No HDV camera will ever output RAW. That's not in the HDV spec,
nor in the DV spec. Not to mention how they would store it anway.

Personally I don't see how an MPEG2 stream is going to be the
future of HD(V). But maybe I haven't been converted yet <g>

Sorry I have taken so long, I was going to re-edit that but the machine crashed in the middle of it.

It was a bit of a joke, but since we have started this project we have seen an unconfirmed report of a $2K 3CCD JVC HD camera, now this cheaper price of the Sony to $3700, which is just enough to discourage people from a project like ours, it is tempting to think we are getting too them ;) If we are successfull then they will need to include raw connections in future to keep people away from us.

I'm just including this as a comparision to our cameras.

Thought so Wayne, just wanted to make sure <g>

guys I hate to burst your bubble that has been floating about for some time but that JVC camera is $20,000 not $2,000

Finally got around to phoning JVC america today (no response by email in past), and got some guy on the phone, who thought his computer screen was an oracle or something, no mention of the camera, couldn't even ask him who I could speak to about it, or send him a link to his site that proved the camera existed. I had to explain, to him, that I might aswell just leave it until it was released, as it was probably preliminary information and the camera was most likely delayed (but went in one ear and out the other). Spent a few hours googling aswell, and nobody else has a price listed, even the shop companies with the camera listed.

So nobody has gotten a confirmation on the price in the video systems article, except for my post about asking a local Australian agent, who thought the $20K I suggested was more likely (but still knew nothing).

Somebody started a new thread about a 1024*768 CCD Sony Box camera with capture software, and firewire, for around $1.5K, thats getting pretty close. So maybe the big guys are catching on, and trying to stramp out all the effort we have invested in these cameras. As long as they aviode a HD resoltion 3 chip camera, Sony can feel reasonably confident in talking a pro customer into spending a lot more on a HD spec camera, or buy the inferior box camera.

Hey everyone,

Been out of the loop for a while. Hey wayne, can you give me the 1 paragraph low-down on how the cameras are coming? What about the Steve Nordhauser cameras? Summix? And seems you're getting strange other rumors now, huh?

Been spending all my time editing for a customer.

Thanks!

My new mac is working beautifully. Here's an HD capture card that just came out from aurora.

http://www.dv.com/reviews/reviews_item.jhtml?category=Archive&articleId=38200001

Might help me when I get the camera, if it's SDI.

Pretty much the same as last time. The micron 1080 camera is out, a bit dark compared to the 1280. The 1920HD is supposed to be close (maybe October). Other people are silently working on other things, like sharks (not a negative, sharks dive and come up from underneath unseens). With the JVC, we can't really say anything until we get a price directly from JVC, or one of the cameras resellers. But, except for 3chip SDI compliance, don't expect it to be as good as the camerlink solutions. Have a look at the other thread, I have taken a bit of a break, as I've been out of it recently.

Thanks

Wayne.

Re-edit: Forgot to mention these:

Camcorder info: Goes to IBC show and talks, a little, about the pro version of the Sony HDV camera for 6KEuro, and JVC still showing off it's camera behind closed doors.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/IBC-Show-Report.htm

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-Announces-High-Definition1080i-HDR-FX1-First-3-CCD-HDV-Camcorder.htm


Ultra Wide Band USB/Firewire is coming with, Motorola spin off expecting to raise it to 1 Gb/s within 12 months.

http://www.theregister.com/2004/06/07/freescale_uwb_roadmap/
http://www.theregister.com/2004/02/19/uwb_group_dumps_ieee/


There is a low powered CE-ATA interface coming out for hard disks for handhelds.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040909_162037.htm


New 3GB/s SATA-IO development

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040909_161726.html
http://www.sata-io.org/


Finger print recognition, though not really needed for our cameras, it still can insure that nobody can accidentally access it when your not looking, or get it working if they steal it.

Microsoft is the latest to introduce new hardware:

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040908_223459.html

Give me details on the micron 1080 camera (specs please)

Have just been to the IBC conference daily news site, this conference will most likely have most of the HD news for the next couple of months.

I have been informed of a new box camera to be released at this conference, but haven't seen it yet.

1920*720 50 HD, anyone, , they are allready talking about next gen HD, how many formats will we get?
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22712&issue=5

Avid's DNxHD
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22559&issue=5

D-Cinema talk
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22605&issue=5

Planned 180 cinemas accross Europe:
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22714&issue=5

Our competition (apart from that HDV Sony ;) Arri digital 35mm handheld (??).
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22701&issue=5


Thanks

Wayne.

