I wonder how/if Cineform have revised their plans (if not technically, then perhaps with regard to pricing) with Matrox's announcement of the MX02.

If the Cineform recorder doesn't come out soon the Matrox may have to do. It's just not my preference. But it seems like the Matrox box is format agnostic and would allow recording into Cineform directly, as long as the Cineform codec is installed on your MacBook Pro or Mac Pro. (They use ExpressCard or PCIe) which is probably why they don't mention a regular MacBook as being compatible.

Nope, we haven't haven't changed our plans. There are just too many reasons for a range portable CineForm capture devices.

Nope, we haven't haven't changed our plans. There are just too many reasons for a range portable CineForm capture devices.


I take it though, that with no announcements at NAB this year, we're still at least a year off? Ever since you guys announced this thing, my HV20 has been begging for a playmate. :)

-burk

Not a year off. But we knew all along it wouldn't be ready for this NAB. The point on the thread was to collect your feedback to make the best product we can. This not just feedback to CineForm, but to hardware partners that complete this project. CineForm is a software company, yet we are porting our compression to hardware so that will appear in a range of forms (this is just one of them.)

I wonder how/if Cineform have revised their plans (if not technically, then perhaps with regard to pricing) with Matrox's announcement of the MX02.

If the Cineform recorder doesn't come out soon the Matrox may have to do. It's just not my preference. But it seems like the Matrox box is format agnostic and would allow recording into Cineform directly, as long as the Cineform codec is installed on your MacBook Pro or Mac Pro. (They use ExpressCard or PCIe) which is probably why they don't mention a regular MacBook as being compatible.

I'm not sure I see the comparison. MX02 is an attachment to your laptop for $1,500 and it's limited to Mac to boot - the CineForm unit would be a complete standalone piece of equipment at $2,000. I know which I'd rather have!

I'm not sure I see the comparison. MX02 is an attachment to your laptop for $1,500 and it's limited to Mac to boot - the CineForm unit would be a complete standalone piece of equipment at $2,000. I know which I'd rather have!

They're not 100% identical, no. I guess they're only similar in the fact that both products would allow you to record straight into Cineform via the HDMI, bypassing long-GOP and HDV compression, preserving 4:2:2, and recording straight to hard drive.

I understand that the Cineform box would be a complete stand-alone, and would also allow Compact Flash recording capabilities. They both would have their pros and cons, but to say there's no comparison at all, well...

Don't get me wrong, I want this Cineform Recorder as much as the rest of you. I'd buy it today if I could.

Another similar hardware solution? Although does not look too mobile:

http://www.telestream.net/products/pipeline_landing.htm?utm_source=NBM

Standard def and SDI only. Watched the presentation and I'm kind of struggling to see the point of it to be honest over and above the obvious coolness factor of capturing over LAN.

http://ffv.com/products/elite_front_4.pdf

This is an SDI i/o device, it records JPEG2000. (Which they call/abreviate J2K)

It is 10 bit sampling at 4:2:2.

It uses hot swappable 2.5" SATA drives for storage.

I prefer an HD-SDI solution built around Cineform codecs, especially FILMREC. I also prefer commodity solid state storage whenever possible.

What Alexander said, agreed on all accounts.

Note to Cineform: please don't forget to provide a switch to use your built-in analog audio line in, instead of HDMI-multiplexed audio!

sorry i do not read all this huge thread, so some of my comments could be redundent.

IMHO, LCD is a pain on such device. You get a a box with a side covered by a very fragile glass (unless you add a cover acting like sunshade when deployed) , sucks battery like hell, not really usefull for preview.
If you replace the HDMI plug with DVI plug, you got better mechanics (can be secured with screws) and adapter are easily found.
ideally the DVI out could be send to a PC monitor (22 or 24") to get real monitoring

sorry i do not read all this huge thread, so some of my comments could be redundent.

