Hello,

I'm in pre-production for a feature film and I intend on using the Redrock Micro M2 with the camera I choose (I already have the V1U). My question... do you think it would be better to use the V1U with HDMI output to the AJA IO HD for an 'uncompressed' ProRes 422 image, or use the upcoming Sony XDCAM EX. I know that using the AJA IO HD would require tethering the camera to a laptop, hard drive, etc. for a live feed, but I wonder what the differences in video quality would be. Also, would there be any advantages to using the ProRess 422 over the XDCAM workflow (I do not plan on using/sharing between the windows platform at all).

I also know that the Sony XDCAM EX isn't out yet (same for the AJA IO HD), so there is no comparisons between the quality (I'm pretty sure that the XDCAM EX codec is the same as it's big brother's). So basically, has anyone compared the uncompressed V1's image direct from the HDMI to the image delivered by an XDCAM?

There's a lot of speculation since neither the XDCAM EX or AJA IO HD is out yet, but I just figured I'd ask a few questions anyway.

Thank you to anyone who would like to comment.

Todd

There are other factors to consider like the quality of the lens and imaging sensor. I don't think the V1 can compare to a 1/2" chip with a better lens. Regardless, it is probably better to shoot your project with the camera you have instead of waiting until the perfect camera materializes.

Hello,

I'm in pre-production for a feature film and I intend on using the Redrock Micro M2 with the camera I choose (I already have the V1U). My question... do you think it would be better to use the V1U with HDMI output to the AJA IO HD for an 'uncompressed' ProRes 422 image, or use the upcoming Sony XDCAM EX. I know that using the AJA IO HD would require tethering the camera to a laptop, hard drive, etc. for a live feed, but I wonder what the differences in video quality would be. Also, would there be any advantages to using the ProRess 422 over the XDCAM workflow (I do not plan on using/sharing between the windows platform at all).

I also know that the Sony XDCAM EX isn't out yet (same for the AJA IO HD), so there is no comparisons between the quality (I'm pretty sure that the XDCAM EX codec is the same as it's big brother's). So basically, has anyone compared the uncompressed V1's image direct from the HDMI to the image delivered by an XDCAM?

There's a lot of speculation since neither the XDCAM EX or AJA IO HD is out yet, but I just figured I'd ask a few questions anyway.

Thank you to anyone who would like to comment.

Todd

Todd,

If I understand your question, you try to compare XDCAM format with uncompressed.
XDCAM is a compressed format, so uncompressed should be better theoretically.

I think the major difference will be in the sensor size, as the sensor of XDCAM EX will be bigger than the one in V1. Therefore HD SDI output of the EX would give you the best quality if connected to the AJA IO HD.
Theoretically.

Thanks Guys,

I knew that the sensors/lens on the EX is superior to the V1U (for obvious reasons), but I figured since I was putting additional lenses on the unit (via Redrock M2) that the image that's being recorded from the superiour lens would be 'influenced' (I'm sure that's the wrong word).

I know the EX has better sensors so it's more flexible when shooting in darker scenes. If I go with the EX, I wouldn't buy the AJA IO HD (I would just stick with the XDCAM codec). Financially the way I look at it: $3000 for the AJA IO HD, $3000 for Macbook Pro; or approx. $8000 for Sony XDCAM EX -selling my V1u (which would also lighten the load/setup since I don't have to run through the laptop when recording).

The V1 with the AJA IO HD would still have compression (ProRes 422) so I wonder how this codec compares to the XDCAM (also the XDCAM EX has true 1920x1080 sensors where the V1 is interpolated).

I'm not always looking to spend money, but sometimes my hands get itchy...

Todd

Todd,

I got the itch too, when 1st seen EX. The format is accepted by the BBB (big broadcast brothers), so its surely superior to HDV.
I will get an EX and keep V1 as 2nd cam. For my kind of work I dont care much about uncompressed.
I have not seen ProRes and obviously no one has seen EX PQ.

One thing is important: it seems ProRes combines bigger file sizes with slow processing time... I am not really good at explaining this, but there are a couple of threads around on the matter.

No matter how good a lens you put in front of the Redrock the light still has to be projected onto a screen and then that screen focussed through the existing V1 lens. In the process you also loose quite a bit of light.

The XDCAM EX should have a superior lens to the V1 and will be easier to use in your kind of shooting as it's a manual lens and the larger sensors sure will help too. Of course until the EX has actually been in a few hands it's all speculation. The price / performance ratio is certainly looking very tempting.

As for the compression issue. It's almost inevitable that your vision is going to pass through some form of interframe compression, some of it possibly even more image unfriendly than HDV. Planning your shoot to minimise the impact of this whether it's occuring in the camera or much later down the path is possibly a good idea.

