4:4:4 12-bit Uncompressed DVX100

Jon Yurek · April 28th, 2004, 08:12 PM

Quote:

However, if you really want to know the inner workings of the DVX and can read schematics, purchase the service manual for the DVX...that's the only thing I used.

Really? I thought you mentioned that the only board missing a schematic was this one. Or you mean you just figured out how it worked from how the stuff around it worked?

Juan P. Pertierra · April 28th, 2004, 08:19 PM

There are some boards missing from the schematic, however i think i might've mispoken because what is missing is the board diagram for exactly the board that has all of this on it. So the schematic for that specific area is there, even though other parts are missing, but the diagram that shows you where everything actually is physically is missing. Also, even though the schematic for the A/D's is there, all it has is lines going out of the page into sections of the board that are NOT in the manual, so it was a pain indeed.

This might all be a misprint in my manual however.

Juan P. Pertierra · April 30th, 2004, 07:51 AM

Done with my final computer vision project...wuf.

Update:
My lab just happened to get a shiny new Agilent 20Mhz signal generator with external sync, so I am going to use it to follow-through the clock, and i'll be able to find out if the speckles are due to over-loading the clock signal.

In either case i expect to have 4:4:4 10-bit Uncompressed clips up tonight in TIFF frames. It the speckles are still there, I will just post raw frames and let you guys do what you want with them.

I'm still not terribly sure about the alignment so i could post independent R,G,B frames also, other wise it's my best guess.

Peter Plevritis · April 30th, 2004, 11:39 AM

Do you have to align the r,g,b? I know they are off but I would rather have the raw original data without any processing at all.

I can adjust the alignment myself as a post process. This would be true for the software you write for the prototype also.

Juan P. Pertierra · April 30th, 2004, 11:42 AM

Ok, in this case I can post separate directories with the R,G,B frames for the clip...does everyone have the capabilities to put this together or should I also post RGB frames?

Jon Yurek · April 30th, 2004, 12:24 PM

Well, if photoshop is the only image editor that will view 16 bit TIFFs, then anyone who can look at it can manage the three different channels, too.

Juan P. Pertierra · April 30th, 2004, 01:32 PM

right, but i figured putting together a clip at 24fps is annoying in photoshop if you have to go frame by frame and assemble R,G,B channels....i can do it with R,G,B clips automatically in shake but i don't know what other program does it.

Juan P. Pertierra · April 30th, 2004, 08:20 PM

I hooked up the function generator as a clock, and captured images without using the clock on the camera at all. The images have the exact same speckles, so that rules the clock out. I am going to try a few other things and see if I can figure anything else....

Peter Plevritis · April 30th, 2004, 08:30 PM

Putting them together as single images in RGB channels is fine but I would prefer them not repositioned to align them. Wouldn't subpixel offsets alter the data? I would rather have the images as clean off the CCD as possible.

I'd like to understand the prototype you are building. Let me see if I have the specs right.

1. A small external device. Possibly velcroed or taped to the camera.
2. From the unit a ribbon cable will run into the camera. Some mod-ing to the camera body to make a gap to allow the cable in.
3. Inside the camera contact connectors will be attached to the three CCDs. No soldering. They will 'clip' on and stay firmly in place. There is enough space in the camera to allow these connectors.
4. The camera will operate as usual. Recording to tape with all other operations intact.
5. The external unit will have a Firewire 800 port connected to a PC.
6. The PC will have software to capture the stream of data coming from the CCD.
7. The PC will need relatively fast and large disk space to capture all the data.

Does this sound right? Did I miss something?

How will the external box be powered?

How long can a firewire 800 cable be run?

Juan P. Pertierra · April 30th, 2004, 08:39 PM

Close, with a couple of differences:

I'm pretty sure the device box will mount using the tripod mount on the camera, and the box itself will have another tripod mount so you can still mount the entire thing on a tripod. i'm planning on the box having the same matching lines/color/switch style as the bottom of the DVX.

You can also connect the device directly to ~any~ FW800 hard drive for recording.

I'm not 100% sure for FW800, but i have a long standard firewire cable that's at least 10 feet long. I don't see why FW800 can't be just as long, and possibly longer. These cables have twisted pairs such as they are pretty safe from interference and long cable lengths are possible, just as with Ethernet wires.

However, if you connect the device to a portable drive, the drive can be mounted near the camera or carried in a shoulder bag. The files will be recorded in some format ready for NLE, like TIFF RGB frames. All alignment parameters can be set on the box itself, so it records them as you wish, etc.

