Mike Metken
June 10th, 2004, 05:59 PM
Hey guys,
I have been following this and couple other boards for last couple weeks. It is a lot of information toabsorb. It is all very fascinating stuff. Here are my opinions:
You must follow some proven techniques and take into consideration what was tried and what works. Also there is no need to reinvent the wheel.
1. On digital cinema production you, as a rule, use 1. a viewfinder or a small LCD and 2. a full resolution monitor. You have lights and whatever that you neet to use outdoors even during the day. You drag along a lot of stuff. You should considering on including a computer. Maybe initially it would be a large one but as soon as some small ones that are powerful enough become available, the concept would stay the same, only the computer would change.
1a. You should consider what is out there and how it fits into the budget. And you need to consider price/performance ratio. I started a thread on use of available equipment and it seems that everyone wanted to keep the system cost under $10,000.
1b. You need NLE. But the NLE can also double as a recording device and it can feed your monitor.
1c. How much quality do you need? As everyone, including me, is very cost consceous, would the same quality satisfy you as satisfies major movie studios? The same quality as in Rodriguez' films Spy Kids 2 and Once Upon A Time In Mexico? Those films were recorded with $100,000 camera that records 1440x1080/24p at 110 Mbps, 8 bit, 3:1:1, with 4.5:1 compression. Varicam that costs $60K and is used for indie film production compresses 6.5:1.
1d. You must realize that 10 bit systems are expensive, that uncompressed is very expensive, and that Mac is generally more expensive than PC.
1e. I would suggest to record on PC, uncompressed, then transcode the footage to Aspect HD in the high quality mode. That will be the codec that you will store the images, codec that you will use on the same computer for editing, and for making your final cut. Maybe the camera manufacturer, or some computer outfit could arrange OEM pricing on the Aspect HD/Premiere package.
1f. What quality will you get? 8 bit, 6:1 compression, 4:2:2, 1440x1080p. Overall the same or beter quality than CineAlta $100K camcorder.
1g. That leaves the camera to be the limiting factor to quality. Camera with one AltaSans 1080p 60Hz chip will output effective 1440x1080 pixels. So you will get the same potential quality as with the $100K camera, considering the image is well adjustable on the low cost one.
1h. The camera LCD can be monochrome; that takes care of the color correction problem. The Monitor should be at least the Sony 16x10 aspect ratio large CRT monitor that sells on U Bid refurbished for a few hundred dollars, when they have them. It has 1920 horizontal pixels. It is large and heavy, but it is a must. Once you use a monitor like this, you see that adding a computer is nothing. But to get accurate color, you would need to use special, a lot more expensive broadcast monitors.
2. There is no need to design a local storage with some processor if there may asoon be a mass manufactured solution soon that will make the design obsolete. I would instead use what is available.
3. You need local camera controls. You need to control the basic functions locally. You need at least tungsten and daylight color corection setting. Auto white balance would be very desirable. You can then zoom onto a white or gray object to set the white balance. Or you can use a white trnslucent cover on the camera and aim it at the loght. You need shutter control, manual and auto exposure control. You need to modify to exposure curve to give it more cinema gamma. You should have a switchable gamma curve with settings for knee control at the top to prevent blowing highlights, etc.
4. You need to take care of defective pixels. If you get a name brand camera and you fly in a plane with it and cosmic rays hit the CCD and you get defective pixels, or if they just go dead, the standard manufacturers has a solution for that. This needs to be addressed. Otherwise the low cost cameras have no long term value, because pixels do go bad.
