Nanoflash Operational Features Discussion

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by James Huenergardt

I think the whole point of Convergent Design's Flash and nanoFlash units are to bypass the on-board camera compression and allow recording less compressed or uncompressed footage to compact flash cards giving you better quality than HDV.

DV25 to a Convergent Design box doesn't offer any advantages other than a tapeless workflow if your camera shoots on tape. You won't experience any bump in image quality.

I believe there are other options out there for recording direct from firewire to hard drive, etc. although I'm not sure how robust they are.

I'm glad CD is trying to make the nanoFlash unit as small as possible and look forward to using it with my EX1.

As to Compact Flash cards, I'm sure Dan or Mike can answer that. However, I do know that my Nikon D700 (as well as most all other pro level cameras) use Compact Flash cards for a reason. Not sure what it is, but they do. There must be a good reason for it.

....There is a whole maket with strong demand for tapeless HDV/DV 25, and folks are demanding to stream HDV to solid state removeable media. Adding such functionality would open a whole new market of considerable size. BTW, I happen to own a Canon XL H1, which produces in camera HDV to tape compressed images of what I consider to be stunning quality. We were streaming to a Firestore HDV capable unit, but couldn't get rid of it fast enough since its dependability was flakey. To be able to stream HDV straight to a stable solid state removeable media would be a wonderful gift.

Regarding the CF card format, there are now SDHC cards which are closely approching the speeds of Transcend CF! I know Panasonic and Samsung and (Sorry I can't remember the company's name at time of writing, but their SD cards are blue in Color) all have fast, fast, fast SD HC and Keydrive Memmory comming out in Q2 this year. The cell phone micro SD cards are getting fast and dense and they are only as large as my pinky's fingernail !)

I certainly understand the Flash XDR and Nanoflash are aimed at shooters who want to have ultra high quality file recording capabilities, and I don't take issue with this stated concept. I believe in flexibility and affordability of use also. What's the use of having full uncompressed 24 fps file recording capability, if I wind up having to pay in Canadian Dollars nearly the purchase price of my camera once again just to get it ? (XL H1) I do agree it's cheaper and smaller than a Wafian Recorder. Quality is important, but so is price.

[Mike Schell]

Originally Posted by Mark Andrew Job

Perhaps it is now time for a third CF recorder design ? One Flash device could be made to be even smaller, or possibly even with a "modular" type pluggin design. Allow me to explain. Instead of two CF sockets, put one. With the higher density CF cards slowly becoming available, then this might make sense. If a client wanted to record firewire, then they could purchase the optional FW plugin interface. If a shooter required HD-SDI, then they could purchase this optional pluggin interface. If another client wanted to use analogue ballanced audio I/O, then they could add this modular piece. If HDMI was required, then this modular pluggin box is purchased and attached. Think of the recorder part as the main engine containing the essential circuitry, then features being built into the seperate interface attachments. In this way, you don't have to design or purchase and pay extra for features one dosn't want, or will never use.

Hi Mark-
I appreciate your thoughts and suggestions, but it's not a simple task to create a low-power, portable box with all these optional features. We have targeted some very specific applications for the Flash XDR and nanoFlash, namely videographers and cinematographers who want very high-quality video/audio with the benefits of tapeless workflow.

The nanoFlash in particular is targeted for on-camera mounting, which means low-power, small size and lightweight. To achieve these goals, we have to keep the number of IOs and associated circuitry to a minimum.

So, if you want HDV to a CF card, then buy the Sony recorder, I am sure it's a great product. But, if you goal is very high quality video / audio, then the nanoFlash / XDR are certainly very compelling products.

My guiding principle is: "Good Engineering is knowing what to leave out" We can't be everything to everyone, else we'll never get the product shipped.

Best-

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Mike Schell

Hi Mark-
I appreciate your thoughts and suggestions, but it's not a simple task to create a low-power, portable box with all these optional features. We have targeted some very specific applications for the Flash XDR and nanoFlash, namely videographers and cinematographers who want very high-quality video/audio with the benefits of tapeless workflow.

The nanoFlash in particular is targeted for on-camera mounting, which means low-power, small size and lightweight. To achieve these goals, we have to keep the number of IOs and associated circuitry to a minimum.

So, if you want HDV to a CF card, then buy the Sony recorder, I am sure it's a great product. But, if you goal is very high quality video / audio, then the nanoFlash / XDR are certainly very compelling products.

My guiding principle is: "Good Engineering is knowing what to leave out" We can't be everything to everyone, else we'll never get the product shipped.

Best-

...First allow me to compliment the acheivement you and your design team at Convergent-Designs have made in creating the Flash XDR & the Nanoflash SSR's. I do believe you have an excellent, excellent technology. Let us continue to discuss ways in which this technology could be made more excellent.