IMHO, LCD is a pain on such device. You get a a box with a side covered by a very fragile glass (unless you add a cover acting like sunshade when deployed) , sucks battery like hell, not really usefull for preview.
If you replace the HDMI plug with DVI plug, you got better mechanics (can be secured with screws) and adapter are easily found.
ideally the DVI out could be send to a PC monitor (22 or 24") to get real monitoring

Well, one of the reasons behind a display is that you need to use it for configuration such as filename, quality et.c. But a good thing would be to be able to turn the display off so it don't suck power.

If, in fact, there is DVI out, then it should not just pass through the HDMI signal, but map it onto the monitor's pixels (which currently do not match HD resolutions at 1920x1200 or 1680x1050 etc.) and monitor's refresh rates (60Hz, 75Hz etc.)

So it should be in addition to the HDMI out on the recorder, and not instead of it.

Any updates on progress for the 'Solid' device?

I can't wait for this! At first, I was thinking of upgrading my Canon XH-A1 to Sony's PMW-EX1, but... this is way better, and CHEAPER!!!

I've loved Cineform since first sight, you guys are awesome.

Although, having the A1, I will definitely need a component-HDMI converter. Hopefully that debuts on the same day the recorder does!


THANKS CINEFORM!!!

So....

Would something like this work?

Is this the price range we'd be looking at for a converter?!

If so, that's great, I was thinking it was much more intensive/expensive.

http://store.customcableconnection.com/hdmc-spdif.html

http://www.pccables.com/cgi-bin/orders6.cgi?action=Showitem&partno=85506&rsite=f.85506

My comments could be redundant (entire thread not read). I apologize for this long post, but I am not a professional videographer. I want to use your device educationally to record entire stage play and opera live rehearsals and performances (both indoor and outdoor) and quickly post result on a website and/or make private dvd for performers. If possible but not essential, for a few events I would like to use 3 or more cameras (each at different angles) – each camera using your recorder - and later make an edited dvd of the event by selectively editing among the different angles. Camera and Cineform operators will mostly be students. We do not want to record to tape or non-removable hard drive. We record in many different venues. We will sometimes use many external microphones mixed live to 2-channel stereo. My suggestions:

1. EXTERNAL DRIVES. Provide separate external drives of various capacities (similar to nNovia) for use with the Cineform recorder. Entire event up to 3 ½ hour must record on one drive. After recording, the drive would be unattached and the drive sent elsewhere for use by a trained NLE/Cineform pc/mac user to add title/credit wording to the recorded video and then post the result to the archive/web and/or make dvds. The Cineform recorder with a new external drive would remain attached to the camera ready to Cineform record (or already recording) the next event at the same time the Cineform recording of the previous event is being processed elsewhere.
2. TOUCH SCREEN vs HARD BUTTON CONTROLS. Why BOTH? Your illustrated design with both touch screen controls and hard button controls is potentially confusing to users. To resolve, make screen non-touch OLED viewable in all lighting conditions and back-light all hard button controls (similar to Edirol R-44). Design mounting methods to ensure screen and button controls are accessible and viewable at all times under all lighting conditions.
3. FOOL-PROOF USABILITY BETWEEN CAMERA AND CINEFORM RECORDER. Under all circumstances, backlight the Cineform record button as solid red when Cineform is recording and blinking red when paused. Add Cineform yellow caution blinking light to warn about low power, low recording time and need to read warning on recorder display. Maximize Cineform capability to always make “usable recordings” and minimize capability of “unusable recordings” that might otherwise result from irresolvable conflicts between camera settings/controls, external audio mixer settings and Cineform recorder settings/controls. Consider adding infrared control capability to Cineform recorder that can work with the camera’s infrared controls via toslink cable connection between camera and Cineform recorder. Purpose is to enable certain functions of both the camera and the Cineform recorder (e.g. start pause, stop) to be implemented simultaneously with the press of one control. This is admittedly kludgey, but might work for some cameras.
4. AUDIO INPUT CAPABILITIES. Cineform audio should either come from the camera outputs OR Cineform recorder inputs but not simultaneously from both sources (e.g. HDMI and NON-NDMI).. Note that the preliminary Edirol F-1 video field recorder includes two audio inputs to add audio channels 3 and 4 to the channels 1 and 2 passed from the camera. I do not think you intended similar usage of the Cineform recorder audio inputs. Note that I want the ability to use the Cineform audio inputs to record audio from external mixer instead of using any audio passed from the camera via HDMI.
5. CAMERAS. We have been using Canon HV20s, BUT will gladly switch to other HDMI cameras with an output that enables direct control of certain Cineform recorder functions (e.g. start record, pause record, stop record, etc) and to rid ourselves of the tapes and their inevitable dropouts.
6. BETA TEST. I would especially welcome the opportunity to beta test your user interface and controls for overall usability.
7. CINEFORM “READER” QUESTION. How feasible/desirable/practical would it be to have a Cineform reader/viewer senario similar to Adobe Acrobat in concept that would enable the Cineform compressed objects to be stored in Cineform proprietary format on internet or dvd and only fully viewable by “authorized” end user consumers? This might have capability to reduce storage requirements and at the same time control who is able to view the output. It would be great if we could use Cineform to minimize archival space requirements and maximize ability to control who can view/copy/edit Cineform recordings plus minimize the time required to “process” Cineform recordings.

