News posts from 2004 Q2

Rob Lohman · June 22nd, 2004, 04:48 AM

It indeed seems to support video as well as a cameralink interface,
that's pretty interesting. The sensor is probably quite expensive, though

Steve McDonald · June 22nd, 2004, 08:06 AM

Was there a mention of an application for a video camera in there someplace? The 1.125-inch size would be too
big for a camcorder, unless it was a large HD type. A huge lens would be needed to get much zoom power with such a large CCD.

I would think there would be a version of the Foveon CCD that was smaller and with fewer pixels, if it was intended for any type of video use, other than ultra-high definition, special use cameras. There was no indication of the refresh or frame-rate that these tri-depth sensors could use. I'm surprised by the slow implementation of the Foveon CCD system, which has been around for several years.
I expected that my next video camera would have been outfitted with one, a couple of years ago. Is there a hidden difficulty in using them for video purposes? Do the three sensing layers use pixel-offsetting?

Lots of questions, but I haven't heard many specific answers, nor have I heard of committments by video manufacturers to use them.

Steve McDonald

Ron Evans · June 22nd, 2004, 09:48 AM

The chip isn't that big its just a bit bigger than a 1/2" CCD(1/2 = 0.5, 1/1.8 = 0.5555, 2/3 = .6666) smaller than a 2/3". So lenses could be 1/2" . This is the first in the series that has a low pixel count. I think the others were intended to address the high end still camera market. This chip could be an excellent choice for a HDV camera!!!

Ron Evans

Ken Tanaka · June 22nd, 2004, 10:12 AM

We've actually had several good discussions on the Foveon. One of the most recent was last August. I don't think their situation has materially changed since then. It looks like they are now emphasizing niche markets rather than suggesting that they're headed for mainstream photo and video devices.

Joe Garnero · June 22nd, 2004, 10:20 AM

I also want to chime in. My friend has gone through 4 Sigma S10 cameras due to spots (dead pixels?) in his pictures. So besides not being ready for main-stream markets, they don't appear to be ready for mass market - period....

Of course this could be a Sigma issue as well.

Glenn Gipson · June 22nd, 2004, 01:17 PM

http://www.shareholder.com/maxtor/Re..._section=press

Gints Klimanis · June 22nd, 2004, 03:04 PM

That is cool. I would like to new 10,000 RPM Western Digital Raptors with this SATA II. Hopefully, Maxtor will put out something to compete with WD's 74 GByte Raptor, which goes for about $200. This little drive hauls ! My coworker works on disk drives uses two in Raptors in RAID0 as a boot drive. His motherboard chipset (nVidia nForce3) supports SATA without using the PCI bus Risky, but FAST.

Steve McDonald · June 22nd, 2004, 04:38 PM

I mistakeningly interpreted the figure "1/1.8" as meaning one and one-eighth inches. This new trend in mixing fractions and decimals to express CCD sizes in what are actually bastardized fractions, is mathematically incorrect and, I believe deliberately confusing. If you used fractional expressions like that on a math test, you'd get an "F".

When a camcorder manufacturer specifies that a model has a 1/4.8th-inch CCD, they're just hoping that many people won't realize that it's actually only
.21 inches and will think instead that it's larger than the 1/4th-inch CCD on the previous year's model. If they insist on going with CCD sizes that can't be expressed by common fractions, why don't they just use pure decimals? A dual expression of, for example,
.55 inches/13.8mm would be best for international products.

Steve McDonald

Boyd Ostroff · June 22nd, 2004, 05:09 PM

Actually the whole CCD size issue is more complicated than this. The sizes are not really diagonals of the CCD's, but go back to the vacuum tube days when camera tubes were designated by the diameter of the cylindrical glass tube. The active image area was quite a bit smaller than this (a rectangle within the circle). When CCD imagers cam into use the first ones were sized to correspond to the active image area of a 2/3" cylindrical tube, hence the term 2/3" CCD. Now there never was such a thing as a 1/4" or 1/3" vacuum tube sensor so these sizes just represent the manufacturer's concept of how big the active image area of a 1/4" or 1/3"vacuum tube would have been if it existed.

According to an article I recently read, a 1.25" vacuum tube had an image diagonal 21.4mm, a 1" tube had a 16mm diagonal, and both the 1/2" and 5/8" tubes had 8mm diagonals. Modern camcorder chip sizes include 1/3" CCD's with 6mm diagonals, 1/4" CCD's with 4mm diagonals and 1/6" CCD's with 3mm diagonals.

Steven Digges · June 23rd, 2004, 04:35 PM

Two days ago in my local paper (Arizona Republic) in the business section there was an article about a new super chip set being announced by Intel that is supposed to be available this week. The article did not name it or give specs, it said:

1. Giant leap forward in graphics processing, can run full res HD TV in your living room and other programs and monitors at the same time.
2. Major improvements for video editing and gaming.
3. First big step towards Intel’s goal of making the PC the heart of a home’s entertainment center.
4. Not a new processor, works with P4, it is a new chip set.

Has anyone heard anything about this?