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher : Give me details on the micron 1080 camera (specs please) -->>>

It will be at the SI site as 3170 (or was that 3300), micron should also have some sensor info. Alltogether the Altasens is much better, but also more expensive.

I think I'm going to say something here more as a challenge, not against SI's excellent work, but to Micron. I would like these sensors for still, machine or security cameras, but for broadcast it is what we should expect from a good prosumer single chip HDV.

The article on the Arri above, has them saying they have finally solved the reduced S/N problem of cmos compared to CCD, that means that existing cmos cameras must not be upto it. I have noted the SN specs are not as good as I hoped in times past, and yes the Altasens S/N is a minium I would like to see, not a maxium. You can't reach down into the darkness, at gain, without visible niose, without it. Now I "know" that there are more than one person here who would love to take me up on that statement, but I'm sticking by it. So if anybody wants to challenge this, go and film a room lit by a 5 lux light source compared to a manually adjusted PD170 (by no means a low light winner compared to pro eng cameras). Where would you use it, ala natural, doco's, and lite lighting, I have, looks nice.

All in all, if micron priced the sensors we are using, so that cameras (on their own) were available from $200, I personally would go for it in a sec. But if you want to save a little money and quality is high enough, I would go for them at the current price, but if quality is prime go for the Altasens.

Hey Wayne,

The SN's on the Micron chips are awful-only around 46-48db. Forget the dynamic range of 68db that they advertise, to get that dynamic range you're pumping the image full of noise. SD cameras that are CCD-based and interlaced are using pixel binning/line-mixing to get better S/N ratios, that's why your PD-150's look so good in the dark. Progressive cameras can't play those tricks, so for instance the Sony's F900 HD camera only has a S/N ratio in progressive mode of 54db, while the Altasens has a typical S/N of 60db+ for it's progressive images. So Altasens has also "solved" the S/N problems of CMOS like ARRI claims, and IMHO, the first mass-producing company to "solve" this problem was Canon with their D30 CMOS chip.

For people new, and old, to the project, I thought I would get around to archiving some posts on my favourite subject, dual slope (also bits on Global shutter and image performance):


<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : OK,
..For image lattitude, we have some with dual slope capability (resets overly bright areas part way through the integration) but the result is nice for security - doesn't really extend the dynamic range - it looks strange.
-->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : I think one of the problems we, as camera manufacturers are facing in bringing a global shutter camera to the DV market is that the sensor companies don't perceive the need. Here are some sensors with global shutter and their specs as they pertain to this group:

Fill Factory - The much maligned IBIS-5 - Can do 1280x720x30fps, 12 bit with an external A/D. 6.7 micron pixels. Color and mono - noisy and the color smearing is pretty bad. Why? Made for machine vision.

Micron MT9M413 - 1280 x 720 @ 500+fps, 12 micron pixels, color and mono. A contender for sure but 10 bit only, 10 tap - 100 I/O lines and expensive for the sensor and interfacing. Made for speed.

Fill Factory LUPA1300 - Very similar to the Micron MT9M413.

Fill Factory LUPA4000 - can do 2Kx1K 30fps, 12 micron pixels, dual slope, 4 tap (I think) sounds exciting????!!!! Are your hopes up yet?????? Mono only. Military and machine vision markets. Might be nice in a 3 chip camera but expensive.

Since I'm having fun discouraging people (OK, I got up too early) we have a prototype that can do 1Kx1K, 12 bit, color/mono, 30fps, 12 micron pixels. Built two cameras and the sensor is no longer available.

There are certainly some CCD solutions out there using interline and frame transfer. People should look at these but they tend to be expensive and slow. These are the areas that CMOS is winning. -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : Wayne on Altasens:
Wayne on dual slope:
Fill factory is the only vendor with dual slope. Back to IBIS-5 or our SI-6600 (pretty noisy). Yes, with enough tweaking in a scene you can get a respectable image. I wonder if you could take a micron sensor and alternate frames of long exposure and short exposure and combine them to do an artifical dual slope..... I haven't tried to change parameters every frame but you might corrupt the following frame with a change to the exposure - it would have to be checked. We know the micron can run at 48fps at 720p. More thinking says this probably won't work with a rolling shutter.
-->>>


Seems like a good idea (except for rolling shutter problem on Micron). Please note, for people who don't realise, this only expands range upwards, and it will sacrifice some lower light ability. I think human vision needs more range in bright scenes than low light, so I think it is a good compromise. We calculate a piont to split the frame rate, maybe just below where the pixels will max out then let the next frame have the rest of the rate. But the timing of this split should be minimal to not let the frame change too much (but then movement blurs anyway, so how much of a problem is this) now the problem is this fast frame will spike bus data a lot. Can we change the linear performance to something a bit better this way. I can't get my head around it at the moment, what do you guys think?


