CineForm HDMI Recorder Concept Posted

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Originally Posted by Mike A. Jones

If you can afford an SDI-enabled camera, you are well outside the demographic of serious--and seriously budget-constrained--indie filmmakers and prosumers who appear to have been the inspiration for this product, at least in its first iteration. Don't co-opt our fifteen minutes of patiently awaited recognition when there already numerous reduced-compression recording options available within your price range, but none in ours!

A Canon HV20 or HG10 with a few accessories is close to $1000 today. This Cineform product is targeted for sale at $2000. Your camera budget is thus $3000.

Canon XH-A1 is $3499. Add this cineform box and you are at $5500.

The Canon XH-G1, which is the same as the XH-A1 but adds HD SDI, is $6299. The Sony XDCAM EX1 is $6699.

Those prices are in the same ballpark, and we are both playing in the "under $10k league."

In other words being able to afford such a camera is far from an indication of unlimited budgets. In fact its safe to say a lot of people considering such equipment are very cash constrained.

I shudder to think what you feel about people who own a pair of Sony F23's and an HDCAM SR deck with a BVM series monitor so you can actually see the images the camera makes. That's about a half million worth of equipment once you add in lenses and such- and doesn't include tripods, mics or lights.

So, am I saying that this is a useless concept? No- its absolutely wonderful. I think the product is going to be awesome.

That's why I am interested in an HD-SDI version.

In general I'd say the camera you are using should cost more than this Cineform box before you will get the best advantage out of the Cineform box.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I hereby nominate Cineform SOLID.

The basic SOLID would have HDMI i/o and 2 miniXLR.

Follow on versions might be called
"SOLID Pro" for an HD SDI version with 2 miniXLR. This is actually a unit I'd want, in fact I might take two.

"SOLID Analogue" would be a bigger version that forgoes digital i/o for BNC component and S Video. One of the BNC should be software switchable to composite.

If those work in the market here's a few more for the family.
"SOLID +" for a version with HDMI and analog video i/o
"SOLID Pro+" for an HD SDI version with analog i/o.
"SOLID Extreme" might be a version with HDMI, HD SDI and analog- the whole enchilada you might say. I'd like one of these as well.

I grant permission for Cineform to use that name, so long as I get credit.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

It just occurred to me that users may well need Cineform codec licenses.

Hopefully you might see your way clear to include one license of NEO HD with each SOLID. (I made that name up, and I'm sticking to it!)

[David Taylor]

Originally Posted by Mike McCarthy

To cater to the SDI crowd, they could offer a DC output to power a separate SDI to HDMI adaptor off the same battery system. (Strap a BMD HDLink to the side)

I like this idea....

[Carl Middleton]

Originally Posted by David Taylor

I like this idea....

I think as far as external adapters, if HDMI offers quality as high as/comparable to/greater than HD-SDI and Component, etc... that inexpensive adapters would really be the way to go.

I could capture using Component into this device via an adapter, and also use it to play back via nice, simple HDMI to use for presentations, etc... or hook it up to an HD-SDI camera if I upgrade, without replacing the whole unit....

I don't own an HDMI or HD-SDI camera, so I'm not sure exactly how those technologies stack up against one another. I do think, though, that if HDMI is sufficient, adapters would be fine for other inputs. Any thoughts, guys?


Carl

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by Alexander Ibrahim

It just occurred to me that users may well need Cineform codec licenses.

Hopefully you might see your way clear to include one license of NEO HD with each SOLID. (I made that name up, and I'm sticking to it!)

I like SOLID.

While each PC/Mac license could in included with the product, it wouldn't be required as the CineForm decoders are freely available for post-production application.

[Jim Andrada]

I don't think there are really SDI guys and HDMI guys and Component guys as much as there are guys who for whatever reason have cameras that have one or another, but not all of the above connection capabilities.

My JVC 110 has component or firewire. I guess that eliminates me from the customer set unless they support either firewire or component input (and not sure why they wouldn't support firewire - it's such a tiny little connector and I think they have one there already for camera control. Why not ingest the hated m2t like HDLink already does so well? I'd bet that a lot of people would like an alternative to Firestore that also happens to eliminate the additional step of conversion to Cineform)

I don't think of myself as a firewire guy, I'd love to have HDMI or SDI - but I'm not about to scrap my cameras to get them. The next big $ item in my plan is another lens for the JVC, not a nice new camera with HDMI or SDI.

I don't think I'm alone!!! I'd rather have the Cineform box because it simplifies the workflow, but let's face it, I can live with tape (and Firestore) for a few more years if I have to.

[Steven Thomas]

Yes, but...
The BM HDLink only supports the following output via HDMI:

HD Format Support via HDMI 1080p25, 1080i50, 1080i59.94, 1080i60, 720p50, 720p59.94 and 720p60.

No 1080p30, 1080p23.976, and it appears no 720p 23.976, 720p 30.
http://www.blackmagic-design.com/pro...ink/techspecs/

Am I looking at this incorrectly..

[Jim Andrada]

BM HDLink?????

I was referring to Cineform HDLink.

