By now, you should have seen what we have running and operating in the camera, so far. What would you like next?

I have one thought, I'll send it to you and Jason through private e-mail within 30 minutes.

Ari - how about using this camera in the field for sports or news. If I were developing a field model, I'd dump the 7" LCD and instead attach a good viewfinder with a an eyecup to keep out bright sunlight. To keep the weight down, the lens / sensor / viewfinder should be one unit, attachable to a tripod or monopod, with cables to the rest of the unit (hard drive, etc). This would also probably reduce the power drain on the battery. Are you contemplating such a model ?

Mark,

What is the reason for the remote unit in this type of application? why not just record locally?

We are working on a plan for an optional Electronic Viewfinder to augment the LCD.

Is there a backup system if the recording hard drive fails?

Could you mirror RAID 2 drives?

It would be good to be able to switch to solid state recording in a few years once the prices drop.

1.) Internal RAID-1 Option on USB HDD cartridge is planned.
2.) Attach a USB RAID device to a USB port
3.) Record to a NAS device via GigE
4.) Plug in a Flash Thumb Drive (8/16GB) for 15-20MIN
5.) We will also offer a FLASH Drive up to 70GB in the Removable USB drive cartridge system too.
6.) Record with Desktop/RAID in a POV/Head-on-wire configuration

Isn't an open architecture wonderful with a FULL SPECTRUM of options?

Isn't an open architecture wonderful with a FULL SPECTRUM of options?

In a word, yes.

Sounds great Ari, my concerns seem to be covered.

Ari - I may have overstated the "remote" aspect. I was thinking that the recording portion could be kept in a travel bag at my feet to reduce the weight and size of the camera on the tripod or monopod. For sporting events, a small "footprint" is less distracting to others and is easier to handle. I will be considering a purchase around November of this year, and will definitely stay in touch. I have family in the San Jose, CA area and I thought that Silicon Optics had offices in that area. Would it be possible to see the camera and its options later in the year at that location ?

I don't know if this is really in your ball park, but a 35mm shallow depth of field would be nice. There are a lot of bright people on this forum who are making (and even marketing) their own adapters, so maybe you guys could work something out with them.

Glenn,

If you are talking about ground glass converters. Any of them can be utilized as is.


Mark,

How small a footprint would you want (give me an example of an existing camera model which would be ideal)? What is we offered a more compact version of camera. You can always use our remote camera head on a stick or jib with a PC/Laptop by your feet (would that work)? Sure, Oct/Nov we can schedule a visit.

Ari - I would hope that it would not be much larger than the HVX-200, which at the current time would be the other camera which I might purchase. Anything larger than that would be a bit cumbersome for me. I really like the approach that your company has taken to this camera, and if possible I will go with your unit.

Mark,

What optics would you be using?

Are you going to be using traditional Cinema gear (follow-focus, etc...)?

Do you already have a 180 degree flip for the LCD screen?

180 degree flip??

Actually, the Video card can already do that, we don't have to-do anything of that nature.

But if you did that, then the controls would be up-side down.

So the better thing we'll do is add a mode that just flips the preview screen in the middle, that way using the GG adapter is transparent to the end-user.

Sounds interesting. What is the reason for the flip?

Where do you plan on putting the camera?

Why not mount the Silicon Mini upside down?

Ari, the reason for the flip is that the ground-glass converters "flip" the image as they project it onto the ground-glass (you're filming the actual ground-glass projected image, that's why you get the 35mm-like DOF), unless you place another lens or prism in the optical path to "flip" the image so that it appears straight again.

Right now, since the optical axis of the Silicon HD-Mini is not in the center of the camera head, flipping the camera head will make the camera incompatible with a variety of accessories that are expecting certain standard heights and distances to/from the optical axis.

Yes...Ground glass converter support...forgot about that! Should we put this on the "A" list for first release (Jason?)