<<<-- Originally posted by Rai Orz : Today i will order the Sumix SMX 150C, because we think the IBIS5 sensor is mutch better than others (in this price range = 2/3" and global shutter).
..
Global shutter was the reason for the Sumix decision. Because the SI rolling shutter is absolutely unfit. We made test with a german camera head (with same sensor characteristics). At 24fps, but also at 48fps, the rolling shutter artefacts destroys each moving picture.
The altasens will have also a rolling shutter, but mutch faster (not the whole fps-time). This produces mutch less artefacts. The altasens supported also a external shutter, so on this way the artefacts will disappear completely. -->>>


Yes I have heard that Altasens has some sort of fix.


<<<-- Originally posted by Rai Orz : <<<-- Originally posted by Ben Syverson: What remains to be seen is whether the SMX-150c can deliver 24fps of global shutter of USB2. I have my doubts, but I'll be interested to hear how your experiments go-->>>

Fist, we can change the hardware inside the camera. For example in the past we changed canon video cameras (up-side-down) to work with our 35mm solution, but without a prism. So we can go arround the USB2.0. But...

...second, read this part of a email from Sumix:
"...In the present SMX-150C pixels are sampled at 10 bit. Then a look up table (which can be arbitrarily programed) converts the 10bit to 8bit. In effect at present SMX-150 user has access to all 10 bit by choosing the look up table accordingly. However we have a new version (a software/firmware upgrade) that transfers directly 10 bit pixel data to PC. This upgrade will be ready in 2-3 weeks. In addition this version has the option of using the multi-gain (muti-slope) sampling features in the IBIS5 sensor used in the cameras. This muti-sampling at different gains provides defective 12 bit pixels (compressed in 10 bits for transfer to PC.) This upgrade will be free of charge for people who have purchased the present SMX-150C...
...Both global and rolling shutters can be used for video streaming..." -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : At the risk of supporting my competitors' sales, here is an application note on dual slope with the IBIS-5:
http://www.siliconimaging.com/Specifications/Dual-Slope%20Ap%20Note%20001.pdf

Here is another test:
I just did a quick experiment with the dual slope capabilities of the SI-1280F using XCAP. I placed a 20W halogen in a fairly dark scene, pointing directly at the camera.

(all files are 1.3MB Tiff files)
http://www.siliconimaging.com/Samples/DualSlope/1280%20Single%20slope%2024%20microsec%20exp.tif
http://www.siliconimaging.com/Samples/DualSlope/1280%20Single%20slope%2013msec%20exp.tif
Then I turned on the dual slope:
http://www.siliconimaging.com/Samples/DualSlope/1280%20dual%20slope%2024%20microsec%20bright%20exp.tif

I didn't spend a lot of time tweaking this but you can see that the details of the lamp are there along with the background image in the dual slope capture. I'm sure it would be possible to improve the contrast of the dark image, but this will give you an idea of what can be done.

Having provided this public service, I'll drop in a commercial. If you find that when you move to 10 bit and global shutter, USB 2.0 can't hack it anymore, think about our camera link version. It is true 12 bit and clocks to 60MHz (important in global shutter mode). It is still an IBIS-5 so it comes with all the other baggage (noise and washed out colors), but that is sensor level stuff. -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Ben Syverson : Hopefully there's some way to control the slopes (Sumix mentioned a multislope setup, with control over each color), because as it is, the dual-slope looks extremely unnatural... -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : Ben:
This is one of my beefs with the IBIS-5. In global shutter mode, the integration time is sequential with the readout time. Let's say that they can move data over USB 2.0 at 40MB/sec and that the 10 bit data is packed. So, you are streaming at 320Mbps or 32Mpix/sec max rate. The real transfer time you need is 1280x720 x 24 = 22Mpix/sec. That leftover time is all you get for integration. The IBIS-5 isn't that sensitive to start, so crank up the gain or the lights in global shutter mode.

With CCD interline transfer or CMOS Truesnap you can overlap the integation time and readout time.

