The Quickstream DV Video Capture Device at DVinfo.net

Steve Nunez · June 1st, 2003, 05:59 PM

Hey everyone,

anyone who has followed any of my threads knows I'm a big proponent of "tapeless" storage ala hard drive type storage.

The Firestore although great for it's purpose doesn't seem ideally suited for true run and gun videotaping without tapes (the new Canon's wont work w/o a tape inserted)..what I was hoping for was a device that could be firewired right through the fw port and capture clips on the go without wires or extra batts etc....

The Quickstream Dv seems to be the solution- it's the size of a pack of cigarettes, self-powered and can be mounted underneateh via tripod socket or above mounted to a hot shoe...nothing more than a single small wire needs to be fed into the dv camcorder- perfect solution for going totally tapeless. Problem is- this product has been annouced quite some time ago yet hasn't materialized in the open market just yet- several calls to different Mac stores that advertise this device all claim it's coming soon but have no concrete ETA...

...does anyone have any inside news about this device by MCE Tech?
I know camcorders will eventually all go tapeless i the future sometime- and running tapes to capture 10 minutes of useable footage is starting to wear on me....we need this Quickstream DV and NOW.....

someone tell me they know something!!!!

Thanks guys!

K. Forman · June 1st, 2003, 07:16 PM

It sounds like it would be sweet- even to a PC person. However, I would still feel safer having tape in the cam...just in case. For short amounts of footage, I guess it would be ok, but you need to have masters.

Jeff Donald · June 1st, 2003, 07:38 PM

I heard that the camera can't control stop and start recording. The device is being reworked and may or may not see the light of day. The price was right, but the device was pretty primitive.. It also recorded a RAW DV that needed to be rendered before your NLE could use it. This doesn't save much time because of the rendering.

Steve Nunez · June 1st, 2003, 07:46 PM

Keith,

I'm sure allot of people would agree having a master or backup of important footage is great- but there's no denying a mass market for people exisit who would rather shoot digitally onto a HD and archive to DVD-R or even back out to tape if desired.... what I am finding is I shoot entire 60 min tapes for around 10 min or so of actual useable video to be included in any project- for myself a tapeless solution would be a God-send....I'd sell the GL2 in a second (even tho I love the thing) for any new 3CCD camera that incorporates a tapeless HD media storage system that would allow the user to shoot onto laptop HD's....with 80GB drives around that's quite a bit more than 60 minute tapes can hold- over 6 hours of tapeless storage- now that's what I am talking about!

Imagine going home and attaching a fw cable to your camcorder and having it mount as a HD on your desktop (Mac or PC) and having raw uncompressed DV clips ready to edit, archive and transfer to your computer in any way data can be saved....I think the technology is ready now and ready to be implemented- the 1st one to do so will have my money right away!

Not saying that tapes are bad but for my purposes and those of others- tape storage seems out of place in the 2003+ years with all digital devices- many of us are shooting digital for the purpose of editing in our NLE systems and having to capture and purchase tapes seems out of place- I shoot digital cameras because they don't use film- if they did I wouldn't shoot a SLR. Canon has $1500 of mine because of buying an EOS 10D because there are no consumeable films to use- the sooner Canon does the same to the 3CCD cams the better!

Just my opinion- for whatever its worth! (probably not much anyway)

Steve Nunez · June 1st, 2003, 07:54 PM

Jeff, you're probably right- as the few shops I've called say no units have arrived and no confirmation as to ETA's for the product.

I do know the Firestore has issues with newer Canon cams as to starting and stopping of recording via the "rec" button..the older Canon cams worked perfectly but for some reason the newer uits aren't recording via the "rec" button, not to mention you need actual tapes inserted- which sorta defeats the "tapeless" solution aspect in my eyes.

I'll just keep on the lookout- hopefully someone will find a workaround to this problem.....or it could be the camcorder co's are already at work on tapeless camcorders and the small DV device co's may have abandoned product developement.

I'll just keep my fingers crossed and order more tapes (yuck)

K. Forman · June 2nd, 2003, 06:57 AM

Steve- A hard drive is a hard drive. I had a hard disk recorder for capturing audio. Worked great... unless the power suddenly went out? Anything that wasn't saved went to... wherever lost bits of memory go...

We have all lost something important on the computor, because we didn't save it. If you are a Proffessional using a camera, how would you explain "No footage"?

Will Fastie · June 2nd, 2003, 07:52 AM

I, for one, can't afford the cost of recording everything to hard disk. It is not a good solution for long-term retention.

That's the edge tape currently has. I've got 25-year-old cassette tapes that still play fine. Tape remains the prefered archival medium in IT circles.