Oh and another thing...i'm not completely sure, but i think the flex cable i am using is so thin, that no modification is needed to get the cable out, it fits in the small space between the two magnesium shells on the bottom. In either case, the modification needed would be so small, it's negligible. We're talking less than 200 micrometers mm thin.

Juan

Peter Plevritis · April 30th, 2004, 09:12 PM

It could be very simple and elegant to design it to fit between the camera and tripod. It will need to be very sturdy to allow for all the potential weight a camera might carry.

I have a 25ft standard firewire cable I have used with my DVX100.

All the software will be in the unit?

What will power the unit?

Adam Burtle · April 30th, 2004, 10:56 PM

Juan.. i snapped two quick shots of these at NAB..

are these the type of HD CMOS sensors you referred to earlier? i kept my eyes peeled for anyone at NAB with similar solutions to the project you're working on now.. but i saw nothing, just a lot of expensive cameras, jibs, and broadcast stuff hehe.

#1
#2

Juan P. Pertierra · April 30th, 2004, 11:06 PM

yep! Actually, i'm in the process of purchasing 3 ProCam 2560's...will take a while though.

Adam Burtle · April 30th, 2004, 11:13 PM

cool let us know how it goes. i will definitely take one of your devices for my XL1S (waiting patiently everyday hehehe), as will a few people i know, probably.. and at least one wa svery interested in your comments about "building" and HDcam to shoot to HDD. (the main problem as i perceive it, to stream to HDD an HD signal, is that you are moving so much data you either need to compress it with a codec before streaming, or move it through gigabit ethernet)

Juan P. Pertierra · May 1st, 2004, 12:33 AM

So, after several hours of testing with the signal generator, i haven't solved the speckles but i think i'm a little closer.

First of all, using the singal generator as a clock, doesn't get rid of the speckles in the image, BUT the image looks quite cleaner...like the edges don't have bumps which seem to be mis-timed pixels.

This leads me to think that indeed the problem is just plain old noise in my test setup, and that by using the signal generator i got rid of the noise in the clock wires but of course, not on the signal wires.

I have posted a photoshop file for a frame i just took. it is uncorrected, uncompressed 4:4:4 10-bit, and it still has the speckles, but i wanted to illustrate how much cleaner some edges look...specially the section of the mobil-1 oil box in the picture that doesn't have speckles on it. If you can imagine the entire image being this speckle-free, that's one incredible SD image!

http://expert.cc.purdue.edu/~pertierr/cap6_RAW.psd

I am in the process of getting my cat to sit in front of the camera long enough to take a short 3 second clip to upload. I will upload it completely raw so you can do as you wish.

April 30th, 2004, 08:20 PM	#428
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	Workin! I hooked up the function generator as a clock, and captured images without using the clock on the camera at all. The images have the exact same speckles, so that rules the clock out. I am going to try a few other things and see if I can figure anything else....

April 28th, 2004, 08:19 PM	#422
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	There are some boards missing from the schematic, however i think i might've mispoken because what is missing is the board diagram for exactly the board that has all of this on it. So the schematic for that specific area is there, even though other parts are missing, but the diagram that shows you where everything actually is physically is missing. Also, even though the schematic for the A/D's is there, all it has is lines going out of the page into sections of the board that are NOT in the manual, so it was a pain indeed. This might all be a misprint in my manual however.

April 30th, 2004, 07:51 AM	#423
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	Done with my final computer vision project...wuf. Update: My lab just happened to get a shiny new Agilent 20Mhz signal generator with external sync, so I am going to use it to follow-through the clock, and i'll be able to find out if the speckles are due to over-loading the clock signal. In either case i expect to have 4:4:4 10-bit Uncompressed clips up tonight in TIFF frames. It the speckles are still there, I will just post raw frames and let you guys do what you want with them. I'm still not terribly sure about the alignment so i could post independent R,G,B frames also, other wise it's my best guess.

April 30th, 2004, 11:39 AM	#424
Peter Plevritis Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 27	Do you have to align the r,g,b? I know they are off but I would rather have the raw original data without any processing at all. I can adjust the alignment myself as a post process. This would be true for the software you write for the prototype also.

April 30th, 2004, 11:42 AM	#425
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	Ok, in this case I can post separate directories with the R,G,B frames for the clip...does everyone have the capabilities to put this together or should I also post RGB frames?

April 30th, 2004, 12:24 PM	#426
Jon Yurek Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Worcester, MA Posts: 64	Well, if photoshop is the only image editor that will view 16 bit TIFFs, then anyone who can look at it can manage the three different channels, too.

April 30th, 2004, 01:32 PM	#427
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	right, but i figured putting together a clip at 24fps is annoying in photoshop if you have to go frame by frame and assemble R,G,B channels....i can do it with R,G,B clips automatically in shake but i don't know what other program does it.