Ari - My goals for this camera are small in comparison to your other users. For me, I am willing to spend more money for a higher class camcorder that has 1080p, hard-drive recording and your innovative codec. I am a serious hobbiest and don't need to make money with this unit. Initially, I intend to record sports events, dog shows, perhaps eventually moving on to short documentaries, especially outdoor scenics. For this, I'll need a good but relatively small zoom lens, perhaps 13 or 16x, a good eyepiece-type viewfinder, no LCD, and a light nimble body that can be tripod or monopod mounted. Optical image stabilization of the lens would be desirable. The hard-drive recorder and battery could be separate from the body and kept in a bag at the base of the tripod to reduce the size and weight of the camera head. Am I looking at the wrong unit for my needs ?

WoW, you guys actually listen and you listen live. I'm impressed Ari and Jason. The preview screen 180 flip would be awesome. Also, perhaps working in conjunction with an adapter maker, i.e. Jonathan Houser from Cinemek, might reap some rewards....

Yasser,

Can you forward me contact information for Jonathan Houser. I will discuss opportunities for collaboration.

Ari

Yasser,

Can you forward me contact information for Jonathan Houser. I will discuss opportunities for collaboration.

Ari

They have a really nice adapter, but beware Ari, they have SERIOUS delivery issues. They were suppose to have delivered that product AGES ago, and still haven't. Seriously consider the maker of the Letus35.

Will can support any GGC supplier. I am not sure we can make any specific recommendation, unless a design can yield specific or unique results with our cameras - becuase it is better suited - if there is such a device.

Glenn, any contact info?

Will can support any GGC supplier. I am not sure we can make any specific recommendation, unless a design can yield specific or unique results with our cameras - becuase it is better suited - if there is such a device.

Glenn, any contact info?

Here you go:

http://www.letus35.com/contacts.html

There is a lot on his adapters here at Dvinfo, you just have to check under the "Alternative Imaging Methods" forum. There are also some examples in the Image gallery, but like you said, I'm not too sure why your camera would be any different from any other 2/3" camera. I suppose the 180 degree flip in the viewfinder is the best you can do.

In defence of cinemek, those guys have some serious integrity, they could have sold beta units, half assed units whatever, but they refuse to do so, they will only deliver an exceptional quality product. No messing around, plug n play and bespoke units, unlike the rest of the adapters. Now i'm not a spokepersons for cinemek, I just believe in the product very much and in no way present their view, just my opinion.

Ari - I would hope that it would not be much larger than the HVX-200, which at the current time would be the other camera which I might purchase. Anything larger than that would be a bit cumbersome for me. I really like the approach that your company has taken to this camera, and if possible I will go with your unit.


I don’t believe that smaller is better for this camera, The prototype that I’ve seen being used, is a perfect size I think, it looks nice and big. I am used to working with BIG expensive cameras and even some film. These cameras are heavy and big, thats NOT a bad thing... They stabilize the image being shot, add to the ruggedness, LOOK PROFESSONAL, use professional 3rd party attachments (matte boxs. ect....) There are lots of advantages for a big camera in stabilization, including shoulder mounted shooting as well.

I think these little small cameras like the hvx are way to consumer targeted rather than professional use. Sure its great to be able to run around with the camera in one hand and shoot, but thats not what serious filmmakers do... We use dollies, big tripods, steadicams, cranes, and many more things to mount our cameras on and create the motion of a film. I think if you are going to offer a seriously good camera, (which you already have) you should keep it on the serious side. Perhaps make 2 kinds, one thats small and handheld and one that’s larger with more guts, and possibley more features. that way the price and options hit both sides of the shooting crowd.


I think the prototype you guys have is a thing of beauty, it looks like a Moviecam, or an Arri system, that will appeal to the serious shooters who will absolutely fall in love with this camera, in the way it shoots, captures, and looks!

Giuseppe...thank you for the input. I am wondering if we can get the best of both worlds with the Silicon Mini with a tethered recording system.

Here is the rig the Spoon team built. We would like to build some commercial devices.

