Shoot Uncompressed 14-bit RGB(4:4:4) on your HVX200

Tim Polster · June 14th, 2007, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry Harrison

Newbie question here, but what editing systems can handle the resulting footage from your mod? Specifically, is it FCP usable?
thanks

H.

Juan,

Are you able to shed some light on the editing side of things?

The thought of 4:4:4 HD makes one think of huge file sizes.

Do you know storage requirements and editing specs?

Thanks

Jon Wolding · June 14th, 2007, 09:02 AM

1. When will Hydra be available?
2. How much will it cost?
3. Could it be used with a 35mm adapter or would it pick up too much grain?

Grant Carden · July 19th, 2007, 11:32 PM

I am very excited.

Any updates?

Jon Wolding · July 21st, 2007, 11:15 AM

Five weeks and my questions are unanswered. Oh well oh well.

Gene Crucean · July 21st, 2007, 11:59 AM

Yeah, I was stoked about this. Then I started to realize how bad they run the company. I live about 2 hours away from them and wanted to come down and check out the system and basically just see whats goin on. Juan never responds to my PM's or emails so F'em. That's exactly how you lose customers.

Red or bust!

Wayne Morellini · July 22nd, 2007, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juan P. Pertierra

Indeed, Hydra opens up the possibility for installing on just about any camera. There is some adjustment required in adapting the installation to the particular system, but the hardware is now VERY flexible.

We will be basing our camera support list mostly on the demand for a particular system.

Cheers,
Juan@reel-stream.com

We had been waiting for years, is their any other cameras?

You say that the it is hard to handle different formats. What about designing an FPGA front end that could be customised in timing and pixel formats, such an thing is relatively simple compared to the whole circuit?

I live outside the US, in PAL territory, and I would like to buy something complete and ready to go, and cheap? You could look through the cameras out there an only support the most suitable. There are few good models that support progressive at the same time, and few cheap ones. And some single chip sensors offer 720p off chip (yes not shifted 4:4:4. The latest Foveon based digital camera sensor offers 720p (but not supported in camera). An shifted 640*360 4:4:4 image could be made from this information prior FPGA.

Why not offer an complete package based on an cheap camera for 1K-1.5K? HV20, an AVCHD camera, but Sanyo HD2, Canon TX1, Aiptek GO HD are probably not high grade enough. This can't hope to compete with the HVX product, but allows more customers.

To expand your customer base, and subsidise development, why not offer make lesser version for HDMI, component, and HDSDI?

Have fun, and how much is the HVX200 version. I would be more interested in versions for the latest AVC Intra and AVCHD shoulder mount cameras coming out?

Jason Boyce · July 22nd, 2007, 09:54 AM

I don't know the guy doing this personally, but I know he has been active @ DVXUser though popping up only time & again to answer questions - the people that bought his Andromeda mod for the DVX (same thing but just for SD) are totally happy with it, so I think he's just swamped right now - they sound like a ridiculously tiny company, maybe just him and someone else?

Wayne, I think the R&D involved in designing the apparatus, doing the installs and testing will likely be too prohibitive to allow them to spread that far that quickly, plus the cost of the mod would exceed the cost of the camera itself.

Plus, and I might be incorrect here, but the reason Juan is able to pull off 4:4:4 colour is because of the 3chip CCD, so that each chip does one colour. The whole thing works by pulling each frame directly from the chips (one red, one blue, one green) and then combining them in-computer later where they won't need to be compressed, as opposed to your camera combining the three images in-camera and compressing them down to 4:2:2 before getting to the codec. If you're going with a one chip camera, the mod probably won't be able to do nearly as much as it can with a 3 chip, so it really has to be cost-effective.

Wayne Morellini · July 23rd, 2007, 09:13 AM

The product has been around for a few years, there is enough time. There are just an handful of preferentially suitable cameras to support. Most of the work/experience done so far makes it easier.

