4:4:4 10bit single CMOS HD project

Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn · July 12th, 2004, 05:58 AM

Didn't you read my post about ADV202????
its costs around $40 in low quantities.
What else? Is this a problem of "Ego" or what? (based on you saying you were the first to post about mini-itx and the rest)

I'm really tired of having to post everything three times for you to read it.
Nothing personal Wayne, but please, don't talk to me anymore.Those long posts you make answering my posts make nothing but noise.They aren't constructive and now I see I'm surfing the same wave :(.
Sorry if I upset you or anybody else here...

Laurence Maher · July 12th, 2004, 06:04 AM

Sorry to do this, but could someone explain again the attributes of this "JPEG 2000?" So it's an imaging chip, right? what are the specs?

Also, can someone tell me what FPGA stands for?

Ya, I know . . . layman.

Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn · July 12th, 2004, 06:19 AM

FPGA stands for Field Programable Gate Array.It's kind of a programable microchip.For example you could program an FPGA to work as an Intel 80386, or a Z80, or as a Jpeg compressor, or as Sound equalizer.

The ADV202 is a DSP (or the like) which compresses video in JPEG2000.
I've posted the specs somewhere in this thread, but I don't remember where.
Try Google.

Rob Scott · July 12th, 2004, 06:45 AM

Quote:

But how do you hide the address and give it a display string like in Html anyway.

[ url=http://whatever.com ] Whatever [ /url ]

[ edit ]

OK, here's a question that perhaps only Steve Nordhauser can answer. If I buy a development board for a FPGA chip, how do I interface with the camera sensor? Would someone have to "breadboard" something?

Rob Lohman · July 12th, 2004, 07:11 AM

Wayne & Juan: please try to stay civil on all of this. I understand
things can get a bit heated in here, but as I've said a couple of
times already I think we need to slowdown a bit. I understand
all the enthusiasm that everybody has and wants to pour into
the thread(s), but that might not always be the best way.

It is of no use to simply dump information into this thread etc.
I have been discussing the matter with Chris and we might
create some subforums to handle threads of devices that are
actually being build etc.

However (Wayne!): I'm not back from vacation I'm GOING to
GO on vacation this friday for 2 weeks. I will be back around
August 1st. Any changes will probably NOT HAPPEN before then.
We simply do not have the time.

Wayne: I have to agree with Juan a bit that your very long
posts and the frequency in which they happen is a bit daunting.
Perhaps you can try to just summerize what you are trying to
say and be a bit more brief? That would certainly help people
read through your posts. Thank you for the consideration.

In that regards I also did not yet have found the time to carefully
read your e-mail and respond to it. I want to give a thorough
reply and not a quick one. That's why it hasn't been done yet,
my apologies to you.

On the matter of FPGA there seems to be a lot of mis-information
and confused peopl (me included). Perhaps someone can write
up a good clearly explained little article with links collected from
this thread? We can put that up as a Wiki for example.

I have questions like how would you connect a harddisk (array)
to an FPGA board and a viewfinder out and things like that.....

Wayne Morellini · July 12th, 2004, 08:43 AM

I am sorry, your posts can be abrasive, confusingly wondering, niosily preaching to the converted instead of reading the thread history and taking on objective discussion. It is more about annoyance at a couple of things here today, than about my ego, and it is not a good day for it. I can accept and concead drive wattage, clearspeed overprice, what ever is right, please do the same. I was asking for an example of a cheap, powerful enough, FPGA PCI?, instead of the cheap hardwired ADV202 compressor. After the last post, I was just aiming to reply to your next post, that I didn't want to talk about it anymore, as it is useless. You have not had to repeat anything three times but was not understanding. I have posted good stuff, people get out of it what they put into it, if they don't want to read it, it is upto them, they miss out. There are still some great opportunities in those posts that nobody has taken up.

Most of the things you just accused me of are actually issues I have been having with you.

