Okay, I do not truyly understand the implications of having an HDMI output on the camera.

Are there monitors that can display directly from the camera? If so, are there any smaller models like 17" computer monitors that can be used (assuming < 1080 resolution)? Is image-scaling built into DVI-capable monitors? For instance, could a 1080p24fps signal be sent to an LCD monitor so it can be displayed at the best possible resolution of that monitor and at the right aspect ratio?

Are there any possibilities that a computer could be used to get the information more directly from the sensors so editing could be done in a less-compressed fashion?

Could true 24p from the sensors be sent directly to the computer via HDMI so any interlacing or interpolated "stuttered" frames done for tape output can be avoided?

Does the HDMI output open up the possibility of Andromeda-like utilization of the raw video data?

It's not RAW video, no.

But you can feed a video village with an HDMI splitter at the best possible resolution the monitor can provide, and if it's got a good scaler in it, it'll look good when downsampled. HDMI is the "budget SDI" interface, and you'll see numerous HDMI-HD/SDI interfaces on the market shortly. I'm aware of at least three right now.

I'm looking forward to HDMI output to some kind of 802.11n transmitter and sending the video feed wirelessly to my laptop 100 feet away. When that's available, I'll be ready to upgrade.

If nobody's already working on such a product, they should be.

Being uncompressed HDMI requires an extraordinary data rate. This is beyond what can currently be done with wireless technology in the space allowed.

The HDMI port is one main reason why I might be getting a V1 in December. While the cheaper of the two new Canon cameras is slightly cheaper than the V1 the Canon camera with HD-SDI will end up costing a lot more than the V1. Since the DSP in Canon is 8 bit anyways you really are not going to gain anything by using SDI over HDMI. So therefore the SONY V1 will be the cheapest 3 chip HDV camera with live uncompressed digital HD output for visual effects projects.

Being uncompressed HDMI requires an extraordinary data rate. This is beyond what can currently be done with wireless technology in the space allowed.

I believe they are working on a wireless HDMI spec with the goal of running 3 HDMI signals in a given area, and it didn't sound like a complete pipedream (I had the impression it was 1-2 years away). I'm assuming they're using something like 802.11n (540 mbit/sec), but I think the intended range was short. I assume it'll involve some compression of the HDMI signal. At this point I'd be happy with a 50 mbit/sec data stream (twice HDV) to reduce motion artifacts.

Bottom line: having an HDMI output is the best future-proofing feature they can put on a camera. Yes, its nice having the option of saving to tape, but if you need to move beyond HDV, then at least you'll have options.

"...but if you need to move beyond HDV, then at least you'll have options."

That's why I asked if the output is uncompressed. If it is compressed to HDV bitrate then expanded for HDMI output, there is no quality increase. If it is 4:2:0 output but not compressed to MPEG, it will be somewhat useful. I suspect the quality will not be uncompressed video in a high-bandwidth colorspace. It is probably going to be the same quality of video that goes out the analog video port, only it will be digital so the signal will be cleaner. This isn't a bad thing, but it does not really futurproof your camera since the colorspace may already be brought down to 4:2:0. Where HDMI might help is with the people that crave 24P. I'm guessing the HDMI signal won't carry anything but the 24 frames of data and the audio. If the HDMI signal is taken before compression and interlacing is done for tape storage, I think people will be very happy with this.

Either way, I think HDMI output is good. I think one must buy a camera for what it can do NOW, then hope it can keep being useful for years to come. I think the one thing the V1 may have that gives it longevity is greater exposure latitude. It seems to have all the basics covered and HDMI seems to be the universal digital output of the future. I hope it is implemented intelligently so people can get non-interlaced true progressive-scan footage in some form. Regardless, I think I may be a repeat Sony customer.

I for one am happy to see HDMI output on the camera. This means I can run a cable from the camera to my Plasma HD TV and instantly see the HD content I just created.
DKane

I would buy the V1 over any other camera strictly for the HDMI conection.
On my HC3 the HDMI looks much better than componet conection.
Using HDMI to Intensity card will be better for me as I do a lot of compositing and need the improved color.

On most HDV cameras the component outputs are 4:2:2 and uncompressed. I do not this for sure since I do not yet have my V1 but the signal through HDMI should be uncompressed 4:2:2. This was one of the main reasons why the Intensity card was made. Not only do you get uncompressed and 4:2:2 but the full 1920x1080 raster instead of the 1440x1080 raster of HDV.

