HD-SDI, HDMI...? CMOS RAW via GIGe! at DVinfo.net

Serge Victorovich · May 15th, 2007, 02:04 AM

New CMOS sensors used in low cost popular camcorders (Sony HC-3/5/7 and Canon HV-10/20) can produce exellent quality in resolution 1920x1080p60.
We only need solution like HYDRA or ANDROMEDA http://reel-stream.com/
and DVR "santa rosa" based with Cineform HDlink to capture into CineformRAW.

With LOW COST GIGe no need HDMI capture cards, short cables and expresscard adapters for notebooks!

Simon Fenton · May 15th, 2007, 05:38 AM

I'm of the same opinion, if GigE can handle the high data throughput of uncompressed HD, then it's a great choice, as the interface is already incorporated into most new laptops.

I'd like to see an HDMI -> GigE adapter, obviously the quality wouldn't be quite as good as a direct feed off the CMOS sensor, bit it'd make it far easier to install, (eliminating the need to open up the camera), which should also bring the costs down.

Serge Victorovich · May 15th, 2007, 06:04 AM

No need HDMI-to-GIGe! Straight from CMOS sensor in same way as SI2K.
Please, read about advantage of Cineform RAW: http://www.cineform.com/technology/CineForm_RAW.htm

David Newman said year ago about possibility to implement CFRAW into FPGA design. In this case no need a bulky dvr on PC based. Just as Elphel but with good Canon CMOS sensor http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=63677

P.S. Simon, but if you want converter... http://www.svideo.com/ext-hdtv-cat5.html

Terence Krueger · May 15th, 2007, 11:55 AM

1920 x 1080 30p at 10 bit on the hv20 is 593 megabits per second. this would barely be doable on gigabit ethernet ONLY if it was pci express based (many new controllers are, most old ones are not). pci based gig e has to share the bus with other devices like usb (and often hard disks on notebooks) and would likely drop frames. 60p would not be possible on any single gig-e connection.

1920 x 1080 12 bit 30p would stress the ethernet connection and probably have dropped frames every so often.

then you have the issue of cmos sensors and their affinity for total integration. many of the newer sensors (unsure about the canon) do not output raw at all. they output a processed image right off the chip. not that this is particularly bad, but it would provide no advantage quality wise over hdmi. it will also be a much larger signal, unable to stream over gigabit ethernet.

an ethernet solution would be very usefull overall, but we will need to wait for 10g to proliferate before it becomes really viable for quality HD. especially for mods to consumer cameras where you have little to no control over output.

terence.

Mike Thomann · May 15th, 2007, 12:11 PM

This is most interesting and worth looking into, especially with some speculation as to whether HDMI outputs 1920 after
it has already been downrezzed to 1440 and back up to 1920.

Serge Victorovich · May 15th, 2007, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terence Krueger

1920 x 1080 30p at 10 bit on the hv20 is 593 megabits per second. this would barely be doable on gigabit ethernet ONLY if it was pci express based (many new controllers are, most old ones are not). pci based gig e has to share the bus with other devices like usb (and often hard disks on notebooks) and would likely drop frames. 60p would not be possible on any single gig-e connection.

1920 x 1080 12 bit 30p would stress the ethernet connection and probably have dropped frames every so often.

then you have the issue of cmos sensors and their affinity for total integration. many of the newer sensors (unsure about the canon) do not output raw at all. they output a processed image right off the chip. not that this is particularly bad, but it would provide no advantage quality wise over hdmi. it will also be a much larger signal, unable to stream over gigabit ethernet.

an ethernet solution would be very usefull overall, but we will need to wait for 10g to proliferate before it becomes really viable for quality HD. especially for mods to consumer cameras where you have little to no control over output.

terence.