Steve

Michael Wisniewski · June 23rd, 2004, 06:51 PM

Is this it? - Tom's Hardware Guide: Intel's 775 Launch Mixes Ambition With A Strong Aftertaste

Gints Klimanis · June 23rd, 2004, 08:12 PM

Lots of manufacturers (nVidia, ATI, Via, etc.) are offering motherboard chipsets for AMD and Intel microprocessors.
This Intel chipset is an incremental, not monumental, step
forward.

Now, this Intel part should help reduce the cost of
big TVs :

http://www.intel.com/design/celect/technology/lcos/

Glenn Gipson · June 24th, 2004, 08:18 AM

Could have implications for DV cam batteries.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...oshiba_company

Gints Klimanis · June 24th, 2004, 02:39 PM

Though, this article doesn't comation enough information to
accurately convert the specs to camcorder battery units of
milliAmpereHours. Someday, we will kiss those big bricks
and recharge anxieties goodbye.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0406/04062401toshibafuel.asp

"Toshiba's methanol fuel cell"

It will certainly be some time before we see fuel cells used in digital cameras but it's worth noting that development fuel cells is accelerating. Toshiba today announced a small methanol fuel cell which weighs just 8.5 g (0.3 oz) and can produce 100 mW of power. Toshiba describe this new unit as "small enough for integration into a wireless headset for mobile phones, but still efficient enough to power an MP3 music player for as long as 20 hours on a single 2cc charge of highly concentrated methanol. The new fuel cell outputs 100 milliwatts of power, and can continue to do so, non-stop, for as long as users top up its integrated fuel tank—a process that is as simple as it is safe."

Press Release:

Steven Digges · June 26th, 2004, 04:24 PM

Michael,

That review on Tom’s hardware is what the republic was talking about. However Tom's review is reality based. It is beyond me why a major newspaper would make it sound like this was the biggest advance in many years. I wish I still had the article so I could quote it. They made it sound revolutionary.
I have a P4, 3.2 Extreme Edition and a 800 FSB on my system and am very happy with it, the article made it sound outdated already.

Steve

June 22nd, 2004, 04:48 AM	#76
Rob Lohman RED Code Chef Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Holland Posts: 12,514	It indeed seems to support video as well as a cameralink interface, that's pretty interesting. The sensor is probably quite expensive, though __________________ Rob Lohman, visuar@iname.com DV Info Wrangler & RED Code Chef Join the DV Challenge \| Lady X Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Buy from the best: DVinfo.net sponsors

June 22nd, 2004, 10:12 AM	#79
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	We've actually had several good discussions on the Foveon. One of the most recent was last August. I don't think their situation has materially changed since then. It looks like they are now emphasizing niche markets rather than suggesting that they're headed for mainstream photo and video devices. __________________ Lady X Films: A lady with a boring wardrobe...and a global mission. Hey, you don't have enough stuff! Buy with confidence from our sponsors. Hand-picked as the best in the business...Really! See some of my work one frame at a time: www.KenTanaka.com

June 22nd, 2004, 01:17 PM	#81
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	Maxtor SATA II Drive w/ 16mb Buffer http://www.shareholder.com/maxtor/Re..._section=press

June 23rd, 2004, 04:35 PM	#85
Steven Digges Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,828	Hot new Intel Chip???? Two days ago in my local paper (Arizona Republic) in the business section there was an article about a new super chip set being announced by Intel that is supposed to be available this week. The article did not name it or give specs, it said: 1. Giant leap forward in graphics processing, can run full res HD TV in your living room and other programs and monitors at the same time. 2. Major improvements for video editing and gaming. 3. First big step towards Intel’s goal of making the PC the heart of a home’s entertainment center. 4. Not a new processor, works with P4, it is a new chip set. Has anyone heard anything about this? Steve __________________ www.CorporateShow.com Been at this so long I'm rounding my years of experience down...not up!

June 24th, 2004, 08:18 AM	#88
Glenn Gipson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Plainfield, New Jersey Posts: 927	Compact Fuel Cell Could have implications for DV cam batteries. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...oshiba_company

June 22nd, 2004, 08:06 AM	#77
Steve McDonald Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Eugene, Oregon Posts: 366	Was there a mention of an application for a video camera in there someplace? The 1.125-inch size would be too big for a camcorder, unless it was a large HD type. A huge lens would be needed to get much zoom power with such a large CCD. I would think there would be a version of the Foveon CCD that was smaller and with fewer pixels, if it was intended for any type of video use, other than ultra-high definition, special use cameras. There was no indication of the refresh or frame-rate that these tri-depth sensors could use. I'm surprised by the slow implementation of the Foveon CCD system, which has been around for several years. I expected that my next video camera would have been outfitted with one, a couple of years ago. Is there a hidden difficulty in using them for video purposes? Do the three sensing layers use pixel-offsetting? Lots of questions, but I haven't heard many specific answers, nor have I heard of committments by video manufacturers to use them. Steve McDonald

June 22nd, 2004, 09:48 AM	#78
Ron Evans Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Posts: 4,220	The chip isn't that big its just a bit bigger than a 1/2" CCD(1/2 = 0.5, 1/1.8 = 0.5555, 2/3 = .6666) smaller than a 2/3". So lenses could be 1/2" . This is the first in the series that has a low pixel count. I think the others were intended to address the high end still camera market. This chip could be an excellent choice for a HDV camera!!! Ron Evans

June 22nd, 2004, 10:20 AM	#80
Joe Garnero Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Woodstock, GA Posts: 60	I also want to chime in. My friend has gone through 4 Sigma S10 cameras due to spots (dead pixels?) in his pictures. So besides not being ready for main-stream markets, they don't appear to be ready for mass market - period.... Of course this could be a Sigma issue as well.

