How much is MOBILE HDMI or HD-SDI PLUS analog SD/HD aquisition worth to you?

Mathieu Kassovitz · February 3rd, 2007, 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Hartzell

Nick,

I totally agree with you. I don't really see a use for this, other than maybe a wild life/tavel doc w/ swappable drives. This thing would have to stand up to some pretty harsh conditions.

I disagree.

This product has potential.

And it truly is an indy solution.

Go ahead Alex!

I am definitely going to take a look at this thread for the future.

David Newman · February 3rd, 2007, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Maranda

How much is a MOBILE HDMI or HD-SDI PLUS analog SD/HD 4:2:2 YUV 10bit aquisition solution worth to you?

If you wish to move forward in this market, adding a CineForm encoder to the box is not as you have priced it (for DigitalFilm level -- which assumes end user retail pricing for Prospect HD Ingest with AJA cards.) We do license encoder solutions to hardware vendors just as we have with Wafian and Silicon Imaging (and Sony and Adobe in the past.) We have plenty of value add of capture solutions, including pulldown extraction from HDMI/HDSDI, and 10-bit compression, with a widening range of post tools and platform support. Your recorder can produce streams targeted to a wide range of post solutions, from a free CineForm decoder for Windows and OS X, to the full Prospect HD Edit DI solution (which is only $1499 these days.)

If you product gains momentum, please give CineForm a call.

Mathieu Kassovitz · February 4th, 2007, 04:54 AM

This thread grows up.

Hmmmm, having Mr. Newman there, it seems an important card. The best you might have ever seen over your own thread. Over your own purpose, your own proposal. Take the chance.

Alex Maranda · February 4th, 2007, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mathieu Kassovitz

This thread grows up.

Hmmmm, having Mr. Newman there, it seems an important card. The best you might have ever seen over your own thread. Over your own purpose, your own proposal. Take the chance.

Mathieu, I'm in quiet mode now but you made me smile; David Newmann's goodwill is welcome but it won't solve my engineering hurdles; Cineform might be a no-go after all, it needs too much CPU power for real-time encoding in mobile mode (which was the promise of the thread). I'm eyeing another codec, mentioned by one of the posters.
I'm working out the power budget right now, a fair bit of the initial specs have already changed because of this. I won't go into details as it would become vaporware and bad business practice, so this thread won't grow any more from my contribution.

Do email me if you're potentially interested in the product (as others have already done, silent readers who haven't even posted in the thread).

I will maintain a private mailing list during product development, and recipients will be in on the current spec and feature set.

David Newman · February 4th, 2007, 10:47 AM

Alex,

We do have one of the best compute cycle per bit encoding times, so you are unlikely to beat us for quality/compute time at a given bit-rate, yet 1920x1080 10-bit is not easy as you may be finding. I wouldn't rule us out without contacting us first, particularly as a huge avantage we have over all other 10-bit codecs, we have ready-to-go real-time post production solutions, helping the marketability of any compressed aquisition product.

Alex Maranda · February 4th, 2007, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Newman

Alex,

We do have one of the best compute cycle per bit encoding times, so you are unlikely to beat us for quality/compute time at a given bit-rate, yet 1920x1080 10-bit is not easy as you may be finding. I wouldn't rule us out without contacting us first, particularly as a huge avantage we have over all other 10-bit codecs, we have ready-to-go real-time post production solutions, helping the marketability of any compressed aquisition product.

David, I am a poor communicator it seems :) I have nothing but respect for wavelet codecs in general and Cineform in particular. It was my first pro choice.
However, preliminary power budgeting indicates I may have to go with a much higher bitrate, but real-time codec. I am contacting you regardless.

Dave F. Nelson · February 7th, 2007, 11:13 AM

I think you are on the right track. I think you should speak to Dave at Cineform before you make any final decisions... pick his brain so-to-speak. Their approach appears to be the strongest low-cost solution out there for cross-platform HD acquisition and editing for low-budget indie filmmakers.

I believe that the best approach for a low cost solution for indie filmmakers would be a cross platform codec such as Cineform. They will be releasing their Mac codec shortly so the codec will be available for the Mac too. The R&D is done. The base is growing. And the stuff works.

Cineform tells me that they are working directly with Blackmagic to support the Intensity card with Aspect HD. Cineform's Aspect HD product will be available shortly with HDMI support, which I'm told will support 1920 x 1080 as well 4:2:2 8-bit.