Quote:

Originally posted by Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn : posts make nothing but noise.They aren't constructive and now I see I'm surfing the same wave :(.
Sorry if I upset you or anybody else here...

Maybe you mean that you have the same objectives and direction as me, but the discussion has been unconstructive niose jumping defensively around. But please no more.

As it doesn't look like I am going to be doing the sponsorship drive, and got everybody in the right direction, there is no reason for me to stay around, I can easily pass case designs onto Rob, or Steve, when I get to them. Ultimately, it is not about me or about you, but about getting the project to be the most benefit to the most people, and my discussions serve that direction.

Now to wait for wrangler Rob to come along and jump all over us for disputing ;)

Wayne Morellini · July 12th, 2004, 08:45 AM

Bugger, you beat me to it, Rob. Sorry I was writing while you posted.

Yes your right, things do move a bit fast, I re-read the recent posts, and they do mostly seem civil enough. We both have called it quits so that is the end of it.

There is just too much volume for me to keep up, if I miss a week, I can spend over 20 hours of reading every thread and replying. Today hasn't been comfortable for me, so sorry that I am not so tolerant today.

About my threads, I don't think that was what Juan was getting at. My threads are already brief complete summaries, that is why it can take 3-4 hours to write and reduce them. I have less research nowadays, but the problem is trying to do weekly summaries instead of multiple indiviual posts (that aren't acceptable), but they are getting smaller. It is mostly a perceptual thing, if I used highlighting to break it up into individual repleis, it would help. I'll try that on one of the recent posts now, have a look and see what you think. Also, in other forums when you quote it comes out as bold indented small text. I have been reducing the amount of quoted text to reduce their size too.

On your last paragraph, design it, design boards, with interfacing components, power supply, and sockets, at this speed the interfacing can get tricky, ask Steve. I suggest people stop talking about FPGA, do the research and choose actual solutions, you'll then get your answers on the way. Brief.

About the threads, have a look at the "Home Made HD Cinema Cameras" threads, they are logically divided.

Richard Mellor · July 12th, 2004, 10:19 AM

guys this is a great thread .and a great opptunity

the passions and excitment are part of this process

One local corporation taught guidelines for preserving creative energy during the brainstorming process, and I think it's applicable to where we are. Often, the best ideas have three components: creative spark, competitive edge, and ease of implementation. Generally, we self-censor our ideas in favor of practicality ... 'it's too expensive', 'it's too complex for the user' ... comments like that. All thr truly creative ideas start with an outlandish though that has practically *added later*. In that vein, you can be sure that all the most competitive ideas with the most appeal will come forth.

All this is a backdrop to the most important aspect of group thinking: don't shoot down ideas because they're complex or 'whacky'. Those are the ones that no one else has thought of. All the group needs to do is to request the originator of the 'whacky' idea to add elements that will make the implmenetaion easier. In that way, everyone stays involved and the process doesn't devolve into ego bashing.

A thought kept inside your brain is in 1 dimension. When written it can be observed and evaluated. I am in the presence of brilliant men .working for a common good , and hope that I may add something to this discourse

Thanks to All

Rob Scott · July 12th, 2004, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Also, in other forums when you quote it comes out as bold indented small text. I have been reducing the amount of quoted tect to reduce their size too.

You can do this by using [ quote ] ... [ /quote ]

Obin Olson · July 12th, 2004, 10:51 AM

Wayne look at what you do on the board and then I think you will find that what some of us are saying is true..all I ask is that you read your own posts -- you will see

I am looking for a zoom lens for the si1300 if anyone has any links ...

Wayne Morellini · July 12th, 2004, 11:01 AM

Rob did the adjustments, looks a lot better.

Richard I know your name.

That is the exactly the same process I apply, except I self apply practicality as soon as possbile (usually straight up while thinking/writing it). Any practical solution is on the table with me here, but the proccess is abit more straight foward here, as many of the technological, manufacturing and economical issues have known practical limitations. So any objective person, with the knowledge, can apply the practical correctly straight up. So there will still be differences, and differences in knowledge. But it would help if we had engineers specialising in FPGA, and mass manufacturing and board design, they could verify options quiet quickly. I certainly don't know enough, otherwise I would have done it myself last year.