June 22nd, 2004, 03:04 PM	#82
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	That is cool. I would like to new 10,000 RPM Western Digital Raptors with this SATA II. Hopefully, Maxtor will put out something to compete with WD's 74 GByte Raptor, which goes for about $200. This little drive hauls ! My coworker works on disk drives uses two in Raptors in RAID0 as a boot drive. His motherboard chipset (nVidia nForce3) supports SATA without using the PCI bus Risky, but FAST.

June 22nd, 2004, 04:38 PM	#83
Steve McDonald Major Player Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Eugene, Oregon Posts: 366	I mistakeningly interpreted the figure "1/1.8" as meaning one and one-eighth inches. This new trend in mixing fractions and decimals to express CCD sizes in what are actually bastardized fractions, is mathematically incorrect and, I believe deliberately confusing. If you used fractional expressions like that on a math test, you'd get an "F". When a camcorder manufacturer specifies that a model has a 1/4.8th-inch CCD, they're just hoping that many people won't realize that it's actually only .21 inches and will think instead that it's larger than the 1/4th-inch CCD on the previous year's model. If they insist on going with CCD sizes that can't be expressed by common fractions, why don't they just use pure decimals? A dual expression of, for example, .55 inches/13.8mm would be best for international products. Steve McDonald

June 22nd, 2004, 05:09 PM	#84
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,801	Actually the whole CCD size issue is more complicated than this. The sizes are not really diagonals of the CCD's, but go back to the vacuum tube days when camera tubes were designated by the diameter of the cylindrical glass tube. The active image area was quite a bit smaller than this (a rectangle within the circle). When CCD imagers cam into use the first ones were sized to correspond to the active image area of a 2/3" cylindrical tube, hence the term 2/3" CCD. Now there never was such a thing as a 1/4" or 1/3" vacuum tube sensor so these sizes just represent the manufacturer's concept of how big the active image area of a 1/4" or 1/3"vacuum tube would have been if it existed. According to an article I recently read, a 1.25" vacuum tube had an image diagonal 21.4mm, a 1" tube had a 16mm diagonal, and both the 1/2" and 5/8" tubes had 8mm diagonals. Modern camcorder chip sizes include 1/3" CCD's with 6mm diagonals, 1/4" CCD's with 4mm diagonals and 1/6" CCD's with 3mm diagonals.

June 23rd, 2004, 06:51 PM	#86
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Is this it? - Tom's Hardware Guide: Intel's 775 Launch Mixes Ambition With A Strong Aftertaste

June 23rd, 2004, 08:12 PM	#87
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Lots of manufacturers (nVidia, ATI, Via, etc.) are offering motherboard chipsets for AMD and Intel microprocessors. This Intel chipset is an incremental, not monumental, step forward. Now, this Intel part should help reduce the cost of big TVs : http://www.intel.com/design/celect/technology/lcos/

June 24th, 2004, 02:39 PM	#89
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Toshiba's methanol fuel cell Though, this article doesn't comation enough information to accurately convert the specs to camcorder battery units of milliAmpereHours. Someday, we will kiss those big bricks and recharge anxieties goodbye. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0406/04062401toshibafuel.asp "Toshiba's methanol fuel cell" It will certainly be some time before we see fuel cells used in digital cameras but it's worth noting that development fuel cells is accelerating. Toshiba today announced a small methanol fuel cell which weighs just 8.5 g (0.3 oz) and can produce 100 mW of power. Toshiba describe this new unit as "small enough for integration into a wireless headset for mobile phones, but still efficient enough to power an MP3 music player for as long as 20 hours on a single 2cc charge of highly concentrated methanol. The new fuel cell outputs 100 milliwatts of power, and can continue to do so, non-stop, for as long as users top up its integrated fuel tank—a process that is as simple as it is safe." Press Release:

June 26th, 2004, 04:24 PM	#90
Steven Digges Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 1,828	Michael, That review on Tom’s hardware is what the republic was talking about. However Tom's review is reality based. It is beyond me why a major newspaper would make it sound like this was the biggest advance in many years. I wish I still had the article so I could quote it. They made it sound revolutionary. I have a P4, 3.2 Extreme Edition and a 800 FSB on my system and am very happy with it, the article made it sound outdated already. Steve __________________ www.CorporateShow.com Been at this so long I'm rounding my years of experience down...not up!