I need software not a white paper ;)

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : I need software not a white paper ;) -->>>

The paper in question contains code (or at least pseudo-code) that looks like it could be used. That is, if you have someone who could implement the software. :-)

Correct. The code in the paper is actually for Matlab.
-Les

Hey Les,

You said you worked at ILM and Dreamworks etc. doing special effects work.

Well this is kind of a silly question, because it's not like I have any money to pay anybody a dime, but you may know talented people looking for experience or I may be lucky enough to come into an investor before I die and rot into the earth at the age of 156, but anyway . . .

Let's say I'm looking to do a feature film that has high-level effects. I'm not talking something as extreme as star wars, but maybe as extreme as Jurassic Park. What I mean is, the creation of CG monsters (man eating-plants or lizards or the like) that actually looks real. I figured the technology may be cheap enough at this point, and you'd know people that have knowledge / could do a bang up job?

I've never done an effects film, but there's a slight possibility I know someone that could give me a (relative) budget to work with. To do the film I wanted to do, I'd need to have people on board that REALLY knew what they were doing with effects, as I have no experience in that realm, just general textbook knowledge.

You can email me at actionvideo@charter.net so we don't have to use this off topic on the thread.

Thanks

just got my mini35 adaptor made for our dvx100...WOW is all I can say..this is what has been missing for me as a DP ...this is AMAZING!

How does the dvx footage with adapter compare to 35 film tansfered to video? You think it is good enough to fool people for straight to dvd release?

oh yes. I think it would fool anyone! my brother has a VERY good eye for what is video and what is film because of all the vfx and cg work he does and he was blown away, told me this totaly changes how what the dvx100 can do...only thing missing is slo-motion from that camera now ...I think it looks like the dof of 35mm and the quality of super 16.."film" grain is even back from teh GG!!!! I LOVE IT!!..it really is amazing even more so after you color grade it in somthing like DigitalFusion or Combustion

I shot some "test" stuff outside thinking ok no lights mid day it's going to look like shit.....not to say you don't need to light and work out your composition but WOW everything I shot handheld looks awesome!

now if Juan can just finish the 4:4:4 output from the dvx100 I think that unless you NEED slo-motion this cam with Juan mod and 35 adaptor is totaly ready to shoot a really really pretty and post color workable image for feature film indy film and commercial work...after all once you get 4:4:4 out of it with a 35mm lens on the front you would gain NOTHING from a better camera UNLESS it was a full-on HD rig...the 1/3rd inch ccds are just find for recording the light from the GG..bigger would not be any better!

this thing also chages how highlights are shot..makes them much softer and WAY more filmic!! even uprezzed to HD it looks good! just soft like 16mm shown at full 35mm size...I can't wait to build the HD cam and put this baby on it!

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : I can't wait to build the HD cam and put this baby on it! -->>>

This may be a dumb question, but assuming a one-chip HD camera, what's the point in using a GG adapter? Wouldn't the one-chip system already have the correct depth-of-field? Or would you want it for the grain?

no the one chip will be a 1/2inch chip..not even close to the size of 35mm film or even 16mm...SO we need to use the adaptor to get the DOF from the 35mm lens

Ahh ... gotcha. But if you used a 2/3" chip, that would be about 16mm, wouldn't it?

(edit) - BTW, can you give me a link to the chip you're using? I found something similar at micron.com but nothing running at 48fps... Thanks!

Hey people,
Steve Nordhauser here at your service. I'm VP of Product Development at Silicon Imaging and the one Obin has been dealing with. The camera he has on order is the SI-1300-RGB-CL. As has been assumed, this is using the Micron 1.3Mpix sensor.

First, the picture I sent to Obin of my daughter was done with our GigE version of the camera. There is no capability to do color balance or anything else with that software so I know it wasn't pretty. For 32 bit systems, we typically ship an Epix PIXCI-CL1 frame grabber because it has great tools. You can do an auto color balance using a Macbeth target. Very cool.


I will do my best to follow Alternative Imaging Methods and answer whatever questions I can. I am pretty knowledgable about sensors, camera link, PC bus bandwidth and RAID issues. Mostly I'm working with OEMs but have been in contact with Indies since we released a 1920x1080@30+fps camera a few years ago.

