High Definition with Elphel model 333 camera
 

I recently did some shots this morning with a model 333 Elphel high defintion network camera.

www.elphel.com
also go to
wiki.elphel.com
for more updated information.

here are some still grabs from the video, please note, i am not using a correct c-mount lens, as i dont have it yet, but i used a 35mm lens with a wide angle 28mm focal length and just threw a black shirt over the setup. 28mm at 35 film isnt 28mm at 1/2 cmos sensor. so it still gives a telephoto shot. and please note i am out of focus slighty.

This was shot at 24fps with a 1/48th shutter speed. the resolution used was 1280x720p:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...tti/beard1.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...tti/smile1.jpg
to show motion blur:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...ti/motion1.jpg
to show dof:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...etti/hand1.jpg

the model 333 can do 1280x1024 at 30fps, 2048x1536@12fps, and higher frame rates can be acheived by scaling resolution further, such as 800x600 or something. you specify exposure time, fps, and everything with the cameras main control window.
http://wiki.elphel.com/index.php?tit...ol_panel_1.jpg

the model 333 costs $800 for the board with the front 3Mpixel sensor. exactly what i have. Andrey Filippov of Elphel was kind enough to let me do these tests and post progress on creating a high definition cinema camera. let me know what you think about the quality of these shots. please note that the jpeg compression quality was set at 70% when i recorded, it can be set all the way to 99%. which in the case no artifacts should ever be seen. but even at 70% you wont see much at all. unless you really anylize it.

I still think it looks good, but it's hard to see the resolution on these shots. I've talked to Andrey Filippov about a 12V version of the camera, so I can use batteries if I want. I'm still about to order the camera, but was too busy this week.

Good to hear. So, are you saying that he is planning on doing a Digital Cinema camera, or just you? Would be good to see, if it had direct to disk USB/Ethernet, and on camera controls interface (no computer needed) and Ibis5a, I would think it would be almost exactly what we need.

Have you tried to find out max Ethernet data rates (min compression ratio), and about the Ogg codec? In the end, the quality of these things is what will deliver the best picture from the micron sensor.

Thanks

Wayne.

Thanks for the input guys! here, i finally got my c-mount zoom lens and it is awesome! i did some tests. and here they are!

This is my friend Eric, this is right after i opened up my lens from the packaging and started using it.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...ti/eric001.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...infocus001.jpg
here, the leaves in the background are in focus
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...cleaves001.jpg

This is my sister and mother. they were very lazy today, it was rainy and cold.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...iafocus001.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...i/oliva001.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...ti/mom2001.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...tti/mom001.jpg

please note, all these were shot at true 24 fps, and at a 1/48th shutter speed. all these were handheld shots, and get a perfect still is quite hard. Thanks!!! and remember these are actually from the .avi video. try to imagine these shots in motion. thanks!

hey
 

Could you please post a short (a few seconds) of video shot at best possible compression settings, highest possible rez, with 48th sec shutter speed, 24fps? Something with movement in the frame?

jef, i will try, ill find a site that can host video files. thanks

Thanks. That will really allow us to see what the possibilities are.

The problems I've had with the "build your own HD cine camera" idea is that all of them (the affordable ones, at least) seem to not shoot 24fps with 48th sec shutter speed (global shutter) at full rez. The shutter speed has to be far shorter. Haven't checked yet but I'm assuming the elphel is a rolling shutter camera as well (?).

Alright here it is, it might freeze take a while for the inital load, but be patient. remember to select orignal size for full frame, or wide for a scaled version so it all fits.

and heres the page to view it:
http://media.putfile.com/Forrest-is-crazy

please note: compression isnt 100% original quality, i lost alot of quality, but its orignal size. but im not sure if its saveable to the comp. tommorow i will try a different host site. oh by the way, if it works, i recorded this from indoors to outside through a dirty window. thats why it looks all crazy iwth the dirtiness

Wayne, right now, im just working on building the cinema camera, and putting everything together. but i would like Andrey to view the idea and see where he wants to take it.

Forrest, you can upload samples to http://www.megaupload.com

My 12V camera is ready to ship, but I don't know when I receive it, because I live in Europe.
Forrest, what are the specs of your computer? Do you use a PC or a laptop?

