the wait is almost over!!
 

much excitment is buzzing around the studio as we have just captured our very first crude images from the camera by holding it up to a film lens by hand and shooting an image!! this is amazing, I will try and post an image later on...soon as I get a lens for this thing I will try and post some video for everyone to see....I can tell you that after we have worked in Combustion and photoshop on the images I can see that you name the look you want and this camera's raw files can give you that in post - somthing that is lacking as you know in DV, DVCAM, and dvcpro even dvcpro50 because this is RAW data!!!

ohh how the fun starts!!!!

I am not going to post images untill I get a proper lens..the images have alot of light leak from holding the thing by hand...but that will be soon!

I know that this is jumping ahead abit but does anyone know anything about C-mount lenses? what would it take to get a macro that would allow this unit to focus on the gg area of a mini35 type adaptor for the 35mm lens setup ? I want to modify the mini35 I just made for the dvx100 to work with this camera after I get the thing running and do some tests with a normal lens on it...help anyone?

Obin,
A bit pricey:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlineca...=2352&search=1

...A 35mm adaptor, though I would preffer lenses optimised for 2/3 or 16mm format:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlineca...=1459&search=1

...or, Rodenstock macros:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlineca...=1416&search=1

... and something cheaper, but I don't know about the macro performance:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlineca...=2411&search=1

Recently an old Kilffit macro for Bolex 16mm sold in Australia for about 600.00.

Go through the 35mm thread, I'm sure there was a link to Cmount adaptors there ;)

Black electrical tap might help keep the light out while you hld it by hand, how small is it?

Yipee, you right I'm going to enjoy seeign this.

thansk

Wayne.

Thanks Rob. 1300. Got it.

*hand held*? I almost choked on my morning muffin. OK, it will work to put something out, but the back focal distance needs to be about 0.001" correct, more for narrow FOV. and perpendicular to the sensor plane by the same.

Obin, your lenses are on the way. For people who are experimenting with some c mount cameras, get a c mount to 35mm manual lens adapter. You get a much narrower FOV (sensor is smaller than the film), but you get to use all that great glass sitting in your still camera bag.

I picked up a great collection of high quality c mount lenses on ebay. Expect to pay $10-30 for CCTV lenses (actually not bad for the larger pixel size of the Micron), $30-$80 for Bolex and Schneider fixed lenses and then some real money for some of the great 16mm lenses. Extension tubes, bellows are all out there cheap as people move to digital point and shoots.

Now, back to my regularly scheduled muffin.

I must clear this up, what I was talking about was NOT a 35mm adaptor but a c-mount lens that would focus macro about30-40mm away from the front on a groundglass from a 35mm rearprojection adaptor so that we can keep the FOV and the DOF of the 35mm lens....

new camera?
 

I came across yet another camera the other day.

SPECS: model IPC2M30HC
2 megapixel 8/10 bit HD camera
progressive scan 16:9
1920*1080 resolution
camera link interface
Programmable: resolution, framerate (will do 24p), electronic shuttter, long intergration, external trigger, pre exposure, strobe output, gain and offset!
(seems versatile!)
frame rate is programmable from 15-60 fps although it can only manage a max of 33fps at 1920*1080.

Uses a 1 inch progressive scan interline transfer ccd
can utilise C of F mount lenses

check it out at www.imperx.com

Please post you're opinions.

high dollar above $4,000

new camera?
 

Obin, how much did you pay for the SI-1300?

Yes I just recieved a pricelist, and the IPX2M30HC is 4,600$...

However that model could only be decreased in its horizontal resolution, and so the framerate would remain the same. But they recommended the IPX2M30C, since this version could.
But I guess they are too expensive...

Could you maybe post a screengrab of the software that comes with the CameraLink, obin? Just to see what options are available and how advanced it looks...

go download a version that is a bit less complex at www.norpix.com

I am praying that after reading all the great suggestions for the XL2
that this board provided, that Canon knocks our socks off 7/1/04!

<<<-- Originally posted by Dennis Jakobsen : Yes I just recieved a pricelist, and the IPX2M30HC is 4,600$...

