Rai & Markus' "Drake" HD camera

[Kyle Edwards]

<<<-- Originally posted by Markus Rupprecht @christian

...export it (scince this application runs on your editing windows pc) to any codec installed on the system. We use HUFYUV with avi container or single frame tiff sequences. The uncompressed 4:4:4 8bit avi's can be read by the quantel system without a problem, so any high grade editing suite should eat it, we edit with pinnacle edition.
-->>>

Would it be possible if you could send out a DVD sample of the raw footage to someone who requests it? I would love to have some to tinker with. Of course I'd pay for the DVD-R and shipping.

[John Nagle]

I second that, some RAW footage on DVD would be a great idea.

[Christian Schmitt]

@Markus:
"(...)we edit with pinnacle edition."
Could you please tell us a bit more on this?
So far Edition was for editing DV only, since version 6 they
included more codecs(eg HDV - what i don't think you'll use).
What format you edit in Edition? Your going for filmout, right?
What are the hardware requirements of your Drake data to be edited with a decent workflow?
Did you build the editingbox yourself or do you use some turnkey sytem?

Now most of all: GOOD LUCK SHOOTING DRACHENFEDER!
if you need a stand-in for a bear, i haven't shaved in days ;o)
i could also do a drunk in an old tavern...

[Rob Lohman]

Markus: I'm glad you are feeling at home. And thanks for posting
the pictures etc.

Just a note to all: please do not go down the path where we are
insulting or attacking people etc. Those posts will be removed or
edited etc.

Thank you for your consideration!

I understand we all are passionate about these sort of things and
have our own thoughts, wishes and requirements, but let's all
stay civil.

Thanks!!

[Wayne Morellini]

Rob La, yes, often I am "annoyed in the shadows" too and this is, probably the second insane argument you have heard from me, but is only insane because I am debating an "Insane argument" yet agoin, instead of just quiting and letting the ussual wide spread delusion of the artistic, know not too much, type reign (of which I suffer a bit, but have put many years of technical research and training to compensate for this obviouse fault ;). Well most of the particularly irritiating sickness has past, so I can sit in the shadows and wag my head at all the unobjective insanity that some times prevailes in the different threads from certain people, who should really consider paying others to write, rather than insult sensible people's intelleigence. Making the brain bigger than the ego, rather than the other way about, is good objective to strive for. If you see me debating something, remember, it is ussually because I can smell B... from a mile off, even if it can't be seen yet.

Now rather than debate things about any camera, and questions that can only have untactfull answers, I'll generalise about no camera in particular, but life and business. If you sell something, simple improvements to sell four times more will improve your business (even ten fold in profit from economies of scale). This is sanity (in many business circles) not doing this, if you have the opportunity, is ussually what is classified as "insanity". Unfortunately, most buyers, by human nature are not the shoebox crowd. Getting on here and trying to debate wrong statements, is like becoming "Canon Fodder" ;). If Christian wants to believe that any company that produces a product is producing a DIY product, and that the defintion of a good cinema camera is a bland squarish/rectangulish box with a tappered coffin like end, that is upto him, he knows the alternative view now.

What you seem to have forgotten, is that the threads are about making equipment for people to then make films. As part of this, getting it to be "successfull", so it can be lower priced and in the hands of our fellow citizens is part of this. So forgive the small suggestions to improve their situation. And by the way I have a lot of respect for the Drake team, and the camera, just some embelishment on the case would go a way.

BTW, Don't joke about the shoebox, oddly it isn't too bad looking ;).

Have a good day Rob.


Rai

I don't think anybody ever suggested that it actually should look anything like a Canon (did I?), it is just that somebody, out of a large number of people, thought that the Canon is a good example of bad taste. As I have said before, the camera needs to look professional, be functional, and look good in a professional way. That basically means simular to what people are used to, a squarish (but embelished to look attractive) boxish shape (with attractive angles and dimension ratios) that looks good. Not something that costs a lot more than what you have allready, just a bit more styling. If you want a fancy design instead I have one in my head since this debate started, but really it should be saved for 8MP or 3chip Altasens level camera. I think, if you are going to have a good style case you have to have the goods in it, to back it up. This is why the styling is a bit wasted on the Canon, it looks great, and gets some sales because of it, but in the end it is only minidv inside and not a seriouse threat to the professional camera market. I don't plan a camera this high end to use the case, so if you want to buy it, it is avaialble.