Thanks for putting up the video file. It is a help, and good job showing human motion.

You said the file is not original quality. If you can upload even just the first second of the original file without the additional compression (the part where you jump) somewhere that allows it to be downloaded, I can analyze it much better. There did seem to be a lot of noise or compression in the full-size image. I'm hoping that came from the additional compression.

Sigh. I'm never satisfied. lol. I do appreciate very much the info provided by you so far. Looking forward to learning more about this camera and seeing how clean it can be at it's best.

Thanks again and please carry on.

Thanks Jef, ill get another clip in soon

Oscar, im using a PC right now, and its a 1.5 Ghz Pentium 4 processer. Its Windows XP, and with 384 MB of RAM. so i really need to make it faster. but it can still record files from the camera.

Forrest,
I've saw the file too - thanks for sharing!

it is M-JPEG compressed and there is some artefacts (interlaced lines) because of the codec, while the source video is progressive.
You better use DIVX,XVID or "windows media 9" (WMV9) at max quality - the encoded file would be without these lines and smaller in the same time.
If you don't have these codecs (or don't want to mess up your system ) , try to setup your M-JPEG codec to encode in "non-interlaced" mode.

Best Regards!!!

I have to say it, but I wonder if the MS Origami mini tablet PC would be suitable for acquisition. This year's models are power hungry (but battery life isn't that bad compared to handy cams of the past) but by the end of the year/next year that could change for better (lower powered processor). There are also all the car pc's, and boards, we explored to the Digital Cinema threads, they are ultra small, about the size of a CD-ROM drive I think. And then, if you go to the www.Via.com.tw website and look up partner products (many categories) you will find Web Tablet like PC's and other things based on Linux (so maybe the software can be compiled on it). You can find a lot of manufacturers of embedded PC/Main boards and miniature PC's there that also carry Intel products.

Just something you might be interested in after you find out if it works.

Compression:
Just of interest, what is the lowest compression you can use and pixel format, at 1920*1080 and at 1280*720 window, 5:1, 2:1 etc? I have given up downloading clips, I only have dial up, and had to pay over 5 times the regular Internet bill last month. The length of mpeg divided by time/fps should give some idea.

Thanks

Wayne.

Wow!!!
 

Wow man, that's pretty cheap for High def res. Let me ask though, how much hard drive space does it take up for say 1 min worth of 24 fps footage?

Sorry to have been away for a while. ive been working on how to incorporate the 35mm adapter with the camera. im afraid the adapter would only be suitable for daytime outdoor shots, as i lose Alot of light with it on.

And for harddisk space. it is amazing. the recorded footage has a data rate of 1611 kb per sec. A 59 sec long peice of footage i recorded has a file size of 96,522 kb. (97mb) about. so thats about a minutes worth. thats with the jpeg compression setting on the camera set to 75%, i can take it all the way up to 99 if i want. but you really arent able to see any compression artifacts at 70/75% so its good enough for me. if you raise it up, everything stays the same, fps speed and such, only the file size in the end gets bigger.

But its not at all a huge filesize because it records to a mjpeg codec.

Wayne, im not sure how you want me to perform the tests, can you explain what to do so i can answer your question about the compression on the camera? thank you

Hey!
 

Jef, and everyone else, i uploaded a video file which is straightly converted from the .ogm to .avi. its about 34 mb

download it here: http://www.savefile.com/files.php?fid=3526893

this means there is no extra post compression. sorry there is not much motion, just a handheld shot at 24fps showing different focuses with my c-mount lens. if your media player doesnt support mjpeg codec, youll need to download the codec, or download the easy and free media player vlc. http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

Well, that part answered it, 1611KB/s, is around 12.9Mb/s, half of MiniDV, around 1/8th of DVCPROHD, which is around 6:1 reduced 1080i res (I'm guessing you are talking about a 1080p image here) so that's around 48:1 MJpeg1, even higher if you are using full 1080p res. MJpeg is very similar to normal Jpeg, and a fraction of the performance of Mpeg2. What about at max settings? The most you can expect from MJpeg (which is similar to DVCPROHD) is performance of DVCProHD, over the 100Mb/s network. That is why Ogg is important, it was supposed to be the alternative to Mpeg2, where even Mpeg2 at 100Mb/s would really kick ass, but we don't know how suitable Ogg is. I examined some Ogg footage up close a month or two ago, and I noticed large colour blocks. Whenever I ask people who should know, about specifics, I get consistent silence, I suspect that there is fundamental bad news. This, apparent problem, may not be such a problem for me, but it definitely will be for others.