I know an bit about small companies, and there are an few different things that maybe happening. I would say, if they haven't already, get an few good, particularly competent in their areas, people that are on top of things to look after customers and the various areas.

The product might be more than an cheap camera, but some lateral diversification can bring overall costs down, and make it as much, or less, than the camera. There are an lot of people out there that would prefer an cheaper camera. If such things, as $500 cameras, had descent SN and dynamic range, aperture and lens, would be preferable to an HV20 with HDMI recording. Of the cheap HD cameras, the GO-HD seems to offer significant SN and range, but the layout of handling and case is another thing. I personally am interested in the upcoming low end Panasonic HD shoulder cams (usually below $2k). I think such an thing (apart from the HV20) offers an significant target.

Businesses are complicated systems, and you have to treat them as such (and streamline) to get them to work more effectively (hence the diversification and specialised employees over areas).

Wayne Morellini · July 23rd, 2007, 09:30 AM

Forgot to mention. Though I say that the GO-HD has "significant" SN and range, it is in reference to the other really cheap HD cameras, not that it is particularly good or anything.

Also, maybe they should wait and find out what Red is doing with their pocket pro camera.

I think that sculptor is an significant program, and if they ever stop making the hardware, they might consider releasing the source to the public domain for other projects to experiment with (putting together an cheap 3chip pixel shifted SD camera, that would be suitable for sculptor, is not out of the question, maybe reel-stream should consider this, I have, and have an number of top performance for price parts in mind).

Actually, is sculptor available separately for an cheap price Juan, or as an developer freebie? When I think of it, this would make some of my past cheap plans much easier.

David Heath · July 23rd, 2007, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Boyce

Plus, and I might be incorrect here, but the reason Juan is able to pull off 4:4:4 colour is because of the 3chip CCD, so that each chip does one colour. The whole thing works by pulling each frame directly from the chips .........

It's rarely possible to have your cake and eat it, and I think that may be true here. 4:4:4 is certainly possible from the 3chip CCD, but 4:4:4 implies 3 pixels - 1 each of R,G,B - for each pixel position. Hence 4:4:4 may well be possible - but at 960x540 resolution.

But the HVX200 utilises pixel shift and is able to achieve an enhancement in resolution because of it - think of it as more pixel positions, more resolution - BUT now not all of the R,G,B information is available at each position. Hence it cannot be truly said to be 4:4:4 at resolutions above 960x540 - you can't have your cake AND eat it.

Normally this doesn't matter, the codec wouldn't be able to make use of it anyway due to subsampling. This is especially relevant of the DVX and the Andromeda mod, where in an unmodded DVX the limiting factor by far is the DV codec - not the chip etc. But in the HVX, using DVCProHD, the cameras native recording system is able to maintain far more of the full quality from the chip than DV could in the DVX - hence I doubt the resolution improvement over an unmodded camera will be as marked as it was with the Andromeda. Dynamic range is a different matter - DVCProHD, like DV, is still an 8 bit system - and here the Hydra mod could be more worthwhile.

Matt Gottshalk · July 24th, 2007, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gene Crucean

Yeah, I was stoked about this. Then I started to realize how bad they run the company. I live about 2 hours away from them and wanted to come down and check out the system and basically just see whats goin on. Juan never responds to my PM's or emails so F'em. That's exactly how you lose customers.

Red or bust!

Nice attitude.

If you think it is easy doing this stuff, then feel free to make your OWN 4:4:4 camera.

It must be nice to cast dispersions on an small innovative company that is working on delivering a breakthrough product at a remarkable price point.

I met Juan at NAB and he was very eager to answer any and all questions I had.

I personally would have no problem putting my money down on a deposit once Reel Streem says they are accepting reservations.

Gene Crucean · July 25th, 2007, 05:31 PM

Yeah sorry that sounded worse than I really meant it to be.

You can't guilt me out of my opinion though Matt. I have tons of respect for what they are doing. I was just voicing my opinion (you all know what my mom says about opinions!) about how I feel. I personally don't want a product from a company that won't be there for me if I need them. Period.