Anyone for some input?

the only concern I would see for a tethered system is for steadicam work, and possibly a problem with someone tripping on this wire, yanking and killing an expensive camera. I have worked on camera ideas myself, using CAD programs to design my own. There is always a middle ground, the hard part is finding it.

the system they used on "Spoon" with the Wafian, was brilliant. It worked for what they needed it to do. I honestly think that if the price is set right, people will be willing to have a tethered system, if the footage will be as good as it is now.

There are lots of filmmakers out there who want to shoot some great films, but are limited by money, and only money. These independent filmmakers are known for their ability to "make it work even if its broken". They might not worry in the least about a tethered system, as long as they are promised the footage will look great.

You could make the camera lens mount and chip to be detachable from the main body, and have a cable that runs to it. Just like they have on spoon, only it would be tethered to that same body, this way the big camera can be sold, but they can use it just like the spoon guys did… instead of using the Wafian, they just use the big camera body as the recorder instead of the body.

I personally would love to be able to use the prototype you guys have already made… it seems to be spitting out some great footage, and at a data rate that can be managed easily. That’s exactly the type of camera I would love to shoot my feature “Roundabout” with. Who knows within the next few months I might call you guys up and want to use this instead of the HD100.

I second Giuseppe Pugliese last write. However, I do feel for the independent community who want to do alot of hand held work or steadicam work, it should be that heavy, i mean sure i've seen the EVE on a steadicam, but that's one expensive steadicam! Also, I don't fully agree that pro-equipment has to be that heavy, nowadays movies like Bourne supremacy, the new world etc, are all shot hand held and steadicam, panavision don't just make HUGE cameras, they make portable ones as well. So it might be a good idea to have both as an option a mini and michael jordan size.

I agree, I guess when I said I liked heavy, I was talking about the mid size ENG weight cameras. I think they have the right balance of bulk and size. I just don’t like to see good equipment get small to the point where it actually affects how you shoot. (by the way Yasser Kassana, you are totally right about the steadicams being very expensive, I looked into some of the new ones... they are around $60,000!)

On another note, have you guys decided about any kind of weather proofing for the camera, may it be a tight composite molding around the metal frame of the body or anything like that? I mean most likely if you are shooting in some weather you will put extra protection on it anyway, but I’m curious if that was looked into at all... Then again it might push the price up more for the added protection.

Something else I’ve thought about too... it seems that there is a cooling fan built into this camera... because of the hard drives and other internal components it needs it, but maybe there should be a way to control how much this fan is blowing.... I have yet to actually see the prototype so I don’t know how loud the fan might be on a closed set with the camera close to the actor/s... but it might be a good idea to be able to control how fast the fan is blowing, or have an internal thermometer like in most computers, that will tell you if you are reaching to hot of a point.

Please tell me if I’m over stepping my boundaries with my suggestions, I’m just a man with lots of ideas, who likes to see what others think. I shoot (Cinematography, Directing, Editing, sometimes all at the same time) at least one film a year, if not more, so I’m always looking for the next thing that could help the production. I’m a very hands on person and this new camera seems to have everything that is needed to shoot some fantastic footage.

The HD world is moving so fast these days its sometimes hard to keep up, so anytime there’s a completely new way to shooting, its always exciting to see it grow.

Ari, speaking for myself, I would prefer eSATA interfaces instead of usb2. eSata supports hot swap and raid. USB2 for the thumbdrives is very cool though.
eSata interface cards are affordable and available for both desktop and newer laptop systems (My HP zd8000 has an expresscard 54 slot that I bought a SIIG dual port eSata card for) LaCie includes a pciExpress card for their external multi terabyte eSata Raid drives . Stand alone eSata drives are priced similar to usb2 drives. Note.....eSata is different than on board Sata interfaces.
Just my .02

Are you going to be using traditional Cinema gear (follow-focus, etc...)?Ari, I know that you already made me the same question before. And if I mentioned my setup since PL mount to the affordable F or c-mount, I can add now as far as feasible. Even for the affordable gear. See this ring for follow focus work:

http://www.filmcamerakit.com/html/lens_modifications.htm

À propos de GG, why? Is there F mount to Nikkor SLR, n'est-ce pas?