Rai, me mate, get some sleep, you deserve it, bigger companies have talked about delivering a camera, you did it ;)


Markus

Hmm, I have talked to Rai in times past about variouse things for his camera, and here they are on the camera, to his credit he didn't let on that he actually used them. He's a Great guy.

Now about Modding cases. Somewhere, wayback in the threads, I suggested that if you wanted a cheap case you could use a small PC case (I used to have pictures of hundreds of different cases and some very interesting and different). I also suggested that these case companies might be cheap places to get a case manufactured (but probably too big of numbers for you). Now as you are only after a squarish case with some internal structure, and they manufacture squarish boxes and add styling etc, maybe they can help.


Christian

I'm not bothering continuing this, but think what the logical conculsions your arguments are, and you don't actually know the history of this project.


Rob

I have just seen your reply, after having written most of the above. Don't worry, I am not really interested in debating it anymore. I feel a bit of bewildered at some of the pionts made, but no malice towards anyone.

[Aaron Shaw]

Just a small comment on DIY:

The arguements presented are really quite subjective as we are talking about semantics. Since there is no meaning set in stone for any one particular phonetic utterance. Language develops all sots of semantic shifts all the time. Words that used to mean one thing now mean entirely different things today. It is therefore quite reasonable to have multiple definitions of DIY based upon a persons perception of the word. One cannot be said to be any more correct than the other. If, for maximum communcation, we wish to set one meaning in stone then we should do so but to otherwise argue about the specific meaning of a word has very little purpose.

[Kyle Edwards]

<<<-- Originally posted by Christian Schmitt : @Markus:
"(...)we edit with pinnacle edition."
Could you please tell us a bit more on this?
So far Edition was for editing DV only, since version 6 they
included more codecs(eg HDV - what i don't think you'll use).
What format you edit in Edition? Your going for filmout, right?
What are the hardware requirements of your Drake data to be edited with a decent workflow? -->>>

You can convert the RAW footage from the Drake system to any AVI format you like. So any editor can take it on. Also Edition wasn't just for DV, at least from what I remember reading.

You can read up or test out the requirements for the Drake converted files on your own. Make a file the same resolution that the Drake system outputs and try a couple different codecs. Huffyuv will require a top of the line system to edit in that res with multi-layers. Some other codecs to look into are Aspect HD and Aware's Motion Wavelet.

[Christian Schmitt]

Edition in the previous versions could handle two formats:
DV as an .avi
DV as a .dif
At least that's what I can choose when logging with it.
Other packages like Pinnacle Liquid Chrome or Blue offer
more flexibility.

Are you from the Drake team or are you just putting together the given information so far?
Since Markus said he edited with Edition and I'm using this when editing on a PC, I was hoping for their complete workflow.
They seem to build everything on their own (Steadycam, matte box, FF etc.), I guess they've come up with their own editing system too.

@Wayne
Of course I'm also not bothering continuing this;o), I just wanna ad sth:
I understand your point, I know that these threads have not been started by commercial enterprises.
No, persons like you and me thought of nice things they couldn't afford and how to built them themselves with less money.
But building a HDcam differs a lot IMHO from building eg a homemade mini35.
a blank CD, some electronic devices, old photographic parts - well, if i put these together and fail I lost 50 bucks and some time in the basement.
If Obins DIY projekt will stay "open source"(just for the comparison) and a "HOW TO BUILD THE OBIN-HD" site will be available for the public, you`ll have to invest a lot more for the parts.
So messing up with 3000$ in parts, I can't afford.
If the ObinCam will be for sale for lets say 5000$ - it will also become a commercial enterprise, same as Drake Inc.
No DIY anymore.
So following your logic, if the ObinCam stays DIY, it will only be available to a capable few: DIY for the elite.
For the time I can concentrate on DIY movie making and not HDcamera building, I'm willing to pay.
I can't pay what sonypanasonicviper want, but maybe now I can nevertheless afford renting HD equipement: be it a Drake, a Obin or a Morellini .
Wayne, stay being so passionate about things,keeps reminding me of the people behind the letters.
Take care.