Terence, thank you for your opinion. Another solution instead of RAW via GIGe
come from Rai Orz, developer of Drake Camera "RAW direct to HDD":

Quote:

Take your brain free from all PC stuffs. The A/D Unit, inside (or outside the CMOS Sensor) have 10, 12 or more output pins (each pin is one BIT). The output rate is 33-66MHz. FPGAs can handle those data speeds in realtime. Shift or translation to 16Bit words are simple works. Next part is the Harddisk. Not a controller or interface, you can write direct to disk. A HDD needs words, not bytes. There are 16Pin (one pin = one byte) and you can connect it also direct to the FPGA or MC.
Also you can split the datas to more than one hdd. (First word to first HDD, second to second...)
But some sensor chip manufactors do the work for you. Most chips (2M pixel, or more) have two, or more output ports. Your FPGA can handle this and you can write to multiple HDD, without software logic. (First chip output go to first HDD, and so on)

http://dvinfo.net/conf/showpost.php?...postcount=2071

Terence Krueger · May 15th, 2007, 02:33 PM

direct to hard disk is potentially a simpler idea.
you can read off the sensor to an fpga, and then out from fpga from an onboard sata/sas controller, or to an offboard controller. in either case youll need off board serializer to interface the drive as the fpga's dont have that kind of speed. drawbacks are that youll need multiple disks to capture uncompressed. 10 bit raw from the hv20 would need 3 7200rpm drives, 10 bit 4:2:2 would need 5 drives. so your are effectively needing a raid array, whether you split outputs(if possible) or actually stripe the disks. there is a transparent external sata raid card which would do the trick on one e-sata port.

what i belive the ideal solution is, is to have a board (inside the cam ideally, tripod bolt mounted for a modded cam) that has an fpga for capture and format, and another dsp or fpga that has programmable hardware codecs. then an E-sata port and a gigabit ethernet port and probably usb for updating. this will allow you to choose between uncompressed, and whatever codec you happen to have in hardware form. codecs will be upgradable too.

so what you end up with is nothing all that different from what we already have, but instead of a one trick pony (hdv mpeg2) youll have full flexibility on what format you want.

this isnt all that complicated either, the hardware and software exists, its only the codecs that youll need to aquire to make this a viable project.

that all said. when talking about off the shelf hdv cams like the hv20.. theres little to no point in doing this. the hv20 for example has 1920 x 1080 8 bit 4:2:2 uncompressed output via hdmi. would raw be better? is it even possible to capture raw from it? debatable with this sensor as its pretty grainy with any amount of gain. files would be smaller, sure. but if you captured raw, you would need to see the footage somehow for exposure, because it would not be the same as what you see in the cams viewfinder. which means youd need to tether to a notebook, or actually add a display interface to your hack. thats a difficult task at best. so.. if you are tethering to a notebook/monitor, and need an external small box to do the capture and stream.. this is no better a solution than using the hdmi to a little black magic card in a box to a notebook express card slot. its functionally identical, and physically similar too. in fact, the only real difference would be that the hdmi solution doesnt void camera warranty and costs 1/10 the price.

terence

terence.

Serge Victorovich · May 15th, 2007, 03:14 PM

Terence, you are right. Your arguments are very convincing. Thank you.

Mike Thomann · May 15th, 2007, 03:26 PM

Is there anything definitive that has told us whether or not the HV20 downrezzes 1920 to 1440 and back for live HDMI out?

Terence Krueger · May 15th, 2007, 06:09 PM

the only thing i can say is that it doesnt look like it downresses then upresses. its very sharp and has alot of detail.

what it actually does inside the cam, youll really never know. its a single chip sensor so theres alot of interpolation already, and its hard to look at the footage and say "yes, its really 1920". only someone with inside info at canon will know for sure as its not mentiened in any literature. they dont say much of anything other than "it has hdmi".

terence

Derek Green · May 15th, 2007, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terence Krueger

the only thing i can say is that it doesnt look like it downresses then upresses. its very sharp and has alot of detail.

what it actually does inside the cam, youll really never know. its a single chip sensor so theres alot of interpolation already, and its hard to look at the footage and say "yes, its really 1920". only someone with inside info at canon will know for sure as its not mentiened in any literature. they dont say much of anything other than "it has hdmi".

terence

I agree with Terence. It's a lot sharper than the HDV but there's no way to know if it's really true 1920. Looks great though.

Mike Thomann · May 15th, 2007, 09:18 PM

Regarding true 1920x1080, take a look at my comparisons of your footage at http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=94079&page=2

Wayne Morellini · May 16th, 2007, 08:10 AM

I was trying to talk an bunch into developing an HDMI to USB, or UWB wireless solution. They already had most of the technology, 100mb/s codec, up to 200mb/s, with dual chips up to 400mb/s wavelet.