Hi David,

I'm wondering if this recorder is due for release this year?

Is it correct to think my HVR-V1U will output uncompressed HD video from the HDMI port which could then be recorded by this unit? If so, I definitely want one of these recorders or something like it.

Thanks...

http://www.kinor.ru/products/flashdvr/

Check that out..

Very cool. Do you know how much Kinor charges for this unit?

CineForm hasn't formally discussed "Solid" (don't know if the name will remain or not, but we'll go with it for now....) project status in a while, and I realize everybody would like an update.

As background, everybody realizes we are large on innovation at CineForm but modest on resources. The last few months we have not been able to apply as many resources on Solid development as we'd like due to other priorities.

This is unfortunate as Solid is as exciting to us as to many of you who have offered comments in the forum - and also in private emails. Thank you for communicating your comments to us.

The good news is we're soon to emerge from our resource constraint and Solid development will benefit. We don't yet have a schedule to announce, but we'd like to have first unit prototypes as close to the end of the year as possible.

I don't know if it is appropriate to post here since this unit is from a different company but this Edirol unit has a lot of very interesting features. If the Cineform unit cold have things such as the networking, audio syncing, and remote operation modes, along with the Cineform recording format, it would almost be the perfect unit for what I'd want.

http://www.edirol.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=341&Itemid=390

If the Cineform unit cold have things such as the networking, audio syncing, and remote operation modes, along with the Cineform recording format, it would almost be the perfect unit for what I'd want.


I totally agree. The only bad thing about the F1 is that it doesn't record to anything but DV and HDV (m2t). I think that a better HD-Codec is what the public wants and the Cineform device will offer that. The F1 seem to be at 3k USD vs the 2k USD price tag on the Cineform device. So I guess that we have to wait another year for the "Solid" to arrive. But it looks like a lot of interesting things are happening in this area and it's just a question of who can ship it first with reasonable features as well as a price.

The Edirol does not have HDMI which puzzles me. But I really want the Cineform capability.
I don't know if it is appropriate to post here since this unit is from a different company but this Edirol unit has a lot of very interesting features. If the Cineform unit cold have things such as the networking, audio syncing, and remote operation modes, along with the Cineform recording format, it would almost be the perfect unit for what I'd want.

http://www.edirol.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=341&Itemid=390

Very cool. Do you know how much Kinor charges for this unit?

4400€ for the 80 gb version, 6400€ for the 160gb version and 8600€ for the 320 gb version.

So they are pretty expensive.

They've also got a IO for EXPRESS CARD notebook system for 2400€

The Edirol does not have HDMI which puzzles me. But I really want the Cineform capability.

