Jason, the color is best pulled out by manipulating the RGB as YCbCr (YUV). That's what my new software chromaPop does -- gives you chroma gains.

You go from this (straight off the camera, no CC) (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/rottentomatoes.jpg)

... to this (same image with levels applied, and then chromaPop) (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/nicetomatoes.jpg)

I had been wondering how to get rich reds and bright colors... I guess it was all hiding in the chroma! :)

chromaPop also lets you apply the change in only the R&B channels -- sometimes you want to keep the G channel pristine, since it's doing the heavy lifting detail-wise.

- ben

I have a vectorscope here though, and that swings image you sent basically had no color info except for cyan. I'm not sure if that was intentional or it was really dark or what, but playing around with the YUV channels isn't going to help that image. Your rotten tomates shot has much more color info, plenty to play with.

I think we need to shoot a MacBeth chart or something to actually get this stuff white-balanced.

Here's the dollar bill shot. (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/dollar.png) Although it's not exactly a completely fresh bill. There are a bunch of artifacts as a result of the moiré happening and my de-Bayering software not knowing what to do with it.

But you can see that "Secretary of the Treasury" is readily legible, as are some of the paper fibers. The camera is almost able to capture the insane grid behind Washington...

I'd love to see the same test shot on the HD10, the SI-1300 and maybe even the DVX-100...

- ben

Like the doller bill, maybe we should compare all the cameras with test charts, and window and 100W bulb streaking, lines and blowouts.

Good to see the images getting better. Could you try the head and shoulders shot again with the same lighting, to see how much the image has improved? How is low light sensitivity now? I am most worried about colour range and sensitivity, it seems too low to play with.

There has been some negatrive talk about the Fillfactory chip and USB in times past, so could I ask some questions to clear things up, your reply would be greatly appreciated.

Have you got the latest version of the chip?

How fast can you run the shutter and not drop below 24FPS in 8 bit and in 10 bit modes.

Can the software gaurantee a frame rate (i.e 24fps, 25fps)? Does sumix know of any front end pro video capture/control software, I have found the cameralink website over at the technical thread but haven't done a extensive search yet.

Obviously there is no pixel packing mode to better use the USB bandwith? Do they have frame buffer memory on the camera (to even out the USB2 bandwidth requirements)?

Real Range and light sensitvity estimates?

Sumix is supposed to be making a range of cameras to suit us, even with compression in the camera head. Have they mentioned anything to you about where ever there will be Gigabit E version, or Gigbit ethernet and USB2 versions with compression?

Thanks for giving me some hope for USB2.

Just done a cinema fov test on the doller of bill shot, and the bayer errors on the still looks acceptable for veiwing.

<<<-- Originally posted by Les Dit : Ben,
Resolution wise, none of the CMOS 1.3 cameras looks anywhere near that sharp. not even close.
It's obvious JVC has a kick ass demosaiker.
-Les -->>>

Thats a worry, the HD10 only has around 850K pixel actual resolution.

Thanks again

Wayne.

Obin

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : .if you have a hotspot that is close to 100% it will have the smear across the whole image -->>>

The smearing problem, could that be from using a faster lense supplying a greater range and more energy to the pixels.

Steve wrote some stuff about adjusting the camera settings to reduce problems a little while ago.

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : Jason on smearing:
That smearing with oversaturated pixels is a Micron problem (all Micron 1.3Mpix cameras will have it). Definitely not the lenses. I bugged them about it and they said run slower, which negates what we want to do about rolling shutter. I was told (but haven't seen) that the 3.2Mpix Micron doesn't do that as much - different pixel architecture. The 3.2Mpix should be able to do both 720p and 1920x1080@24fps, 10 bit. If Obin and Rob want to upgrade in about a month I'll work it out with them. The SI-3300 will have less sensitivity though.
-->>>

So the next version is an improvement.

For people asking where Steve is:

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : Hey gang, I'm going to be gone starting this evening through Sunday. Doing a camping folk festival - not even taking a computer, cell phone or video camera. Hopefully the 1920HD will be at the FG company by then, you guys will conclude that a system can be built the size of a cell phone and someone finds all the software under their pillow. That's my fantasy and I'm sticking to it until a better one comes along. -->>>
On the 21st, that was a lot of pages ago ;) So he should be back soon.

Steve, I have an idea for this.

<<<-- Originally posted by Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn : You don't understand me.I mean CONCENTRATE (put a lens between the SLR and the sensor), not WASTE.

Anyway you don't like what I'm saying :(

Please if someone here could explain him what I'm trying to say, it would be nice :) -->>>

My version doesn't have GG.

Please don't get offended Ben, if I repeat something you allready know, I don't know what you know, and it is usefull to repeat things for clarity and for the other readers.

Originally posted by Wayne Morellini :somebody mentioned it on a XL1s 35mm adapter thread, and I also asked about it in a thread last year. By making an 35mm adpator with suitable codensor, instead of projection surface, you can pipe all the light down to the chip (no loss from the projection surface). You don't get SLR DOF, but you get the angle of veiw and extra bright image.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22715&
Originally posted by Jonathon Wilson :
I actually built one exactly as you described because I was frustrated at the amount of light loss with the ground glass. I replaced my ground glass with a 'relay lens' which changes the magnification at the focal point down to the size of my ccd. It worked beautifully -- incredibly bright image... but very long Video-looking depth of field. I basically had the focal length/field of view of my SLR Lens, but depth of field of video.
We face the same problems as detachable XL1s lense people face:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23377&highlight=sizing+down+the+image

Have agood week. I eagerly wait for your next camera releases Steve.

