CineForm HDMI Recorder Concept Posted

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

...You will be competing against a Blackmagic Intensity in a micro PC that can be put together for less than $1000 including 2G RAM and 250G hard drive including the Intensity card.

While the are only a small percentage of technical users that will build their own mini PCs to capture from the Intensity, that little PC has other costs, like a NEO HD license. :) i.e. CineForm wins both ways, and we certainly encourage build your own capture station based on CineForm.

Regard capture only vs capture play. We get the playback pretty much for free (other than the second HMDI connector and driver) so we not going to lose playback for the $15 savings in parts. We see presentation applications for this device. If the addition markets increases the sales volume, prices fall, so likely the device will be cheaper with playback than without.

[Mark Williams]

Any chance of a package deal with either prospect or aspect hd plug-in for CS3?

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by Mark Williams

Any chance of a package deal with either prospect or aspect hd plug-in for CS3?

We certainly have the option, likely there would be discounts offered on software for hardware purchases or visa. Of course multi-platform decoders are free, and may customers will work happily with that.

[Jason Rodriguez]

You will be competing against a Blackmagic Intensity in a micro PC that can be put together for less than $1000 including 2G RAM and 250G hard drive including the Intensity card.

Having built many mini-PC's, this pricing structure does not look realistic for the assoicated specs required for real-time field recording of HDMI.

For instance the basic system you would need:

1x Commell LV-677 with available PCIe x1 slot - $360
2x 1GB SODIMM's - $46
1x 2.33Ghz Core 2 Duo - $642
1x 250GB 7200RPM drive - $150
Case - $142
DC/DC power supply with wide voltage input (for batteries) - $80
Intensity Card - $249
Small LCD display (touchscreen) - $300
Windows XP license OEM - $140

All that together drives the price to over $2000 . . . I'm sure there are some cheaper parts available (such as processors), which could save you some money, but I don't see a fully configured and field-ready system costing less than $1000 that would have the horsepower to encode live video off the HDMI port with no chance of dropped frames. Also the overall interface would not be optimal as well.

So all-in-all, a small, hand-held $2000 dedicated CineForm recording and playback device is quite a grab :)

[Alex Raskin]

Originally Posted by Jason Rodriguez

1x 2.33Ghz Core 2 Duo - $642
... there are some cheaper parts available (such as processors)

OK, for my miniPC with Intensity, I got "Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80557E6850 - Retail" for less than $280, and it's a huge overkill - I could've gotten 2.66Ghz model for $190, and still have *plenty* of processing headroom.

So the processor price should be less than $200, which is $450 less than in Jason's quote.

Quite a difference if you ask me.

[Ron Evans]

I think my calculation was maybe out by $230. From my local computer store
http://www.shoprbc.com/ca/shop/produ....php?pid=26352
A Nano cube at $560 Can $ complete ready built, OS WIN XP $130,Intensity $247, Xenarc Monitor USB touch screen $299. So total is about $1230. Of course one still has to find AC power!!! This solution is less convenient but a lot more capable so isn't really an alternative for a portable HDMI recorder. The point I was trying to make is that in the studio there are other solutions and for portability the full capability is not needed just record at the lowest cost and smallest size. Playback is another issue. For the field use another unit could be created for those that really want it. The competition for the playback unit is of course a laptop, many of which are less than $1000 with dual core 2g RAM and Flash memory readers. In the studio the editing PC will manage the playback.

Ron Evans

[Jason Rodriguez]

OK, for my miniPC with Intensity, I got "Intel Core 2 Duo E6850 Conroe 3.0GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80557E6850 - Retail" for less than $280, and it's a huge overkill - I could've gotten 2.66Ghz model for $190, and still have *plenty* of processing headroom.

I agree . . . processing power wise that is a nice combination, but won't really work for battery powered operation, nor quiet or outdoor environments where cooling with minimal fan noise will not be an easy task.

[Alex Raskin]

Originally Posted by Jason Rodriguez

battery powered operation

I thought the miniPC cannot realistically be battery-powered. Due to the rather large size/weight, I cannot "wear" it, and since it sits in its cabinet, I have no problem powering it from the electric outlet.

But in your experience: have you built any wearable PCs? How small? How much does it weigh? Thanks

[Jason Rodriguez]

The first SI-2K prototype was a mini-pc held in a small pelican case powered by Anton Bauer battery units with a big 90mm quite fan on top to suck out all the heat on the CPU (dual-core AMD Opteron back then) We used it to shoot a short-film called "Abigail" . . . if you ever visited the website, it was the clips of the little girl with the mom.