However that model could only be decreased in its horizontal resolution, and so the framerate would remain the same. But they recommended the IPX2M30C, since this version could.
But I guess they are too expensive...

-->>>

It's good to see a larger sensor. If used with lenses mounted direct would give a FOV of super16.
I don't like the S/N which is less than 60. It would be nice to be at around 65.

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : I must clear this up, what I was talking about was NOT a 35mm adaptor but a c-mount lens that would focus macro about30-40mm away from the front on a groundglass from a 35mm rearprojection adaptor so that we can keep the FOV and the DOF of the 35mm lens.... -->>>

Sorry, I was thinking of getting rid of the need for the lense in the c-mount first place (makes it shorter, and probably opticall truer), then you can swap between straight 35 mm and with relay and straight C-mount anytime you like.

Hey guys,

What type of color separation does the IPX2M30HC have? 4:2:2? What type of interface does it have. Described it as "DIGITAL"? That's vague to me. Does the $4600 include capture software so you can hook it directly up to a pc or mac? I'm not sure what the difference of 60 Mhz signal to noise ratio as compared to 65 means? Will someone explain this? What's the output rate to the capturing computer in Mbps?

Also, guys, this is a 16:9 chip (incredibly convenient) and fits directly with C-mount. Does someone make a C-Mount to 35mm slr adapter?

Obin, you said this one can't do different frame rates? Specs said it could (my guess at least 720p at 40 fps). That's not too bad.

It this thing is $4600 total for the camera plus bug-free software to work it, isn't this pretty much the camera we've been looking for, or are you guys shunning it becasue that's too expensive for you?

Give me some input guys.

Thanks.

By the way . . .

Jacques said

"I am praying that after reading all the great suggestions for the XL2
that this board provided, that Canon knocks our socks off 7/1/04!"


Is there some scheduled announcement or product release from Canon on that date regarding the XL-2 HD camera that I haven't heard about yet?

Hey Wayne,

I know this is off subject, but it seems all the threads over at camcorderinfo.com are non-accessable. Man, I wrote you and Jim Messerschmidt some post that took damn near an hour and now it's wiped. You getting the same problem?

With every 6db you're gaining a stop of dynamic range.

Signal-to-Noise ratio basically deals with the amount of signal versus the amount of noise in the image. Every 6db you have basically doubled the percived intensity of the signal (you're one-stop brighter). So at 58db, you're only getting around 9-10 stops of usable dynamic range, although the last 6db at the bottom is typically all noise, so it's more like 8-9stops. Actually most HD cameras only have a S/N ratio of 54db (which gives them a maximum of around 8-8/12 stops), so 60db isn't bad, although digital still cameras can be up to 72db, which gives you a nice clean 11-12 stops of dynamic range, which is getting very close to film.

anyone want to jump in a help me find a "relay" lens as you call it for the agus35 adaptor I made for the dvx100? it's got to fit my c-mount 1300 camera and attach to the agus35 with a 72mm thread mount.....or i can make a new mount at whatever mm we need for the c mount lens

Obin,
There are aparently 3 ways to mount the camera behind the lens (I only knew of two before reading this group). The first and simplist is positioning the sensor at the focal point of the current optics. This would be the film plane. I would allow for some adjustment since it is very difficult to know exactly where the sensor surface is. (to 0.001"). You will see that on the SI-1300, there is a set screw on the nose and a ring that can be turned. This will allow you to move the c mount shoulder with respect to the sensor plane. Whatever adapter you make, you want it to be optically black inside so no stray light rays bounce around and to seal the system unless you are in an optically black box (like the inside of a film camera).

Second, as people have been talking about, you can put a ground glass at the film plane and use a macro c mount lens to focus on the image on the glass.

Third, you can use a relay lens to focus and resize the image from the main optical system. I don't have a clue, other than a ray tracing program like Oslo, how to select the optics. This is the method they frequently use in high end image intensifiers.