If the V1 doesn't work like this I will be really sad since I can capture uncompressed 4:2:2 from my simple SONY HC1 with the component outputs.

Uncompressed (*relatively) 4:2:2 would eliminate a lot of concerns by potential buyers. The whole "V1 may not be good for chromakey" question would certainly not have any merit. This would also give the V1 an edge on the Canon XH-A1 and move it near the realm of the $7000 Canon XH-G1.

Just imagine 24P recording on 60i 4:2:0 HDV in the field and uncompressed 4:2:2 in the studio for chromakey. Sounds nice, huh? It also sounds like a feasible setup for the V1. Keep your fingers crossed. I at least hope it is uncompressed 4:2:0 without interlacing.

*I realize that 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 is a form of information compression.

The V1 outputs 1440 x 1080 4:2:2 at the HDMI output if you're using it for live output.
Post tape/recorded output is processed to 4:2:2 for HDMI output.

Oh man, I can't wipe the grin off my face. Thanks for the HDMI confirmation Spot.

I think Sony is going to have a repeat customer in Honolulu. Now, I can't wait!!! :)

I also hope that I will be able to build an inexpensive monitor from a computer monitor that has DMI input. I can't afford a laptop and HDVRack without cutting into my budget for props and food for the crew. Wouldn't a battery-powered 15" computer monitor with 1280x1024 resolution be nice if it can deal with the HDMI signal? Another nice thing is that most LCD monitors are already 12V powered via an AC adapter.

Marcus, two words...."Papa Hui". :-)
See you in December!

Council meeting? Hmmm, I'm claiming that you have a natural advantage over me with Native American languages! :) I'm familiar with "hui", but I'm not good with phrases. I only know the words that are in everyday useage here. I can say this, if you visit here one more time you may qualify as Kamaaina!

I'm guessing you have indicated that you are coming here to meet with Vegas users, but I didn't get the message! I feel abandoned...perhaps the group found out I have been shirking my editing responsibilities...

Do you know when you will be here? What do you have planned?

The V1 outputs 1440 x 1080 4:2:2 at the HDMI output if you're using it for live output.
Post tape/recorded output is processed to 4:2:2 for HDMI output.

D.S.Eagle,
Are you suggesting that if I already have recorded to tape in the field, back in the studio, the tape will unpack itself back into 4:2:2 from 4:2:0 HDV tape?

Also are there viable Laptop ingests for the HDMI signal?
Or do you need a Tower with a card?
Thanks,
J

Are you suggesting that if I already have recorded to tape in the field, back in the studio, the tape will unpack itself back into 4:2:2 from 4:2:0 HDV tape?This is the same thing that Scott Billups said was happening with the Canon XL H1 over SDI output, but nobody would believe him.

Tapes will always be sort of upconverted when going out any other form of output other than firewire.

What happens is that the 4:2:0 has to pass through a A/D converter. With S-video on a DV camera or component on a HD camera the signal will not have any extra detail compared to 4:1:1 or 4:2:0 but it will be blurred. This means there is no extra precision in the chroma but it isn't as jagged either.

This is why in some ways I still prefer to capture live as component. Analog signals do not work in 1's and 0's but in waveforms so the chroma can become a lot smoother and easier to deal with. There are filters in certain NLE's that do the same sort of thing but that adds to rendering time and not everybody has access to those filters.

I wasn't sure if tape to HDMI would pass through a filter or not since it is pure digital but if Spot says it does then maybe it does.

I have been trying to get a test done for a long time to see how much different capturing Component would be to SDI or now HDMI. I realize analog has some quality issues but in the end I'm not sure if anybody would really notice the difference when played back. I think I might still prefer component to HDMI but HDMI is great since the Intensity card is only $250.00. To get a card that has component and HDMI the cost goes up to $995.00. I will have to see how much the HDMI is filtered. If tape to HDMI would use the same type of upsampling and filtering as the component well then HDMI would be better.

This is the same thing that Scott Billups said was happening with the Canon XL H1 over SDI output, but nobody would believe him.

Billups is correct, as am I.

Nothing is gained in the conversion, but nothing is lost, either. It's simply a process that conforms to what the output of the live preview is as well.

