaps a comparison with a higher quality Blackmagic Intensity codec will be helpful..

Cheers!

[Andrew McAllister]

Hi,

Has anyone considered or tried this on a MacBook Pro:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...ard_34_to.html

http://www.magma.com/products/pciexpress/expressbox1/

Technically, the Intensity Card only requires a 1x PCIe slot, and the Magma provides exactly that.

I can see storage being a bit of an issue but if you used DVCPRO HD 1080i it might be possible, as the disk requirements are not as onerous, so FW800 would work.

Andrew.

[Andrew Swihart]

It has been mentioned ad nauseum here, mostly by people pointing it out as if no one knows about it but them. The thing is the price is ludicrous, so not many are willing to pay almost what they paid for the HV20 for that. I have seen one person say they are using just fine however, so it does work, as you would expect. We are all hoping and praying for an ExpressCard version of the Intensity.