Ben,
If your lens is 30 years old or up, sorry to hear that.
Although it would be a really good lens, it would give some color distortions and artifacts under certain situation.This is just because it lacks a modern coating treatment.If it is 20 years old I´m sure it is fine.
But no problem it is what you got. :)

The tomatos shot is nice but has unbalanced color.Look at the bright zone left on the tomato.It is yellow/green that is why you don´t get a nice red.

Now that you work in YUV colorspace, there is a simple method to apply a lowpass filter on colors.
Take U and V planes, downsize to 640x360 and upsize again to 1280x720 using bicubic or Lanczos. (Bicubic sharpens or not depending on internal coefficients, Lanczos always sharpens)

Test it.I can´t send you an image now.

I'm curious to know why these cameras, if they're operating at a certain frequency, can't keep a consistent frame-rate.

Ben, you were saying that your frame rates were all over the place. I was doing some math, and if you're varying by more than just a little bit, like .2 or .3 fps, you're going to be out of sync very fast-half a frame to a whole frame every second. I was planning on getting 2GB of RAM for 90 seconds of recording time, but at that rate, I'll be way out of sync by the end of 90 seconds, anywhere from 2-4 seconds from the frame rate flucuations you described!!

So if everything here is computer controlled, how come the fluctuating frame-rates? Is there a way to get a timing circuit on the camera that can lock the frame-sync? Anything else seems to spell big trouble for my projects which depend on sound-sync.

BTW, pitch-shifting audio when you're trying to edit mixed takes is an absolute nightmare, and any other editor except for myself on my own projects would throw the material back in my face! :-)

hey ben,
how do quick pans look with the camera? could we maybe see a clip?

Ben,
Have you tried to see what kind of framerate consistency you can get at lower resolutions? For example, have you tried 720x480 @24fps to see if the framerate still ends up being slightly different everytime you capture.
How many different computers have you tried capturing to? Does the camera get its power from the USB2.0 port?
Ultimately, I don't think the slightly erratic framerates are that big of a problem unless you plan on using really long takes (90 seconds) without any audio work. As an editor, I wouldn't shy away from mixed takes with such incrementally small differences in framerates. Even Adobe Audition has robust enough "time-stretching" filters to take care of the job these days.
I wouldn't suggest the camera rig for a long form documentary... but for cinema... I'm sure I don't need to say much more than ADR and Foley.

I'm wondering if sync is coming from the USB port, or if it's coming from the Camera itself. If so, can you plug in a timing circuit to the external sync connector on the camera and run the camera in "snapshot" mode? That should get good sync with a crystal timing circuit.

You guys are freaking out about the sync issue. It's a 90 second take, tops. Since it's double system, you'll have to line the clapper up with the audio anyway -- it's not too much more trouble to stretch it to fit a little. Like I mentioned before, it only varies by a small amount each time. Juan, your math is suspect. If it varies .2fps, how could you go out of sync by a whole frame in 1 second? The difference is .2frames.

The camera is driven over USB2 -- that's the only cable. It gets its power from the USB2 bus (although it needs very very little power -- it can actually run over USB1, even if the USB1 can't keep up with the data). The sync probably varies because the camera depends on the computer to tell it to take another frame. The computer doesn't always have the same taskload, so it will vary.

Wayne, interesting stuff on the 35mm adapter. Here's my question to Juan: how is using this setup better than C-mount lenses? This setup requires another piece of glass -- a "relay" lens -- of questionable optical merit. Any additional piece of glass between the film plane and the subject is "bad." So what makes you think that this would be better? Do you just loooooove SLR lenses? They're not carved out of god, man.

Like I said, I'm not sure how old the Angenieux is, but it's clean, smooth, and multicoated.

Eric, quick pans do indeed show some rolling shutter-ness. It doesn't bother me, but I'm not as picky as some people on this board...

@Juan: "The tomatos shot is nice but has unbalanced color.Look at the bright zone left on the tomato.It is yellow/green that is why you don´t get a nice red."

Case in point. This is not the Alatasens. It's an 8 bit camera. Keep that in mind.

- ben

Ben,
Well it seems that no matter what I tell you, everything I say to you sounds wrong.
Anyway do as you like.This is not a competition.I'm telling you some things I've found through my years of experience working at feature films and at the post-production industry.
Within my 5 years of work to develop a Film Recorder system, I've researched many things and discover that some usual things are not as believed (at least not always).
My bussiness partner has around 25 years of experience as DP.He has made more than 5,000 commercials from here and the rest of the world, and agrees with me in what I'm saying.
If you say your Angenieux lens 30 years old is better than, for example, a 10 years old Pentax, its OK to me but I ought to tell you no.
I say SLR lenses cause they are cheap, nothing else, if you want to buy a $10,000 PL lens good for you.
Do you know what's the difference between a normal Karl Zeiss and the Ultra Prime lenses?

What do you think about the low pass method I posted before?

I don't understand what's the relation between a bad white balance and an Altasens chip.

Where did you get that a lens between a lens and the sensor is "Bad"?