MiniPC's can be very small (a little larger than a deck of playing cards), although if you need an intensity card and PCIe expansion, you're looking at Mini-ITX being the smallest practical configuration, and with a small Dionic90 or IDX-Tek battery, is about the size of a small book (8"x4"x4" + battery which adds another 1-2" on the top). Weight is around 5-7lbs. Using a wide input voltage DC/DC converter, you can input raw battery power (www.opussolutions.com). Of course one typically also needs to hang some type of LCD input device off it, such as the Xenarc touchscreens or something of it's ilk, and then there you have a lot of cables running around. And as I've noted above, a "working" system is going to put you back around $2K . . . and in the end it's not going to be anywhere near as "field-functional" or "device-friendly" as the CineForm SOLID, meaning you're gonna have to muck with Windows quite a bit unless you plan on writing your own software with an easy-to-use interface for touchscreens and embedded input (like either we have at SI or Wafian has with their HR series of recorders).

So my take, after having done this a lot, is now that CineForm has announced this device, save your money, don't waste it on something that is going to cause you a lot of grief unless you're doing this more for the sport rather than the end-result (i.e., you like to tinker).

[Alex Raskin]

Thanks Jason.

So I assume the difference in price pertains to the mobo/processor that are suitable for the micro form factor?

In any case, I have already built a Intensity/Cineform cap "mini" PC that weighs freaking 40Lbs (Thermaltake case, 2 HDDs in Raid 1 for data security etc.)

In fact, it is extremely quiet, so no problems there.

The weight is killing me.

OF COURSE I'd rather go for the Cineform box.

Now, I also lug around a 24" HDMI monitor to control the video signal as I record it.

So frankly, ther monitor is still big... so the current rig is not critically limiting... I have built a very good case that holds both PC and a monitor, padded for the transportation. So I'm good for now.

However I'll be the first in line for the Cineform box.

That is, unless Sony starts listening and puts Cineform, instead of the silly mpeg2, as an on-camera recording option on EX1!

[Jason Rodriguez]

So I assume the difference in price pertains to the mobo/processor that are suitable for the micro form factor?

Yes, the smaller you go, the more specialized the application . . . anything below uATX and the prices increase exponentially as you try to miniturize smaller, typically because of specialized industrial or military applications are the chief driver of those markets, and therefore smaller niche markets = higher development costs that are ammortized through the customer.

[Carl Middleton]

I think we should split this conversation off to a new thread, and keep this one about ideas/comments on the Cineform recorder, to make it a bit easier for these guys to produce anything from our chatting ;)

Carl

[Alex Raskin]

Seems like Cineform recording box, in its HD-SDI version, will compete against Convergent Flash XDR:

http://convergent-design.com/downloa...0and%20FAQ.pdf

Flash XDR (which is HD-SDI In only, btw) has XLR audio in; very high quality mpeg2 4:2:2 recording options in 50, 100, 160 Mps; and it flips the image for those who use 35mm adapters a-la P+S Tekhnik.

This image flip (passed through to the monitor) may be a good idea for Cineform's HDMI box, by the way.

I still would rather have Cineform recorder (external box or on-camera), since it lets me edit in real time in the *same format* that the footage is recorded.

[Ron Evans]

I think that the posters, including me, see multiple uses for a tapeless recorder. However there is a big difference between just a tapeless recorder and one that recorders 1920x1080 from the sensors bypassing the encoding in the camera and producing an intra frame coded file for editing at high quality. To my knowledge the analogue out from any of the current HDV cameras will have been encoded already and will be 1440x1080. So in this case the recorder is just a tapeless recorder encoding to the intermediate file format. As a field recorder it thus saves time later rather than use one of the existing hard drive units like Firestore or DR60( or the Compact Flash recorders that will come with the new Sony camcorders next year). In this case the cost must just equate to time saving since one would still need Cineform software to edit. For direct recording of 1920x1080 bypassing the camcorder encoder it has no competition but this implies HDMI or in a more pro version HD-SDI. The only competition for this would be to take a PC along!!!!

Ron Evans

[Alex Raskin]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

To my knowledge the analogue out from any of the current HDV cameras will have been encoded already and will be 1440x1080.

Sorry, this is incorrect.

Starting with Sony FX1 and up, all of them have real-time Component out that is *before* compression (if captured live of course.)