The second and third options will resize the image, the first is very simple. You might be able to take the c mount off the 12mm lens I sent you (a CCTV lens, not too valuable after your preliminary testing is done) and find a way to mount that a little in front of the film plane so that the camera sensor is in the right spot. c mount is about 17.5mm so that is the approximate distance from the camera shoulder to the sensor plane. That means the shoulder on the adapter you are making from the lens should be that far in front of the film plane.

I hope.
Steve

yes I fully understand(ihope) what you are saying. I like the 2nd idea because you get the FOV from your 35mm lens but most important you get the depth of field - this is one of the fundamental differences of film and video and overcoming this will be a very important step in the production of the lowcost HD camera that customers would want to shoot feature films on - the ability to pull your subject from the background is something almost every cinematographer wants in his/her camera.

This 1/2inch chip is not even close maybe a 2/3 or 1 inch would do the trick - I know this because I have a broadcast 3ccd camera that has 1/2inch chips and the DOF is not even close to film or super 16mm so a relay/macro lens shooting groundglass and a 35mm on the front would be a stopgap but we need 35mm sized chips EVEN if they are low(1280x720) resolution that is ok

Gotchya Jason, 6 db for each stop, thanks.

Canon EOS camera 8 Mp shoots @ 15fps!
 

Maybe just off topic. Just saw this post on Rob Galbraith site http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthrea...b=5&o=&fpart=1 regarding the Canon EOS MKII camera with a 8 Megapixel sensor:
15 fps ... hmmm!!!! if it is believable, consider that this camera doesn't have RAID drives, is designed only for stills work and writes data on CF cards. There is hope that with the proper hardware a HD dream camera is not too far away.

found what may be a great screen for this system once some people get the itX computer made, it's 1024x768 7inches and is touchscreen! I bet that would work well for a monitor/capture pc controller for this project!


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3698&item=4134438908&rd=1

<<<-- Originally posted by Jason Rodriguez : With every 6db you're gaining a stop of dynamic range.

Signal-to-Noise ratio basically deals with the amount of signal versus the amount of noise in the image. Every 6db you have basically doubled the percived intensity of the signal (you're one-stop brighter). So at 58db, you're only getting around 9-10 stops of usable dynamic range, although the last 6db at the bottom is typically all noise, so it's more like 8-9stops. Actually most HD cameras only have a S/N ratio of 54db (which gives them a maximum of around 8-8/12 stops), so 60db isn't bad, although digital still cameras can be up to 72db, which gives you a nice clean 11-12 stops of dynamic range, which is getting very close to film. -->>>

I forget how it goes but doesn't it go something like this:

8-bit (each bit doubles value) = 48db + 6db for totally clear image. But for clear low light images you would add the db of the desired gainup, say 24db, that would be 78db dersired s/n, or for 10 bits, 90db. So the 54db is only for clear images in good light.

Some interesting news:

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/bbs/sho...5642#post75642

Quote:---
Concept HD
Guys,

Go to the HD Forum of Cinematography.com. You will find many arguments there by professional DP's against the use of industrial HD cameras in HD productions. I would urge everyone to wait for our camera announcements. Our cameras will not have these shortcomings.
----

Haven't had time to read the threads mentioned (haven't even read this thread yet) but well and truely worth looking at. I still say that any machine vision company should be able to pull through the goods, if they want.

pics:

dv3productions.com/test_images/test1.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test2.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test3.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test4.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test5.jpg
dv3productions.com/test_images/test6.jpg
test 4 is a raw/color worked split in half file
the rest have been treated from the RAW format

frames may be a bit blurry because i don't have the software workin right

test5 and test6 are the same location same lighting changed the "look" in photoshop

Obin ... very nice! Is that with your GG adapter or without? I assume you got your software working. Can you e-mail or post a raw file (i.e., pre-Bayer) so I can take a look at it ?

