What is the read/write speed a USB drive needs to be compatable, or work for your system?
A MAC mini? You would have to rig up some sort of battery power or be tethered by cables. So if we are going to be tethered with cables, the MAC mini is really the best desktop for the job? I always assumed you ment MAC laptops were better suited than PC laptops. So even in the catagory of desktops, the mini MAC has a large advantage?

Juan,
Sorry to post this here and on the Reel|Stream forums
but I am very interested in Andromeda and have a few questions that might help others too:

1) I most often shoot mobile with a light glidecam smoothshooter - How can I use a computer in this situation? I was thinking of strapping a laptop to my vest, but Motion & a laptop (with spinning Hard dirve & possible fan noise) doesn't really seem smart

2) So I can find used prices for DVX around 1800$ on eBay, but the DVX(b) is at around 3000$ ...??? That much better?
(unfortunately I am Not a previous DVX owner - which would make my decision easy)

3) I would LOVE this to work, but it is similar price as an HVX...(minus P2)
Is it that much better in terms of Res/less noise/ artifacting? NOTE: I am not being difficult - I know this is subjective, and I know most don't have an HVX to compare it to...I just want your thoughts on it

4) I want 16:9. I assume from your posts I would frame that in Post or with Sculptor?

5) Also - I record to Laptop or Mac mini (which may work on the steadicam sled -- if....if... the Mini has a battery--?) and can I also back up in DV what is shoot simultaneously?

it is so nice that people are thinking outside the Box
I am trying to glean as much info as I can -
Thanks,
John

Ken:

There is no limitation on drive read speed for recording. But, the record drive should be able to write at 28MByte/sec continously. This is not hard for a modern 7200RPM 3.5" drive to achieve. There are even some new 7200RPM notebook drives that can achieve this speed.

You are correct in that you can also use a Powerbook, I was just pointing out the mac mini is the most economical solution. In my opinion the most portable solution out of the box is the 12" powerbook, but if you are building your own setup and already need power for something else, the mac mini is also a good choice.

John:

1.)You can use a setup with a 12" powerbook, which would be completely portable. You can also use active USB2.0 extension cables to make the cable length very long and simply keep the computer static somewhere. Tethered setups such as this are used all the time on film shoots.

2.)You can install our system on any of the three DVX variations, although we recommend either a DVX100A or a DVX100B. The reason being is that most of the DVX100(original) specimens we have seen have been used heavily, and it is not uncommon for them to have other problems that we have to fix before proceeding.

That said, the only difference between the DVX100A or DVX100B are just the actual camera features, the image captured by Andromeda is the same.

3.)I'd say look at what you are planning to do and the footage from both systems. So far all the tests seem to point that Andromeda on the DVX yields more dynamic range, color precision and resolving power, without compression artifacts, among other things. You don't have to believe me about this, you can just look at the posted test results and decide for yourself.

Of course, the HVX does have some advantages such as variable frame rates and a more portable form factor. I can't say for sure, because for example if you buy an HVX with a 4GB card, that's not really that portable if you plan on recording more than 4 minutes. You'll have stop and download to a computer every 4 minutes of continuous shooting. Even if you go for a $10,000 dual 8GB card setup and plan to shoot continuously, you need to download while shooting.

These are all things to take into consideration. I've talked to a lot of people that see the HVX as a more portable solution, until they start thinking about how the card worflow would work. Many just endup having the camera hooked up to a computer anyway.

4.) You can either letterbox in post, shoot 10-bit 16:9 which is automatically letterboxed by sculptor, or you can use the anamorphic adapter for a 1.85:1 aspect ratio.

5.)Operation of the camera is completely unaffected by Andromeda. The camera ALWAYS operates as normal, so yes, you can record to tape regardless of what Andromeda is doing.

I hope this information is helpful, please let me know if you have any other questions.

Cheers,
Juan

Yes, this is true. I have been looking at sensors with 15 stop to 20 stop latitude (using dual slope and per pixel gain enhancement schemes) from Cypress Semiconductor. I have also been considering extreme pixel shift for HD and very low light work. I have specific purposes in mind for it, and jobs that border on surreal footage. People don't realise that the video look is low stop high contrast look, and that resolution is not the answer to everything.

Juan, there has been much talk about recording uncompressed from HD camcorders via the component (or HDMI interface) but there is nothing cheap to do it. Are you planing a cheap component/HDMI recording version of the Andromeda in a box, if so, I would have a use for it in a custom made camera. My only need is 4:4:4 10bit+ and variable resolution.