Do you know how many lenses a Good angular lens have?
Do you know how much light do you loose because of that extra lens?

As I have started discussing in the technical thread, Steve was talking about USB requiring too much processing power and being unreliable

(thanks Intel, why didn't you just adopt a version of Firewire, ohhh what "Apple/TI product", rather than "Intel Microsoft product" how pathertic, thanks for making our lives a nightmare).

Have a look at cpu usage, it might be possible that USB itself has timing problems, or it is maxing out cpu time. You could work around it, but it will need specialist USB drivers (and system setup) like Steve does with GigbitE (ask Sumix). I have posted some links over at the technical thread.

@ Ben

why not make they priority set to the highest and shutdown all other programs/ internet connections etc..

and have a "clean" defragemented harddrive?

(I still think the solid state hard drives are the way to go)

Also @ Ben once you have your captured file (AVI?), is it ready to play? i'm a bit confused with all these bayer stuff that i've read earlier,

i'm thinking of getting this cmos camera:

http://www.compumodules.com/image-processing/high-resolution-CMOS-camera.shtml

FINAL QUESTION:

If i was too buy the above camera (CMOS ULTIMA II, COLOUR 1.3 MEGAPIXEL USB2)

And lens + USB cable, what software will i need to start capturing video
P.S i have a 2.6GHz Toshiba laptop (i hope its fast enough)

Juan, I'm just saying that it's best to use a lens that was designed for your sensor size. Can you find me a 25mm SLR lens at f0.95? How about an 8mm at f1.4?

Jason and I are looking into physical low-pass filters to deal with the moiré -- I'll keep people posted on that.

@Juan: "I don't understand what's the relation between a bad white balance and an Altasens chip."

Okay -- let me explain it. This is an 8 bit camera. The RGB gains are software, at 8bit (not hardware at 10bit). This means there's no way to adjust the color in hardware. Which means that in order to white balance, you need to adjust the image with software. With 8bits, this is simply not possible. When you shoot indoors, you get a yellow-orange image. If you don't want that, you must use an #80 blue filter, because that's the easiest way to color correct the shot.

The Altasens will run at 10 or 12 bit, giving you a bit more flexibility to white balance with software.

That is the relationship between bad white balance and the Altasens.

@Wayne: "You could work around it, but it will need specialist USB drivers (and system setup) like Steve does with GigbitE (ask Sumix)."

Or we need a FW800 camera, like Sumix may be developing...

@Anhar: "why not make they priority set to the highest and shutdown all other programs/ internet connections etc.."

This is a dedicated machine. There are no other programs ever running.

"and have a "clean" defragemented harddrive?"

I'm recording to RAM.

"Also @ Ben once you have your captured file (AVI?), is it ready to play?"

No -- it captures RAW video files, and then their software converts it to a lossless AVI.

"i'm thinking of getting this cmos camera:"

That's the same exact sensor (looks like the same exact camera) as the Sumix 150c. I think Sumix developed the 150c, so they must be reselling it to other companies...

- ben

<<<-- Originally posted by Ben Syverson : @Wayne: "You could work around it, but it will need specialist USB drivers (and system setup) like Steve does with GigbitE (ask Sumix)."

Or we need a FW800 camera, like Sumix may be developing...
-->>>

well tell me more ;), I'm sick of waiting for a HD camera (I have been waiting since before the HD10 for a better camera that will do 25fps for PAL HD markets).

<<<-- Originally posted by Anhar Miah : @ Ben

why not make they priority set to the highest and shutdown all other programs/ internet connections etc..

and have a "clean" defragemented harddrive?
And lens + USB cable, what software will i need to start capturing video
P.S i have a 2.6GHz Toshiba laptop (i hope its fast enough) -->>>

Actually you can make a difference setting up the computer, as windows runs a lot of service programs in the background (aswell as thrid party anti-virus, secuirity, firewalls, and unistaller monitors). These play havoc with smooth performance, every time they task switch is a big hit. I have posted links to optimisation guides (for realtime processing) on the technical thread, I think one site has links to setups for different processing applications.

ugh, me too.

It seems like with every camera out there that has some promise there's always some other compromises!

.2*90 frames = 18 frames

.5*90 frames = 45 frames

1*90 frames = 90 frames

I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, but I did want to point out that the frame rate that a recorder will be running at is 23.98 or 24fps.

I noticed in your frame rates that you were off by almost 1fps in some cases. At the end of 90 seconds that's more than 3 seconds off. Very noticeable.

I'm not trying to spaz out with this issue, but it is an issue, and there must be ways to deal with it. And again, my main wonder/puzzlement is that if this is a computer with clocks, etc. how come there is no consistent frame-rate?

Ben and Juan. About the 35mm adaptor benefits and problems.

From what I've been told the only benefits are: GG 35mm adapter, cinematic/arty shallow DOF, and softening of the image with far better optical properties than standard consumer video lense (cheap secondhand). The problem is that yuou ussually loose 1 to 2 stops of light from using the projection plane, but they are working on diffferent methords that might gain (I'll stop there, because last time I said this I got a long thread full of irrate people not understanding what was being said arguijng seimantics?? arguing with people that actually knew what I was talking about).