Sorry for the confusion about the compression thing, wasn't too well, and I didn't explain it properly. To measure compression just get the bytes per second and divided by, frame size times the frame rate times by the amount of data per pixel (in bytes). That will give you an idea of how much smaller than compressed footage si from the original.


Viewing distances for a Cinema effect, and display resolution:
There is a fundamental problem in how people examine HD footage for Cinema use, and lots of people do it. A big HD TV is meant to be viewed from a minimum distance that makes the screen look something like half the width that a really good Cinema seat should give you (similar to the coverage that the Imax seat would give you). 4:3 TV viewing distances are worse again. The extra wide effect makes the footage look like it has much less res, and makes the compression problems much more evident. So, what is widest, from private tests, nearly a wide glass lens width of image (after that vision goes into purely peripheral head turning vision), half that for a poor cinema seat. This is about half an eye full of vision, line up one corner of your single eye vision with the side of the screen, while looking straight ahead, and about the middle of your vision should be on opposite edge of the screen. Try it, HD footage looks a lot different. But, for HDTV work, things are much better, that is already heavily compressed.


Display resolution:
With Displays there are a few things they do that hide the problems, that should be looked at. One, they use odd, none genuine 1080 or 720 resolutions (indeed, even HDV 1440*1080 does this in camera) in the actual screen, that blurs the boundaries in between pixels, causing data from one pixel to integrate with another pixel. This hides some problems. Some displays use inputs that don't work at the full resolution they are receiving. Still others make a genuine attempt to clean up the image and get rid of artifacts, maybe even artificially restoring some lost detail. There are wide screen TV's that use genuine 720/1080 resolutions, in the past many didn't.


Jpeg problems effecting detail and resolution:
Jpeg is not so good at retaining detail, because it gains great performance from dropping detail, in DV codec at least, it also tends to be so imprecise also that you usually need a special version to do lossless compression. Examination of some of the links I have posted for filtered Raw Bayer from Web cams mods (in alternative imaging) compared to video camera footage shows much better line/edge sharpness. So, while it might retain a clean HD edge, you might notice that much detail in the image itself is dropped to lower resolutions. So the images should look less detailed, less defined, and blander. Our eye though, probably likes the high res edges and don't take to much notice. But on a big screen, the lower resolution is much more noticeable, and probably benefits as much as an slightly out of focus scene.

I agree with you Wayne, but the nice thing about the Elphel camera is that it is open source and develops and improves pretty fast.
As far as I know..and I hope I don't know much..there isn't a OGG Theora converter to AVI or other useful codec (or lossless format) in windows.

Forrest, what lens do you use on the 35mm adapter? If you use a 1.2 or less (meaning bigger) aperture, the lightloss will be no more than 1 or 1.5 stops.
Indoors you'd need a 500W light or more when using an adapter, what ever camera you use.

Amazing how I was dismissed by Elphel owner just like one year ago when I asked him about doing the same thing and he just said: "that is not possible".
Now, suddenly he is making one!!!
I guess I should be doing something really wrong when I talk to people.....

thanks for all the replys guys, I have a f1.7 50mm lens, and f2.8 28mm wide angle lens, and a 135mm f2.8 telephoto lens. so far i wasnt able to get good light transmission, but i think a big problem is the glass im using. i need to get a beattie screen, and build either a mechaincal osicillating adapter or a vibrating adapter similar to the letus with the beattie screen. that should offer alot of help in lightloss.