Supporting Cineform's codec would give your customer the option of working with Cineform's Prospect HD for lightly compressed 10 bit just like the Wafian Drive. And Cineform's codec allows you to keep the drive size smaller.

I would like to see a recorder that accepts HDMI input and HDMI/DVI output. All new camcorders from JVC, Panasonic, and Sony will be including HDMI in their AVCHD and HDV camcorders. It should have Cineform's new HDMI enabled Aspect HD bundled with it (should be available soon. Speak with Dave about it).

The Blackmagic Intensity card, provides HDMI output for monitoring too. Monitoring is a problem with these camcorders since when you use the HDMI port, the camcorders disable the component, composite and S-video ports on the camera so you are shooting blind unless you think you can see to focus high quality footage with a 3 inch LCD SD monitor.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Ken Hodson · February 7th, 2007, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Nelson

Supporting Cineform's codec would give your customer the option of working with Cineform's Prospect HD for lightly compressed 10 bit just like the Wafian Drive.

I wouldn't call ProspectHD "lightly compressed" it is very compressed, and that is why it has such amazingly low disk usage. Of course "compressed" isn't the dirty word many believe it to be as the codec is 10-bit visually lossless, it just means it requires more cpu power to encode.

David Newman · February 7th, 2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Hodson

I wouldn't call ProspectHD "lightly compressed" it is very compressed, and that is why it has such amazingly low disk usage. Of course "compressed" isn't the dirty word many believe it to be as the codec is 10-bit visually lossless, it just means it requires more cpu power to encode.

It is lightly compressed when compared with the whole spectrum of codecs. For the Filmscan modes under Prospect HD/2K, our compression is as light as Panasonic D5 (i.e. 5:1 compressed 10-bit.)

Alex Maranda · February 11th, 2007, 01:24 PM

Hi, can you guys provide input on this:

I've concluded that 1920 30p/60i is not technically feasible with current hardware/software in a fully mobile capture box. 24p/50i is, if only just...it really is this tight. I won't go technical on why this is so, my question is does this kill the concept from a marketing perspective?

Your thoughts please.

Mathieu Kassovitz · February 12th, 2007, 02:31 AM

Do you mean: 24p/60i or 25p/50i, bien sûr, n'est-ce pas?

Of course, not!

See the new Canon's HV20 example. . .where's the 30p mode? There's no 30p.

For sure, an overcranking capability from a 60/72/120fps would be gold but go to the 24p/60i or 25p/50i route and you should be fine.

Alex Maranda · February 12th, 2007, 04:01 AM

I don't speak French but somehow I don't think I got my point across.

This is what can be done at 1920x1080:
fully mobile (battery operated): 24p 25p 50i.
tethered (with AC mains): 24p 25p 50i 60i (60i with different storage option)

It's a power budget (and storage bandwidth) constraint. 60i is to HD what 29.97 is to NTSC. Same goes for 50i/HD - 25/PAL.

In your particular case (Europe) I assume you don't care much about 60i. North American customers may feel differently.

Ken Hodson · February 12th, 2007, 04:59 AM

The HVX200 and HD100/110/200/250 are native progressive cams and an obvious favorite of the indie film crowd and are most commonly shot using 720p24. How would your set-up handle this?

Alex Maranda · February 12th, 2007, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken Hodson

The HVX200 and HD100/110/200/250 are native progressive cams and an obvious favorite of the indie film crowd and are most commonly shot using 720p24. How would your set-up handle this?

No problem with one of the DeckLink HD cards (component in). The MOBILE issue comes up only at 1920x1080i60. Even then, it can still be captured (albeit with a stationary unit) at dramatically lower cost than the Wafian and other upcoming solutions.

I encourage you to email me and get updated on the current spec (codec, form factor, storage, battery, total weight) on the private mailing list.

Kevin Shaw · February 12th, 2007, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Maranda

For example, the more expensive manufacturer (but better quality and with solid reputation in the business) can deliver vivid colors like Yellow, Deep Blue, Flaming Red, Pale Green, whereas the cheaper one will give me nondescript black. We're not talking thousands of $ difference, but a couple hundred in production price.

If you're trying to keep the price low, I'd say go with the less expensive black option. People who want something fancier can mod it after they buy it.