Maximum of GigE, is apparently 100MB/s, or 800Mb/s, some simple compression would be best. Ethernet cable is capable of much more, but not in GigE format. I think we Will eventually see an GigE solution, it would be an good solution to send HDMI from PC to remote panel, or remote player to an PC.

I suspect then parts are out there to be combined into an Alternative imaging project that writes directly to hard disk. Opencores, and the usual chip manufacturers suspect, Analogue devices already has an Jpeg2000 codec.

I recently communicated with somebody about HDMI capture, as you know many cameras are 8 bits, and this is cutting the stops of latitude down compared to reel stream. If only an reel stream camera was much less, i would be much more interested.

Serge Victorovich · July 29th, 2007, 08:32 AM

Just for information:
Shooting to RAW with Canon PowerShot (DIGIC II - based only)

Now need to find tech specification for HV10/20 and possible these hackers can get raw from cmos of Canon camcorders :)

Bob Grant · July 29th, 2007, 08:44 AM

Kind of interesting discussion given that I've been recording 2K down GigE the last couple of days. It's a squeeze, you do need the right NICs and drivers but it can be done.

May 15th, 2007, 02:04 AM	#1
Serge Victorovich Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 376	HD-SDI, HDMI...? CMOS RAW via GIGe! New CMOS sensors used in low cost popular camcorders (Sony HC-3/5/7 and Canon HV-10/20) can produce exellent quality in resolution 1920x1080p60. We only need solution like HYDRA or ANDROMEDA http://reel-stream.com/ and DVR "santa rosa" based with Cineform HDlink to capture into CineformRAW. With LOW COST GIGe no need HDMI capture cards, short cables and expresscard adapters for notebooks!

May 15th, 2007, 05:38 AM	#2
Simon Fenton New Boot Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: London, UK. Posts: 20	HDMI ->GigE adapter? I'm of the same opinion, if GigE can handle the high data throughput of uncompressed HD, then it's a great choice, as the interface is already incorporated into most new laptops. I'd like to see an HDMI -> GigE adapter, obviously the quality wouldn't be quite as good as a direct feed off the CMOS sensor, bit it'd make it far easier to install, (eliminating the need to open up the camera), which should also bring the costs down.

May 15th, 2007, 06:04 AM	#3
Serge Victorovich Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 376	No need HDMI-to-GIGe! Straight from CMOS sensor in same way as SI2K. Please, read about advantage of Cineform RAW: http://www.cineform.com/technology/CineForm_RAW.htm David Newman said year ago about possibility to implement CFRAW into FPGA design. In this case no need a bulky dvr on PC based. Just as Elphel but with good Canon CMOS sensor http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=63677 P.S. Simon, but if you want converter... http://www.svideo.com/ext-hdtv-cat5.html

May 15th, 2007, 11:55 AM	#4
Terence Krueger Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: toronto, canada Posts: 65	1920 x 1080 30p at 10 bit on the hv20 is 593 megabits per second. this would barely be doable on gigabit ethernet ONLY if it was pci express based (many new controllers are, most old ones are not). pci based gig e has to share the bus with other devices like usb (and often hard disks on notebooks) and would likely drop frames. 60p would not be possible on any single gig-e connection. 1920 x 1080 12 bit 30p would stress the ethernet connection and probably have dropped frames every so often. then you have the issue of cmos sensors and their affinity for total integration. many of the newer sensors (unsure about the canon) do not output raw at all. they output a processed image right off the chip. not that this is particularly bad, but it would provide no advantage quality wise over hdmi. it will also be a much larger signal, unable to stream over gigabit ethernet. an ethernet solution would be very usefull overall, but we will need to wait for 10g to proliferate before it becomes really viable for quality HD. especially for mods to consumer cameras where you have little to no control over output. terence.

May 15th, 2007, 12:11 PM	#5
Mike Thomann Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Amherst, NY Posts: 100	This is most interesting and worth looking into, especially with some speculation as to whether HDMI outputs 1920 after it has already been downrezzed to 1440 and back up to 1920.