I cant save a pre-bayer file but I could send you a 16bit tiff file that has not been touched like the face shot inside

dv3productions.com/test_images/frame2.tif

that is with a cheap cctv lens at 25mm I think better glass will have an effect on the image quality

http://www.dv3productions.com/test_i...udio_test1.jpg
http://www.dv3productions.com/test_i...udio_test2.jpg

shot in our cyc wall with one hard light same image with some "filmLOOK" on the 2nd one

Obin, to get raw data (no Bayer algorithm), do a PIXCI Open/close and close the window. Then do PIXCI Open/close, selct camera format and model and choose the monochrome version. You will get one value per pixel. You can tell - when you zoom it way up it looks like a screen door.

Obin,
It would be very interesting to take two pics of the same exact setting, with no motion. Defocussing the lens just a bit. Can you post a tiff sample of that?
This is one of the 'acid' tests for camera noise.
My biggest concern is for noise in lower light settings.
The jpg's you posted look very promising, good work !
-Les

Obin, how far can you underexpose those images to keep the highlights down without inducing too much noise into the image?

Just wondering, especially about the boy with the door in the background. Very nice images, but the highlights seem to clip very harshly, and I'm wondering again if underexposing the image by quite a bit and then lifting it back up in post will still get you a suitable image without too much noise.

BTW, also if these are pure linear files, and you're trying to make them "bright" on the screen so that you can "see" them nicely, then you're not utilizing the full bit-depth of the camera. 10-bits packed into a 16-bit image with padded zero's should look VERY dark, much darker than what you have right now. By making it "brighter", you're sacrificing the room you have in the shadows to increase the brightness of the image, but you end up clipping off when you hit the saturation point of the camera's CMOS. So again, I would think the images should look even darker, especially if they're 10-bit's linearly packed into 16-bit image.

I'm also curious to know how hard you're finding it to capture extensive lengths of video at a time, like a minute or two.

And lastly, the bayer algorithm you're using needs some major improvement, it's totally falling flat on those car shots with the powerlines and the edges on the car-not good. The other images seem to have come out pretty good, but the car shot is horrible. So if anybody is planning on using these cameras for serious work, they're going to have to get a better Bayer demosaic algorithm going.

BTW you might want to check out http://www.dmmd.net/products/products.htm and their Pictura software. Obin, since you have access to a RAW bayer image, you might want to pass it through his bayer demosaic algorithm, like the car shot, and see what it does, if it cleans up the mess of the edges.

Keep us posted, besides the bayer demosaic problems, things are looking pretty good!

guys take a look at this, first image VW-BEETLE is 1300 single cmos camera I shot. 2nd image, varicam is from the Panasonic HD varicam camera.

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/vw_beetle.jpg

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/varicam.jpg


is the varicam worth $98,000 more then the 1300 camera?

(oh ya I shot with a $20 cctv/spy camera lens) ;)

Hey Obin, I'm posting a CC'd version of the TIFF from "Frame2.tif" I was trying to work around the blow-out in the window, trying to make it as smooth as possible. It was quite harsh IMHO. Overall I think it's a very nice "film-ish" look, and yes, I'm quite amazed at the latitude that you can get out of your TIFF file.

I'm still wondering about my previous post though, in how far you can underexpose to get the maximum amount of dynamic range. Do you have a light-meter available to see how many stops you're getting or can get while having a very acceptable image?

http://www.geocities.com/turbochrg/Frame2_CC.jpg

you can underexpose a huge amount, the guy outside,(thats me) was shot with the face almost totaly black and cc back to what it is now

Rob and Rob, take a look at this:

http://www.dmmd.net/products/algorithms.htm

Keep in mind that these are probably captured as 8 bit images since they are 24 bit tiff. That only gives you 256 levels from black to saturated on a pixel. When Obin gets to 10 bit he will be at 1024 levels.

Great shots Obin!

Software development libraries
 

Rob and Rob,
Leadtools has some pretty great tools. As far as I remember, there are no runtime fees so it might be possible to encapsulate their library functions in your own library to make a mostly GPL application.

http://leadtools.com/SDK/Multimedia/...Products-n.htm

I bought one of their general image processing libraries once and it came with a sample program that was like a mini-photoshop. Very impressive.

When someone has the time to really commit to this, let me know.

using the viefinder in the K3
 

Obin,

The viewfinder in the K3 is a reflex type and the mirrored back surface of the shutter reflects the image onto the light path.