What about two V8's in a old Mini for 4 wheel drive, read it once ;)


Thanks

Wayne.

I think that is a horribly inaccurate analogy.
If one already has the cam it is a very lucrative finacialy, especially if you also own a mac laptop. I think it is more of a $ issue than raw horse power. All of the new HDV cams can output uncompressed, but at a staggering $$ due to the equipment needed. A/D convertors, capture card, capture PC, very fast RAID. Not exactly very portable. Or light on energy requirements.

This system isn't for everyone, but I think it is incredably advantageous to the indie film-maker. The mac laptop might be a deal breaker for some who can then justify getting a HVX or HDV cam (get on this boys, you are gonna loose sales!) but even then, this frankenstein has an amazing price/performance ratio.
Ferrari for the price of a ford might be a better analogy.

Aaarg.
If I already owned a DVX - the Andromeda would be mine by now !!!
I agree, if you already own one & a mac it is the best solution.
Keep up the good work Juan !
This is just the beginning.

I read your post that Sculptor might, in the future, do up-rezzing,
targetting 2K formats for film composition. Wow.
I hope that Andromeda will be around as a solution to many cameras,
in many ways, for quite awhile.
Cheers,
Benton

Juan, am I right in thinking that you don't do PAL cameras?

Cheers
Aaron

Sorry for the late reply:

Wayne:

I couldn't possibly agree more. This statement should be a banner on every digital video site. :)

About recording the analog out, we don't currently have any plans to build a portable digitizer/storage solution, although I guess it is possible. Our current focus, however, is on providing access to real digital uncompressed raw video, as is common practice with the high-end cinematography cameras.

Recording the analog output does usually yield better results than the compressed format, but it's a world of a difference from having access to the RAW data from the camera head. Digitizing the analog out is like attempting to duplicate an uncompressed WAV file by putting a microphone next to the speaker. Our system gives you the actual WAV file, and is more compact and inexpensive than something like a Wafian.

I do know there are other companies working on self-contained digitizing solutions, keep an eye on NAB2006.

Ken:

I think your post correctly summarizes how users should look at this system...it's just another tool with specific strong points like everything else. We understand that, for example, somebody who already has a DVX and a mac will find our system a lot more affordable than somebody who has neither. But this is the same with many products, the HVX is a current example. In order to record HD, you either need to invest in cards(possily P2Store) or invest on a mac laptop to record anyway. If you buy a car, you need to buy gas, maintenance, insurance, registration, furry dice, etc.

Aaron:

That is correct, we currently do not support PAL cameras. Not because the system cannot be installed on one, but because the difference in the amount of data(1 extra frame per second, 100 extra lines per frame) exceed the current max USB bandwidth of the available computers. We would have to make compromises such as cropping the frame or not record full 4:4:4, which we would rather not sacrifice.

Cheers,
Juan

Juan;

would you like to pass comment on why the Andromeda EIA1956 resolution chart referred to earlier shows the black lines as significantly thinner than the white spaces between them?

my copy of the EIA1956 resolution chart shows the black lines as equal thickness to the white spaces; which is as it should be.

Hello John,

Can you be more specific? I looked at the trumpets in Photoshop just now, and I don't see what you are saying. I do see edges that lie within a single sensor element/pixel, so there are gray pixels between the black and the white. If you count the gray pixels as black, then the lines are thicker. If you count them as white, then they are thinner.

Cheers,
Juan

Pity, most of the solutions are just to expensive, a $500-$1000 could be much more popular.

Hey Juan;

Not much to add really; but if you look at the black vertical lines in the center square , the black concentric lines in the bullseye and the black horizontal lines on the 200 blind as typical examples and compare them with the chart for the HD100 it shows your chart black lines to be much thinner. The HD100 chart looks about right.

For want of an explanation, it looks as if your chart has had the maximum photoshop plugin applied to it, although I'm not saying it has; but it looks like something of that nature.

Wayne:

It looks like there will be other solutions to doing what you are talking about...however, It really doesn't seem like any of them will be in the $500-$1000 range, that would barely cover the actual cost of the drive array!

John:

I dropped the image into photoshop, and I still don't see what you are saying. The vertical lines in the center are 6 pixels wide with 6 pixel spacing. However I think I know why the lines may appear thinner when seeing the image at full resolution.

