AVCHD Z2/DVX rumors?

Wayne Morellini · July 9th, 2006, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lawrence Bansbach

I don't think it's certain that Panasonic won't support 100 Mbps. In a sidebar to ([url=http://www.tvtechnology.com/features/news/2006.06.28-n_panasonic.shtml].. I think it's pretty clear that Panasonic is at least considering 100-Mbps "AVC Intra," which could yield full 1,920 x 1,080, 10-bit encoding, or 4:4:4 or some combination of the three. Whether Panasonic implements it is another matter. I personally think it would be foolish not to. Sure, doubling the recording duration is nice, but with increasing P2 capacities, potential alternative..

Good find. If this turns out to be true, it explains a few things. It looked a bit strange to claim double DVCPROHD quality at half the bit rate. H264 gets a lot of boost from Inter coding techniques, 4 times increases in Intra sounded a bit ambitious. It also looked a bit suspicious to have the intra so close to the inter rate, and leave a gap above. But still, did I do my calculations of quality with the double increase already built in, I will have to sleep on it. We would need closer to 200Mb/s, for visually lossless tru1080i then.

Wayne Morellini · July 9th, 2006, 11:02 PM

AVCHD is meant for bluray, probably 8cm or smaller discs. Because of problems with bluray, it is going to DVD first. Perfect for Hard disk though. So, long term pretty good.

AVCHD is an Inter codec, requiring more processing horsepower in your workflow, and less performance when the screen gets busy, compared to 50mb/s Intra. On the consumer side I think the Intra codec will be much less seen for sometime, and AVCHD Inter is a long term prospect, as long as you have it on a sufficient camera with sufficient recording times.

Jack Jenkins · July 19th, 2006, 09:18 AM

I have wondered and thought about this for a while now, but why not have the camera have the ability to compress on the fly in whatever codec and or compression rate you want? Obvious not all codecs/compression rates would work out.

Also to have the ability to add new codecs to the cam might be nice so as codecs evolve you could add more. All it would take is a decent onboard cpu.

Wayne Morellini · July 19th, 2006, 10:27 AM

Jack

That makes me smile, I doubt it. They could do it with a FPGA, might suck up power a bit faster though. The problem with a processor, is that it is so processor intensive, that even if you get H264 to work, it might not have enough processing power for the next big codec. Even with FPGA, you would have to go for a fairly comprehensive one (or two) and they are expensive, but Sony is the sort of company that could order enough of them to bring down the price. But the truth of the matter is, that if you have multiple formats, you have multiple work flows, a confusing mess, and they may well want to limit customers ability so they buy more expensive models, not extend it.

The Elphel camera does it and their FPGA can be reprogrammed (353 model is coming sometime and is probably preferable, the current has some limitations). If you want this ability, and have the ability to make it happen, the Elphel is the camera to use, with some recording device (like UPC, or Ethernet Hard disk caddy, after you program support for it).

July 19th, 2006, 09:18 AM	#33
Jack Jenkins Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 122	just an idea... I have wondered and thought about this for a while now, but why not have the camera have the ability to compress on the fly in whatever codec and or compression rate you want? Obvious not all codecs/compression rates would work out. Also to have the ability to add new codecs to the cam might be nice so as codecs evolve you could add more. All it would take is a decent onboard cpu.

July 9th, 2006, 11:02 PM	#32
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	AVCHD is meant for bluray, probably 8cm or smaller discs. Because of problems with bluray, it is going to DVD first. Perfect for Hard disk though. So, long term pretty good. AVCHD is an Inter codec, requiring more processing horsepower in your workflow, and less performance when the screen gets busy, compared to 50mb/s Intra. On the consumer side I think the Intra codec will be much less seen for sometime, and AVCHD Inter is a long term prospect, as long as you have it on a sufficient camera with sufficient recording times.

July 19th, 2006, 10:27 AM	#34
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Jack That makes me smile, I doubt it. They could do it with a FPGA, might suck up power a bit faster though. The problem with a processor, is that it is so processor intensive, that even if you get H264 to work, it might not have enough processing power for the next big codec. Even with FPGA, you would have to go for a fairly comprehensive one (or two) and they are expensive, but Sony is the sort of company that could order enough of them to bring down the price. But the truth of the matter is, that if you have multiple formats, you have multiple work flows, a confusing mess, and they may well want to limit customers ability so they buy more expensive models, not extend it. The Elphel camera does it and their FPGA can be reprogrammed (353 model is coming sometime and is probably preferable, the current has some limitations). If you want this ability, and have the ability to make it happen, the Elphel is the camera to use, with some recording device (like UPC, or Ethernet Hard disk caddy, after you program support for it).