Quote:

Richard Mellor
A thought kept inside your brain is in 1 dimension. When written it can be observed and evaluated. I am in the presence of brilliant men .working for a common good , and hope that I may add something to this discourse

Are you saying you work with some corporation that works for the common good. Good, can I join, it sounds like where I should be working. One of my legal freinds wants me to send my unemployment solution to the prime minister, and there are many other good ideas I have written up.

Thanks Richard

Wayne.

Wayne Morellini · July 12th, 2004, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Obin Olson : Wayne look at what you do on the board and then I think you will find that what some of us are saying is true..all I ask is that you read your own posts -- you will see

Groan, I do, I can't help it if some people get confused or couldn't be bothered. I spend a lot of time structuring and simplifying them. I know there is nothing really wrong with them, and I generally keep back my comments about other's inadequacies. It is all in the mind of certain people, and I am familiar with this mental problem. To read them, divide up the variouse quotes (ussually most of the message) scan the first few lines of each quote to remember the post it was from and it's subject, then read the reply if you want, then go to the next one. My sentences canbe full of information and mixed meanings, so divide them up aswell, sorry. Still, sometimes it doesn't matter how simple I make it, some people just can't understand it, even statements like "the sky is a lovely blue colour". Now it should be 10 times easier to read, and look propperly divided up in your mind instead of a page full of confusing text. Try it. Now, when I get sick, messages are a big confusing mass of text, but I still read them while I can, even if I have to read it ten times slower than normal. If I can do it, so can most. I'll try to make it easier in the future, which is easy as most of the foundations are laid and there is not much more to discuss. I have divided my past 4-5 posts up with quotes, have a look, they make a big difference in dividing up the message.

This is highly personal and I prefer not to talk about it, and I prefer not to be bothered addressing it, but I believe that it is the responsibility of a person to explain/justify/accept their actions and reasoning, and only proud, arrogant, selfish, foolish xxxs won't. Once we have strength for that, we are better off.

Hope this doesn't offend.

Simplified summary for everybody:
Uggh, Igg, Ogg, eeK ;) .

Jason Rodriguez · July 12th, 2004, 03:50 PM

Hey Wayne,

I don't think the problem is with you or anybody else here on the list.

I think the problem is lack of focus.

I've got a great idea. Why don't we see how to get Obin's camera working as good as it can (new bayer de-mosaic filters, recording software, good lens, maybe an Altasens chip) before we jump onto this FPGA stuff. I know it sounds so nice, but I can guarantee you that you're not going to beat the Kinetta, Panavision, Arri, etc. with this home-made stuff.

You keep talking about the economics of mass-production. Well as of right now there is no mass-production and no mass-market to market to, and if a camera is going to cost $12K, you can kiss you mass-market good-bye.

There's a reason you can OEM your own whitebox computer for cheap $$$'s-there's a huge OEM market for cheap do-nothing (or gaming/non-critical task) computers!

Now how many $$$-toting producers do you know who are willing to risk their big $$$$$$'s on a shoot with your home-made camera?

None.

Yup.

No-one. Not me at least. Shoot's are waaayyy too expensive if any production value is being put into them, and the last thing that I want to happen is canceling and losing lots of man-hours and cash on a broken or not-working camera.

I think for right now Obin and Rob have the right idea. Do the simple stuff. Cheap. Leave the big stuff for the big boys right now. I find it quite comical that all the features you guys are trying to do right now and so many more are coming with the Kinetta, which is going to be a fairly cheap professional HD camera. Professional in that I can take that sucker to Mongolia and not worry about it crapping out on me or breaking, etc. It's built like a tank, has RAID-3 on it's hard-drives, a superior de-mosaicing algorithm (with de-moire software too) run in RT by a very powerful Xilinx, built in color-corrector, 10-bit uncompressed log-DPX file export (for maintaining the total dynamic range of the chip), and a very nice Altasens chip at it's core that will go from timelapse to 60fps at the touch of a button; not to mention complete sound sync with 12 channels of audio at 24bit/96khz.