The IBIS-5 doesn't exactly control slope. You can set a knee point and any pixel that is saturated at the knee is reset. In my lamp example, the light is reset very shortly before closing the shutter. This lets the bright areas integrate for a short period while allowing the full integration for the rest of the image. Unless it is finely tuned, it does look very artificial. Very nice for machine vision though. -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : <<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : At the risk of supporting my competitors' sales, here is an application note on dual slope with the IBIS-5:
http://www.siliconimaging.com/Specifications/Dual-Slope%20Ap%20Note%20001.pdf
-->>>

I would just like to say that the dual slope example in the PDF looks really good, it is just the sort of thing I'm looking for. How many stop range are we looking at? How much better is the Altasens going to be?

Thanks

Wayne. -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : Wayne, it might be possible to write a complex autoexposure routine for dual slope. There are two variables - the epxosure time of the dark and the exposure time of the light areas. This is only available in global shutter mode so the exposure time of the dark (the other is a subset) is added to the readout rate based on the current clock. The idea is that this sum plus blanking time gives you your frame rate. More complicated when you target a specific rate such as 24fps.

The Altasens will be much better - more like a true 12 bit and more sensitive. We haven't experimented much with it but there is also a mode called DNR (dynamic noise reduction) which can apply different amounts of gain - much better than dual slope because the integration time is the same.
.. -->>>


That was that Auto gain feature, I was thinking about.

I admit it, I was basing my statement on them crowing they were the best compared to all other cmos sensors (meaning everybody else must be behind CCD's), and what I've used before. Are any of the top HD CCD cameras better?

I would like something at least as good as the old JVC GY-DV500, better than the PD150, but much less than modern ENG. The spec sheet talks about 60db or more SN and 68db dyn Ran, (and f1.4 prism, good). That's what I would call minimal for our purposes (and ironically around the Altasens specs). I know we are talking Apples and Oranges as far as pixel size is concerned, but that has allways been my production goal.

Yes I remember noticing the Dynamic range/SN micron thing before (should have remembered that one).

Our eyesight's resolution, framerate and dynamic range (bits per pixel) drops in the dark, I'm prepared to live with half of 1080 binning, or something like that, for low light, the audience's visual centres will be expecting it anyway. PD-150 is a poor example anyway, I think pro ENG CCD designs are just more refined in S/N and range (not to mention big glass and big chips).

Regards,

Thanks

Wayne.

the whole point of this project is lowcost filming..not DOC work! if you are going to shoot a "real" project then you better have a nice light set! and if you want to shoot a DOC then buy a SOny HDV cam..it will be GREAT for DOC work...I wish people would lay off the lowlight issue..it's a non issue

This project has allways BEEN a general work camera project, not a privatist venture. Your camera maybe a cinema camera but that little market is not what the general, original, Steve I, Sumix (pluss all cameras including SI), project was all about (but it was part of it, the cream on the cake that the idies would get off the larger marketed work camera). The only reason I put "cinema camera" in the title of this thread was so people would not get confused. As such it includes the project discussed in the Steve I thread and as a side track (as many people where from that thread) the SI only based project. The fancy thread title gives a fancy title reflecting the maxium extent work camera systems will go (i.e, we wont be aiming to be scientifically filming sunspots with Brad Pitt clearly seen as a reference in the foreground ;).

I hope it's not too difficult to realise, that being so general it can both include cameras that are good for cinema, and cameras that are good for ala natural doco. And to realise that ala natural cameras (the medium compressed detail on HDV being a burden, and the camera less suitable in natural scenes) under this project, are also easier to setup lighting for cinema filming, and probably will produce better results with the weaker lighting.

Remember the rest of the potential customer base that can help lower the price for all of us. We are starting with cinema cameras, but that is not where it should end.

Have fun.

Well, following your thoughts Wayne , I realized a couple of things.
I always thought it was a project for Cinema making.
If it is thought for making "normal' Docs it should follow a different approach.
For normal Docs, everything is more or less at hand by now.
We don't need a large area sensor (to get decent DOF).
Just get the SI 3300 at 30p, the Epix FG, the software from the Robs, A pentium M mini-itx or 5.25 board and ready.It would be enough to get a very good image for a minimum price.
After testing some images Steve N. took I'm beginning to think that in fact it is much better than what has been said before..
(if you give me your e-mail I can send you the image I got after de-mosaic)

If sensitivity is an important issue, just use Medium format lenses instead of SLR (it's been tested and yes, you get increased sensitivity if used with a relay lens adapter).Medium format lenses aren't so expensive when bought second hand.