No surprise. It makes no bones about what it is. A FireWire DV/HDV to Hard Disk Drive Recorder.
It does not have any kind of compression engine of its own.
It is simply stripping out the Compressed Video+Audio stream and recording that to disk.

What was most interesting to me was that they use NTFS for the file system.
FAT32 is nowhere to be seen. So the old file size limitations that everyone loves to hate are gone.

How does the file system choice affect Mac users?

Need to shoot tomorrow? Get this one:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?p=908253#post908253

(shameless plug, I know... relevant to the Cineform topic though :)

So....

Would something like this work?

Is this the price range we'd be looking at for a converter?!

If so, that's great, I was thinking it was much more intensive/expensive.

http://store.customcableconnection.com/hdmc-spdif.html

http://www.pccables.com/cgi-bin/orders6.cgi?action=Showitem&partno=85506&rsite=f.85506

Never heard an answer on this. Any ideas?

A couple of thoughts on Cineform recorder.

- HD-SDI: I now think that, Sony Ex1 being already ubiquitous and affordable at low price, and generating full-raster 1920x1080 output... the base configuration of the CFHD recorder should probably be oriented onto that camera and have HD-SDI input standard. People with HDMI cams can get HDMI->HD-SDI converters?

- Separate audio inputs: again, EX1 turned out to have a fantastic quality audio - a real breakthrough, so there's no need to have a separate analog audio bus in CFHD recorder anymore, I think.

- Batteries: how about go independent from the camera type/battery type/connector type... and have an internal rechargeable battery. Or maybe use 4 rechargeable AAs. Wireless mics use the same approach, why not this recorder. Feasible, given the device's power consumption and anticipated run on a single charge?

It should address the needs of uncompressed, HDMI and HD-SDI me thinks... The more different inputs they have the more devices they will sell. If it's not included in the recorder they should at least recommend boxes that run on batteries that gives you alternative options. I am quite sure there were a HD-SDI to HDMI converter mentioned in this thread.

Seperate audio inputs isn't required but again it will give more options for the end user and I would love to have 4 channel audio recording. I already uses that with an external recorder but integrated with video it would rock. I seriously doubt that audio recording would be a huge expense to the final package. High quality AD-converters seem to be very cheap.

Well, the batteries must be replacable in some way since on the field you might not have the time to recharge. But there are several batteries out there so no need to re-invent that. I am not sure 4 AA would work. My audiorecorder uses 8 and a couple of hours shooting will eat them up. I think that video encoding to Cineform intermediate will require more power.

But it would be nice to receive and update of how it's going.... Cineform??? :)

Alex / Fredrik - good comments. Thank you.

... it would be nice to receive and update of how it's going.... Cineform??? :)

CINEFORM: Have you resumed dedicated work on this project? Status update info would be appreciated. Thanks.

I suspect what Cineform found is also why direct to disk/flash recorders are so expensive.
Everybody has their pet list of requirements, HDMI/Component/HD-SDI/XLR/RCA/2 channel/4 channel/playback/pass through/headphone plug/flip/screen/no screen..........
So they bring it to market and right away a bunch of folks are ticked off because their requirements didn't make it.

And at the end of the day, it would sell for very limited volumes.
Most of the folks who would buy it are right here on this forum, or ones similar to it, if that is possible.

And once many folks saw what it cost, they would go pick up a Sony DR-60 or CompactFlash HDV recorder I suspect.
I see the DR-60 is available for ~$1400.
About Cineforms target price, I believe.

Nothing else records in Cineform Prospect HD codec natively.

Which means, NO conversions/transcoding before you edit, with Cineform recorder. At least on PC side, I think there's no contest to Cineform workflow, as it simply affords the best quality at the lowest disk space requirements, plus real-time playback in Premiere.

Granted, Cineform's recorder doesn't do it either, since it hasn't been manufactured yet :)

But hopefully it will... the sooner the better.

Nothing else records in Cineform Prospect HD codec natively.

Not quite. The three models of Wafian recorders all use CineForm Intermediate natively (4:2:2 and 4:4:4), and the Silicon Imaging SI-2K uses CineForm RAW natively. We just working to add to this line-up.

