Over/under crank with the Flash/Nano

[Ofer Levy]

Dear Dan,

Please let us know whether we can expect an upgrade which will enable over/under crank with the Flash XDR any time soon. I believe it was on the agenda quite a while ago.

Thanks,
Ofer
Ofer Levy Photography

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Ofer,

We are scheduled to release an interim release within 10 days or so.

Over and under-cranking is scheduled for the next full release. This is scheduled for near the end of October.

[Ofer Levy]

Fantastic news Dan!! Thank you!
Regards,
Ofer

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Dear Ofer,

We are scheduled to release an interim release within 10 days or so.

Over and under-cranking is scheduled for the next full release. This is scheduled for near the end of October.

....Over and under cranking ! S W E E T ! :-) :-) :-)

[Matt Chandler]

Over and undercranking would be amazing. The technology you guys have cramed into this little box is nuts.

Any details on how this function would work? What kinda of input/camera/settings would you need to set for the Nano to find the signals?

There a numerous cheaper consumer level cameras that feature pretty good, high framerates....but are cropped and squashed to fit the data rate onto the SD/internal memory cards. I wonder if your overcranking may be able to steal these higher framerates before teh camera crushes the resolution down?....

exciting

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Matt,

Many modern cameras have either HD-SDI or HDMI output.

This is always the best quality output that the camera offers.

The HD-SDI or HDMI signal is before the resolution and quality robbing compression that occurs in many (almost all) cameras. The exception would be the ultra high end cameras with built in recording facilities.

For over and under-cranking, we will need you to setup the camera for either 720p60 (59.94) or 1080p30 (29.97).

Then we will record the appropriate frames to give you, in 720p, a frame rate of 1 to 60 frames per second and 1 to 30 frames per second in 1080p mode.

[Rafael Amador]

I don't understand much the use of Under cranking except if you want to make a kind of time lapse where the lapse is shorter than one second.
About the Over cranking, I really don't see the need in the NANO.
With the EX-1 (SxS recording) you get the best slow mows by Over cranking because the camera records at near 90 Mbps instead of 35Mbps.
With the NANO you will get the same picture quality with or without Over Cranking.
The NANO just records the signal you feed with the quality you set.
I don't expect an slow mow clip from the NANO to play at 220 Mbps.
Over Cranking just would skip the need for conforming. Probably you would loose the audio.
Cheers,
rafael

[Matt Chandler]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Dear Matt,

Many modern cameras have either HD-SDI or HDMI output.

This is always the best quality output that the camera offers.

The HD-SDI or HDMI signal is before the resolution and quality robbing compression that occurs in many (almost all) cameras. The exception would be the ultra high end cameras with built in recording facilities.

For over and under-cranking, we will need you to setup the camera for either 720p60 (59.94) or 1080p30 (29.97).

Then we will record the appropriate frames to give you, in 720p, a frame rate of 1 to 60 frames per second and 1 to 30 frames per second in 1080p mode.

Hmm - this is interesting - as ive already been able to record 720 at 60p. I mentioned it at the tail end of my other post. I have a Xacti hooked up to the nano via its HDMI dock. Inside the camera, if i set the HDMI signal to ouput through the HDMI a 60p signal - the nano allows this. Ive shot a load of water tank elements/inks this way.

Im worried - maybe im frying my Nano.....?

1080 at 60p is too huge a data set i am guessing? Ive been lookin up some info about it.

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Matt,

No, you do not need to worry about frying the nanoFlash.

I doubt that you are getting true 1080p60. This requires a dual link HD-SDI or 3 Gigabit per second link.

If we are recording it, then it is not true 1080p60 or true 1080p59.94.

If you check on the line near the bottom of the screen, on the left, we will report what we are receiving.

[Matt Chandler]

sorry Dan - im not getting 1080p at 60 - but i am/can already get 720 at 60p...when using my Xacti 1010.




As you point out in your post, aquiring true 1080p60 needs a pretty fast linkup. Such framerates are always so tantalisingly close.
Sanyo's newer Xacti models support/record full 1080p60 - though compressed to SD disk at 24mbps.

http://sanyo.com/xacti/english/produ..._fh1/spec.html

Ive yet to try a link up to this model to see what it would, if anything try and throw out. Would it be possible to capture into the Nano at a reduced data rate? So we sacrifice a littel clarity/100mbs in order to aquire the signal?

Id best be quiet now - since joining the forum ive gone nuts and starting posting all the time!