Sir, I started this thread to discuss creating operational features that shooters like yours truly require and want to use. Streaming firewire to a CF card is certainly one of those features. I don't consider it a step backward in logic or practicality to add a feature which will allow the Nanoflash device to have greater end user production flexibility (Thus greater market penetration). Earlier in this thread, another shooter wanted the Nanoflash to accept firewire streams as well. I also stated earlier I considered the FW could well be of the 800 MB variety, so as to add the greater benefit of high speed transfer of data recorded in "any" format from the CF cards using the Nanoflash without the need of an extra FW 800 CF card reader ($85.00), as well as compatibility to any camcorder with a FW interface in the world.

I did not know there already was a device on the market made by Sony which records FW streams to CF cards, and I will for sure go check this out. As someone who is looking at using this technology in production, rather than manufacturing it, and is looking for a cost effective and practical solution, are you suggesting I have to purchase a Sony FW to CF card recorder at what price ? - At least $1,000.00 plus US + A Flash XDR at $4,995.00 US retail + an additional $995.00 US if I want a future upgrade for uncompressed recording because I also require analogue audio input + a Nanoflash at $3,995.00 US retail just because I also need it to be low power and small enough to attach to my camera for a grand total of $11,000.00 US ? I use Canadian currency, so if you calculate the additional exchange rate on the purchase of all of these items, then I'm sure you will understand perhaps a little more of where our production company is coming from ? Ironically, this total would at least equal, if not surpass, what we were quoted for a Wafian DDR ! I don't believe in spending money endlessly.

Also, I do not participate here to offend or to facilitate the sale of your company's products. I participate because I am in the market for an affordable solid state recording solution to use with our production Canon XL H1 camera. Our independent digi-underground production company's requirements to produce our web Tv series are financially challenging. It is in the spirit of wanting to purchase a solution that best serves our production needs in which I'm offering feedback and expressing ideas.

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Bill Koehler

#1. Sorry guys - the product is already out there. It's called the Sony HVR-MRC1K.
Look it up here.

Sony Product Detail Page - HVRMRC1K

You seem to have missed that both the XDR and Nanoflash are pointed at folks who are wanting a far better codec than the HDV/AVCHD that is coming out of their cameras. That's the core reason why they command the price premium they do over something like the above Sony product.

.....Hey Bill. I had a thorough look at the Sony HVRMRC1K CF card recorder. This device requires it to sit on its cradle to complete the FW streaming circut, and the cradle it sits in is designed to mate with Sony CamCorders. It does not look like this device would be easly mountable on our Canon XL H1 production camera. (??) However the price point Sony is suggesting is more consistent with that market sector.

I have not missed the purpose or the market direction the XDR and Nanoflash are directed at. I simply proposed firewire streaming capability be added to the Nanoflash to make it more adaptable to lower end cameras. I find it somewhat ironic that this was the stated thinking behind adding the HDMI interface from Convergent Designs, which they baucked at when I first suggested it be added last year.

[James Huenergardt]

Mark,

Check out: nNovia

I just visited their site and they have solid state recording available.

Almost as much as a nanoFlash though.

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by James Huenergardt

Mark,

Check out: nNovia

I just visited their site and they have solid state recording available.

Almost as much as a nanoFlash though.

...Oh Yeah ? OK. Will do. Thanks for the heads up on this ! :-) I am thinking I "may" go for the Sony CF recorder (HVRMRC1K), if I can ascertain a way to mount it on my XL H1 and it's Interval Timelapse function "also works in the HDV mode."

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Mark,

Timelapse recording usually requires an I-Frame mode.

Thus, the Firestore FS-4 could only record timelapse in DV mode, not HDV mode.

So, check the spec's carefully, if you want HDV material, recorded via a firewire connection, recorded as timelapse. I will be surprised (and 100% wrong) if it does.

HD timelapse will be a feature of the nanoFlash and Flash XDR.

[Dean Harrington]

Originally Posted by Mark Andrew Job

.....Hey Bill. I had a thorough look at the Sony HVRMRC1K CF card recorder. This device requires it to sit on its cradle to complete the FW streaming circut, and the cradle it sits in is designed to mate with Sony CamCorders. It does not look like this device would be easly mountable on our Canon XL H1 production camera. (??) However the price point Sony is suggesting is more consistent with that market sector.

I have not missed the purpose or the market direction the XDR and Nanoflash are directed at. I simply proposed firewire streaming capability be added to the Nanoflash to make it more adaptable to lower end cameras. I find it somewhat ironic that this was the stated thinking behind adding the HDMI interface from Convergent Designs, which they baucked at when I first suggested it be added last year.

HDMI & HD/SDI on nano is designed for 1920X1080 recording ... firewire, at least on the EX1/3 will not do that. I bought into the nano flash because of it's lightness and to get 4.2.2 at high bit rates. That's the point for me. AJA IO is a better route for those who need a larger number of in/outputs, me thinks!