Regards,
Steve

Steve!! cool dude! how you hear about this thread??

oh ya I have not heard anything as to when your shipping me my product?

www.dv3productions.com/test_images/dvx100_spinning35.jpg

check this! spinning 35 adaptor with a 28-135 zoom! even looks like real film grain! and the DOF is just AWESOME that lens is set at about 30mm and I was about 2 feet infront of him

the dvx100 shot it

obin,

you think all things combined will give you an HD image? Or at east good enough to blow up to theater release prints?

when juan gets the 4:4:4 output yes I am sure we will have a quasi-HD system on our hands...it's above SD in size and WAY above ANY SD format in RAW quality..with a spinner35 and a good 35mm lens on the front I see no reason to think it would not be great for a HD blowup and project....BUT i am still building a TRUE HD camera from scratch using a 16mm Russian film camera and some HD chips..everything is on order..waiting now to get it and start building

you just can't beat resolution and RAW output when it comes to image quality ;)

Well, if that DVX gives an HD image, then will my HD10 in raw mode give me IMAX ? ;)
Kidding aside, pixels are pixels.
-Les

uhh well Juan is getting more then SD out of it now...I think like 780 or somthing instead of 720

I read a post in there (don't follow the thread, but have scanned it) that said the frame returned was 859 pixels (or something) across). A HD camera should give better results again. I veiwed some side by side DVX100 and HD10 cinematic footage (in a thread on some board) and the HD10's was better than even the uprezed DVX100 footage in res terms.

hi obin,

just a thought: you mentioned the cmos chip you ordered being 12mm x 15mm. why not use two of them next to each other in your camera setup? that would give you 2 chips covering a total of 15mmx24mm which is even SUPERIOR to 35mm film (uses 17mmx22mm). and even better: since you'd cover the total 35mm film plain there's no need for a DOF adaptor since you'd get the natural DOF of 35mm anyway.
the drawback of such a setup would clearly be the doubled cost for the chips and you'd need a software (and capable hardware) that joins the two seperate frames 'on the fly'.

valentin

Nice idea. There are very few chips packaged so that they can be edge butted without imaging loss. I think some of the specialty CCDs for applications like astronomy can be butted. All of the CMOS chips that I have looked into have the sensor with bonding pads on the edge, with wires to a carrier. I'm guessing that the space between two adjacent sensors is about 50% of the chip width.

Now you could take two adjacent cameras with the same lens and angle them slightly outward so that the insides of the cones were parallel and just overlapping - this would be true out to infinity. Of course you are taking the worst part of the lens where the MTF curve falls off and putting it in the center of the image...... could that be done with a single lens? No, because the sensors must be flat at the focal plane. Focusing the two would be hell.

For ease of processing, it is much easier to just go to a bigger, faster sensor as long as someone makes one.

bigger faster sensor! bigger faster sensor!

;)

Now Obin, don't pop a blood vessel over this but:
http://www.panavisionsvi.com/imagers_Quad.htm

Key Features:
· 4 times resolution of HDTV 1080i, 1080p standards
· 60 fields/second interlaced
· 30 frames/second progressive
· 3840 x 2160 optical resolution
· 3888 x 2192 total pixels (including black pixels)
· 28.80 x 16.44 mm active area
· Compatible with 35mm optics
· 16:9 Aspect ratio
· On-chip correlated double sampling
· 7.5 µm X 7.5 µm pixel size
· High Sensitivity
· Wide dynamic range
· Ultra low FPN via patented ACS® technology
· On-chip Integrated Timing and control logic
· Multi port video, eight 37.125 MHz ports
· Easy to use and integrate, single 5 volt supply and simple clocking

It should be the sensor used in the JVC quad HD camera:
http://www.towersemi.com/press/apr0402.html

steve what chip is that?!

can you use it?

There you go with that blood vessel thing....This is a very expensive chip (I'm guessing $10K) that they only want to sell to a potential high volume customer. Right now I know JVC is the major customer. I'm sure JVC has enough clout to discourage them from selling to potential low end competition.

I just tossed this out to let you know where things were going. This chip was working about 1.5 years ago.

So, the short answer is that we will not do a camera with this anytime soon.

http://www.olympus.co.jp/en/news/2002a/nr020522p8megae.cfm

http://world.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.olympus.co.jp%2Fjp%2Fnews%2F2004a%2Fnr040409sh880j.cfm&lp=ja_en

They use a "4 plane imaging system" to split the image over 4 chips. Is this expensive to do?