I only suggested the version without the GG to increase the image brightness in low light situations, using a seperate 35mm lense. As far as I can figure out the aperature ratio tells you how well lit every piont is over a set area. 35mm has, 4 times more area than 2/3"???, so concentrating a good F1.0 slr lense onto 2/3' chip (though yours is 1/2") would give two stops more light than a F1 2/3" lense. Is that right?

Now what Ben has said about putting a lense inbetween producing problems (I think they are discovering that over at the adaptor threads, but I haven't been keeping up with them) is true. It increases variouse chroma abbervations etc, but I think they are using achromatics?? (dual lense type lenses) to correct this. So you can get your cake and eat it. Then again, I am not an optics or production expert.

Thanks

Wayne.

Wayne,
Achromatic or Apochromatic.They are design to avoid color aberrations.In no way anyone can put a single lens system, because this (as a magnifier or Lupa) will ruin the image.
The light transmission for a good quality lens is around 98%.So you just loose 2%.
No problems here about resolution cause they usually resolve more than 200 lp this days.

Ben, after tweaking carefully the Dollar image, to white balance it I needed to increase Blue 30%
The same happens with the Tomato shoot.

Hey guys. I'm very elementary at this and I realize you guys aren't! So , if you have a chance, please let me know if this is good and proper. I'm ready to try this and was wondering if there is anything I'm missing here. Here are the links for the goods...

Camera...
http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlinecatalog/displayproduct.cfm?productID=2490&search=1

Lens-to-body adapter for Canon EF lenses...
http://www.birger.com/html/ef232_home.htm

Hard drive for CameraLink connection...
http://www.leutron.com/english/product/lvmpc_d.htm

Now what am I missing? Something to view it with! Or, should I just capture to a laptop?

What's missing here to make this work?

How bad is the rolling shutter? I know you said not bad, but I'm wondering at 1/48th of a second how it compares to Obin's camera.

Ben, Jason:

I have a CC version of the Dollar image with almost all the color moire removed.Can any of you post it?

yah, email it me at jrod@mindspring.com

Ohh, you are good. I can't really help you, (Obin, Rob, Jason, Ben and Jaun could) but thanks. I can't keep up with all this research, but in the other technical thread I've posted links to cameralink home pages products registery. If you, or somebody else, would like to go through them looking for good cameras, cheap frame grabbers, and good pro video control/caputre software and report back to us it will be helpful for us and you.

So far this is what is happening, two groups are trying to work on provide/cinema freindly software to link any cameralink camera to any codec to any popular supported NLE. It's not finshed, until it is we can't select the minium configuration for certain, or say exactly which system is best for what level of aquisition (but you can allways get something that is more powerfull than needed). This is because continouse optimisations of the software will significantly boost it's performance.

We also are not really selecting the best hardware peices until the new cameras are comming.

A few people are going to try a FPGA compresion accelerator, and seperate codecs are being developed/adapted.


I've got a request, we need volunteers to find suitable components for the system:

We really need to pick up our game. I have done a load of research here, a number of others have too. But it is too difficult to do everything, and I have had to leave a lot of things undone. Steve N has suggested this before, and if you think I post too much, that is because I do lots of research compared to most, and have a lot of technical knowledge because I have looked in to making variouse products in the past. I would like to spend time on other aspects of the project, and other things. I would like volunteers from people who aren't allready doing a lot on the project. Anybody interested?

What we need:

Pro video capture/control software for the cameralink, usb2.0 and gigabit cameralink cameras.
Cheap capture cards.
Good cameras.
The fastest hard drives raid or normal ata/sata, 3.5 or laptop.
The best/cheapest motherboards, big, small, or low powered for the capture interfaces above.
The best/cheapest small computers and laptops.
The best/cheapest system workflow solutions.
The best/cheapest power supply/battery options
The best/cheapest sound options.
The best/cheapest case options.
The best cheapest monitors.
The best/cheapest software/codecs.
Facts and figure calculations for target performance (advanced).
Remote controlled (robotic) lense system and camera mounts.
etc.
Collect the links and information and post to the technical thread and the wiki. A good place to start is all previouse posts and links here, in the viper thread, in the homemade camera design thread, fpga thread and techncial and general threads.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28781
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28779

This would require objective scientific investigation and evaluation of the options, specifications, stats and performance, and would suit technical people or engineers. It needs to be a systematic, logical "checklist" investigation down every avenue and option. If you can self organise, and group organise to divide up the work, it would help.


Thanks

Wayne.

Hey Obin and Steve,

I read this over on the Micron site:

No Artifacts, Smear, or Blooming Means Higher-Quality Images


With our active-pixel architectures, the RMS input-referred noise is comparable to the very high-end (and expensive) CCDs. Both technologies provide excellent imagery compared with other CMOS image sensors. Our active-pixel architectures use intra-pixel amplification in conjunction with both temporal and fixed-pattern noise suppression circuitry (i.e., correlated double sampling), which produces exceptional imagery in terms of dynamic range (a wide ~75 dB) and noise (a low ~15 e-RMS noise floor), with low fixed-pattern noise (<0.15% sat). Our active-pixel sensors achieve a quantum efficiency (sensitivity) that is comparable to high-end CCDs, but, unlike CCDs, they are not prone to column streaking due to blooming pixels. This is because CCDs rely on charge domain shift registers that can leak charge to adjacent pixels when the CCD register overflows, causing bright lights to "bloom" and leading to unwanted streaks in the image. In our active-pixel architectures, the signal charge is converted to a voltage inside the pixel and read out over the column bus, as in a DRAM. Our sensors have built-in anti-blooming protection in each pixel, so that there is no blooming. Smear, caused by charge transfer in a CCD under illumination, is also avoided.