I'd suggest:

a) use the beam splitter, 50/50 should work fine. You'll loose one stop and the image through the viewfinder will be 1/2 as bright. A 25/75 will cost you only 1/2 stop but the image will only be 1/4 as bright as looking through the camera.

b) easier, take a video feed and attach an LCD screen.

Took another look at that image that you talked about (the outdoor shot), and yes, I can see the noise which looks as though the shot's been pushed a bit.

If you don't mind me asking, in the pre-color-corrected version, was the background behind you still blown-out? And were these shots at the full ten bits?

If it was still blown out, even with your face in the blacks, then I'm wondering how many stops of dynamic range you're getting. It's probably seven, maybe eight tops if this is the case, which isn't too bad, but not quite as good as I was expecting, since the Viper with a S/N ratio of 54db is at eight to eight-and-a-half good stops of useable dynamic range.

I guess that's pretty reasonable amount though, considering that the Micron chip is actually a consumer digital camera chip, and those little digital cameras only get around seven-to-eight stops max, rather than the ten to eleven that something like the 10D can get.

thanks for the clips obin . this is looking realy good

Jason the ONLY thing that was blown out was a tiny bit on the truck everything else was underexposed looking from the raw file and the face was in the blacks. I have the 10D and I would say this thing is close to that.....MUCH better then a normal consumer or even professional video camera, all because of 10bit...now I am thinking about using c-mount lenses in the k3 film camera that way I get the FOV that the lens is made for..I could just remove the k3 lens and have a little c-mount sticking out the front...this may work ...I may post some pics of the k3 and ask the group what you guys think

Sorry Obin,

I was just giving my analysis after looking at the file in Photoshop. The whole left side of the image with what appears to be a street and the entire side of the truck is at 255 RGB, which seems clipped to me. The fence is fine, but that's just what I'm seeing after running the eyedropper around the scene in Photoshop.

BTW, if it's not too hard, do you think you could post the RAW file of that outdoor scene with you and the truck? I'd like to see what I can do with it in Combustion if there was as much information there as you're saying.

Thanks.

BTW, the Canon 10D and D60 work off of 12-bit A/D's and have a S/N ratio that's near 70db, so they're much better quality than the Micron chip, actually their specs (but not frame-rate) is very similar to the Altasens 3560, so you may see similar performance as the 10D (which is around 9-10 stops easily) from the Altasens chip. I'm not nocking the Micron, but from the clipping that I'm seeing in your current images, it looks like around 7-8 stops max, which isn't bad, I mean that's where the Cinealta, Viper, etc. are (8-9 stops). The Varicam can supposedly do 11 stops, but I've found that this is pushing the camera to the absolute maximum, and you simply can't safely underexpose that camera without some serious problems with compression artifacts in the shadows when you try to raise them. So even with the Varicam, I think you're getting around 9-stops effective.

Now, the only thing in this estimate is where on the 10-bit scale you're shooting. Are you pushing into the highlights, maximizing the S/N ratio, or are you shooting more into the shadow regions of that range? It seems from the looks of things that you're doing the former, but then I'm not sure how noisey that camera's going to get in the shadows (according to Micron there's only a 45db S/N ratio, which isn't as good as the 54db that the HD cameras have, or the 64-70db that the high-end DSLR's have). I'm not sure if Steve and SI have done some things differently to push that S/N ratio up, but regardless of that, the Micron chip simply isn't what the Canon DSLR chips are, and you can't expect the same performance-but nevertheless you are getting great performance, and having acess to the RAW files probably has a lot to do with that.

BTW, do you know what the approximate ISO of this camera is? Or what is the f-stop rating at 2000lux?

That are some great looking shots Obin! Obin, Rob & Steve: I've
just returned from my little "holiday" and will be looking at all the
camera "stuff" today... some reading up to do (again).

Obin: how do you have the chip set up now? What lens is in front
and how is it connected to your PC? Can you post a picture of the
"camera" with everything connected etc.?