Remember that this image is logarithmically encoded. This means that there is literally no black, but the white/bright areas are still there. Thus, the 'gray' pixels that sit in between the black and white are pushed brighter by the logarithmic curve, and the black itself is pushed to gray. This makes the dark area look thinner, but if you look at it closely in photoshop you'll see what I mean. This is the same encoding used for scanning film because it uses more bits for the darks, where most of the the detail is.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'the maximum photoshop plugin' but we didn't apply any plug-ins, this is standard output.

Cheers,
Juan

Thread moved to our DVX forum... finally.

Thats too bad, General HD is where it deserves to be. It is in the same price ballpark as the P2 HDV solutions, and provides many of the solutions that people in the HD/HDV forums are seeking.

I agree with Ken,
I think this should be in the High Def forums - this is where it will get play and raise the general discussion levels.
But, whoever wants to find it, no doubt will...
personally I feel Andromeda should be more widely known

"Is Panasonic DVX Glass just flat out better then Canon XL2 Glass? "

I believe so... but thats jsut my opinion... of teh years ive worked with this range of cameras, i am yet find a better piece of glass. with virtually no Lens abherations, barrel distortion is only SLIGHTY visible depending on your lighting and only in full wide, flare is NICE... most people hate lens flares, but wth this camera, i actually USE flares to accentuate certain scenes and enviornments, static pickup (ie dust) is easy to manage...

i found the that the DVX has the cleanest glass of the lot..

I think this is really a question about what to do with the normal Pana, so it belongs in two forums. We have a similar problem with the DIY Cinema Camera threads over at Alternative imaging, the 35mmSLR adaptors simply swamp everything. I have to go through every now and then to locate the odd thread on DIY cameras and subscribe to them (though I don't post to all of them). I haven't really advocated a separate forum for them, because there wasn't an active enough community. But this gives me an idea that ties in with Andromeda.

The SLR lens adaptor technology can be move to their own sub forum, all other alternative imaging products, including DIY camera and original Andromeda threads can be kept in the general Alternative imaging methods forum.

Another idea would be to have an Alternative Camera (Alternative and DIY)forum under HD forums (very few alternative cameras nowadays are SD) or at least all the commercially released ones "Commercial Alternative Camera (Alternative and DIY)" forum and we can shove all those flash cameras into there too.

Many times a thread might belong in more than one forum at once because of the subject matter, like this one. When we start a thread we could get to nominate which forums it is posted to, where a link to the thread goes in each forum. So you could post a thread like this in a Panasonic forum and a Andromeda/HD/Alternative Camera forum at the same time. Single thread so conversation never gets split up over different forums.

What do you think Chris?

Sorry, I slipped up, I have been dealing with concepts of visually lossless compressed to ordinary hard drives too much. So I was talking without drives (user supplies). I agree, uncompressed would be impractical as it either would require more consumer grade drives (I think upto 10-20MB/s) than is worth worrying about, or a few expensive 32 or 50MB/s sustained class drives.

I hope somebody gives us low cost high quality recording for all the low cost cameras out there. I did some estimates and it would be a cheap alternative for a 720p camera and people could opt for the expensive faster drives for the true 1080*1920 cameras. Hopefully somebody in the market will cotton onto this:

Basic 4:2:0 8 bit 720p/25fps (around 32.5MB/s) is doable with two cheap consumer drives. 4:4:4 and 12bit 4:2:2 (around 75MB/s) is doable with four cheap drives but big. For HDV1080 4:2:0 8 bits it is doable with cheap drives, but higher bit rates, format, or true 1080 resolution requires fast drives.

Some people claim that the Sony cameras (for example) are not outputting true 4:2:0 1080HDV format, but that the resolution reflects the unprocessed pixel shifted resolution, with a circuit that synchronises to odd formats than it would line up with more 720p data rates.

If lossless or visually lossless compression could be used than the data rate would drop by 1/2 to 1/6th.

I have contemplated in the past, that maybe Sony could have possibly included a servicing mode on the HC1 to examine every pixel through the component port If such a mode exists then it might give a true RAW 8-14bit bayer output 1080 (50-87.5MB/s).

Still, I am interested in a platform to record uncompressed 4:4:4 pixel shifted Standard definition through component, I have a camera in mind. Will you be offering a box to do something like this Juan, or do you know of a cheap box?