I've commented on flash-memory camera-mounted recorders. Sorry if I was unclear.

Sorry to have annoyed you, Alex.
My comments were not meant as a slam against the technical goodness of Cineform.
Strictly the technical problems and business case of bringing this product to market.

Actually, I'm just glad to have gotten a response from Mr. David Newman.
I thread still being monitored (your time is valuable) means a product still in the pipeline?

Strictly the technical problems and business case of bringing this product to market.

Speaking of the problems getting this to market and desired configurations....

I was thinking about audio inputs.

They aren't really needed at all. I was one of the ones out here arguing for XLR (specifically miniXLR) but that just isn't necessary.

Most cameras today offer either SDI or HDMI outputs... both of which have high quality embedded multitrack audio.

Most cameras used for "high end" production that really warrants use of a codec like Cineform have audio inputs. Almost regardless of the quality, that is good enough.

Most should be using a field mixer of some sort. The outputs of that can be converted down to RCA or even mini stereo (headset type) jacks if need be, and most support two channels of XLR out.

For those of use who have complicated location audio needs, I suggest dual system recording.

I suggest the following I/O for Cineform's SOLID:

HD/SD SDI (in/out based on SOLID's operating mode)
One HDMI 1.3 for input to the system.

Obviously only one of the video inputs needs to be active at a time.

One HDMI 1.3 for passthrough monitoring while recording.
Headset (1/4" stereo TRS or 1/8" stereo mini jack)
Mic (1/8" stereo mini jack, for those few who really have no audio inputs on their cameras)
There should also be a small cellphone type microphone for "mutter tracks."

Now... that's one device that should be able to service 90% of the market.

Coupled with two CF card slots and a USB 2 (or 3 if it shows up later than I hope for) port.

There should be a "confidence" LCD, so you know its working and so you can set it up. I'd like some actual physical button transport controls.

If you want to get needlessly fancy, then some sort of remote control with some extra dedicated buttons and a jog shuttle would be nice. Make it an optional device, connect it via the USB port.

What about Dual Link SDI 4:4:4 ?

Show me a camera cheaper than RED that supports that? Heck other than RED show me a camera under 90K USD that supports that? Its just too niche. Make a separate device and charge a premium if the market wants it.

I promise to buy one down the line when I get my dual link SDI camera, as it is though cashflow keeps pushing that EX3 out on my purchase horizon.

Ditto on HD-SDI in, and no compulsory analog audio inputs, as basic version.

This is a u-turn from what I previously thought would be necessary, based on prosumer cameras' audio specs.

But I found that EX1 actually has great mic preamps. Low noise, good fidelity.

So most of the people who shoot with it probably will be just fine feeding audio into the cam, and capturing HD-SDI video+audio out into the (eagerly awaited) Cineform recorder.

How is the development going?

Have any ideas/goals been changed?

Has the potential release date been pushed back any?

..also (sorry if this has already been answered) - why use CF and not SDHC cards in this recorder?

I don't recall if anyone has asked this before, but would you consider using an up-converting feature on the "Solid" to convert from 4:2:2 to the 4:4:4 color space? If it worked effectively, then it would allow these HDV cameras to get pretty close to cinema-like quality as far as acquisition goes. I'm considering the Canon EOS 5D Mark II as a replacement for my Sony V1, but if the Solid can effectively remove color compression, then I'd probably just buy the Solid to go with my V1. I saw what it's like to not have HDV compression the other day when someone showed me what their Pany HVX200s can do, it was far better quality than my camera, but my V1 has the potential to blow away the Pany 200s when paired with the Solid, especially since the V1 has about 50% higher effective horizontal resolution than the Pany 200s, (775 TVL instead of 540 TVL).