You complain that cameras like that are too expensive. Well there's a reason they cost so much, and it's because you can use them on shoots that cost $$$$$$$$'s!!! Home-made put-together cameras don't get used on those types of shoots, and as a result you shouldn't be spending a whole lot of money on them, because you'll never see the return in cash in a buisness sense. Now if it's something you're curious about, or think will fill a small niche, then that's fine, but realize this isn't a mass-marketable product. If the software was there to get nice images out of these things and get them to an edit app, then I think you'd already have your marketable product. Slapping on $$$'s worth of development time in FPGA's, this, that, etc., etc. is not worth it IMHO, and that's why I feel your posts drag on too long. They're great ideas, but not for do-it-yourself projects that can't see a return in cash, and the reason they won't see a return is because they can't be used on big $$$ projects.

So instead of spouting on about speculation on this or that FPGA, megapixel, etc. why don't we figure out the simple stuff first: rolling shutter artifacts, fixed pattern noise, good software for capture and de-mosaicing, lossless file capture, etc.

So, I know your posts are with the best intentions, but right now, I think the best intension for this project is to get Obin's camera working flawlessly.

There's a reason why the evil of compressed tape and DV lives on-it's easy.

I can get a call right now, grab a camera, go to the producer's location, shoot, give him a tape that he can edit wherever he wants, and cash his check at the bank the next day.

Or if it's film, I get the film, get the camera, shoot, send film to lab, telecine, send back the tapes, pocket cash.

I'm not rendering on a computer for hours just to see what the footage looks like. I'm not explaining to the producer how he'll edit his stuff. No. Shoot, deliver tape/film, pocket cash, repeat the next day (if that's where you want it to end). Until these home-made cameras become that full-proof and that easy to use, you're going to have a much harder time making money with them, and as a result, have a harder time (or at least the normal videographer/shooter) justifying the expendature for a home-made camera that needs days/weeks of investment in assembling, and then it's a rickety pile of bolts in the field.

The truth is that producers (the one's shelling out the $$$'s for your project that you get to work on, and are paying your checks) don't have image quality at the top of their list. Content is king. No content, no money for them. So if your stuff is a hinderance to them making more content and pumping that content out quicker, better, cheaper, then it's a hinderance to them making money. Yes, the same money that you like them paying you, they must make themselves first. So if they have to settle for DV, they will, because some $$ in the pocket is better than no $$ in the pocket but "great" image quality.

Les Dit · July 12th, 2004, 05:30 PM

Jason,
How many Kinetta's are out in production right now? Any test productions using it?
What's the price? Delivery date?

Was the demo at NAB a working camera without a sneaky umbilical cord running to a box under the desk ? ;)

I've seen no demo footage from their camera yet. I wonder if they can send or have an FTP site with some footage? Stills?
I congratulate Obin for posting short clips, albeit 8 bit, to the world.

I'm not doubting they have something, but it sure would be nice to see something from them.

True on the content, unfortunately !

I would bet that some DV PAL people would indeed risk shooting with a new camera, but you are right, it can't have a duct tape and bailing wire feeling about it. But they so desire that 'film look' so who knows what they may risk.
-Les

Obin Olson · July 12th, 2004, 06:11 PM

Jason your sooo on-the-money!! Would I use this thing for work-for-hire? HeLL NO. I will use this thing for in-house projects that I can afford to mess up and re-shoot! I am doing it because for special effects like compositing/colorwork/greenscreens/slowmotion/ etc DV DVCAM DVCPRO DvCpRO50 and even DVCPROHD and HDCAM SUCK... so I would have to rent a Viper and god knows how much that would cost not to mention I have NO idea how to use it..so back to square one - i am doing this to let some of our projects SHINE - and yes this footage SHINES when you pit it agints any of the "standard" formats ;)

ROCK ON!