If, however, there was an optical disc capable of holding no less than one hour of raw (AVI) footage, that would provide a suitable medium for long-term retention. The blue laser devices would fall in the two hour category generally speaking, with projections for future capacities in the 100GB = 7 hours range.

Then, and only then, would I be willing to have a hard disk in the camcorder. I'd shoot, stream off the cam to the PC's hard disk (or just mount the cam's disk), and then burn the original footage to optical discs. That would free up the cam's hard disk. It would also allow long-term retention of the footage and high-speed access to it on demand, without cluttering up the PC's operating hard disks with archival footage.

Tape is a very cost effective medium. Comparisons:
Tape (13GB) -- $4, $/GB = $0.31.
DVD+/-RW (4.7GB) -- $4, $/GB = $0.85
Disk (40GB IBM TravelStar 5400RPM) -- $127, $/GB = $3.18
Flash (1GB SanDisk) -- $227, $/GB = $227.
MicroDrive (1GB IBM, 3600RPM) -- $184, $/GB = $184

Note: The MicroDrive is probably not fast enough for video. 5400RPM notebook drives are marginal.

One cannot discount the possibility of cams with optical recording (I know they exist now, but they capture MPEG, not DV). If there really was a 100GB, CD form factor optical disc, then the 3" form factor disc would hold 26GB equivalent to two hours of raw video.

That would probably put a stake in tape's heart. Until then, tape has attractive and compelling attributes.

Steve Nunez · June 2nd, 2003, 07:56 AM

Keith,

I'm not sure I am following your reasoning (questioning)...

but if future camcorders had internal HD's that captured video and the batts were charged- you'd be in the same boat as any professional today with a camcorder that use tape and batteries- and as far as I know- all camcorders use batteries...as long as they are charged you'd pretty much have the video that was shot......the only negative would be HD failures- but seeing as to how hundreds of thousands of laptops are chugging away- laptop HD's would seem a safe bet.

As for me- i'm still waiting for the Quickstream DV to materialize...unless a tapeless pure digital camcorder comes out (3CCD of course)

K. Forman · June 2nd, 2003, 08:54 AM

All I was trying to say, is shit happens. If the battery on my cam dies, I just replace the battery and plow on. If a HD loses power, it loses ALL UNSAVED info. I have lost audio on my HD recorder, due to UNPLANNED power loss. And in this world, where Muphy's Laws rule supreme, I would just feel safer with a back up, and not solely on the HD. That's it.

I would still love to get my hands on something like this. It would be perfect for when something runs 75 minutes, and my tape is only 63...

Steve Nunez · June 2nd, 2003, 06:41 PM

Keith,

I gotcha.

As for wanting to get your hands on something like this- yeah me tooooo!

..something's telling me this may never materialize.....but who knows?

Ken Tanaka · December 12th, 2003, 10:39 PM

MCE apparently began shipping this gadget this week. Read more here.

Steve Nunez · December 13th, 2003, 09:33 AM

Ken- thanks a million- I've been dying for this product to come out.....the 180 minute model is in my sights- thanks again!

Will Fastie · December 13th, 2003, 01:55 PM

Great sounding product, but hideously expensive. The 90-min model costs $30 per GB and the 360-min model just under $13/GB.

Everyday IDE hard drives are $0.50 per GB. Expensive laptop hard drives are $6/GB.

So the only possible tradeoff is time. How long does it take to transfer the contents of the 90-min drive to the hard disk of an NLE station?

Will

Ken Tanaka · December 13th, 2003, 10:51 PM

This product does interest me, even though I'm not keenly interested in direct-to-disk units. But indeed, Will, it's an expensive "hard disk" if you look at it purely from that viewpoint. (Although the Sony units are far, far more expensive and deliver less value.) The value proposition of all of these devices is nearly exclusively that of time savings, whether translated into labor costs or into turn-around competitiveness.

Mark Williams · December 17th, 2003, 02:46 PM

There are some other very important advantages here.

1. No need to purchase a mini-dv deck for your NLE computer system. Last time I checked one of the cheaper JVC mini-dv decks cost around $800.00 unless you use a cheap dv camera about $350.00 instead. A Panasonic mini-dv deck is over $1,000.00

2. Supposedly no problem with dropped frames on this device.

3. Finally, an end to dv camera head and tape alignment issues. My GL1 has been in the shop 2 times already costing me over $200.00

If this proves to be a quality product and performs as advertized, then at least for me it is well worth the price.