So Obin, how come you're getting smear with your sensor?

my chip does not have this feature??
best guess..sorry ;)

my chip looks like a $20 cmos security camera when you get a really hot spot in the frame..like try shooting a scene with a lamp in the frame :(

uggghhh....maybe Steve will ask Micron about this issue

Here's what I'm talking about Obin.

This is one of your original images, there's no smear even though you have a very hot image in the BK.

http://home.mindspring.com/~jrod/frame2.jpg

Maybe playing around with the gains screwed things up? I just remember your earlier images looking pretty good-no streaking.

well have you pushed that a bit?

gain is worse..yes

is this the camera with the altasens chip that everyone is talking about?... and is it really less then $2000? when will it be available? will it record directly to computer?... for the love of god... i need answers.

http://videosystems.com/mag/video_shoot_tools_26/

Sorry Obin,

I'm just trying to figure out the pros and cons of each system before I think about spending the money to purchase one.

Ben's system looks very promising:

Pros:
USB 2.0 (easy to hook up to a computer)
Seems quick and easy to setup (good software)

Cons:
Color Saturation is less than ideal
Frame-rate's not locked
8-bit (I'm noticing banding artifacts)

Your system:

Pros:
10-bit
Much better color
Faster frame-rates

Cons:
Streaking?? (I really thought this wasn't suppose to happen with CMOS)
XCAP software isn't so good
Frame-rates locked?
Strobing (rolling shutter?) on slow-motion shots?

There's a lot of question marks on the cons with your system Obin because you mention stuff and problems here and there, but inquieries are either never answered/followed up, or they get lost in the shuffle of all the ideas that get thrown around on this thread.

Again, I'm sorry to be asking so many questions, but I'm trying to get to the bottom of what is good/bad about these systems. This thread is now 28pages, and I'm finding the search tools on this site less that ideal for finding the info that I want (it just spits out the thread, yippee, now I have to sift through 28 pages). I've gone through the pages just to see where things get messed up, and it seems like you start to mention the streaking problems after you started doing white balance with the gains on the camera.

This streaking worries me, because frankly CMOS is NOT suppose to do that. Streaking was a very early CCD problem, and like I mentioned from the Micron site, even they advertise no streaking. Your early pictures have no streaking. I guess I'll just have to call Steve and see what is/is not the problem.

For instance, I found after about 30 mintues of searching that you had set the gains at 11db for red and 4db for blue and green. Maybe puching up the red so high wasn't such a good idea? 11db, if that's anything like the camera gains I'm used to is A LOT of gain, especially when i try to run at 0 to -3db. 12db gain on my former DVX100 made that camera look very crappy. So maybe that high gain settings to color balance the image has thrown things off?

Hey guys,

I just emailed back & forth with Sumix re: CMI/Viewbits. Sumix is the engineering and design house for CMI, which sells the cameras. I assume they sell mostly to scientific/industrial concerns. However, Sumix is also interested in working with filmmakers directly to figure out what we want.

Farhad at Sumix also dropped a bit of a bombshell when he told me that they were working on improved software and firmware for the camera that would let it do 12bit log->10 bit transfer, and then some kind of conversion to map it back to 12bits, with controls over each channel. In my opinion, even 9 or 10 bit would improve our color situation, so this could be just the ticket. That could move the SMX-150c from an experimental tool to a production tool. They'll be testing it in a few weeks, so I'll keep you updated.

Around the same time they'll have a Linux driver, which I'm eager to test out. Hopefully we can get better performance from a bare bones Linux install.

Farhad and everyone at Sumix have been extraordinarily helpful and curious as to what I'm doing with their camera. They've been making optics and scientific cameras for a few years, but decided to get more heavily into cameras recently, so now they have 8 electronics and software engineers working just on cameras, with additional physics and metal specialists. They'll also be adding tech support engineers to help people with their various applications. So for them to be experimenting with the filmmaking market is kind of like two worlds colliding. But they're very excited and interested.

When I asked them about Altasens, they said they were on track for a 3650-based camera coming out in the late fall. The interface of choice? Firewire800. They tend to like simple solutions like Firewire and USB because they can power the camera as well as transfer the data. They may also release a Gigabit Ethernet version later.

I'm really stoked about the Altasens model, but I'm glad I'm working with them now. They want to know our desires and interests now, so they can try to accomodate us. The Altasens is going to be great no matter what, but we can help shape their control software and so forth if we get involved and tell them what our needs are.

Anyway, Obin was posting about lamps again, so I shot this. (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/lamp.jpg) Hopefully this demonstrates there's no streaking on the IBIS-5.

Also, I shot a couple of test shots outside today again. I think I'm getting a better grasp on the situation. Here's a color corrected image from that test. (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/becca2.png)

- ben

Farhad at Sumix also dropped a bit of a bombshell when he told me that they were working on improved software and firmware for the camera that would let it do 12bit log->10 bit transfer, and then some kind of conversion to map it back to 12bits

Whoa.