May 15th, 2007, 02:33 PM	#7
Terence Krueger Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: toronto, canada Posts: 65	direct to hard disk is potentially a simpler idea. you can read off the sensor to an fpga, and then out from fpga from an onboard sata/sas controller, or to an offboard controller. in either case youll need off board serializer to interface the drive as the fpga's dont have that kind of speed. drawbacks are that youll need multiple disks to capture uncompressed. 10 bit raw from the hv20 would need 3 7200rpm drives, 10 bit 4:2:2 would need 5 drives. so your are effectively needing a raid array, whether you split outputs(if possible) or actually stripe the disks. there is a transparent external sata raid card which would do the trick on one e-sata port. what i belive the ideal solution is, is to have a board (inside the cam ideally, tripod bolt mounted for a modded cam) that has an fpga for capture and format, and another dsp or fpga that has programmable hardware codecs. then an E-sata port and a gigabit ethernet port and probably usb for updating. this will allow you to choose between uncompressed, and whatever codec you happen to have in hardware form. codecs will be upgradable too. so what you end up with is nothing all that different from what we already have, but instead of a one trick pony (hdv mpeg2) youll have full flexibility on what format you want. this isnt all that complicated either, the hardware and software exists, its only the codecs that youll need to aquire to make this a viable project. that all said. when talking about off the shelf hdv cams like the hv20.. theres little to no point in doing this. the hv20 for example has 1920 x 1080 8 bit 4:2:2 uncompressed output via hdmi. would raw be better? is it even possible to capture raw from it? debatable with this sensor as its pretty grainy with any amount of gain. files would be smaller, sure. but if you captured raw, you would need to see the footage somehow for exposure, because it would not be the same as what you see in the cams viewfinder. which means youd need to tether to a notebook, or actually add a display interface to your hack. thats a difficult task at best. so.. if you are tethering to a notebook/monitor, and need an external small box to do the capture and stream.. this is no better a solution than using the hdmi to a little black magic card in a box to a notebook express card slot. its functionally identical, and physically similar too. in fact, the only real difference would be that the hdmi solution doesnt void camera warranty and costs 1/10 the price. terence terence.

May 15th, 2007, 03:14 PM	#8
Serge Victorovich Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 376	Terence, you are right. Your arguments are very convincing. Thank you.

May 15th, 2007, 03:26 PM	#9
Mike Thomann Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Amherst, NY Posts: 100	Is there anything definitive that has told us whether or not the HV20 downrezzes 1920 to 1440 and back for live HDMI out?

May 15th, 2007, 06:09 PM	#10
Terence Krueger Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: toronto, canada Posts: 65	the only thing i can say is that it doesnt look like it downresses then upresses. its very sharp and has alot of detail. what it actually does inside the cam, youll really never know. its a single chip sensor so theres alot of interpolation already, and its hard to look at the footage and say "yes, its really 1920". only someone with inside info at canon will know for sure as its not mentiened in any literature. they dont say much of anything other than "it has hdmi". terence

May 15th, 2007, 09:18 PM	#12
Mike Thomann Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Amherst, NY Posts: 100	Regarding true 1920x1080, take a look at my comparisons of your footage at http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=94079&page=2

May 16th, 2007, 08:10 AM	#13
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	I was trying to talk an bunch into developing an HDMI to USB, or UWB wireless solution. They already had most of the technology, 100mb/s codec, up to 200mb/s, with dual chips up to 400mb/s wavelet. Maximum of GigE, is apparently 100MB/s, or 800Mb/s, some simple compression would be best. Ethernet cable is capable of much more, but not in GigE format. I think we Will eventually see an GigE solution, it would be an good solution to send HDMI from PC to remote panel, or remote player to an PC. I suspect then parts are out there to be combined into an Alternative imaging project that writes directly to hard disk. Opencores, and the usual chip manufacturers suspect, Analogue devices already has an Jpeg2000 codec. I recently communicated with somebody about HDMI capture, as you know many cameras are 8 bits, and this is cutting the stops of latitude down compared to reel stream. If only an reel stream camera was much less, i would be much more interested.

July 29th, 2007, 08:32 AM	#14
Serge Victorovich Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 376	Just for information: Shooting to RAW with Canon PowerShot (DIGIC II - based only) Now need to find tech specification for HV10/20 and possible these hackers can get raw from cmos of Canon camcorders :)

July 29th, 2007, 08:44 AM	#15
Bob Grant Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 1,570	Kind of interesting discussion given that I've been recording 2K down GigE the last couple of days. It's a squeeze, you do need the right NICs and drivers but it can be done.