SI 3300 is 10 bits linear so getting 8 bit log out of it would be enough.An 8 bit uncompressed ( I mean uncompressed and mathematically lossless compressed are the same thing to me) has a lot of room for CC anyway. (I've been correcting DV for several years with decent results, so....).

8 bit+lossless will let you use just one disk (and at 1920x1080!!!)as if it were a tape cartridge and would be really practical for DOCs....
No need to tell you that you could also get a couple of audio channels at 16 bit 44 Khz (also lossless compressed if you like).
That kind of system shouldn't cost more than 3,500~4,000 for the whole thing...


Even the new Sony HDV camera would be a great choice for documentary work at around the same price...

The whole idea is that we have many many cameras on the market NOW that anyone can buy and make a DOC. DOC Directing/Producing/Shooting is nothing more then a well told extended news story like you watch on TV every day..the whole point of this camera is Cinema because the standard resolution of DOC cameras is not enough to project on the big screen...ALL THE NETWORKS use SD cameras for DOCS all day long that is a non-issue for them! GET REAL WAYNE.

I can shoot a DOC anyday I want with the Panasonic 24p camera I have or the JVC 500 or the Sony vx1000 hell I could even go to BestBuy and buy the $600 3ccd minidv camera and shoot a DOC that ANY network would air at this moment in time.

how much have you been paid this year Wayne from your SD compressed 4:1:1 camera? Mine makes me a living everyr year..and nobody ever asks for anything better..not untill HD is the norm and even then they will accept HDV if that is a format that the big boys push on us!

So no I would not say this is about DOC projects..not to say that it will not work..you can resize for NTSC but what is the point? none....unless you want to create lots of extra work and render times

Jaun, please don't get offended if the following is too simple and detailed, I am writing it so newcomers to this project can understand the issues we are talking about.
-------------------

re-edit: I should also put, that part of the project is specifically taylored to Cinema, like what is happening at the other thread, and any individual can do what he likes with his camera, though we should not forget everybody else. I give a helping hand to a better future, you don't see me dictating like some other people.

Yes, I was there near the beginning so I read everything that has happened (but scanned a months worth too). I appreciate your arguments, but I want a doco camera that can capture the scene with such visual clarity as to be comfortable to the viewer. Big sensor chip and light gathering power, allow you to naturally follow people into normal lighting situations without the annoying spot "(d)effect" all the time, letting the veiwer veiw something that looks like what they expect to see in those situations (though a bit moody and artistic), rather than an episode of "Cops". Though I would use a spot in the dark at night, there are many instances in the daytime where alot of cameras need a spot if somebody walks through a dim room, that a good camera will just jog through.

We had a doco on here the other night, a guy who walked accross Australia totally unassisted living off the land (wonder how he recharged the camera). I think he had a PD150/170 or VX2000/VX2100. The thing looked like a kindegaden crayon art class, the shiny leaves on the scenery blew out (many leaves are birght in the dry regions with whitish undersides). (I know he needed a ND or to adjust the iris, but most of the scene was OK, it was just the range, the footage of him being attacked by wild dingos at night was acceptable). It looked horrible but still watchable. Now I don't expect the Sony HDV to be anybetter. So a bigger 2/3" chip on the Altalsens would have been able to render that scene much better.

So in both cases we need the range and sensitivity to match the footage that could be shoot on a JVCGY-DV500 ENG (let alone a 5000, or new JVC HDV). Many handheld doco's don't look as good.

Now if I was filming a cheap, low low budget cinema production, at night. Steet/sidewalk lighting affords some pretty good moody scenes around here, a camera that can capture that would be good. But it is a production preference, others might want to light everything up like a light house for a cheerier lighting scheeme (mood again).

The one thing I warn people about is not to get stuck with equipment that is only good for shootting in one lighting style (like the older high stop loss 35mm adaptors, where everything rolls off into black fast). Whatever style it is, it might be trendy for the moment, but you'll want range enough to do something different eventually.
--------------------

The medium format idea, yes I have been advocating that for over a year. I am still waiting to find a good MF prime at a good price, and am planning to get a SLR zoom with wide enough circle to use as a medium format zoom.

I've been advocating different levels of camera (handheld, Eng, Cinema) for a while, from cheap to $5K altalsens systems. Thats why, even though we are starting with lossless at the moment, I allways advocate lossy compression afterwards, from Cineform quality, through DVCpro50 quality down to HDV quality, to suit every occasion and use. So I can come significantly cheaper than you suggested for single chip 720p system, but not with altalsens. I am waiting to see what happens with the compressed cameras (if I can wait), and then use cheaper ITX VIA system to save the compressed stream to single or dual disks, in a smaller package. I would love to use a Camera with standard interface instead of a framegrabber too, but the price is not cheap enough to warrant the datarate restrictions compared to a framegrabber.