Oh BTW our animation/post department LOVES this thing because now we have enough resolution to work with in post

the 1080p will only be that much better!

even if we don't have any REAL software for capture done I will be shooting a 30sec spot with this camera soon and will give lots of clips for all to take a look at ;) guess I better check and see if sync-sound works with it first!

July 12th, 2004, 07:11 AM	#680
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	Wayne & Juan: please try to stay civil on all of this. I understand things can get a bit heated in here, but as I've said a couple of times already I think we need to slowdown a bit. I understand all the enthusiasm that everybody has and wants to pour into the thread(s), but that might not always be the best way. It is of no use to simply dump information into this thread etc. I have been discussing the matter with Chris and we might create some subforums to handle threads of devices that are actually being build etc. However (Wayne!): I'm not back from vacation I'm GOING to GO on vacation this friday for 2 weeks. I will be back around August 1st. Any changes will probably NOT HAPPEN before then. We simply do not have the time. Wayne: I have to agree with Juan a bit that your very long posts and the frequency in which they happen is a bit daunting. Perhaps you can try to just summerize what you are trying to say and be a bit more brief? That would certainly help people read through your posts. Thank you for the consideration. In that regards I also did not yet have found the time to carefully read your e-mail and respond to it. I want to give a thorough reply and not a quick one. That's why it hasn't been done yet, my apologies to you. On the matter of FPGA there seems to be a lot of mis-information and confused peopl (me included). Perhaps someone can write up a good clearly explained little article with links collected from this thread? We can put that up as a Wiki for example. I have questions like how would you connect a harddisk (array) to an FPGA board and a viewfinder out and things like that..... __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

July 12th, 2004, 10:19 AM	#683
Richard Mellor Major Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: cambridge ma Posts: 247	hi everyone guys this is a great thread .and a great opptunity the passions and excitment are part of this process One local corporation taught guidelines for preserving creative energy during the brainstorming process, and I think it's applicable to where we are. Often, the best ideas have three components: creative spark, competitive edge, and ease of implementation. Generally, we self-censor our ideas in favor of practicality ... 'it's too expensive', 'it's too complex for the user' ... comments like that. All thr truly creative ideas start with an outlandish though that has practically added later. In that vein, you can be sure that all the most competitive ideas with the most appeal will come forth. All this is a backdrop to the most important aspect of group thinking: don't shoot down ideas because they're complex or 'whacky'. Those are the ones that no one else has thought of. All the group needs to do is to request the originator of the 'whacky' idea to add elements that will make the implmenetaion easier. In that way, everyone stays involved and the process doesn't devolve into ego bashing. A thought kept inside your brain is in 1 dimension. When written it can be observed and evaluated. I am in the presence of brilliant men .working for a common good , and hope that I may add something to this discourse Thanks to All

July 12th, 2004, 05:58 AM	#676
Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Buenos Aires , Argentina Posts: 444	Didn't you read my post about ADV202???? its costs around $40 in low quantities. What else? Is this a problem of "Ego" or what? (based on you saying you were the first to post about mini-itx and the rest) I'm really tired of having to post everything three times for you to read it. Nothing personal Wayne, but please, don't talk to me anymore.Those long posts you make answering my posts make nothing but noise.They aren't constructive and now I see I'm surfing the same wave :(. Sorry if I upset you or anybody else here...

July 12th, 2004, 06:04 AM	#677
Laurence Maher Join Date: May 2004 Location: denton, texas, usa Posts: 416	Sorry to do this, but could someone explain again the attributes of this "JPEG 2000?" So it's an imaging chip, right? what are the specs? Also, can someone tell me what FPGA stands for? Ya, I know . . . layman.