Other than that, the only factor i can think of is the portablility issue, so far, i think i will need to film near places with power outlets so i can run extension cords from the computer and such. but i will buy the beattie screen and build an adapter around that and then build the camera body to go around it all of it. simulating the style of a 35mm film camera. i also am making a homemade viewfinder also

VLC has a Ogg codec. They also have that linux disk, that should have lots of video options there, try Cinelerra and other Linux editors, you should strike something, then again, you can ask the commercial company that controls Ogg itself, they should know something. My, interest is Ogg, as I know it might deliver the extra quality. But then again, he is doing something in USB2.0, so that might help. The latest Ogg is also the choice for one of the Chinese HD DVD formats, so there is bound to be something out there, maybe even the possibility, even possibly the official Ogg enabled cheap DVD players.


There is another option. As far as I know, that if you put a lens through a suitable condenser it increases the effective aperture diameter, with the same FOV as the 35mm, so that the depth of field is the same as on a 35mm SLR camera but with lots more light. But once the aperture goes to much, the angle of light through the micro-lens will produce poor pref romance (except the Ibis5a, which has a 100% surface technique instead of micro-lens) and eventually it will be so much that light will bounce off the surface of the chip rather than goign in. Yes, apparently, 35mm adaptor can be done this way.

Yes, I remember, I have noticed that sometimes as well. After I saw your post I didn't bother either. But I think the issue is that somebody else is doing the work in this case.

With his design, it would be possible to put what ever codec you want to in the camera. 100Mb/s capacity, where as 24fps 720p 8 bit Bayer is 177Mb/s, so a simple lossless codec would fit. 498Mb/s for 1080p, there are some codecs that will get close to lossless at that rate (and he is talking USB2.0 soon). So you can do the FPGA stuff you wanted to do using this camera, and it is a low cost platform. Plus you can probably can use the existing Mjpeg codec FPGA design as a basis for a 720p design (see the news-net compression FAQs about what needs to be changed in Mpeg/Jpegs tables to make it true lossless).

It would be good to see you involved. Have fun.

The Ogg codec and DVD players with HD codecs
 

I mentioned HD codec DVD players somewhere, so relatives can watch it without a computer. I have also found the Ogg codec page, and more advanced commercial forms of it that beat H264 or WMP, that you might be interested in.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/11..._killer_video/
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2005/11...me_production/

The down loadable stuff is linked to these pages (these are the people that did the codec they use in Ogg, their VP3.2 codec, they are now upto version VP7):

http://www.on2.com/technology/vp7/
http://www.on2.com/video_samples/vp7-samples/
http://www.on2.com/company/

You notice that the PSNR maxes out around 36db, you get max compression on your upper 6 bits (36db, 48db=8bits) because there is less noise. Might be worth looking out for.

Ogg stuff:
http://www.theora.org/
http://www.on2.com/company/news-room...leases/?id=144
http://www.on2.com/company/news-room...leases/?id=124

Forrest, I was thinking..how about using a laptop to record the footage:
Close the laptop and carry it around as(or in) a bag on your back or something, and wire it to the camera, to a small keyboard to control the camera and to a small LCD screen to preview. You'd be pretty mobile with such a setup and fairly easy to do in stead of building a bigger 'Drake' like camera with mini PC integrated.
Just a thought, I'll give it a try anyway when I get my Elphel camera.

high bit depth???
 

I looked at the avi video. So this is a 10 bit / chan. camera ? Or more ?

Other than potential bit depth, this video did not demonstrate any advantages over video from an off the shelf HDV camera. In fact, the resolution looked rather sub HD.

So how about some stills of the high bit depth, I'd love to see the color grading latitude of the camera.

-L

you could use a windows build of ffmpeg for that :)
But i don't thinks it's a good idea to use the theora codec, it's too old (design-wise) and almost not supported by anything.

Quality is what matters for a Digital Cinema camera. Ogg is an alternative to mpeg2, it may even be a lot newer and more efficient. There is bound to be a Linux editor that does it. Ogg hopefully will give you the max quality, in a usable form (if Ogg does large colour blocks bigger then 4:2:0, then maybe not) Mpeg1 simply can't get the same quality for equivalent bandwidth.

From Ogg format you could transcode to whatever is needed, but for film transfer, a big standard lossless format could be sued. If it does have the quality, for HD/DVD, the transcode might still retain more quality then HDV.