Wayne.

well at least a "2 plane imaging system" could be done easily and wouldn't be expensive. only thing you'd need besides 2 chips is the body of a slr camera. any slr cam has 2 image planes. if you take a picture the mirror that normally rests in a 45° angle is removed and thus the image (or focal) plane is at the very point the 35mm photo-film usually is transported. if the mirror rests in its 45° postition however the image is reflected to the viewfinder (2nd image plane).
i hope you get the point... now if you'd just remove half of the mirror, half of the picture would reach the 1st plane where our 1st cmos chip would be placed and the other half of the image would be sent in a 45° angle to the 2nd image plane - given the viewfinder removed . and could be captured there with our 2nd cmos chip. once again we use the merits of 35mm DOF (see my last posting). now if we put both images together there should be no noticable 'cut' or breach because either the image - actually the light - passing the lens is sent to the first cmos or reflected in a 45° angle to the second cmos.

any comments on my thoughts appreciated ;)

Good idea, you could simply keep going with this to get as many mirrors as you want. The edge of the mirror would have to be machined smooth and tappered to the front to reduce distortion (but will it cause diffraction?? patterns). It would have to be sealed air tight, it would be bad to clean.

This gives me an idea. If you had a half mirored surface (no backing) then half the light would be reflected to the veiwfinder and half to the film plane, going one step further the mirrors could be coated to only reflect an individual range of primary colour, using two mirrors, who needs a $1-3K 3 chip prism splitter? I'm going to bring this up in the Home made camera thread.

One issue that comes up with these designs is a tough one: thermal stability. It can be very hard to keep the pixel borders aligned under various thermal conditions and also vibrations. The human vision system is great at detecting one group of pixels moving in relation to another.

Update:

got the K3 16mm camera today...hmm a well made unit I must say...not like a plastic toy... very heavy like a russian tank ;)
anyway i see a big issue ...if I remove the shutter then I remove the ability to see the image in the viewfinder....any ideas for this problem anyone?


when the shutter is open you see nothing in the viewfinder when it is closed it has a mirror on it that shows you the image in the viewfinder


I guess I could try and use a 2 way mirror but then how many f-stops would I throw out??

what mirror or beamsplitter should I look at if any?

http://www.thorlabs.com/SelectGuide2.cfm?Guide=51&Section=2&Ref=3&GoogleAdwords=1&Keyword=beamsplitter

maybe the amount of light coming in with a beam splitter would be ok because 3ccd cams have beamsplitters right? so should I look at 50/50 splitters or?

got the camera!!! WOW this camera link stuff is no easy click-to-record...very very lowlevel control of your camera with TONS of options! I will take a few days to get it all down I'm sure! Steve is sending me a 25mm lens so I can start testing this baby out I did put the 16mm lens infront of the cmos and it will work but I want to shoot some footage BEFORE I tear the camera apart with the 25mm lens that should come in a day or two...

Yo Obin

What HD camera was it that you ordered?

thanks

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher What HD camera was it that you ordered?
-->>>

It was the SI-1300 from http://www.siliconimaging.com

It has a resolution of 1280x1024 and can be programmed to generate 1280x720 at up to 60 fps.

Obin -- I'd be curious to see a few of the raw (and I mean *really* raw :-) files to see how they are formatted. Thanks!

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

ohh how the fun starts!!!!

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

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

Obin,
A bit pricey:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlinecatalog/displayproduct.cfm?productID=2352&search=1

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

...or, Rodenstock macros:
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlinecatalog/displayproduct.cfm?productID=1416&search=1

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

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

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

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

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

thansk

Wayne.

Thanks Rob. 1300. Got it.

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

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

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

Now, back to my regularly scheduled muffin.

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

I came across yet another camera the other day.

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

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

check it out at www.imperx.com

Please post you're opinions.

high dollar above $4,000

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-->>>

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

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

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

Hey guys,

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

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

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

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

Give me some input guys.

Thanks.

By the way . . .

Jacques said

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


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

Hey Wayne,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I hope.
Steve

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

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

Gotchya Jason, 6 db for each stop, thanks.