VIP: the deal with the Grass Valley Viper FilmStream ? at DVinfo.net

Leo Mandy · April 27th, 2005, 09:23 AM

From what I read, it seems to capture the image to the harddrive - isn't this the same as capturing straight to a laptop through firewire?

Joshua Starnes · April 27th, 2005, 10:03 AM

Not exactly - the Viper sends out a very large datastream over an HD-SDI cable (actually, it's 2, isn't it?) to whatever you want. Thompson makes a hard drive based HD VTR that you can record to (which I believe is also dockable with the camera itself, for steadicam work or something similar), but I've also heard of them being hooked up to the new Sony HDCAM SR decks.

Theoretically, you could hook the F950 up to record to hard drive as well, though I think for logistical purposes most stay with tape until post.

Leo Mandy · April 27th, 2005, 12:18 PM

I wonder if all cameras could be hacked in this way to get a better image from cheap mini DV and maybe - even analogue?

Keith Wakeham · April 27th, 2005, 05:12 PM

I guess you have been reading about andromeda mandy for the hacking situation.

In theory all can be hacked, even analog, but it really provides no benefit. Hacking a single chip ccd minidv camera isn't going to be a miracle because you still have a bayered analog output at low res.

The reason DVX looks good when it is done is because with minidv, 3ccd information is almost destroyed, a huge amount of colour data is thrown out along with the electronics destroying the picture just a little but more along with some old school dct compression. Bypassing all that leaves the raw image. Easier to work with in post, but needs more work in post. Thats the trade of, but if you want quality then you won't really care about the little work.

Viper is different, its designed around a huge ccd to do what it does

Leo Mandy · April 27th, 2005, 07:03 PM

Thanks for the info. I guess the panasonic GS series would benefit from it too because they are 3CCD, right?

Keith Wakeham · April 28th, 2005, 02:53 PM

They likely would, but i doubt that it will be hacked anytime soon for that because the cost of doing the mod charged by reel stream to do the mod on the dvx is 3000 so moding a cheaper camera would seem almost pointless unless it could be done for a lot less

Dan Diaconu · April 28th, 2005, 03:04 PM

Why pointless? How come?
If I could get the best signal out of any 3ccd, I'd go for the least expensive rig any time. Why use the 3ccd from DVX or other cameras when you can get the same for less? (using the mod)
The mod makes sense to me and I will ask them if it is avail for other camcorders. I'd rather spend 3k on mod than on "features" that are avail in NLE and you may not get to use them anyway if the mod is there... Just my POV.

Leo Mandy · April 28th, 2005, 03:48 PM

That is the way I was looking at it. Hopefully, a modification is easily transferred over to another Panasonic model. 3CCD's is the bottom line, right?

Dan Diaconu · April 28th, 2005, 04:26 PM

IMHO yes....

Keith Wakeham · April 29th, 2005, 08:21 AM

I didn't mean that it was pointless per say. Yes you would get a huge jump in aspects relating to the ccd like latitude and all that extra colour information. But consider this, you get what you pay for. The lens and the build quality are also factors along with ccd quality and framerate control. I don't have a gs series camera but i don't think it will output 24p, or anything outher than 30i.

So taking a $1000 camera and doing a mod that would cost over $3000 totals up to 4 grand for a camera that is still interlaced that uses windowing on it ccds, so it is not even reading the entire megapixel for video on the ccds. Then you have a smaller lens with less controls.

All camcorders can benefit from this mod, including old betamax camcorders, but at what point do you justify spending $3000 to get 4:4:4. In my opinion it would be a nice prosumer or better. You might think a high end consumer model is justifable. When a modification costs more than the camera I think a better camera is in order

Dan Diaconu · April 29th, 2005, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith Wakeham

The lens and the build quality are also factors along with ccd quality and framerate control. I don't have a gs series camera but i don't think it will output 24p, or anything outher than 30i.

No, it will not output 24P.
Sorry, my mistake. I mean to be used with an image converter at which point, the original lens gets "in the way".

>>>>>
So taking a $1000 camera and doing a mod that would cost over $3000 totals up to 4 grand for a camera that is still interlaced that uses windowing on it CCD’s, so it is not even reading the entire mega pixel for video on the CCD’s. Then you have a smaller lens with less controls.<<<<<

again, whatever lens control would have been on the original lens was of no interest to me, (but I did not mention)

From what I understood about Andromeda, It will gather the signal from the CCD and (aside from being uncompressed) will be exported to HD as whatever form the user will decide (including 24P)
Even if that is not the case, there are options in NLE to make it "look" like 24P (for the sake of strobbing) and unless print to film is desired (which would be done from a higher end chips for higher resolution) the purpose would be accomplished from a lower end camcorder (IMHO)
The 2.3Mpixel still from that model could be Hi Rez enough for video (if all data could be captured uncompressed) The refresh rate may not allow for 30fps (or even 24) but who knows.....

Keith Wakeham · April 30th, 2005, 02:36 PM

The andromeda does capture what ever is output from the ccd's just after the adc and right now is designed to fit inside a dvx100 so all that is available is a mini usb port.