5. You only need one sensor. But it needs to be the best avilable.
6. Concentrate on design of the camera. The system needs to be upgradable and modular. Maybe today $4K industrial camera is good enough. But there is also a Sony HDC-X300 camera that is 3-chip 1080p and costs $15K. There was no such thing until recently. If you wanted 1080p you needed to use $90K studio camera. So maybe in a year another manufacturer will come out with a similar camera as the Sony, but with one chip, for $5K. What do these major manufacturer cameras have in common? HD SDI interface. HD SDI PC cards drop in price in half about every 6 months. Now you can buy one for about $1K. A year from now they mey cost couple hundred dollars. The coax can be 200' long. So we should go by the video industry standards and use HD SDI, not some non-standard interface. It will make the camera also sellable to the pro market. The Red Lake camera is nice, has a control box with adjustments, etc., but no standard industry interface. You know what that means? No video, broadcast or digital cinema sales.
7. Come out with some kind of 35 mm adapter and have it mass manufactured. Don't each of you guys make your own. Someone should come out with a standard design; then we'll find some company in the Far East to mass manufacture it. Or we can start calling them now. They can carry on the design beter than we. You need to keep the distance from the GG to the lens constant. I think that vibrating design would work the best.
8. Use C mount lenses for wide angle and 35 mm for longer focal lengths. There are plenty of high definition, high contrast, megapixel C mount lenses available, including macro lenses, that could be used in the adapter. For longer than standard focal length, 35 mm SLR lenses will be more cost effective and will be better for do follow focus. 35 mm to C mout adapters are cheap..
9. You need to look at the cost of a whole system and make sure that it will not be obsolete soon. I started a thread on available low cost HD solutions. I listed there system costs. Even if you don't use local hard disc array and record to the NLE PC, you can't keep the total price as low as many here imagine. Check that thread. There are some comments by some movie people who shoot 16 and 35 mm film stock, who talk on a differnt wavelength. Just realize that.
10. You need to know at where is the pro and prosumer HD market heading to make sure that you don't make today something that will become obsolete tomorrow. I say concentrate on the best one 2/3" camera, 1080/<30p, with HD SDI interface and C-mount. Forget anything else for now on. If you can create a plug and play device, your sales will be high. If you create a non-standard solution, realize that the majors will be creating quality low end HD products soon. Their not so good HD product that will be easy to use will make your a lot better non-standard product gather dust on a shelf.
Mike
I have been following this and couple other boards for last couple weeks. It is a lot of information toabsorb. It is all very fascinating stuff. Here are my opinions:
You must follow some proven techniques and take into consideration what was tried and what works. Also there is no need to reinvent the wheel.
1. On digital cinema production you, as a rule, use 1. a viewfinder or a small LCD and 2. a full resolution monitor. You have lights and whatever that you neet to use outdoors even during the day. You drag along a lot of stuff. You should considering on including a computer. Maybe initially it would be a large one but as soon as some small ones that are powerful enough become available, the concept would stay the same, only the computer would change.
1a. You should consider what is out there and how it fits into the budget. And you need to consider price/performance ratio. I started a thread on use of available equipment and it seems that everyone wanted to keep the system cost under $10,000.
1b. You need NLE. But the NLE can also double as a recording device and it can feed your monitor.
1c. How much quality do you need? As everyone, including me, is very cost consceous, would the same quality satisfy you as satisfies major movie studios? The same quality as in Rodriguez' films Spy Kids 2 and Once Upon A Time In Mexico? Those films were recorded with $100,000 camera that records 1440x1080/24p at 110 Mbps, 8 bit, 3:1:1, with 4.5:1 compression. Varicam that costs $60K and is used for indie film production compresses 6.5:1.
1d. You must realize that 10 bit systems are expensive, that uncompressed is very expensive, and that Mac is generally more expensive than PC.
1e. I would suggest to record on PC, uncompressed, then transcode the footage to Aspect HD in the high quality mode. That will be the codec that you will store the images, codec that you will use on the same computer for editing, and for making your final cut. Maybe the camera manufacturer, or some computer outfit could arrange OEM pricing on the Aspect HD/Premiere package.
1f. What quality will you get? 8 bit, 6:1 compression, 4:2:2, 1440x1080p. Overall the same or beter quality than CineAlta $100K camcorder.