Mathieu,

Can you explain in more detail? My Frenglish is not very good lately :-) !!


Joe,

Yes, we agree. We have discussed the eSATA for the SiliconHD DVR.


Giuseppe,

We do need a fan and therefore the unit will not be completely sealed. With the new Intel dual core the heat levels are going down and we should be able to use smaller and quieter fans. If you need complete silence in a particalar shot use the Mini and record remote...

Mathieu,

Can you explain in more detail? My Frenglish is not very good lately :-) !!You can bet :) No big deal...

Why Ground Glass converters if you offer a F mount?

*PS*

en ce qui concerne (that is: concerning, in english) the size/weight . . .

A) How much smaller or lighter = better.

B) To have a big camera only to leave a good impression to the actors, it's not a smart way. I know Kiefer posted somewhere that he was concerned with the new HD cameras (if I'm not wrong the 24 series crew have been testing some small 1/3" chip cameras to the job) . . . but not the actors with whom I'm used to work. Even if I'm not sure it was Kiefer himself saying that or someone quoting him . . . The indie world is not Hollywood nor the advertisement market . . . where the agencies don't want digital because they need higher budgets not lower ones. The DPs either. I'm sorry but that's the way it is. Nevertheless, some people are thinking that the camera must look professional in order to be professional or the others can be accept them as professionals. In the movie making, that's NOT accurate.

C) If you wish to get your core business it will not be in hollywood, surely . . . but into real indie world. Where a feature doesn't mean necessarily fiction (and my work is essentially fiction). Follow the Sundance river and you will get the ocean, non-fiction as well.

Giuseppe,

We do need a fan and therefore the unit will not be completely sealed. With the new Intel dual core the heat levels are going down and we should be able to use smaller and quieter fans. If you need complete silence in a particalar shot use the Mini and record remote...

Thats actually a wonderful idea that I didnt think of... simple, works, perfect.

Love it.

Will it be able to use standard prime Super 16mm film lenses? That would be nice.

Yes, that is PL-mount.

Also, this is a seperate thread, but because I'm very self-concious I didn't want to start another thread. Anyway, a question for the Silicon team. THe cineform codec which is embedded in the architechture of the your model, is the codec upgradeable, so when a new version comes out of the codec you can update. If so, how?

If this has been asked before slap me with a wet fish.

Software upgrades will be available for download from the website (Silicon or Cineform). Typically, when you install ProspectHD the codecs are automatically installed (at least for the decoders).

Sorry my fault for not being detailed enough. I mean the camera hardware itself, say there's a bug or something like that, would the firmware for the silicon be downloaded to fix a bug within the camera?

Mama Mia..... It's In there :-) !

Firmware upgrades for the SILICON cameras are already operational and supported by the software...

BTW, as a slight clarification, most of what we're doing is happening in software on the camera controller (embedded PC or laptop or whatever). You will hardly ever need to upgrade the firmware on the camera head, so we have a very flexible platform that can go beyond the fairly simple upgrades you get with most firmware updates (which typically only add a feature or two, and usually nothing "major", like software updates can provide. For instance, look at how many features you get and improvements from Final Cut 3.0 to 5.0, or Premiere Pro 1.0 to 2.0, or After Effects 6.x to 7.x, or OSX 10.3 to 10.4, etc. You start to get the idea of how we can manipulate, improve, etc. software vs. hardware-based firmware updates).

The only limitation we have on software updates and features are the capabilities of the host processing module (embedded PC, laptop, etc.).

BTW, the above post was just to clarify that we're not completely firmware-based. The camera head firmware is basic operational stuff to make the camera head run and output bits (and send messages to the chip to control the basic camera operation).

Right on and cleared.