April 30th, 2004, 08:30 PM	#429
Peter Plevritis Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 27	Putting them together as single images in RGB channels is fine but I would prefer them not repositioned to align them. Wouldn't subpixel offsets alter the data? I would rather have the images as clean off the CCD as possible. I'd like to understand the prototype you are building. Let me see if I have the specs right. 1. A small external device. Possibly velcroed or taped to the camera. 2. From the unit a ribbon cable will run into the camera. Some mod-ing to the camera body to make a gap to allow the cable in. 3. Inside the camera contact connectors will be attached to the three CCDs. No soldering. They will 'clip' on and stay firmly in place. There is enough space in the camera to allow these connectors. 4. The camera will operate as usual. Recording to tape with all other operations intact. 5. The external unit will have a Firewire 800 port connected to a PC. 6. The PC will have software to capture the stream of data coming from the CCD. 7. The PC will need relatively fast and large disk space to capture all the data. Does this sound right? Did I miss something? How will the external box be powered? How long can a firewire 800 cable be run?

April 30th, 2004, 08:39 PM	#430
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	Close, with a couple of differences: I'm pretty sure the device box will mount using the tripod mount on the camera, and the box itself will have another tripod mount so you can still mount the entire thing on a tripod. i'm planning on the box having the same matching lines/color/switch style as the bottom of the DVX. You can also connect the device directly to ~any~ FW800 hard drive for recording. I'm not 100% sure for FW800, but i have a long standard firewire cable that's at least 10 feet long. I don't see why FW800 can't be just as long, and possibly longer. These cables have twisted pairs such as they are pretty safe from interference and long cable lengths are possible, just as with Ethernet wires. However, if you connect the device to a portable drive, the drive can be mounted near the camera or carried in a shoulder bag. The files will be recorded in some format ready for NLE, like TIFF RGB frames. All alignment parameters can be set on the box itself, so it records them as you wish, etc. Oh and another thing...i'm not completely sure, but i think the flex cable i am using is so thin, that no modification is needed to get the cable out, it fits in the small space between the two magnesium shells on the bottom. In either case, the modification needed would be so small, it's negligible. We're talking less than 200 micrometers mm thin. Juan

April 30th, 2004, 09:12 PM	#431
Peter Plevritis Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 27	It could be very simple and elegant to design it to fit between the camera and tripod. It will need to be very sturdy to allow for all the potential weight a camera might carry. I have a 25ft standard firewire cable I have used with my DVX100. All the software will be in the unit? What will power the unit?

April 30th, 2004, 10:56 PM	#432
Adam Burtle Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 173	Juan.. i snapped two quick shots of these at NAB.. are these the type of HD CMOS sensors you referred to earlier? i kept my eyes peeled for anyone at NAB with similar solutions to the project you're working on now.. but i saw nothing, just a lot of expensive cameras, jibs, and broadcast stuff hehe. #1 #2

April 30th, 2004, 11:06 PM	#433
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	yep! Actually, i'm in the process of purchasing 3 ProCam 2560's...will take a while though.

April 30th, 2004, 11:13 PM	#434
Adam Burtle Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 173	cool let us know how it goes. i will definitely take one of your devices for my XL1S (waiting patiently everyday hehehe), as will a few people i know, probably.. and at least one wa svery interested in your comments about "building" and HDcam to shoot to HDD. (the main problem as i perceive it, to stream to HDD an HD signal, is that you are moving so much data you either need to compress it with a codec before streaming, or move it through gigabit ethernet)

May 1st, 2004, 12:33 AM	#435
Juan P. Pertierra Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 479	So, after several hours of testing with the signal generator, i haven't solved the speckles but i think i'm a little closer. First of all, using the singal generator as a clock, doesn't get rid of the speckles in the image, BUT the image looks quite cleaner...like the edges don't have bumps which seem to be mis-timed pixels. This leads me to think that indeed the problem is just plain old noise in my test setup, and that by using the signal generator i got rid of the noise in the clock wires but of course, not on the signal wires. I have posted a photoshop file for a frame i just took. it is uncorrected, uncompressed 4:4:4 10-bit, and it still has the speckles, but i wanted to illustrate how much cleaner some edges look...specially the section of the mobil-1 oil box in the picture that doesn't have speckles on it. If you can imagine the entire image being this speckle-free, that's one incredible SD image! http://expert.cc.purdue.edu/~pertierr/cap6_RAW.psd I am in the process of getting my cat to sit in front of the camera long enough to take a short 3 second clip to upload. I will upload it completely raw so you can do as you wish.