[Markus Rupprecht]

Just real quick before I need to go to bed. Now, we didn't build the editing system... But a friend of mine was involved in the core programming of edition, back when it was "Fast Studio". The render engine is really powerfull, preserving the clip format. With the 499,- software only version you only can log clips in HDV (MPEG2 and so on) but when you import clips from a hard drive they can be uncompressed, or compressed with a lossless codec, the system does not reencode them !! - they stay in their native format. That's new in the new version and really powerfull. If you want SDI output you need to buy the much more expensive HD-Version. If you stay digital the software only version will do. If our camera will get really used by other people, it might be an idea to turn the stand allone export tool into a plugin. So far you need that inbetween programm to turn the raw files into something editing systems can read. With the IBIS5 chip it makes sense to do it with an more powerfull aplication, scince the fixed pattern noise is really a problem you have to deal on a shot base, depending on light situations you need to adjust one or two paramters manually with visuall quality controll to get rid of all potential problems.
Now I need to sleep for the shooting or my producer will shoot me ;)
Cheers
Markus

[Christian Schmitt]

Thanks !
Been with FAST since the VideoMachine;o)
So no Avid HD editing system or similary necessary?
That would allow to feed the crew hehe and maybe buy some fancy directors chair yuhuu...
Hm, for output you'll use TGA sequences on a mobile harddrive and give it to swiss effects for filmout...?
guess you sleep now...

[Kyle Edwards]

<<<-- Originally posted by Christian Schmitt :Are you from the Drake team or are you just putting together the given information so far?
Since Markus said he edited with Edition and I'm using this when editing on a PC, I was hoping for their complete workflow.
They seem to build everything on their own (Steadycam, matte box, FF etc.), I guess they've come up with their own editing system too.. -->>>

Not really putting together, just stating their methods in which they vaguely said in this thread. I think the explaination is alittle vague because of the language barrier.

They probably use Edition because that is their preference and the new version seems to be getting real good reviews.

Also I can see how there would be some confusion about Edition since you are ruining an older version. I was not aware of only DV input. As the post above mine explains, the program is totally revamped.

[Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn]

Guys, you can edit with anything you want.
For example now that Premiere supports importing EDLs I use it for everything from DV up to HDCAM.
Even you can edit uncompressed HiDefinition on a PC with premiere 6.0 and 6.5, just need to specify custom format under AVI properties :)
Your only limitation will be HDDs speed and systen power...

[Wayne Morellini]

Aaron that has been my thought, it is a matter of semantics, so it was not worth carrying on, he can believe what we beleives. But you must remember that the (I forget the term for relative meaning, used in language interpretation, connotative) meaning of a term like this is given by it's usage and in this the root usage of that type in this application, rather than the denotative meaning of the individual words, where it came from, to the best of my knowledge, is what I am saying, and current usage. Maybe in German the term never had that this widespread primary meaning, but that is how it is being used. So yes, lets move on. But when you think of it every capture software and camera project here is now a commercial enterprise requiring payment, except for Rob's export tool, and Ben's attempt, and Obin's origional camera setup.

I hope I got that correct, I have been operating at down to 10% due to this flu, and am still at around 50% of my ussual non optimal.


Markus

Good to hear about pinnacle edition, I think all the projects need stuff like that, from what I can understand.

Wayne.

[Wayne Morellini]

Juan, interesting, what is a EDLs, and are you meaning it is now possible to define raw pixel and file formats to import. Is it possible to define anything beyond raw formats?

[Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn]

Wayne please don't get confused.
EDL is a standard file format, really old (I guess it is from early 80's late 70's).Edition/Editor's Decision List.
It is a human readable list of every take/shot used to make a full edited movie, like the digital version of cutting and pasting negative to make a whole movie.right?
Professional Edition packages support that format.Premiere always had the capability or exporting EDL, but because of some strange marketing strategy from the " Illuminated Geniuses" at Adobe always lacked of the EDL importing feature.Since last version they added it ( I always wonder if it have something to be with my continuos e-mails through 5 years asking for it :) )

" are you meaning it is now possible to define raw pixel and file formats to import? "

Who said that?
I said "uncompressed" not "RAW".for example you can use Uncompressed 1920x1080 on any Premiere.You can even use any strange resolution with it.At least if you know exactly what you are doing..
May be a made a mistake when I said format, I should have said: aspect ratio,resolution and fps.Sorry Wayne.

"RAW" to keep it clear, means nothing else than that the RAW data lacks a "Format".So anything "RAW" have no extra data like info, headers or the like. So a computer ,or software if you prefer, has no way to know by itself what that "RAW" data means.
RAW data can be anything. Compressed data lossy or lossless, a text file,etc,etc...
That is the reason of the existance of headers and the like...