Much love

Wayne.

"The thing looked like a kindegaden crayon art class, the shiny leaves on the scenery blew out"

this shows your non understanding of the subject at hand, your talking about HOTSPOTS and blowouts not lowlight!

what side are you on Wayne?

Unlike some countries, we have had rising stadards over here, that appears to have slacken off. One network was not even accepting anything that was not on a Beta format. 3CCD is the minium and anything prosumer was looked down upon. But in the last year or so things have eased and even neworks are using the little crappy buggers.

The truth is, if you want to make cinema you can use a 16mm film camera, you don't need anything else! But why do people go for 35mm, or digital, because it either looks better, or offers some other advantage to them. The same is for doco's, you can use a crappy SD 3CCD'er that needs lots of NLE colour/lighting work to make it look somewhat natural, or you can get a better camera and make your stuff look good. That is REALITY, and nobody should expect Doco's to settle for third best.

Still more stuppidfying, is the fact that I did two paragraphs, for two issues, as to why the camera and sensors inquestion where not the best, one for range, and one for low light.

BTW Wayne I can make a "crappy 3ccder" look just as good as your BETA SP rig or your DVCPRO50 rig..it's all in how you light your subject...not to say that the dynamic range from a really CHEAPO camera is not worse then a $35,000 dvcpro50 rig..but if you light FOR your camera you can get the SAME image...really ...trust me....it's what I do day in and day out

BTW on a note of something that everyone can use:

SheerVideo has told me that the "conversion" from RGB-->YUV is something that is built into the codec..so this is a non-issue now as well...

"was not on a Beta format" that is a VERY aging format!
how can you say:
"we have had rising stadards over here"

In case you didn't realise I said Beta (generic) that includes all beta formats, and if you think a miniDV camera has as much detail or range as a good dvcpro50 (or digital Beta) you must need my glasses. If you followed the story you would realise that we had a problem with rising standards here, upto a year or so ago, now it is in reverse. But I am also worried (which I admit I did not put in there) that this trend will start again when the 3 chip Sony PD-190 comes out. As usual I notice you have avoided all my correct overriding arguments, because you can't argue against them. I don't know why, because you are making enough of a hash out of the avoidance arguments you are using.

I didn't mention anything about sheer video?????

Okay: I've edited out some stuff you guys where throwing around.
Let's keep it civil. It is easy to mis-understand one-another on
such a place as a forum and people will have very different stand
points on things that they might defend a bit too much.

Obin: since you are designing your own camera and you want it
to be for only cinema work that is fine. Others might want to use
it for other work as well (like documentary) so you might want to
take that into account. If you don't, that's fine as well, since it is
your own camera platform. However, do not put other people
down because they might want to do this.

Wayne: Obin can do whatever he wants in the end with his own
platform. That's okay. If he doesn't wants to use it for DOC work
that's fine. When I spoke to Rob S. it looks like we do want to
make an (a more?) open platform (that can be used for shooting
different kinds of footage) , but the main priority is to get a
complete working system first. As you can imagine.

Since this is a technical discussion do not reply with more thoughts
about what kind of work it should do. For Obin's camera that is up
to him and for the Rob's <g> platform that can be discussed in the
other thread.

Thank you for your understanding and let's keep it civil people!

Yes, I agree whole heartedly, that's my piont he can do that with his platform and for now we are also trying to start with a cinema system. Except I started this thread as a general technical thread, and it is a technical issue aswell. So I hope I'm free to find low light alternatives, and cheaper alternatives, suitable for a wider range of work (if I knew any).

I however have one thing to say: Obin, please, leave me alone, as I have been doing for you in the other thread.


Thanks

Wayne.

Rob S, here is an interesting case style for a handheld 720p.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/JVC-Announces-two-new-Solid-Media-Digital-Camcorders.htm

Would certainly show JVC up if somebody introduced a simular 720p camera with a hard disk that is 20 times that capacity and a fraction of that ones $399-$500 price.

Now only if they could do that?

What do you think Rob?

Thanks

Wayne.

Wayne Morellini wrote:
Rob S, here is an interesting case style for a handheld 720p.Thanks Wayne! Looks interesting.
Would certainly show JVC up if somebody introduced a simular 720p camera with a hard disk that is 20 times that capacity and a fraction of that ones $399-$500 price.