By the way, is there any technical reason someone couldn't just make an adapter box which took an HD-SDI input and converted it to an eSATA output, then connect that to an eSATA card on a laptop and use the laptop to convert to a moderately compressed recording format? Why go to all the trouble of building specialized devices with their own processor when good laptops are readily available?

February 4th, 2007, 10:47 AM	#50
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	Alex, We do have one of the best compute cycle per bit encoding times, so you are unlikely to beat us for quality/compute time at a given bit-rate, yet 1920x1080 10-bit is not easy as you may be finding. I wouldn't rule us out without contacting us first, particularly as a huge avantage we have over all other 10-bit codecs, we have ready-to-go real-time post production solutions, helping the marketability of any compressed aquisition product. __________________ David Newman -- web: www.gopro.com blog: cineform.blogspot.com -- twitter: twitter.com/David_Newman

February 7th, 2007, 11:13 AM	#52
Dave F. Nelson Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 129	I think you are on the right track. I think you should speak to Dave at Cineform before you make any final decisions... pick his brain so-to-speak. Their approach appears to be the strongest low-cost solution out there for cross-platform HD acquisition and editing for low-budget indie filmmakers. I believe that the best approach for a low cost solution for indie filmmakers would be a cross platform codec such as Cineform. They will be releasing their Mac codec shortly so the codec will be available for the Mac too. The R&D is done. The base is growing. And the stuff works. Cineform tells me that they are working directly with Blackmagic to support the Intensity card with Aspect HD. Cineform's Aspect HD product will be available shortly with HDMI support, which I'm told will support 1920 x 1080 as well 4:2:2 8-bit. Supporting Cineform's codec would give your customer the option of working with Cineform's Prospect HD for lightly compressed 10 bit just like the Wafian Drive. And Cineform's codec allows you to keep the drive size smaller. I would like to see a recorder that accepts HDMI input and HDMI/DVI output. All new camcorders from JVC, Panasonic, and Sony will be including HDMI in their AVCHD and HDV camcorders. It should have Cineform's new HDMI enabled Aspect HD bundled with it (should be available soon. Speak with Dave about it). The Blackmagic Intensity card, provides HDMI output for monitoring too. Monitoring is a problem with these camcorders since when you use the HDMI port, the camcorders disable the component, composite and S-video ports on the camera so you are shooting blind unless you think you can see to focus high quality footage with a 3 inch LCD SD monitor. Just my 2 cents worth. Last edited by Dave F. Nelson; February 8th, 2007 at 08:31 AM.

February 12th, 2007, 04:59 AM	#58
Ken Hodson Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Vancouver BC Canada Posts: 1,315	The HVX200 and HD100/110/200/250 are native progressive cams and an obvious favorite of the indie film crowd and are most commonly shot using 720p24. How would your set-up handle this? __________________ Damnit Jim, I'm a film maker not a sysytems tech.

February 4th, 2007, 04:54 AM	#48
Mathieu Kassovitz Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: paris Posts: 289	This thread grows up. Hmmmm, having Mr. Newman there, it seems an important card. The best you might have ever seen over your own thread. Over your own purpose, your own proposal. Take the chance.

February 11th, 2007, 01:24 PM	#55
Alex Maranda Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Bucharest Posts: 33	Hi, can you guys provide input on this: I've concluded that 1920 30p/60i is not technically feasible with current hardware/software in a fully mobile capture box. 24p/50i is, if only just...it really is this tight. I won't go technical on why this is so, my question is does this kill the concept from a marketing perspective? Your thoughts please.

February 12th, 2007, 02:31 AM	#56
Mathieu Kassovitz Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: paris Posts: 289	Do you mean: 24p/60i or 25p/50i, bien sûr, n'est-ce pas? Of course, not! See the new Canon's HV20 example. . .where's the 30p mode? There's no 30p. For sure, an overcranking capability from a 60/72/120fps would be gold but go to the 24p/60i or 25p/50i route and you should be fine.

February 12th, 2007, 04:01 AM	#57
Alex Maranda Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Bucharest Posts: 33	I don't speak French but somehow I don't think I got my point across. This is what can be done at 1920x1080: fully mobile (battery operated): 24p 25p 50i. tethered (with AC mains): 24p 25p 50i 60i (60i with different storage option) It's a power budget (and storage bandwidth) constraint. 60i is to HD what 29.97 is to NTSC. Same goes for 50i/HD - 25/PAL. In your particular case (Europe) I assume you don't care much about 60i. North American customers may feel differently.