That aside I think you could still go with the V1 for less dollars, have you thought about the BMD Intensity card? I believe you can now capture through that directly to the Cineform DI codec.

Hello,

I'm in pre-production for a feature film

questions:

when do you need to start shooting? is it a firm date? do you have a solid feel for when YOU can get an EX?

how are you going to work with the ex cards in the field?

what will you archieve to?

when you say "feature film" i assume you must have a budget. if it allows the purchase of the ex -- and you can work out the field issues -- the ex is a better investment long term.

i'm very sure it will record 1080p24 so there will be no pulldown issues. it's june and still no fcp support for the v1.

Bob,

I figured the EX would be a better option with light loss, but I will look into the BMD Intensity Card (and I've heard great things about Cineform).

Steve,

I do have a budget (small, but at least we have a budget). Our main shoot doesn't even happen until April '08 (but we need exterior seasonal shots that will be done in Oct. of this year; I'm hoping the EX will be out by then, and that I have a chance to shoot some test footage...). I was going to dump the footage onto my Powerbook in the field (through a card compatible with the EX) onto hard drives (I know that the AJA IO HD requires an Intel Mac).

I thought the same thing that the EX would be a better long term investment, and the 24p issue would be null. I'm only hoping that the EX is out in Sept.; that will pretty much make my decision clear.

Thanks for everyones insight.

Todd

I'm only hoping that the EX is out in Sept.; that will pretty much make my decision clear.

I got the feeling at NAB -- end of summer. Likely to be shipping at IBC time in Sept.

What will you back up your Mac to at the end of each day? A bluray burner would be nice, but the first versions are VERY slow. I think 1X which means if you shot 8 hours in the day you would need 8 hours of copying at night when you might need to be sleeping. :)

Those interested in the EX should probably read the P2 forums for a while to get a sense of how they are working.

I'm now working with JVC's HD-to-HDD camcorder. It is an odd feeling to have nothing in your hand after shooting. You really have to trust the camcorder's harddisk. The 60GB disk holds 5 hours and the only thing that could easily archieve this is a bluray burner -- which I don't have.

What will you back up your Mac to at the end of each day?

I figured I'd look at the PDW-U1 external drive for backup/archives (I know... another expense). I also planned on dumping the footage onto external hard drives as well.

I like the idea of the PDW-U1 since I'd have the ability to 'safely' keep the footage; we all know how expensive shooting can be and the last thing we need is to lose the footage. This is how I can justify the additional expense.

I'm really hoping the EX will be out by IBC.

Todd

I figured I'd look at the PDW-U1 external drive for backup/archives (I know... another expense). I also planned on dumping the footage onto external hard drives as well.

I like the idea of the PDW-U1 since I'd have the ability to 'safely' keep the footage; we all know how expensive shooting can be and the last thing we need is to lose the footage. This is how I can justify the additional expense.

I'm really hoping the EX will be out by IBC.

Todd

I was going to suggest the U1 -- it's Sony's optimum solution -- but worried it might break your bank. This combination will serve you well for a long time.

Willl the Sony XDCAM EX have HDMI out..? The best possible solution would be to connect it to a BMD Intensity Card. Than you'd have 1/2" sensors with uncompressed quality, or?

Willl the Sony XDCAM EX have HDMI out..? The best possible solution would be to connect it to a BMD Intensity Card. Than you'd have 1/2" sensors with uncompressed quality, or?

Unknown at the current time, but if you want uncompressed quality with the $ 250 Intensity card, get ready to invest $ 17K in a Wafian as well. Otherwise you will not get uncompressed material, as the required sustained write transfer rates are around 200 MB/s and no single disk can achieve that.

Unknown at the current time, but if you want uncompressed quality with the $ 250 Intensity card, get ready to invest $ 17K in a Wafian as well. Otherwise you will not get uncompressed material, as the required sustained write transfer rates are around 200 MB/s and no single disk can achieve that.

You can use the same codec as the Wafian with the Intensity card, you no longer need serious RAID to record off it.

But I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to bypass recording to SXS cards. This will likely be a different experience than HDV to tape. It'll also be somewhat different to using a HVX and P2 cards. Firstly, less data per minute of record time and secondly the SXS cards are way cheaper so you can perhaps afford enough to hold a whole days shoot and thirdly the data transfer rate is much higher so offloading data is quicker. In other words you can get the data off the cards much faster than you're filling them up shooting.

At the same time as Sony announced the EX they also announced a XDCAM drive in a box with USB for around $3K. This makes backup fairly simple and I hear the price of XDCAM disks are coming down as well.

Of course you still have the issue of making backups and this is one issue the EX and the HVX will have in common. The good news is hopefully it'll be less of a deal breaker.

On top of all that the EX gives you HD-SDI out. Most of the things that go on the other end of that port are expensive but it makes the camera more versatile. It's viable for use in a HD OB situation. You might never need or want to do this but it opens up the possibility of your camera earning money renting it to someone who does.