HD is achieved with output because the green ccd is shifted a fraction of a pixel and uses a technique similar to debayering in the dvx. If the gs is pixel shifted then it would use the exact same method to enlarge it likely.

If you really want to and think it is a viable option to mod a gs400 then I wish you good luck and hope you have an electrical engineering degree because unless you can somehow convince Reel-stream to do (doubtful at best) it or after they have developed for every single current prosumer out their, then it probably won't be done. They are the only ones who have done it and they won't likely be doing anything other than modding dvx's for a nice while, since it just barely entered a beta testing phase.

April 27th, 2005, 09:23 AM	#1
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	VIP: the deal with the Grass Valley Viper FilmStream ? From what I read, it seems to capture the image to the harddrive - isn't this the same as capturing straight to a laptop through firewire?

April 27th, 2005, 10:03 AM	#2
Joshua Starnes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 356	Not exactly - the Viper sends out a very large datastream over an HD-SDI cable (actually, it's 2, isn't it?) to whatever you want. Thompson makes a hard drive based HD VTR that you can record to (which I believe is also dockable with the camera itself, for steadicam work or something similar), but I've also heard of them being hooked up to the new Sony HDCAM SR decks. Theoretically, you could hook the F950 up to record to hard drive as well, though I think for logistical purposes most stay with tape until post.

April 27th, 2005, 12:18 PM	#3
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	I wonder if all cameras could be hacked in this way to get a better image from cheap mini DV and maybe - even analogue?

April 27th, 2005, 05:12 PM	#4
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	I guess you have been reading about andromeda mandy for the hacking situation. In theory all can be hacked, even analog, but it really provides no benefit. Hacking a single chip ccd minidv camera isn't going to be a miracle because you still have a bayered analog output at low res. The reason DVX looks good when it is done is because with minidv, 3ccd information is almost destroyed, a huge amount of colour data is thrown out along with the electronics destroying the picture just a little but more along with some old school dct compression. Bypassing all that leaves the raw image. Easier to work with in post, but needs more work in post. Thats the trade of, but if you want quality then you won't really care about the little work. Viper is different, its designed around a huge ccd to do what it does

April 27th, 2005, 07:03 PM	#5
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	Thanks for the info. I guess the panasonic GS series would benefit from it too because they are 3CCD, right?

April 28th, 2005, 02:53 PM	#6
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	They likely would, but i doubt that it will be hacked anytime soon for that because the cost of doing the mod charged by reel stream to do the mod on the dvx is 3000 so moding a cheaper camera would seem almost pointless unless it could be done for a lot less

April 28th, 2005, 03:04 PM	#7
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	Why pointless? How come? If I could get the best signal out of any 3ccd, I'd go for the least expensive rig any time. Why use the 3ccd from DVX or other cameras when you can get the same for less? (using the mod) The mod makes sense to me and I will ask them if it is avail for other camcorders. I'd rather spend 3k on mod than on "features" that are avail in NLE and you may not get to use them anyway if the mod is there... Just my POV.

April 28th, 2005, 03:48 PM	#8
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	That is the way I was looking at it. Hopefully, a modification is easily transferred over to another Panasonic model. 3CCD's is the bottom line, right?

April 28th, 2005, 04:26 PM	#9
Dan Diaconu Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 804	IMHO yes....

April 29th, 2005, 08:21 AM	#10
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	I didn't mean that it was pointless per say. Yes you would get a huge jump in aspects relating to the ccd like latitude and all that extra colour information. But consider this, you get what you pay for. The lens and the build quality are also factors along with ccd quality and framerate control. I don't have a gs series camera but i don't think it will output 24p, or anything outher than 30i. So taking a $1000 camera and doing a mod that would cost over $3000 totals up to 4 grand for a camera that is still interlaced that uses windowing on it ccds, so it is not even reading the entire megapixel for video on the ccds. Then you have a smaller lens with less controls. All camcorders can benefit from this mod, including old betamax camcorders, but at what point do you justify spending $3000 to get 4:4:4. In my opinion it would be a nice prosumer or better. You might think a high end consumer model is justifable. When a modification costs more than the camera I think a better camera is in order

April 30th, 2005, 02:36 PM	#12
Keith Wakeham Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: St. John's, NL, Canada Posts: 416	The andromeda does capture what ever is output from the ccd's just after the adc and right now is designed to fit inside a dvx100 so all that is available is a mini usb port. HD is achieved with output because the green ccd is shifted a fraction of a pixel and uses a technique similar to debayering in the dvx. If the gs is pixel shifted then it would use the exact same method to enlarge it likely. If you really want to and think it is a viable option to mod a gs400 then I wish you good luck and hope you have an electrical engineering degree because unless you can somehow convince Reel-stream to do (doubtful at best) it or after they have developed for every single current prosumer out their, then it probably won't be done. They are the only ones who have done it and they won't likely be doing anything other than modding dvx's for a nice while, since it just barely entered a beta testing phase.