Now only if they could do that?

What do you think Rob?I think it's possible, but to really compete with someone like JVC would require a lot of resources.

Wayne, since you're worried about low-light with the Altasens, know that the 3560 chip, when boosted to +18db, will be at ISO 1600.

ISO 1600 should be plenty enough for everybody.

Rob, I suppose I'm not really talking about competing with JVC, just a show pony to show them up. I don't expect multiple 100K sales or anything like that.

Jason thanks, but what S/N at that db (I am still not clear on that yet, will have to contact Altasens)? I expect it to do the job as well as the previouse JY-DV500.

supposedly Altasens is bragging that the 3560 can do up to 100db maximum, 72db typical. I'm not sure what the S/N ratio is at +18db gain.

Jason thanks, these are much more than the figures I have read previously, and right in my ball park of what I am after (more than the GY-DV5000). Now if I can compress the bright light contrast range down, I should be able to pickup some brilliant images, lowlight and bright local sunlight.

The problem was that I had read some funny figures around 54-60db for this chip, gain amplifies SN floor, so that meant 18db gain would have given me something like 36db+ SN, which is on average the upper 6 bits of a 8 bit pixel. But if it is upto 100db that is around 82db, enough for nearly 14-bits (which in 12-bit mode is perfect).

Hitachi 100 GB 2.5" S-ATA 5400 RPM drive (http://www.hitachigst.com/portal/site/hgst/index.jsp?epi-content=GENERIC&folderPath=%252Fhgst%252Faboutus%252Fpress%252Finternal_news%252F&docName=20040914.html&beanID=736703123&viewID=content)

Yes, good find Rob, this is the first laptoip good enough to add to my links database of the project. It is saying older laptop drives are using a 100Mbit/s interface, that would explain why so many are so slow, and this one uses 100MB/s interface, perfect for us. For those who haven't read it, it also says that sata will be the new laptop interface.

This is the first laptop drive good enough to I have added to my project boomark.

Forgot to mention, for those who want to use big processors. Digitlife, has news on the Thermaltake BigWater thermal cooler solution (17-21db).

http://www.digit-life.com/news.html?108547#108547

and sony is producing OEL's finally (lost the link, but here's a product announcement).

http://www.digit-life.com/news.html?108449#108449

Wayne Morellini wrote:
and sony is producing OEL's finally (lost the link, but here's a product announcement).Here's a link:
http://www.brighthand.com/article/Sony_Now_Mass_Producing_OLED_Displays

Here are those smallest mini-itx fanless PSU's, and the company has some other mini-itx stuff, including P4 boards, very small box pc, wrap around pc, ATA to compact flash convertor. Maybe all a bit slow at the moment but worth keeping an eye on. :

http://www.mini-box.com/

http://www.travla.com/
More Car PC stuff, p4 m-itx PSU, and compact flash adaptor.

http://www.morex.com.tw/mainpage2003.htm
More of the same.

Build your own Super Tint Home Server:
http://www.extremetech.com/print_article/0,1583,a=133886,00.asp

VIA also announced the new processor naming scheme, and I found information on the new post 2Ghz low powered processor:

http://www.via.com.tw/en/resources/pressroom/2004_archive/pr040916_processor_naming.jsp
http://www.via.com.tw/en/resources/pressroom/2004_archive/pr040518epf.jsp


Rob, yes that's the one, have you read their upcoming technology articles, they ussually have some nifty stuff.

I also have to piont out that I expect multimedia Arms and Xscale machines to hit 1Ghz next year (as the highest speed possible is beyond that for a while now), as they are Windows .net, it might make an interesting platform (Windows .net also adopted the Tron OS task switching technology that should help in speed compared to normal).

Marginly related to us, for those who are interested:

Disk based, high quality compression: Interesting that the new Ikegami Editcam HD Memory card/disk, camerea uses 4:1-20:1 Avid's DNxHD codec compression. (also new wireless, and slow motion HD anouncments).
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22670&issue=5

For those into slow motion capture
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22090&issue=1
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22091&issue=1
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22336&issue=3

Multiproicessing pci-x encoding card:
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22647&issue=4

Avid HD architechture
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22204&issue=2
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22559&issue=5

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini :
...
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22670&issue=5

For those into slow motion capture
http://hugecgi.com/cgi-bin/ibc_dailynews1.cgi?db_id=22090&issue=1
...
wayne,
i was on the ibc. that ikegami camera (first photo/link) is just a mockup. the guys are maybe working on this in labs, but not on the show. there were no possibility to do anything with that camera, exept to say how nice it looks. it's just a box with lenses, but not working model at all.