It's not "uncompressed" as once it's compressed, it's compressed. It's not like a Zip file. But the color space maybe standardized on output, which is what (to my knowledge) the Canon and V1U offer.

As far as tests of the differences between component out and firewire out for recorded material, this has been performed ad nauseum. Hasn't been tested via HDMI at this point, because there isn't a shipping card that I'm aware of. Announced, but not shipping? Perhaps I'm incorrect on that one.

Hi DSE - off-topic i know (sorry!) but i remember a week or two ago you said that your article on V1 would be expanded from a "quick look" type of thing to a more full review (pending Sony's ok i think). Any further news on that ?

thanks in advance.

Hey I'm new to the game here and pardon my lack of knowledge as I'm trying to catch up and learn as fast as possible. With this HDMI output, can you utilize this signal and record straight to a portable laptop or some means other than tape bypassing the further compression that puts it on the tape. I'm not sure if I'm understanding this 100% but if I'm wrong can someone point me out? Thanks a bunch.

With this HDMI output, can you utilize this signal and record straight to a portable laptop or some means other than tape bypassing the further compression that puts it on the tape.

You can use either the "Intensity" or "Intensity Pro" cards from Black Magic Design to record live output from the V1 via HDMI to a desktop computer thus bypassing the HDV compression. (It's a PCI-Express card, so you can't use it in a laptop.) The Intensity is HDMI I/O only and lists for $249. The new Intensity Pro has HDMI I/O as well as analog I/O and lists for $349. I suppose you could record the HDMI output playing from tape as well, but it will have already taken the quality hit by virtue of being compressed and recorded to tape.

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/

John

Mike, keep searching those old posts and you'll find more info. Check out the cineform forum too, and search on "intensity".

The short story is that yes, there is a workflow from camera to PC via hdmi, it must be live from camera, not from tape, to realize the benefits.

AFAIK, the only solution is:
Camera
HDMI cable to Blackmagic Designs Intensity PCI-X card (about $250).
Capture to BM MJPEG codec, or perhaps better yet, use Cineform Connect HD (now being relabeled/updated to NeoHDV) to compress directly to Cineform digital intermediate and store on a vanilla hard drive.
Edit with some NLE that can use Cineform (used to be only PC, Vegas & Premiere, but now cineform tools can compress to or convert to a QT wrapper for FCP).

One significant gotcha' in this otherwise very interesting workflow: HDMI capture is only available on a PC with expansion slots ie. a desktop machine, not laptop. Meaning AC power, separate monitor/KB/mouse, big heavy box, perhaps noisy, etc. Perhaps there will be a laptop HDMI capture solution in the future.

Hey thanks for all the quick replies. It seems like every few days I lean more to the V1 over the A1. Still in the research process but I thank everyone for the patience and willing to respond to my noob questions. Thanks again.

One significant gotcha' in this otherwise very interesting workflow: HDMI capture is only available on a PC with expansion slots ie. a desktop machine, not laptop. Meaning AC power, separate monitor/KB/mouse, big heavy box, perhaps noisy, etc. Perhaps there will be a laptop HDMI capture solution in the future.

But you can buy 10metre HDMI cables. Is there a degradation in quality over a 10metre cable? If it's a digital signal nothing can interfere with it right? The way it leaves the camera is the way it arrives at the computer, yes? Otherwise it doesn't arrive at all. I think...

So you can conceivably have a 10m gap between camera and your PC... I hope so because that's my grand plan with my V1 and my soon to be bought terabytes of hard drive space...

does the picture from my fx-7 to my plasma pioneer look the same with hdmi and component because the set has 1280x768 pixels.chris

HDMI is a budget connectivity solution. It was designed for consumer grade equipment, but a lot of people have discovered that it does a darn good job. You can buy an Intensity card from Black Magic for about $250 that will ingest your HDV tapes via HDMI. That same card will feed a HD display that can be purchased from Wal-Mart.

Is this the best way to go? Well....no. But we recently bought a Panasonic HD monitor that cost nearly $4000. The Intensity card and the HD display from Wal-Mart will cost closer to $1000. The cheap solution won't have all of the bells and whistles, but it will do an adequate job.

Just another example of the acceptance of HDMI.....AJA's new Io HD box does include HDMI in/out connections. Since the Io HD will connect to a MacPro laptop via a Firewire cable, that means you don't have to have a desktop computer with PCI slots.