July 12th, 2004, 06:19 AM	#678
Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Buenos Aires , Argentina Posts: 444	FPGA stands for Field Programable Gate Array.It's kind of a programable microchip.For example you could program an FPGA to work as an Intel 80386, or a Z80, or as a Jpeg compressor, or as Sound equalizer. The ADV202 is a DSP (or the like) which compresses video in JPEG2000. I've posted the specs somewhere in this thread, but I don't remember where. Try Google.

July 12th, 2004, 08:45 AM	#682
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Bugger, you beat me to it, Rob. Sorry I was writing while you posted. Yes your right, things do move a bit fast, I re-read the recent posts, and they do mostly seem civil enough. We both have called it quits so that is the end of it. There is just too much volume for me to keep up, if I miss a week, I can spend over 20 hours of reading every thread and replying. Today hasn't been comfortable for me, so sorry that I am not so tolerant today. About my threads, I don't think that was what Juan was getting at. My threads are already brief complete summaries, that is why it can take 3-4 hours to write and reduce them. I have less research nowadays, but the problem is trying to do weekly summaries instead of multiple indiviual posts (that aren't acceptable), but they are getting smaller. It is mostly a perceptual thing, if I used highlighting to break it up into individual repleis, it would help. I'll try that on one of the recent posts now, have a look and see what you think. Also, in other forums when you quote it comes out as bold indented small text. I have been reducing the amount of quoted text to reduce their size too. On your last paragraph, design it, design boards, with interfacing components, power supply, and sockets, at this speed the interfacing can get tricky, ask Steve. I suggest people stop talking about FPGA, do the research and choose actual solutions, you'll then get your answers on the way. Brief. About the threads, have a look at the "Home Made HD Cinema Cameras" threads, they are logically divided.

July 12th, 2004, 10:51 AM	#685
Obin Olson Trustee Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wilmington NC Posts: 1,414	Wayne look at what you do on the board and then I think you will find that what some of us are saying is true..all I ask is that you read your own posts -- you will see I am looking for a zoom lens for the si1300 if anyone has any links ...