You can use the same codec as the Wafian with the Intensity card, you no longer need serious RAID to record off it.

On top of all that the EX gives you HD-SDI out. Most of the things that go on the other end of that port are expensive but it makes the camera more versatile. It's viable for use in a HD OB situation. You might never need or want to do this but it opens up the possibility of your camera earning money renting it to someone who does.

Bob,

As I read it (Javor's question), the question was about HDMI (the poor man's HD-SDI connector) and UNcompressed output. You are of course completely correct when talking about XDCAM-HD streams @ 35 Mbps, but to get the full uncompressed HD-SDI/HDMI stream @ 1.485 Gbps on disk, you are condemned to Wafian like configurations.

...but to get the full uncompressed HD-SDI/HDMI stream @ 1.485 Gbps on disk, you are condemned to Wafian like configurations.

Am I incorrect in assuming that you could achieve acceptable rates using a 5+ HDD RAID array? I'm not quite sure I understand the reason behind a $17k piece of equipment that (appears) to do the same thing that a RAID based PC could do for a fraction of the cost.

Bob,

As I read it (Javor's question), the question was about HDMI (the poor man's HD-SDI connector) and UNcompressed output. You are of course completely correct when talking about XDCAM-HD streams @ 35 Mbps, but to get the full uncompressed HD-SDI/HDMI stream @ 1.485 Gbps on disk, you are condemned to Wafian like configurations.

Not at all. You can use the Cineform codec just like with the Wafian. You can also use ProRess, DVCPROHD, Photojpeg or Sheervideo on the Apple which gives you much less then uncompressed datarates. On the PC side of the Intensity card you can use the jpeg codec which isn't as perfect as Cineform but is a heck of a lot better then HDV for hard to compress scenes. Just because the camera pumps out a uncompressed signal doesn't mean it has to be recorded as uncompressed. In fact compared to Cineform (the full 1920x1080 version) uncompressed is really a waste.

Hello,

I'm in pre-production for a feature film and I intend on using the Redrock Micro M2 with the camera I choose (I already have the V1U). My question... do you think it would be better to use the V1U with HDMI output to the AJA IO HD for an 'uncompressed' ProRes 422 image, or use the upcoming Sony XDCAM EX. I know that using the AJA IO HD would require tethering the camera to a laptop, hard drive, etc. for a live feed, but I wonder what the differences in video quality would be. Also, would there be any advantages to using the ProRess 422 over the XDCAM workflow (I do not plan on using/sharing between the windows platform at all).

I also know that the Sony XDCAM EX isn't out yet (same for the AJA IO HD), so there is no comparisons between the quality (I'm pretty sure that the XDCAM EX codec is the same as it's big brother's). So basically, has anyone compared the uncompressed V1's image direct from the HDMI to the image delivered by an XDCAM?

There's a lot of speculation since neither the XDCAM EX or AJA IO HD is out yet, but I just figured I'd ask a few questions anyway.

Thank you to anyone who would like to comment.

Todd

What kind of movie is this going to be? mpeg2 codecs depend on how complex the scenes are. If this is a slow paced drama then XDCAMHD will be more then enough for perfect quality. Even HDV itself only really starts to fall apart with very fast and complex scenes. XDCAMHD has that extra chunk of bits to help out even some of the most demanding situations. 24 movies tend to compress a lot better then live shot material because usually the camera is on a tripod or a steadycam of some sort. Many times the camera itself may not move at all which makes the compression very easy. Even an action movie may be ok with XDCAMHD although sometimes you may notice a few blocks during explosions or photograph flashes or strobe lights ect...

If the project is a drama or comedy or something that isn't super complex and fast paced the live capture to lightly compressed or uncompressed may be a little overkill.

What I may suggest doing for your test shots in October is maybe rent one of the current XDCAMHD cameras to see how well the codec works out for your material. If it holds up very well and will be more then enough for you to work with then you can think about getting the XDCAM EX when it comes out. During this time you can even bring along your V1 to see how it compares to XDCAMHD. At that point you may even be able to rent the EX itself to compare to the V1. Nobody will be able to tell you better about how well each camera will work for your project then you yourself could.

What kind of movie is this going to be? mpeg2 codecs depend on how complex the scenes are. If this is a slow paced drama then XDCAMHD will be more then enough for perfect quality. Even HDV itself only really starts to fall apart with very fast and complex scenes.

Our film is primarily a drama, so fast motion is very limited. I think the EX will probably be my choice since the 24p is implemented better than the V1 (unless FCS2 adds the pulldown feature). I don't forsee much post adjustments other than color correction (there aren't any special effects requirements). I also think that the EX would have better light sensitivity given the light loss from the M2. If the EX isn't out, I may go the rental route.