[Bill Ravens]

I have a nNovia QCDeck. It will record m2t(19mbps) in timelapse mode. It has a removeable 120Gb mediapac storage drive, composite and firewire input and output.

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Dear Mark,

Timelapse recording usually requires an I-Frame mode.

Thus, the Firestore FS-4 could only record timelapse in DV mode, not HDV mode.

So, check the spec's carefully, if you want HDV material, recorded via a firewire connection, recorded as timelapse. I will be surprised (and 100% wrong) if it does.

HD timelapse will be a feature of the nanoFlash and Flash XDR.

...Thanks for the tip Dan ;-) Yes I'm well aware both your CF card recording products will do timelapse eventually at a premium price ! Sony seems to be "insuating" their CF recorder does "Interval" recording @ 0.5 seconds. I'm speaking with Sony reps now to get confirmation of Interval Record Mode function. 0.5 seconds would equal at least one Long GOP set in HDV would it not ?

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Bill Ravens

I have a nNovia QCDeck. It will record m2t(19mbps) in timelapse mode. It has a removeable 120Gb mediapac storage drive composite and firewire input and output.

Hey Bill. Wow ! HDV Timelapse (m2t) files ! This is doable. Here's how I think timelapse could be accomplished in HDV m2t files.

STEP 1. Clock passes off a Canon XL H1 3 CCD chip head, for example, via the FW cable.

STEP 2. Record a series of these frames to a built in cache memmory (Not directly to tape)

STEP 3. Once the cache fills up, then start writing a series of Long GOP's, out to an HDV file.

STEP 4. Make the writing of these HDV files deliverable to FW, or to built in SDHC card socket (Smaller foot print & way cheaper). Thanks for this info Bill. This seems to confirm what I was researching about timelapse to HDV file. I thought it could be done to Nanoflash, but Mike and Dan say no way. I think it maybe time to call an electrical engineer friend and do a patent search to start building our own device ;-) I have this vision of a small external SDHC card recording box which accepts FW and HDMI and can record HDV, MPEG 4, Quicktime MXF, Xvid and Divx. It would embed TC and at least 8 channels of audio.

[Bill Koehler]

Originally Posted by Mark Andrew Job

.....Hey Bill. I had a thorough look at the Sony HVRMRC1K CF card recorder. This device requires it to sit on its cradle to complete the FW streaming circut, and the cradle it sits in is designed to mate with Sony CamCorders. It does not look like this device would be easly mountable on our Canon XL H1 production camera. (??) However the price point Sony is suggesting is more consistent with that market sector.

Quoting from the page I linked to:

"...For all other existing Sony professional HDV and DVCAM users, the HVR-MRC1K comes supplied with a mounting bracket to mount the unit on the accessory shoe of the camcorder..."

As an example that relates fairly directly to you, there is a thread here on DV Info Net where Canon XH-A1 users are happily using this recorder. So it is a reasonably safe bet it will work on your Canon XL-H1.

Here's the link:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-xh-...non-users.html

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Bill Koehler

Quoting from the page I linked to:

"...For all other existing Sony professional HDV and DVCAM users, the HVR-MRC1K comes supplied with a mounting bracket to mount the unit on the accessory shoe of the camcorder..."

As an example that relates fairly directly to you, there is a thread here on DV Info Net where Canon XH-A1 users are happily using this recorder. So it is a reasonably safe bet it will work on your Canon XL-H1.

Here's the link:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-xh-...non-users.html

....OK. Thanks Bill :-) Looks like it "will" work on a non Sony Camera. I see there is a Firestore type hotshoe gymbal mount which would seem to be fine as well.

[Bill Ravens]

Mark...

IMHO...you need to take a deep breath dude. You want to buy my nNovia hardware, I 'd be glad to sell it to you. But, be advised, this may not, ultimately, be the quality you expect. It works pretty nicely at 19mbps. If that's good for you, go for it. In the mean time, I humbly suggest you give the guys at C-D a break. My experience is that they're doing the best they can.....and they deserve a bit more respect than you've been offering...so back off.

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Bill Ravens

Mark...

IMHO...you need to take a deep breath dude. You want to buy my nNovia hardware, I 'd be glad to sell it to you. But, be advised, this may not, ultimately, be the quality you expect. It works pretty nicely at 19mbps. If that's good for you, go for it. In the mean time, I humbly suggest you give the guys at C-D a break. My experience is that they're doing the best they can.....and they deserve a bit more respect than you've been offering...so back off.

Ouch !...I didn't think I was being disrespectful in asking for a particular feature. I started this thread to discuss "possible" features for the Nanoflash Bill. I'm only making suggestions from the point of view of an end user. They don't have to do it just because I ask for it, of course. I didn't realise folks would feel offended. My mistake.