Regards,

Mark Williams

June 1st, 2003, 05:59 PM	#1
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Quickstream DV no show?? Hey everyone, anyone who has followed any of my threads knows I'm a big proponent of "tapeless" storage ala hard drive type storage. The Firestore although great for it's purpose doesn't seem ideally suited for true run and gun videotaping without tapes (the new Canon's wont work w/o a tape inserted)..what I was hoping for was a device that could be firewired right through the fw port and capture clips on the go without wires or extra batts etc.... The Quickstream Dv seems to be the solution- it's the size of a pack of cigarettes, self-powered and can be mounted underneateh via tripod socket or above mounted to a hot shoe...nothing more than a single small wire needs to be fed into the dv camcorder- perfect solution for going totally tapeless. Problem is- this product has been annouced quite some time ago yet hasn't materialized in the open market just yet- several calls to different Mac stores that advertise this device all claim it's coming soon but have no concrete ETA... ...does anyone have any inside news about this device by MCE Tech? I know camcorders will eventually all go tapeless i the future sometime- and running tapes to capture 10 minutes of useable footage is starting to wear on me....we need this Quickstream DV and NOW..... someone tell me they know something!!!! Thanks guys! __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

June 1st, 2003, 07:38 PM	#3
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	I heard that the camera can't control stop and start recording. The device is being reworked and may or may not see the light of day. The price was right, but the device was pretty primitive.. It also recorded a RAW DV that needed to be rendered before your NLE could use it. This doesn't save much time because of the rendering. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

June 1st, 2003, 07:46 PM	#4
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Keith, I'm sure allot of people would agree having a master or backup of important footage is great- but there's no denying a mass market for people exisit who would rather shoot digitally onto a HD and archive to DVD-R or even back out to tape if desired.... what I am finding is I shoot entire 60 min tapes for around 10 min or so of actual useable video to be included in any project- for myself a tapeless solution would be a God-send....I'd sell the GL2 in a second (even tho I love the thing) for any new 3CCD camera that incorporates a tapeless HD media storage system that would allow the user to shoot onto laptop HD's....with 80GB drives around that's quite a bit more than 60 minute tapes can hold- over 6 hours of tapeless storage- now that's what I am talking about! Imagine going home and attaching a fw cable to your camcorder and having it mount as a HD on your desktop (Mac or PC) and having raw uncompressed DV clips ready to edit, archive and transfer to your computer in any way data can be saved....I think the technology is ready now and ready to be implemented- the 1st one to do so will have my money right away! Not saying that tapes are bad but for my purposes and those of others- tape storage seems out of place in the 2003+ years with all digital devices- many of us are shooting digital for the purpose of editing in our NLE systems and having to capture and purchase tapes seems out of place- I shoot digital cameras because they don't use film- if they did I wouldn't shoot a SLR. Canon has $1500 of mine because of buying an EOS 10D because there are no consumeable films to use- the sooner Canon does the same to the 3CCD cams the better! Just my opinion- for whatever its worth! (probably not much anyway) __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

June 1st, 2003, 07:54 PM	#5
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Jeff, you're probably right- as the few shops I've called say no units have arrived and no confirmation as to ETA's for the product. I do know the Firestore has issues with newer Canon cams as to starting and stopping of recording via the "rec" button..the older Canon cams worked perfectly but for some reason the newer uits aren't recording via the "rec" button, not to mention you need actual tapes inserted- which sorta defeats the "tapeless" solution aspect in my eyes. I'll just keep on the lookout- hopefully someone will find a workaround to this problem.....or it could be the camcorder co's are already at work on tapeless camcorders and the small DV device co's may have abandoned product developement. I'll just keep my fingers crossed and order more tapes (yuck) __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

June 2nd, 2003, 07:56 AM	#8
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Keith, I'm not sure I am following your reasoning (questioning)... but if future camcorders had internal HD's that captured video and the batts were charged- you'd be in the same boat as any professional today with a camcorder that use tape and batteries- and as far as I know- all camcorders use batteries...as long as they are charged you'd pretty much have the video that was shot......the only negative would be HD failures- but seeing as to how hundreds of thousands of laptops are chugging away- laptop HD's would seem a safe bet. As for me- i'm still waiting for the Quickstream DV to materialize...unless a tapeless pure digital camcorder comes out (3CCD of course) __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

June 1st, 2003, 07:16 PM	#2
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	It sounds like it would be sweet- even to a PC person. However, I would still feel safer having tape in the cam...just in case. For short amounts of footage, I guess it would be ok, but you need to have masters.

June 2nd, 2003, 06:57 AM	#6
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	Steve- A hard drive is a hard drive. I had a hard disk recorder for capturing audio. Worked great... unless the power suddenly went out? Anything that wasn't saved went to... wherever lost bits of memory go... We have all lost something important on the computor, because we didn't save it. If you are a Proffessional using a camera, how would you explain "No footage"?