Okay, one less con for Ben's system :-)

BTW, you may have heard him wrong, he's probably talking about 12-bit linear to 10-bit log back to 12-bit linear. That's a normal workflow since 10-bit log was designed to contain the data in a 12-bit linear file, but at a reduced size-it's a nice form of compression :-)

Jason, you're probably right about the 12-10-12 issue, but that's how Farhad pitched it to me. Either way, as long as we're seeing at least 10bits transferred, I think we're doing okay. :)

To follow up on the frame rate issue: the camera software sets its frame rate in a settings dialog. It says something to the effect of "take a frame every ___ ms." The problem is that 1/24sec == 41.6666... seconds. So you either do 41 or 42ms. I'm not sure why it varies, but hopefully Linux will make the fluctuations a little smaller.

Also, the variations are really never more than about .3 frames a second, so the drift is:
23.6 * 90 seconds == 2124 frames
23.3 * 90 seconds == 2097 frames

2124 - 2097 == 27, or just over 1 second. Unless you're filming a really dialogue-heavy movie, this just won't be too much of a problem. While you're editing you frequently have to spend hours tweaking the audio anyway; this will just be one more step.

Edit: you can always keep a stopwatch going on set, and when the take is over or gets close to 90 seconds, you can run in and do a tail slate. With a head and tail slate, you can just stretch the audio to fit.

- ben

Ben,
Not to offend you but you are not getting it with the color correction (CC).Your images are too green/yellow.
I have a couple of images corrected that I can send you.
Can I?
I've also corrected Obin's image posted by Jason and it looks real nice!!!

Ben, The frame rate is probably a software problem. Instead of taking a frame after every 'N milliseconds' they should be tying it to an absolute timer, taking a frame on every tick of that timer. That way the most problem they would run into would be jitter in the individual frame times, but no long term time error.

It they can pack the 10 bits into the USB with the full frame rate, that would really be great news. Maybe they will be doing some mild compression?

-Les

<<<-- Originally posted by Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn : My bussiness partner has around 25 years of experience as DP.He has made more than 5,000 commercials from here and the rest of the world, and agrees with me in what I'm saying. -->>>

Since we all seem to be in the spirit of touting our expertise and bickering over mathematical equations, I figured Juan might have missed a chance to truly express the magnitude of accomplishment that his DP business partner has enjoyed in his many years of service to the film industry.

5,000 commercials divided by 25 years = 200 commercials per year.
5000/25=200 right?

And there are only 365 days in a year, though 366 on leap years, which occur every four years.
25 years divided by every 4th year being a leap year = 6.25 leap years, or 6.25 additional days.
So... 365 days in a year multiplied by 25 years plus 6.25 days for leap years.... equals....
(365x25)+6.25= 9131.25 days

So less than 10,000 days have gone by in 25 years, yet the DP Business Partner of Juan M. M. Fiebelkorn has managed to make 5,000 commercials.

9131.25 / 5000 = 1.82625

and we all agree that 1.82625 is less than 2... right?

So DP of Fiebelkorn managed to CONSISTENTLY make a commercial every two days for 25 years.....
......
.....
....

And it took God six days to make the earth.

Juan, I am "getting it." Color correction is a very personal thing -- you may want the outside shot I just posted to be less green, but I like it with the balance it has. In fact, I like it a little bit bluer too. (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/becca3.jpg)

The indoor shots I posted before were taken without a #80 blue filter. Without higher than 8 bit images, you cannot white-balance in post. You can adjust the gamma a little bit and you can push the saturation a little bit, but white balance is the equivalent to adjusting the input whites in Levels. That will give you banding all over the place as soon as you try to push the saturation.

Wait for the 10/12 bit software from Sumix. Then I'll be able to push these images to where you think they "should" be. Until then, they aren't going to have perfect white balance and color correction like some video shot by the government.

@Matthew: "So DP of Fiebelkorn managed to CONSISTENTLY make a commercial every two days for 25 years....."

<chuckles> I'm sure you're DP is great, Juan. You just have a way of telling other people they're doing things wrong. "Don't color correct that way." "Don't shoot with that lens." "You have to do it this way."

I'm just saying... if you want to show us how to really do it, order a camera and start posting images.

-ben

ok, I just made a mistake and put a zero while being in a hurry,
SORRY.
About white balance I have the imges and I want to send them to you Ben.
The easy way I use is to measure RGB values for a white zone, and balance according to that.
I don't really understand why I do annoy you so much.
mail me fiebelk at hotmail dot com


So tell me.
Must I stop making posts?
Do I have to go somewhere else cause I'm really stupid?
Everything I say is really a nonsense?

Cause I'm starting to think that.

Juan,
I think we just have too many people here who like to talk about how smart they are and wave around a list of what they have done in their life as some kind of certification of their right to be on this thread.
It is as if there is an unspoken contest to see who can contribute the most posts to the Alternate Imaging Methods. The winner gets recognized by the other members of this message board as "Grand DV Master" and all must bow to him.

Ben said it right. Anyone who wants to show us all how to do it right is gonna have to buy a camera and start posting some results. Otherwise negotiate with Obin or Ben how much you'll have to pay one of them to do exactly what you want them to with their own equipment.

Ben never said anybody was annoying him. Let's try to keep it that way so he keeps sharing his results.