There would be nothing to gain by upconverting inside the recorder. The SDI or HDMI signal going into the recorder is only going to be a 4:2:2 signal for most cameras. (There is an RGB varient of HDMI, but it is not supported by any camcorder I am aware of.) Converting to 4:4:4 would only increase the datarate needing to be compressed, and therefore the processing power needed, and storage bandwidth required. At this point, in light of the existance of the XDR, I would say that Cineform needs to go one of two ways:

1. The low cost route of HDMI, support 4:2:2, possibly 10bit HDMI 1.3 if reasonably possible, and no analog audio, to save space, cost and weight. This item would have to sell for less than the XDR, and the advantage would be the cheaper HDMI interface.

2. The high end route would be to offer 10 bit recording of SDI 4:2:2, once again, only with embedded audio to save cost and space. Audio can be embeded to the SDI with an external box if needed. The only SDI camera not to embed audio in the SDI stream is the Canon XL-1H. 10bit compressed recording would be the selling point, putting it a step above the XDR in that regard. The only other 10bit aquisition options are SR, D5, and DCinema like SI2K and Red, nothing as small as a Solid mounted to an EX1 or similar camera.
(FFV has the EliteHD which offers 10bit SDI recording to a SATA disk, so that would be the closest competition)

Keep in mind that Convergent-Design has already announced their intentions to offer a 10 bit option for their XDR.

Keep in mind that Convergent-Design has already announced their intentions to offer a 10 bit option for their XDR.

Yes, but the XDR price is $4995!

I think I speak for us all when I say a progress update is needed. We've been pretty patient. We just want to know if we can expect a product roll-out in the next 6 to 9 months.

Personally I'm waiting for the hd sdi version for use with my JVC HD250, but the release of the hdmi version would keep me interested and away from other competing tapeless capture products. I love the Cineform codec and would rather spend my money on this device than a HDV hard drive recorder.

I'm shooting another feature in April and would love to use this product for that production. HDV to Aspect HD has improved the quality of my current project greatly (The Terror has Awakened (http://www.wakethewitchmovie.com)). Capturing directly to Cineform would make my next project even better.

Thanks.

Since nothing has happened, and there is no feedback from Cineform :-( lets consider a DIY mini-ITX PC with touchscreen. There have been a few threads on this, a couple built (including mine)..
Ahs anyone tried the new Penryn LV Core 2 Duo CPUs for Cineform. These are only 1.8 GHz max, but have a 1066 FSB for faster memory access and have a 6MB cache so there should be some performance increase to allow for Cineform recording with a lower clock speed CPU..
David, can you at least check if Cineform will work on a laptop with these specs ??
I am looking at battery solutions - and also a touchscreen daylight readable display (transflective LCD) so there may be an option to make a custom enclosure that will serve as a recorder + external monitor..

1.8GHz won't handle CineForm realtime capture.

Check out the HP Pavilion Slimline. Mini-ITX. PCIe x16 and x1 slots. I've got a Q9300 in mine. About 3 inches shorter than a PS3, but two inches deeper. I reckon an Intensity (not Pro) would fit in there. Refurbs are dirt cheap from eBay and even cheaper on uBid. I got a Q9300 model with graphics card, TV tuner, 4GB of RAM and 500GB SATA drive for $550. Mine has been rock-solid and I max out the CPU for hours on end using it as a VC-1 encoding workhorse.

If you want to mod in a touchscreen, there's plenty of space if you remove the optical drive and cut out a portion of the lid. There'd just be the problem of the connections but I can't see that being a big issue so long as you can find the USB and VGA pins on the motherboard/graphics card.

Richard - how do you power this mobile rig in the field?

How much does it weigh and what are the mounting options?

It sure would be great if Cineform delivered the recorder soon though...

I don't use it in the field. It's on my desktop! I bought it mainly for the dual PCIe slots, the fact that a Core 2 Quad is supported (though weirdly you can't put your own Q9300 in there, it has to have been in there from purchase) and also because it's mini-ITX. I power it through the mains ;) It has a 180w PSU if that's any indication on power-draw.

At a guess I'd say it weighs around 7kg.

HP sure make robust PCs. This thing is beautifully built.