1g. That leaves the camera to be the limiting factor to quality. Camera with one AltaSans 1080p 60Hz chip will output effective 1440x1080 pixels. So you will get the same potential quality as with the $100K camera, considering the image is well adjustable on the low cost one.
1h. The camera LCD can be monochrome; that takes care of the color correction problem. The Monitor should be at least the Sony 16x10 aspect ratio large CRT monitor that sells on U Bid refurbished for a few hundred dollars, when they have them. It has 1920 horizontal pixels. It is large and heavy, but it is a must. Once you use a monitor like this, you see that adding a computer is nothing. But to get accurate color, you would need to use special, a lot more expensive broadcast monitors.
2. There is no need to design a local storage with some processor if there may asoon be a mass manufactured solution soon that will make the design obsolete. I would instead use what is available.
3. You need local camera controls. You need to control the basic functions locally. You need at least tungsten and daylight color corection setting. Auto white balance would be very desirable. You can then zoom onto a white or gray object to set the white balance. Or you can use a white trnslucent cover on the camera and aim it at the loght. You need shutter control, manual and auto exposure control. You need to modify to exposure curve to give it more cinema gamma. You should have a switchable gamma curve with settings for knee control at the top to prevent blowing highlights, etc.
4. You need to take care of defective pixels. If you get a name brand camera and you fly in a plane with it and cosmic rays hit the CCD and you get defective pixels, or if they just go dead, the standard manufacturers has a solution for that. This needs to be addressed. Otherwise the low cost cameras have no long term value, because pixels do go bad.
5. You only need one sensor. But it needs to be the best avilable.
6. Concentrate on design of the camera. The system needs to be upgradable and modular. Maybe today $4K industrial camera is good enough. But there is also a Sony HDC-X300 camera that is 3-chip 1080p and costs $15K. There was no such thing until recently. If you wanted 1080p you needed to use $90K studio camera. So maybe in a year another manufacturer will come out with a similar camera as the Sony, but with one chip, for $5K. What do these major manufacturer cameras have in common? HD SDI interface. HD SDI PC cards drop in price in half about every 6 months. Now you can buy one for about $1K. A year from now they mey cost couple hundred dollars. The coax can be 200' long. So we should go by the video industry standards and use HD SDI, not some non-standard interface. It will make the camera also sellable to the pro market. The Red Lake camera is nice, has a control box with adjustments, etc., but no standard industry interface. You know what that means? No video, broadcast or digital cinema sales.
7. Come out with some kind of 35 mm adapter and have it mass manufactured. Don't each of you guys make your own. Someone should come out with a standard design; then we'll find some company in the Far East to mass manufacture it. Or we can start calling them now. They can carry on the design beter than we. You need to keep the distance from the GG to the lens constant. I think that vibrating design would work the best.
8. Use C mount lenses for wide angle and 35 mm for longer focal lengths. There are plenty of high definition, high contrast, megapixel C mount lenses available, including macro lenses, that could be used in the adapter. For longer than standard focal length, 35 mm SLR lenses will be more cost effective and will be better for do follow focus. 35 mm to C mout adapters are cheap..
9. You need to look at the cost of a whole system and make sure that it will not be obsolete soon. I started a thread on available low cost HD solutions. I listed there system costs. Even if you don't use local hard disc array and record to the NLE PC, you can't keep the total price as low as many here imagine. Check that thread. There are some comments by some movie people who shoot 16 and 35 mm film stock, who talk on a differnt wavelength. Just realize that.
10. You need to know at where is the pro and prosumer HD market heading to make sure that you don't make today something that will become obsolete tomorrow. I say concentrate on the best one 2/3" camera, 1080/<30p, with HD SDI interface and C-mount. Forget anything else for now on. If you can create a plug and play device, your sales will be high. If you create a non-standard solution, realize that the majors will be creating quality low end HD products soon. Their not so good HD product that will be easy to use will make your a lot better non-standard product gather dust on a shelf.
Mike