July 12th, 2004, 03:50 PM	#688
Jason Rodriguez Trustee Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 1,095	Hey Wayne, I don't think the problem is with you or anybody else here on the list. I think the problem is lack of focus. I've got a great idea. Why don't we see how to get Obin's camera working as good as it can (new bayer de-mosaic filters, recording software, good lens, maybe an Altasens chip) before we jump onto this FPGA stuff. I know it sounds so nice, but I can guarantee you that you're not going to beat the Kinetta, Panavision, Arri, etc. with this home-made stuff. You keep talking about the economics of mass-production. Well as of right now there is no mass-production and no mass-market to market to, and if a camera is going to cost $12K, you can kiss you mass-market good-bye. There's a reason you can OEM your own whitebox computer for cheap $$$'s-there's a huge OEM market for cheap do-nothing (or gaming/non-critical task) computers! Now how many $$$-toting producers do you know who are willing to risk their big $$$$$$'s on a shoot with your home-made camera? None. Yup. No-one. Not me at least. Shoot's are waaayyy too expensive if any production value is being put into them, and the last thing that I want to happen is canceling and losing lots of man-hours and cash on a broken or not-working camera. I think for right now Obin and Rob have the right idea. Do the simple stuff. Cheap. Leave the big stuff for the big boys right now. I find it quite comical that all the features you guys are trying to do right now and so many more are coming with the Kinetta, which is going to be a fairly cheap professional HD camera. Professional in that I can take that sucker to Mongolia and not worry about it crapping out on me or breaking, etc. It's built like a tank, has RAID-3 on it's hard-drives, a superior de-mosaicing algorithm (with de-moire software too) run in RT by a very powerful Xilinx, built in color-corrector, 10-bit uncompressed log-DPX file export (for maintaining the total dynamic range of the chip), and a very nice Altasens chip at it's core that will go from timelapse to 60fps at the touch of a button; not to mention complete sound sync with 12 channels of audio at 24bit/96khz. You complain that cameras like that are too expensive. Well there's a reason they cost so much, and it's because you can use them on shoots that cost $$$$$$$$'s!!! Home-made put-together cameras don't get used on those types of shoots, and as a result you shouldn't be spending a whole lot of money on them, because you'll never see the return in cash in a buisness sense. Now if it's something you're curious about, or think will fill a small niche, then that's fine, but realize this isn't a mass-marketable product. If the software was there to get nice images out of these things and get them to an edit app, then I think you'd already have your marketable product. Slapping on $$$'s worth of development time in FPGA's, this, that, etc., etc. is not worth it IMHO, and that's why I feel your posts drag on too long. They're great ideas, but not for do-it-yourself projects that can't see a return in cash, and the reason they won't see a return is because they can't be used on big $$$ projects. So instead of spouting on about speculation on this or that FPGA, megapixel, etc. why don't we figure out the simple stuff first: rolling shutter artifacts, fixed pattern noise, good software for capture and de-mosaicing, lossless file capture, etc. So, I know your posts are with the best intentions, but right now, I think the best intension for this project is to get Obin's camera working flawlessly. There's a reason why the evil of compressed tape and DV lives on-it's easy. I can get a call right now, grab a camera, go to the producer's location, shoot, give him a tape that he can edit wherever he wants, and cash his check at the bank the next day. Or if it's film, I get the film, get the camera, shoot, send film to lab, telecine, send back the tapes, pocket cash. I'm not rendering on a computer for hours just to see what the footage looks like. I'm not explaining to the producer how he'll edit his stuff. No. Shoot, deliver tape/film, pocket cash, repeat the next day (if that's where you want it to end). Until these home-made cameras become that full-proof and that easy to use, you're going to have a much harder time making money with them, and as a result, have a harder time (or at least the normal videographer/shooter) justifying the expendature for a home-made camera that needs days/weeks of investment in assembling, and then it's a rickety pile of bolts in the field. The truth is that producers (the one's shelling out the $$$'s for your project that you get to work on, and are paying your checks) don't have image quality at the top of their list. Content is king. No content, no money for them. So if your stuff is a hinderance to them making more content and pumping that content out quicker, better, cheaper, then it's a hinderance to them making money. Yes, the same money that you like them paying you, they must make themselves first. So if they have to settle for DV, they will, because some $$ in the pocket is better than no $$ in the pocket but "great" image quality.

July 12th, 2004, 05:30 PM	#689
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Jason, How many Kinetta's are out in production right now? Any test productions using it? What's the price? Delivery date? Was the demo at NAB a working camera without a sneaky umbilical cord running to a box under the desk ? ;) I've seen no demo footage from their camera yet. I wonder if they can send or have an FTP site with some footage? Stills? I congratulate Obin for posting short clips, albeit 8 bit, to the world. I'm not doubting they have something, but it sure would be nice to see something from them. True on the content, unfortunately ! I would bet that some DV PAL people would indeed risk shooting with a new camera, but you are right, it can't have a duct tape and bailing wire feeling about it. But they so desire that 'film look' so who knows what they may risk. -Les

July 12th, 2004, 06:11 PM	#690
Obin Olson Trustee Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Wilmington NC Posts: 1,414	Jason your sooo on-the-money!! Would I use this thing for work-for-hire? HeLL NO. I will use this thing for in-house projects that I can afford to mess up and re-shoot! I am doing it because for special effects like compositing/colorwork/greenscreens/slowmotion/ etc DV DVCAM DVCPRO DvCpRO50 and even DVCPROHD and HDCAM SUCK... so I would have to rent a Viper and god knows how much that would cost not to mention I have NO idea how to use it..so back to square one - i am doing this to let some of our projects SHINE - and yes this footage SHINES when you pit it agints any of the "standard" formats ;) ROCK ON! Oh BTW our animation/post department LOVES this thing because now we have enough resolution to work with in post the 1080p will only be that much better! even if we don't have any REAL software for capture done I will be shooting a 30sec spot with this camera soon and will give lots of clips for all to take a look at ;) guess I better check and see if sync-sound works with it first!