June 2nd, 2003, 07:52 AM	#7
Will Fastie Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Jarrettsville, MD Posts: 353	I, for one, can't afford the cost of recording everything to hard disk. It is not a good solution for long-term retention. That's the edge tape currently has. I've got 25-year-old cassette tapes that still play fine. Tape remains the prefered archival medium in IT circles. If, however, there was an optical disc capable of holding no less than one hour of raw (AVI) footage, that would provide a suitable medium for long-term retention. The blue laser devices would fall in the two hour category generally speaking, with projections for future capacities in the 100GB = 7 hours range. Then, and only then, would I be willing to have a hard disk in the camcorder. I'd shoot, stream off the cam to the PC's hard disk (or just mount the cam's disk), and then burn the original footage to optical discs. That would free up the cam's hard disk. It would also allow long-term retention of the footage and high-speed access to it on demand, without cluttering up the PC's operating hard disks with archival footage. Tape is a very cost effective medium. Comparisons: Tape (13GB) -- $4, $/GB = $0.31. DVD+/-RW (4.7GB) -- $4, $/GB = $0.85 Disk (40GB IBM TravelStar 5400RPM) -- $127, $/GB = $3.18 Flash (1GB SanDisk) -- $227, $/GB = $227. MicroDrive (1GB IBM, 3600RPM) -- $184, $/GB = $184 Note: The MicroDrive is probably not fast enough for video. 5400RPM notebook drives are marginal. One cannot discount the possibility of cams with optical recording (I know they exist now, but they capture MPEG, not DV). If there really was a 100GB, CD form factor optical disc, then the 3" form factor disc would hold 26GB equivalent to two hours of raw video. That would probably put a stake in tape's heart. Until then, tape has attractive and compelling attributes.

June 2nd, 2003, 08:54 AM	#9
K. Forman Capt. Quirk Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Middle of the woods in Georgia Posts: 3,596	All I was trying to say, is shit happens. If the battery on my cam dies, I just replace the battery and plow on. If a HD loses power, it loses ALL UNSAVED info. I have lost audio on my HD recorder, due to UNPLANNED power loss. And in this world, where Muphy's Laws rule supreme, I would just feel safer with a back up, and not solely on the HD. That's it. I would still love to get my hands on something like this. It would be perfect for when something runs 75 minutes, and my tape is only 63...

June 2nd, 2003, 06:41 PM	#10
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Keith, I gotcha. As for wanting to get your hands on something like this- yeah me tooooo! ..something's telling me this may never materialize.....but who knows? __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

December 12th, 2003, 10:39 PM	#11
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	MCE apparently began shipping this gadget this week. Read more here. __________________ 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

December 13th, 2003, 09:33 AM	#12
Steve Nunez Trustee Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pembroke Pines, Florida Posts: 1,418	Ken- thanks a million- I've been dying for this product to come out.....the 180 minute model is in my sights- thanks again! __________________ Steve Nunez-New York City www.stevenunez.com

December 13th, 2003, 01:55 PM	#13
Will Fastie Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Jarrettsville, MD Posts: 353	Great sounding product, but hideously expensive. The 90-min model costs $30 per GB and the 360-min model just under $13/GB. Everyday IDE hard drives are $0.50 per GB. Expensive laptop hard drives are $6/GB. So the only possible tradeoff is time. How long does it take to transfer the contents of the 90-min drive to the hard disk of an NLE station? Will

December 13th, 2003, 10:51 PM	#14
Ken Tanaka Retired DV Info Net Almunus Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,943	This product does interest me, even though I'm not keenly interested in direct-to-disk units. But indeed, Will, it's an expensive "hard disk" if you look at it purely from that viewpoint. (Although the Sony units are far, far more expensive and deliver less value.) The value proposition of all of these devices is nearly exclusively that of time savings, whether translated into labor costs or into turn-around competitiveness. __________________ 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

December 17th, 2003, 02:46 PM	#15
Mark Williams Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Deep South, U.S. Posts: 1,526	There are some other very important advantages here. 1. No need to purchase a mini-dv deck for your NLE computer system. Last time I checked one of the cheaper JVC mini-dv decks cost around $800.00 unless you use a cheap dv camera about $350.00 instead. A Panasonic mini-dv deck is over $1,000.00 2. Supposedly no problem with dropped frames on this device. 3. Finally, an end to dv camera head and tape alignment issues. My GL1 has been in the shop 2 times already costing me over $200.00 If this proves to be a quality product and performs as advertized, then at least for me it is well worth the price. Regards, Mark Williams