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini: I only suggested the version without the GG to increase the image brightness in low light situations, using a seperate 35mm lense. As far as I can figure out the aperature ratio tells you how well lit every piont is over a set area. 35mm has, 4 times more area than 2/3"???, so concentrating a good F1.0 slr lense onto 2/3' chip (though yours is 1/2") would give two stops more light than a F1 2/3" lense. Is that right?
-->>>

It sound you will have more than 100% light. But this is definitely not possible. Every lense system loses light. But the point is the front side diameter (in relation to the projection diameter) of the lenses. A lense-system with 2% light loss but with 70mm diameter catches mutch more light as a 20mm lense with the same 2% loss. Just a look to the size of a lense-system can bring a idea how bright the image will be.

Wayne, can you contact me via email (reg. cases and others) ?

This is the common missunderstanding people has about what I'm saying, what I am saying is the light from a large film area is condensed down to a smaller film area=brighter image, no light production. In the other thread I had, people kept on stupidly arguing about interpreting words to mean producing light, rather than gathering more light to a smaller area, they got caught up on words (crossing the I's and dotting the T's ;) rather then what was meant, (like English majors trying to argue history from the gramma they spoke, instead of what was meant). Which I know your not doing.

Jason, I would say that gain makes things worse but is not the main issue..it's just when you shoot a blownout light it streaks! the less gain the less streak but it's still in the darks...rolling shutter is fine at 40mhz and above IMHO...it's the streaks that worry me..I would not buy a camera with usb or firewire..not enough datarate when you compare with CameraLink

About Summix, "Steve I" and Summix actually started this whole custom HD camera thing here, Obin decided to go with SI instead. They are very interestred in doing stuff with us and we have old announcements they have made on the other thread about everything discussed here (apart from the new software 12-10-12 improvements and firewire). I wish everybody would read the threads rather than rehashing information and questions. (Sorry, I hate to see unanswered questions to new people (and even suggestions) because people consider them old news, and the rightful recognition drifting away).

Re-edit: I forgot to mention the use of Firewire B is dissapionting, unless it can gaurantee 100MB/s (after overheads) like we can get out of Gigabit Ethernet. Can you find out if itcan Ben, thanks?

Competitions, I got nothing to compete about in production, or camera technology, this is the real training ground, I read and learn, and rarely get involved in production/post production issues. I contribute to the technical side because I am aware of many of the issues (from experience and learning) and I want to see the best solutions (the most appropriate low cost quality solutions). Not really a competition, but sometimes some people want to fling it like they know it, and have to be enlightened.

Now Jaun, don't get offened by people, you just come accross differently from what you intended in English. When you read it sometimes you missunderstand it differently than is intended. It is just the way you speak is differrent from normal english and the gramma is different. I also have a bit of this problem (my sentences back to front and complex), this has made it diificult for you and Obin to read my stuff aswell.


For everybody:

Now the other problem is competitions, and being unquestionable etc, rather than discussing and working to an understanding.

Don't get offended by other's niave questions, probing, and suggestions, it is just part of communicating and coming to an understanding of what is happening, and sometimes the people recieving them are actually mistaken, despite what they think, and I am allready aware of my own weaknesses.

So peace to everyone, lets discuss and continue on.


Frank Roberts, made a good post. The systems he sugested are interesting, and the machine vision section of Edmund optics is interesting, with a cheap 2/3inch HD camera (hadn't researched that properlly yet).

Somebody with more practical knowledge please help and encourage him.

Thanks

Wayne.

Well I know some people ignore my posts, that is why they keep asking questions allready answered. But I posted them because they are very benefical to the propper developement of the project, and they have taken a lot of research hours, so take advantage of them.

Now I haven't contacted Apple, VIA or X number of other companies. A major multimedia event software firm, Cinelerra, case manufactures, adpator manufacturers, or Sumix (as was suggested), because there is too much to do to get the project from adhock (red herring) to mature pro project.

Now the volunteer resreachers post I did yesterday is needed. Sure everything is adhock at the moment, that is normal, but it can't stay that way, otherwise everything people have criticised over at cinematography forums (and even that camcorderinfo forum) about this project will be true. Obin, I think you know what I mean from recent events, you want good software and cases now, and good workflow, I agree (though it will still take some time). I have been talking to the Rob's and Steve I about big corporate sponsorship, funding and development, and even past that.

Now, I wanted to do a few political, advocacy and fundraising things (aswell as some hardware development for cases etc) for the project (I suppose it is because I am feeling good at the moment) but I need help, it is too much (just keeping up with the threads).

We can rock everybodies world, but past the experimental cameras of Obin and Ben, we have to get seriouse, and structured, if we want an effortless camera system this year. I don't volunteer for anything (for health and commitment reasons and because I will lend up doing too much without volunteering anyway). But if you need a project manager, or representative, I can volunteer some time (with some assistance).

I have a good grasp of techncial and business issues. I used to run my own technical advocacy website, and am planning a social activism site (to use the camera for). Have been around people developing expensive hardware projects (processors, and computer devices). I also have researched into new designs and concepts for the following devices: PDA's, computers, laptops, case formfactors, handheld/watch/projected game systems, 3D/volumetric game portable game systems, and projected displays, bit map to serial augmented display, text entry systems, keyboard systems, game controllers, bus networks (abstract), Virtual OS system (with a improved versions of nearly every system in the OS and computer, including processer and 3D pixel system), low light loss SLR adaptor (intial research on hold for this project), camera case systems, hybrid HD acquistion etc. Generally every aspect of anything I'm researching, with new origional concepts and practical solutions for most things (a number replicated independently in the industry, i.e the simple Palm Pilot formfactor). Unfortunately hardware ussually requires much too much money.