second link (with bandpro camera) is a different story. that camera works!and works marvelous! i saw the footage and it looks unbelivable. 1000 fps. this is THE camera. cannot say about the price for it, but i know that in germany is possible to rent it approx for 2500 euro (about 2800 us$) for a day!
but for those who need this - it's a must. quiet, fast, uses film pl mount lenses
cmos is little smaller than 35mm frame, but you really cannot see that. very interesting.

filip

There is also another 2MP 4:3 one based on a custom Fillfactory chip (who recently got bought out by Cypress Semiconductor) called the Phantom. Capable of doing 1000 fps, at 2MP. (needs to be converted to 1080, but should look spectacular anyway).

http://www.visiblesolutions.com/phantomv9.html

Were you talking about the editcam3, it is allready price listing (TBA) on the internet, so maybe it is not too far away? It is just a curiosity for us as a competitor anyway, like Kinneta.

This is curiouse, a new Nikon still camera that will do 5fps @ 12.4MPixel RAW, but 21FPS as Jpegs, $3900 Jan 2005. I wonder how fast it would go at quarter the res? I have an article around here predicting that digital still cameras will do 1.3MP video by 2006, it looks like they might be able to do that a lot sooner (but whould anybody dare, 21fps, is conviently not 24fps).

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040916_124853.html

I'll have to look for more details latter.


Thanks

Wayne.

That Phantom camera costs around 100K with 4 GB of memory, don't need to tell you how much it goes with a capture system ,right?

Good, just illustrates what the competition is doing (and that it would cost us 10-20K, if add up the parts, to do the same).

<<<-- Originally posted by Filip Kovcin :
second link (with bandpro camera) is a different story. that camera works!and works marvelous! i saw the footage and it looks unbelivable. 1000 fps. this is THE camera. cannot say about the price for it, but i know that in germany is possible to rent it approx for 2500 euro (about 2800 us$) for a day!
but for those who need this - it's a must. quiet, fast, uses film pl mount lenses
cmos is little smaller than 35mm frame, but you really cannot see that. very interesting.

filip -->>>

I saw an ad for that camera and it costs $160,000.00.
I saw some of the footage at NAB, and it did look
*excellent*. They even had it hooked up and running, but to do
high speed they had a 575W HMI about 6 inches from the object
that was wrapped with foil. Now that's bright!

So anyone know a good way to win the lottery ;) ?

You could allways pay for it by making a hit movie like Starwars, it's more likely than winning the lottery ;)

I've been advised of this impressive general Indie HD site:

http://www.hdforindies.com/

Notice the 1.8terabyte Raid system for $3295. Too, much for the present cameras, but impressive for some people.

Also note the costings analysis of his proposed HD editing system solutions.

He mention something called "SoftRAID formatting software" and says you will need it. Must be some software raid system that might be worth studying.

Wayne,
To do the same as the Phantom you would need just over 10,000 just for the FG.
I guess a complete system for such a thing would cost a minimum starting from 30,000 (but it´s going to be a bulky one)

OK, I don't want to argue, I should not have said "make it the same" but making a cheap slow motion camera (upto what a good PCI-X camerlink card system will take. I think it can (eventually, in a year or two after we have suceeded with the current project and prices drop a bit), but without figures infront of me I should not have said that. So sorry for that.

No, really don't take it personal.
It is just a high sppeed sensor outputs so much data that for anything above 1280x720 and 500 or more frames you can't use a normal FG on a Pc, and that kind of FG cost around 10k.Just that ;)

Netgear gigabit pcmcia network card (http://www.netgear.com/products/details/GA511.php)

Thanks Jaun,

I just realised, my original comment with costing, about doing that slow motion after we finished the main project (i.e. one or two years), must have been deleted during pre-editing. I was wondering what was going on, sorry.

Have found out the Fillfactory slow motion sensor is $800, I thought it was a lot more. Jaun, out of curiosity, how much would you say that a 250fps slow motion format 1MP 720p system would be (should be enough for 4 drive raid? If somebody made the camera for $2-3K, and used a PCIX Frame Grabber card of at least 266MB/s? I view slow motion as very specialist, short shots that could be buffered in memory and sent out to disk after. Is there any need beyond that in real world cinema applications?

P.S. When I say I don't want to argue, I wasn't really being offended or annoyed, just not wanting to get side tracked into a big debate.

Thanks

Wayne.