4:4:4 10bit single CMOS HD project

[Barend Onneweer]

Mastering to bayer images doesn't seem like a very good solution to me. The only situation where you'd want this is if you edit in RAW images, and don't do any postproduction treatment whatsoever. I wouldn't want to convert my CGI and other special effects and treatments to bayer images...

I think the focus is best kept to an affordable high-quality acquisition workflow. As long as there are solutions to convert the RAW images, everyone can edit and master in a a format that suits their needs and budget: DVCProHD native (for minimal bandwidth and storage needs) to 4:4:4 uncompressed HD and visually lossless solutions like Cineform somewhere in between.

Bar3nd

[Jason Rodriguez]

Why is everybody trying to edit HD natively???

The best approach by far is to edit a low-res NTSC DV-based, or M-JPEG based offline and then online the footage without any compression, etc.

Use that uncompressed 12-bit source as your master. Color correct the RAW footage, do whatever you want, but I think it's actually kind of silly to try and edit full-res HD when it means you have to compress, etc. and jump through countless hoops to "edit in HD".

Also while I think that Cineform or even DVCProHD is a nice format for editing, it hamstrings you if you have a good editor who's an AVID or FCP guy, not a Premiere Pro person. Apple's DVCPro won't work with AVID, and Cineform won't work with either program. This isn't a pro-mac, anti-pc argument, this is what are good trained editors familar with. Maybe with small independent stuff PremierePro or Vegas might be a nice choice, but by far the most experienced professional editors are going to be on AVID and then FCP.

So the best, most editing-app agnostic approach is an offline/online approach. Use a common everyday Quicktime format like DV that will work with AVID or FCP or even PremierePro, render to that codec in NTSC, edit your offline, and then online in whatever package you want with a high-bit-depth DPX or TIFF file sequence.

I guess if everybody here wants to edit stuff themselves then they can do whatever they want, but when you start to farm your editing jobs out to professional working editors (not in-house corporate industrials where there are a lot of Premiere Pro guys, but they aren't film editors), you're going to have to face a market that's dominated by AVID with FCP creeping in.

Also keep in mind that there are a lot of Meridian and AVBV-based AVID's still out there cutting film material in Hollywood or for Hollywood-destined stuff. Some Adrenalines too. Those guys, unless the Adrenaline folks have the latest updates can't edit in HD or these fancy codecs.

[David Newman]

Jason,

You are "hamstrung" what choice you make there is nothing new to that; comprises are everywhere in the post-production workflow. Choosing a off-line vs on-line workflow is your choose, we know there are clear advantages and disadvantages to both. The workflow I just had involvement in, was off-lined on a AVID and on-lined on Premiere Pro run Prospect HD. There where no PC vs Mac issues here, the mixed workflow performed there individual tasks as needed. In the future we are going to see more direct on-lining not less, as the technology allows for this preferred workflow (overcoming the issues of storage and bandwidth.) There are far fewer "hoops" than you would imagine, editing in HD is getting easier, and biases against compression are fading rapidly. You just need the right sort of compression. ;)

[Joshua Starnes]

Why is everybody trying to edit HD natively???

The best approach by far is to edit a low-res NTSC DV-based, or M-JPEG based offline and then online the footage without any compression, etc.

I'm not interested on editing HD natively, though if I could do an HD online on my Mac, I'd certainly jump at the chance. But it's not essential.


But it's eventually got to be cut somewhere - and while we hunt around for a good cheap codec that does what we want it to, we have to keep in mind that probably someone besides us is going to have to cut with it to. I for one don't look forward to having to carry harddrives with my images and codecs around with me when I want to get an online edit or a filmout done. Which is the main reason why DVCProHD seemed like a good idea at the time. Should have known it was too good to be true.

David,
This may have been asked before, but are there any plans for CineForm to support FCP?

[David Newman]

Joshua,

Yes they are plans to support FCP in the future. Our codec technology is very portable and I'm sure it would run very well on G5s.

David.

[Régine Weinberg]

is this a thread about edit
or camera ??????

I do guess a new thread about edit would be better
sorry
only my 5 cents

[Joshua Starnes]

<<<-- Originally posted by Ronald Biese : is this a thread about edit
or camera ??????

I do guess a new thread about edit would be better
sorry
only my 5 cents -->>>


It's both, but more camera than edit. Whatever software we use to capture the images, if we can't edit them, then we've wasted our time and energy. So that has to be decided now as well.

[Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn]

Doesn't anybody here know the old and good DLT tapes?
Fastest models go up to 72 MB/s

[Jason Rodriguez]

Yes they are plans to support FCP in the future.

As another FCP user, this sounds really great (especially since you are the only one out there with a native Bayer codec)!

[Jason Rodriguez]

You may have a much easier time editing with a compressed tape-based format like DVCProHD or another intemediate format like Cineform on the PC before you go down the DLT route. That's going to cost you some serious $$$'s, money you might as well spend on hard-drives which are faster and random access.

[Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn]

I was just talking about data security never said to edit using directly the DLTs, that would be a nonsense.

Also if you want to output to a DVCproHD, wouldn't be better using DLT instead?
If a HDD hits the floor what happens?
What is the result if the same things happens to a DLT ?

I fact DLT aren't more expensive than disks or DVCproHD.
How much does a DVCproHD tape deck cost?

A 600 GB DLT tape costs something around $180.
How much goes for a simillar HDD ?

A DSR11 DVCAM tape deck costs around $2,500.
The highest SDLT tape drive costs around $4,000.

I can't see your point when you are saying $$$....sorry.
Also I didn't know there were disks faster than 72 Mbytes per second..... :)

Also if I were doing some shooting and need to travel a long a distance, going from cars to planes, etc , I'd for sure choose a DLT and be happy the rest of the road!!!!!

PS: (not related with you Jason) Sometimes it looks to me that people isn't talking about doing things the cheap way but more of some kind of price madness with ridiculous numbers like wanting to replace $ 2000 dollars products investing just $100........
What we are talking about here is having an "affordable" (doesn't mean cheap, bargain,free or the like) way of shooting High Definition with top quality.
I can't understand why if someone is able to buy a 30,000 new car he cannot invest $20,000 or $30,000 on professional equipment which is supposed to be used to generate some revenue.
What is the usual monthly income for everybody here?
Unless you are from a semideveloped country like I am, with a standard monthly income of less than $300 and technology prices from developed countries, then that kind of discussion begins to have no sense.

Sorry if I went too far...

[Wayne Morellini]

Nothing extra special, some new micron models, no Altasens yet.

Wayne.

<<<-- Originally posted by Ronald Biese : is this a thread about edit
or camera ??????

I do guess a new thread about edit would be better
sorry
only my 5 cents -->>>

When there are cameras to discuss we tend to discuss that, otherwise we fill in time, keep the thread alive, and discuss other issues. Works out fine now days (in early days too much discusion at once, but now fine).

<<<-- Originally posted by Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn : Doesn't anybody here know the old and good DLT tapes?
Fastest models go up to 72 MB/s -->>>

Yes I tried to talk about this 6 months, or so, ago. $180 for 600GB tape is too close in price to an array of cheap 200GB harddrives, is there any cheaper? I suggest that existing decks could be used to backup drives (rent one or go and rent time on one) can DLT be rented day by day? HDD very durable, but would not trust them for long term archival storage, so tape would be good for that. In the end maybe we should pick the best HD format and convert finished productions to that, then studios, and TV could easily use that.

----------

Any thoughts on the new Sony HDV, it's mpeg2 compression apparently goes down to 4.7(4.3??):1. How good is it compared to vissually lossless?

To all, if we can get DLT/Tape cheap enough, we can backup to it and reuse more expensive drives. So we don't buy $3K of drives for each production.

Storing in Bayer Raw. This would gives us best quality to work from and re-edit in the future.

[Joshua Starnes]

Any thoughts on the new Sony HDV, it's mpeg2 compression apparently goes down to 4.7(4.3??):1. How good is it compared to vissually lossless?



As I understand, it's fine as long as you don't need to move the camera at all.

If you try to pan or boom or do a nice dolly move - artifacts galore.

[Wayne Morellini]

Good, that's all I needed to hear, the higher variable compression stated doesn't help in the most crucial area.

<<<-- Originally posted by John Nagle : Wayne,

Do you have any more info on the new Sumix cameras, I went to their site and there is no mention of them there. -->>>


Yeah, sorry I knew there was something I forgot to cut and paste in the rush, the address:

http://optics.sumix.com/products/cameras/index.html

[John Nagle]

Thanks Wayne,

I found them, no real move forward there for the moment for what we want here.

One other thing of interest from Sumix, they are talking about a 3 sensor IBIS5A camera with global shutter that might be of interest.