This project has potential to be sold as a good marketing and business opportunity.

I also have to start work on my OS again sometime (that was to fund many of the hardware projects) but this camera is the sort of social activism project I like.

So you can appreciate why I don't like bothering with competitions, and concentrate on practical "long term" marketable solutions.

(About the competitions, if your good, you got my appreciation right away, unless you need to convince me (prove it by discussion or action), otherwise you can still get my respect. It's a good policy to adopt, rather than getting offended and being unquestionable. Understand what each other is really saying (their meaning, and piont of veiw or opinion), don't expect too much, but appreciate that you may not be able to agree, or have two different opinions or pionts of veiw (agree to disagree).


Thanks

Wayne.

You guys, you can search post-by-post. Just enter your search terms, and select "Alternative Imaging Methods" in the forum popup, and then select "Show results as posts" rather than "Show results as threads." Show results as threads is useless, because it's like "4 results found in 4:4:4 10bit single CMOS HD project!" Great... very helpful. :)

Juan: please don't stop posting--Matthew and I were just ribbing you a bit. I understand what you're saying, you just have unrealistic expectations sometimes. Try to keep in mind that these systems are extraordinarily experimental right now. But keep giving us your feedback!

@Wayne: "I forgot to mention the use of Firewire B is dissapionting, unlewss it can gaurantee 100MB/s (after overheads) like we can get out of Gigabit Ethernet."

The "800" in Firewire 800 is 800 gigabits. So 800/8 == 100 MB per second. Unlike USB2, that rate is sustained. Technically, all FW800 equipment should be rated and usable at the maximum data rate sustained. So it theoretically can guarantee 100MB/sec, just like GigaE. Also, if you just really want GigabitEthernet, Sumix will likely deliver it sometime after FW800.

For me, FW800 is more than enough. 1920x1080 at 12bit at 24fps is 71.2MB/sec. I don't think I'll be shooting 1080p, but it's nice to know I can over FW800. I'll probably be shooting 720p, because it's more manageable.

Also, I like the idea of one cable to power the camera and transfer data. With GigabitEthernet, you'll need to plug the camera in or figure out some battery system. I don't like hacking stuff like that together.

Also @Wayne: the systems taht Frank mentioned were cool, but it'll be a cold day in hell when I invest in an obscure, overpriced "standard" like CameraLink.

- ben

I am going to bed now. But my concern with firewire (because I can't remember) was that interfaces have error correction and routing overheads. If firewire B doesn't have this strructure (I think USB2 does) then I will be happy, but I don't remember if Firewire has extra signaling cable to handle this? Also Firewire tops out at 3.2GB/s, Ethernet will go to 10GB/s eventually, and Gigbe is standard on newer boards.

Looking to the future eventually we will be using 8MP and 32MP cameras (even in 3 chip form) (not to mention the high FPS people here), that is why I prefered GBE as a standard. I think firewire is great myself (the Mac people will LOVE you now ;). If they announced 10Gb Firewire tomorrow, I would be torn. Well at least the future 1.6GB/s Firewire B should support 3 chip 1080, and single chip 8MP. I understand your piont of veiw, it is simular to my own personal one, I just have different ones for the project itself.

Ben, have a look at the cameralink homepage links I posted in the technical thread, there is a lot of support and they are definetly cheaper than HD-SDI setups. They also support USB and Gigbe, that might be what you are using.

Rob, what about all these different interfaces, are we going to see support? Maybe if the software could plug into these interfaces through some standard API?

I aim to get well designed power solutions for the ENG case and camera. If USB2 was 800Mb/s instead I would prefer it (if it had the timing and low cpu use of firewire), USB3, where art you.

I wonder if we can pick up a descent sensor camera for $200.

Thanks

Wayne.

Once again Wayne gives us the very big picture -- hopefully in the near future we will all be shooting with $200 3 chip 32megapixel cameras in slow motion over 10GB/sec interfaces. I salute your research, Wayne -- may all your predictions come true!

For now I'm just trying to get 10 bit on my 1.3megapixel camera over USB2. :)

Big Laugh ;)

That's not exactly what I meant, I mean't $200 720p bayer USB/firewire type thing ;) Somebody picked up one for $60 but it was a dog and he didn't even bother trying to get it past 15fps

That big picture is also really the end game (well VR environments could theorectically go to 66K or so pixels accross, ouch).

Wayne, I think that camera had a built-in lens? I wouldn't buy something without C-mount -- you never know what kind of plastic optics you'll get. :)

I shot a few more tests -- I really can't wait to get the 12-10-12 software. I hope it improves the color situation. However, in the mean time, this camera is perfectly usable. There is a good deal of banding in color gradations once you crank up the chroma. But for some shots it's barely noticeable.

These are 100% quality .jpgs -- unless you guys really want uncompressed PNGs to test with, I'll just continue posting these high-quality jpgs.

Ivy on the wall (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/ivy.jpg)

Some shrubs (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/shrubs.jpg)

Brick walkway -- nice + bland color, Juan! :) (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/walk.jpg)

Door and flowers across the way (http://www.bensyverson.com/hd/images/footage/door.jpg)

- ben