Sorry for any confusion.

I guess it can happen when two different companies use the same name for two different products.

[Steven Thomas]

Sorry, I was commenting to Mike McCarthy's post in this thread regarding the BM HDLink

[David Newman]

Remember CineForm used the name first. :)

However the BM HDLink could be used to convert HDSDI to HDMI.

You issues:

1080p30 -- same as 1080i60.
1080p23.976 -- prosumer cameras put 24p over 60i, although 24psf would have been nice (I'm not sure HMDI has support though.)
720p 23.976, 720p 30 -- transmitted as 720p60 with pulldown (removable.)

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by Jim Andrada

Why not ingest the hated m2t like HDLink already does so well? I'd bet that a lot of people would like an alternative to Firestore that also happens to eliminate the additional step of conversion to Cineform)

This is very unlikely = not going to happen. We would add analog input way before doing that (solving the issue.) M2T quality is what we are working to avoid, yet to support it would mean we would have to add an MPEG2 decoder to the hardware design.

Inputs via HDMI, HDSDI and Analog all make good market sense, as all come from a pre-compressed source. Also only supporting uncompressed inputs mean simplied hardware.

[Richard Leadbetter]

Originally Posted by David Newman

Remember CineForm used the name first. :)

However the BM HDLink could be used to convert HDSDI to HDMI.

You issues:

1080p30 -- same as 1080i60.
1080p23.976 -- prosumer cameras put 24p over 60i, although 24psf would have been nice (I'm not sure HMDI has support though.)
720p 23.976, 720p 30 -- transmitted as 720p60 with pulldown (removable.)

A range of Blu-ray and HD DVD players can output 1080p/24 from HDMI, so I'm sure it is a standard. Although those devices will be HDCP encrypted.

I can analyse the signal if you want, but gut feeling is that it's actually outputting 72fps.

[David Newman]

Until the camera sources do 24p at 24Hz (or over 72Hz) we don't need to worry about it. We will be implementing HMDI I/O with flexibility in mind, if a new mode is used, we can upgrade the units in the field. But of the internal feature will be software/firmware upgradable by an image on a USB thumb drive.

[Brian Standing]

Spectacular product! I'm very interested in this as an adjunct to the recently announced Sony Z7 HDV camera (which will ship with Sony's own CF-recorder). First, recording "true" 1920x1080 video, plus uncompressed audio through HDMI would be an obvious advantage over either tape-based or flash-based HDV recording. Secondly, with a unit like this, you could create instantaneous triple-redundancy, by recording to tape, and to two CF recorders. It's even conceivable you could record in SD, HDV and Cineform simultaneously!

I'm torn on the LCD screen. On one hand, I really want this baby to be as affordable, small, light, portable and error-free as possible. On the other hand, I can see how having a screen could be a godsend for reviewing footage in the field without tying up the camera, or lugging a laptop around. So, perhaps you're spot-on in giving it a basic LCD, but not overdoing it on resolution or quality.

A couple of other thoughts:

On the topic of weight: I would lean toward portability over heavy analog audio connectors. Mini-xlr may be fine (I've never seen them), but standard XLR are way too heavy for a unit like this. I'd be OK with stereo-mini, if it is made out of solid materials, and has the little screw-top fastener seen in some of the Sennheiser wireless microphones. If I have critical audio, I typically use an external preamp and feed it through the XLR line inputs of the camera, and simultaneously output through the pre-amp's unbalanced auxiliary stereo-mini output to a portable digital recorder. Under this scenario, I don't think I'd be losing too much going analog to HDMI through the camera.

Power options: A slot to attach a Sony battery would be great. Even better, how about adaptor plate that fits between the camera battery and the camera, with a small cable out to power the recorder? It may be worth taking a look at Sony's new CF recorder that will fit over the NPF-970 battery of the new Z7 camera to see how it accesses the camera battery for power, and design something compatible. Failing that, I'd like to see a standard 4-pin XLR power attachment, and a wide range of voltage requirements, so it could be powered off of any power source.

Data ports: A couple people have mentioned a SATA connection, so you could attach, and record to, external hard drives. The problem with SATA is that you still need a separate power source for the drive, which could be a problem in the field. Could you connect 6-pin firewire or USB drives instead? This would help minimize the number of cables needed. Or is the throughput insufficient for HD?

Will camera sync be possible with this unit, so it starts and stops recording when the camera RECORD button is pressed?

Overall, for efficient field use, there should be at least an option to connect this with an absolute minimum number of cables. In a perfect world, I'd be able to solidly attach this unit on the back of a Sony Z7 instead of the Sony HDV CF recorder, have it draw power directly from the camera's NPF-970 battery (with no or extremely short cables, if possible), connect a short HDMI cable, and be off and running.

Also, make sure that the slots for the CF cards are designed so they cannot be inadvertently ejected. Perhaps some kind of door over the CF slot? I have a laptop with a card reader that is forever popping out the flash card when it's being carried around.

Finally, what would I need to edit the recorded files in Vegas Pro 8?

This project is a godsend! I look forward to seeing it released soon!