Guitar Man
 

Alright, sorry for a long delay period. i did some tests just today at about 3:30 pm

And here they are, they are outdoor shots, all shot at 24fps. these are just stills from the actual footage and have not been enhanced or color corrected in anyway. i realized later i had the exposure just a little too hot. but not too bad.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/1.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/2.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/3.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/4.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/5.jpg
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/6.jpg

AND HERE IS THE FOOTAGE YOU'VE BEEN WAITING FOR!!!..

http://www.savefile.com/projects.php?pid=967631
its at half the resolution, but still very clear and powerful. take a look! (click on the "Me Playing Guitar in the Back")

And if the half-res aint doing it for ya, here is a full size version of the same thing, coded in wmv. but still keeps pretty much all the quality. (as much as i can see).

http://www.savefile.com/projects.php?pid=967631

This footage looks great. Grrmm.... still don't have my camera. (it made me write another email though)
I really like the colors and the lack of grain. The motion is good too.
I still think it would be wonderful to use this with a 35mm adapter...although the DOF isn't bad at all. Thanks for the footage Forrest.

Thank you Oscar.
I think the thing that is so stunning and makes it so filmlike is the fact that it doesnt have artificial edge enhancerments, or atleast, looking at the footage, there seems to be none of that. It gives it a much more filmlike trait. and the color it picks up is unbelevieble also. im going to post some more clips real soon. one of which, you can actually see the pick in my hand is a bright orange clip. i know my dv camera cant pick that up.

Alright, so i got 2 more half res clips for you guys.

HERE is the link for the clips: http://savefile.com/projects.php?pid=967631

One is called "Guitar Chair"
still preview:http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...tarchai001.jpg

and the other is called "Motion test back"
still preview: http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...ti/jump001.jpg

you can also view the other clips, i have 2 versions of me playing the guitar
preview:http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/4.jpg

one is full res and the other is half.

One more video. half res, its called Mother with a Gun. this is shot indoors at nighttime.

http://www.savefile.com/projects.php?pid=967631

very nice clips.

have you tried performing much color correction on your raw video files? if so, how well do they stand up to adjustments in contrast, saturation, etc? is there much to work with beyond what's seen in the compressed internet vids (can you pull alot of hidden info out of shadows, etc.)?

looking good.

The color corrections for contrast and saturation stand up perfect. I fixed that scene with the closeup of me and the guitar outside because i didnt white balance the camera correctly before i recorded. it recorded a little too green. so in Adobe After Effects i adjusted the curves and lowered the green a tad, and that coloring was perfect. I also was able to add the S-curve, much like film has and it held fine. i havent tried to bring out details in the shadows, that might be a goood thing to try. are they are techniques in doing this?

Heres an example of color correction:

original, unbalanced green shot: http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/vericetti/1.jpg

Adobe After Effects color corrected and s-curved: http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...rrected001.jpg

it looks like most of your outdoor footage (the shot of the shovel and you with the guitar especially) is over exposed quite a bit (the sky and highlights are just blown out white that bleeds into the rooftops and fence)...

a good way to test the range of the camera would be to try underexposing some outdoor footage quite a bit, to the point where it looks too dark to your eye. try setting the exposure so that you can get as much definition out of the clouds as possible and everything else should be pretty dark. seeing if you're able to pull detail out of the dark stuff in post is a good test...

also is it possible to see some full res stuff compressed at %100 jpeg quality? i think once you start trying mess with the footage alot in post, the compression will become much more apparent.

This is good advice. In the RAW cameras, the footage naturally came out dark and had to be increased in post.

The bleeding from the clouds into the roof tops, I didn't look, but is this blooming? The 1.3 mpixel microns were supposed to be very bad at this, but the 3 mpixel is supposed to have on chip circuits to suppress this.

To the 333 owners. Can you describe the workflow for recording session. Lets say we have evrything working indoors. Now we taking whole system (camera, laptop/desktop, etc) outdoors. Please, describe steps necessary to setup camera to new conditions and do the recording. What software is used and what tools you have to control camera setup before and during record session.
Thank you.