CineForm HDMI Recorder Concept Posted

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by Robert Kennedy

Please offer AES audio inputs. That is the only way to preserve the quality of audio collected by audio professionals.

I agree, I would prefer AES inputs instead of any analog, simplifies the design. That is not the only driving factor.

[Fredrik-Larsson]

Originally Posted by David Newman

I agree, I would prefer AES inputs instead of any analog, simplifies the design. That is not the only driving factor.

I have no problem with only digital inputs and I can imagine that it's a lot easier to develop an all-digital version than one that need to consider the digitization of analog data. However I think it's important is to consider how it can fit into a reasonable flow and who is the target market for this product. I did a search on field mixers that provides digital outputs and it landed on 3800 USD as I recall it. That is definately out of my budget and I couldn't find much else on it. It would be nice to have suggested flows and what products to use.

[Alex Raskin]

In my opinion, the whole point for Cineform recorder is to accept Analog audio and process it in high quality into Digital audio.

It's not about what's easier, it's about what users actually need.

Sony implements mpeg2 compression because it is easier, but users really need Cineform on-cam.

Cineform recorder should have high quality analog audio inputs (whether xlr or rca, balanced or unbalanced) because analog output is what most of the mic preamps' provide.

[Lonnie Bell]

Any ETA on this baby?

[Michael Young]

I agree, and I still say that XLRs are the way to go. Most pro mics are this way and there is no logical reason to go with another type of plug.

Then if the CineForm box doesn't take analogue, then we need an A2D converter which would make the "workflow" more cumbersome.

Forcing the audio to go through the camera seems like a great idea if camera makers would make great pre amps in their lower end cameras which they clearly do not because of tiered pricing for their products. HDMI will be top notch video quality, lets make sure we have top notch audio as well.

The CineForm product only becomes cool because it could allow quality at a certain price point of cameras. Add quality XLRs to the HDMI workflow, we will get an unprecedented level of quality and portability.
M

[Jim Andrada]

Second the motion for high quality analogue audio input even if it costs a bit more. I'd be willing to compromise on the connector type in the interest of compactness - ie mini XLR or 1/4" TRS - but, of course, XLR is first choice.

[Graham Kay]

Would a multi-pin connector (eg Hirose) and breakout cable like you would use with a mixer (2 x balanced audio + mic return) be a way of simplifying connections, if this is the problem?

[Denis Danatzko]

Not to hijack this thread, or take away from the promise of the CF recorder, but to point out our options are growing. (I'm looking forward to the CF box; I just hope they've decided on the final version and it doesn't end up in perpetual design mode, meeting the same end as the CinePorter). This seems to be the newest tool from Focus Enhancements:

http://www.focusinfo.com/solutions/catalog.asp?id=183

I got this in an e-mail yesterday. While it's not the same as the CF recorder, hence not really competition for it, and is intended for a different purpose, I think it proves that the manufacturers realize we're serious about wanting the ability to produce better images to capitalize on the promise of HD.

It takes either component-out or HDMI and converts it to SDI, for both SD and HD. It doesn't create a CineFormed output, and it has no USB or firewire ports to record to an external drive; the web page describing it shows the intended flow to be either:
cam -> firestor converter -> switcher, or
cam -> firestor converter -> VTR, or
cam -> firestor converter -> monitor.

and it attaches between the cam and tripod head. It takes 2 audio inputs and embeds them in the SDI out. MSRP = $ 699.

I wasn't aware they were working on this. I don't have SDI, so likely would not have paid attention to announcements about it, but it could prove helpful for those who do.

I take it as a good sign that we are likely to see more similarly helpful tools in the future.

[Alex Raskin]

Sorry, I fail to see how the aforementioned device correlates to Cineform recorder box, or it's concept, in any way at all.

[Denis Danatzko]

Originally Posted by Denis Danatzko

While it's not the same as the CF recorder, hence not really competition for it, and is intended for a different purpose, I think it proves that the manufacturers realize we're serious about wanting the ability to produce better images to capitalize on the promise of HD.

and

I take it as a good sign that we are likely to see more similarly helpful tools in the future.

I like the fact that we're being presented with more tools to make better/broader use of equipment that many of us already own. If FE is willing to do this, what else might they, or others, have on the drawing board? It's not earthshaking, for sure, but, speaking for myself, I find it encouraging. I thought others might, too. (Didn't mean to annoy w/my naivete).

[Ian G. Thompson]

Originally Posted by Denis Danatzko

I like the fact that we're being presented with more tools to make better/broader use of equipment that many of us already own. If FE is willing to do this, what else might they, or others, have on the drawing board? It's not earthshaking, for sure, but, speaking for myself, I find it encouraging. I thought others might, too. (Didn't mean to annoy w/my naivete).

Don't worry Denis...this is good info that you passed along.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Originally Posted by Alex Raskin

Sorry, I fail to see how the aforementioned device correlates to Cineform recorder box, or it's concept, in any way at all.

Have you read Cineform's page for the device?

http://www.cineform.com/products/CineFormRecorder.htm

"Comment: We anticipate developing multiple members in the recorder product family - each targeting different recording needs. This first device targets HDV camcorder users and offers the ability to bypass the highly-compressed MPEG format. The features specification is below. We imagine a sister device that supports single-link and dual-link HD-SDI recording. "

Its the third paragraph.

So, imagine if you will a production house that has primarily SDI, but does have one or two cameras (say a couple of HVX200's) that don't output SDI.

Now a Cineform SOLID SDI user might happily fork over for a converter rather than buying a whole other SOLID just for their "oddball" cameras.

[Frank Brodkorb]

I got a HVX200 so component input would be great - on the other hand I can buy a $250 box that converts component to hdmi (and I hope id is not messing up the signal).

Image filp is a must, I do almost everything with a lens adapter now.

Having a chance to record to a external disc makes more sese than CF cards for many reasons allready discussed her. A powered drive caddle would be great but I coul live with a external disc of the shelf.

Using camera batteries would be great. Adapters for almost every battery can be purchased from the guys who selling those little chargers. So you only would need a base platte.

If it will have that features I´m selling my firestores in a heartbeat and buy 2 of your recorders.

Frank

[Alex Raskin]

Speaking of external HDD support...

My understanding is that the new generation of SATA (Sata III? ) will support power over the data cable.

So no need for an additional HDD power supply, if Cineform box provides Sata III (?) spec connection.

[Mike McCarthy]

Yes the new eSATA spec would make the device more functional.

As far as that FocusEnhancement box goes, it would be useful if you had an SDI Cineform Solid, but with HDLinks available, there are few reasons to create an SDI version in the first place. HDMI is the way to go. And component can be converted to HDMI as well, via a cheaper box.