[Rafael Amador]

The problem is not to record 1080p60.
The problem is to output that.
A camera would need two HD/SD-SDI out sockets.
rafael

[Matt Chandler]

I have recorded 60p on Sanyo Hd2000 and played it back via HDMI onto the HD broadcast monitors here at work. Looks really nice. Perhaps im being ignorant here and its dropping frames and sending less info across hdmi?

Anyway - we are flying off at a tangent here. Yes, capturing 1080p is not possible.

I have had some interesting results sourcing 60p to the nano in 1080 though, but changing the signal to interlaced, then using fields kit/bob n' weave in post to fake it back to 60p. Obvioulsy this isnt entirely true 60p, but after studying some comparisons - it does seem sligtly crisper than sending out a RAW 60i signal from the camera.

But referring back to earlier post. Yes, i have been able to already capture 720p60 into the nano when shooting some ink/cloud tank elements for some VFX work. Nano works beautfully for this. So easy to key/luma out even the finest tones.

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Matt,

Keep up the questions until you get all the answers you need, no problem at all.

1080p60 is just something that we, and no other single-link 1.485 Gbps recorder can handle. This is due to the fact that the communications link is just no fast enough to handle of the data.

It could be that HDMI is fast enough for 1080p60, I have not researched it.

I can also state that our recorder is setup for 1080i60, 1080i59.94 and many other data rates, but not setup for 1080p60 or 1080p59.04.

Now, for a theoritical answer. If we can record 1080p30 or 1080p29.97, at 100 Mbps, then we would have enough bandwidth in our system to record 1080p60 or 1080p84.94 at 50 Mbps.

Now, for a more practical answer. We have not investigated this and I do not have an informed answer as to if we could do this or not over HDMI. I know we can not do this over HD-SDI.

Once you get 1080p60 or 1080p59.94, I wonder how you might edit it and how you might deliver it.

I hope this helps.

[Rafael Amador]

You can edit 1080 p60 in FC.
However the only practical application would be to get a 1080p slow mow.
Rafael

[Matt Chandler]

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton

Dear Matt,

Keep up the questions until you get all the answers you need, no problem at all.

1080p60 is just something that we, and no other single-link 1.485 Gbps recorder can handle. This is due to the fact that the communications link is just no fast enough to handle of the data.

It could be that HDMI is fast enough for 1080p60, I have not researched it.

I can also state that our recorder is setup for 1080i60, 1080i59.94 and many other data rates, but not setup for 1080p60 or 1080p59.04.

Now, for a theoritical answer. If we can record 1080p30 or 1080p29.97, at 100 Mbps, then we would have enough bandwidth in our system to record 1080p60 or 1080p84.94 at 50 Mbps.

Now, for a more practical answer. We have not investigated this and I do not have an informed answer as to if we could do this or not over HDMI. I know we can not do this over HD-SDI.

Once you get 1080p60 or 1080p59.94, I wonder how you might edit it and how you might deliver it.

I hope this helps.

Hi Dan,

Appreciate all the info. do we ever leave this forum?! We are all in and out of here every 30 mins.

hmmm - very interesting theoritical point. I would be very interested indeed to see if the Nano could handle 1080p60 but at a lower bitrate. 50mbps is still a highyl acceptable source quality when compared with native qulaity of other higher priced cameras and capture solutions. In terms of praticality/usability - 1080p60 would be extemily useful for element shoots and stuff i use for VFX. Plus 60p playing back at 23.976/film rates is a lovely overcranking look for film.

I would think HDMI can indeed handle 1080 60p. Early last year i was making a cinematic trailer for Sony Entertainment Europe for 'Killzone 2' game. The insisted we create/render it at 60fps...or rather 60p. This was pretty crippling for our setup at the time, but it reminded me that the playstation 3 plays back true 108060p over HDMI. So i would say that HDMI could indeed handle the data.

If the Nano could handle this input at a lower data rate, this would be a huge leap.
I think a lower data rate will trade off nicely with potential quality loss - as 60p is going to capture more fps - therefore any motion blur wont suffer too horribly due to more 'inbetweens'.

Be great if you guys could look into this.


Currently i use Cineform ProspectHD for all editing/encoding - though i often convert the MXF files to file sequences aswell, such as Floating point, lossless, OpenEXR sequences. This uses large amounts of disk space, but that is of no concern as I tend to only work with these, beign a vfx artist, and we have many terabytes of storage available.