Like I said, I'm stoked about this product... but probably not buying it anymore. Maybe something will change that. Who knows.

Matt Gottshalk · July 25th, 2007, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gene Crucean

Yeah sorry that sounded worse than I really meant it to be.

You can't guilt me out of my opinion though Matt. I have tons of respect for what they are doing. I was just voicing my opinion (you all know what my mom says about opinions!) about how I feel. I personally don't want a product from a company that won't be there for me if I need them. Period.

Like I said, I'm stoked about this product... but probably not buying it anymore. Maybe something will change that. Who knows.

Fair enough. As for me, I canceled my RED reservation and instead will be gladly getting this mod to my HVX whenever it is ready.

Robert Lane · July 25th, 2007, 09:21 PM

A few forum members had forwarded this thread to me and asked me to chime in about the possibilities of this proposed system.

At first look it seems to be an ambitious project just as the DVX100 mod was however the three major drawbacks that I see are:

1) Because the Hydra is going out GigE that means you're always shooting tethered to either a laptop or desktop system which obviously limits the location capabilities and makes any hand-held, run & gun operation completely out of the question;

2) Since the signal is going out a third-party connector that means you're no longer recording to the P2 cards. That may seem like a bonus to many since most P2 users have always complained about the cost of P2 media (let's not use this as a segway to start that debate again, please) however that also means you're losing the benefits of having solid-state-type media.

3) You're voiding the warranty which means the only people who would - or should - consider the mod are those who's cameras have already fallen outside the 1-year factory support. Never, for any reason would I ever suggest trashing a warranty's usefulness even for the holy-grail of acquisition.

There's also the concept of bang-for-the-buck; since pricing for the Hydra hasn't been announced yet (that I can tell) it might not make sense if the mod is beyond $3400; higher than that plus the original purchase cost of the HVX itself and you're closely approaching the cost of the HPX500 which has far greater capabilities than the HVX anyway. Not to mention the additional costs of having enough HDD storage/horsepower to capture and edit the uncompressed files (assuming you went that route).

So while the Hydra does have it's place in the market - and I sincerely hope it does come to fruition for those who would take advantage of it's capabilities - it's not a mod that I'd recommend for 95% of HVX users.

Wayne Morellini · July 26th, 2007, 10:30 AM

It maybe an little worse. The new Red pocket, the new Sony HD XDCAM EX, the replacement for the HVX200 using H264 Intra, inter, have the potential for delivering quality at an much higher point. Yet again, there is plenty of superior sensors out there to what Panasonic is probably using. I have seen the spec sheets on some and read about some others. Forgetting Kodak for the moment, Altasens have cheaper sensors available for this market, Foveon have finally started to branch out into different sensors, and I suspect that Altasens at least, will turn up in some name brands. Cypress can still deliver with it's acquisition of FF and Smal. HDR and Planet 8 have some very interesting technology which I suspect to come to HD, and Micron is moving closer to enough technology.

But as I indicated before, the development of Hydra could be directed to another camera, like the better ones coming out. So, all is not lost, but price is very important, and unless I can gather an HVX200 for $1K-1.5K secondhand next year, + conversion, I suspect that it is going to be close to the new improved models. Ironically, this might be the sort of price we see when they come and the HVX200 is replaced.

June 14th, 2007, 09:02 AM	#32
Jon Wolding Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 195	1. When will Hydra be available? 2. How much will it cost? 3. Could it be used with a 35mm adapter or would it pick up too much grain?

July 19th, 2007, 11:32 PM	#33
Grant Carden New Boot Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 23	I am very excited. Any updates?

July 21st, 2007, 11:15 AM	#34
Jon Wolding Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 195	Five weeks and my questions are unanswered. Oh well oh well.

July 21st, 2007, 11:59 AM	#35
Gene Crucean Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 295	Yeah, I was stoked about this. Then I started to realize how bad they run the company. I live about 2 hours away from them and wanted to come down and check out the system and basically just see whats goin on. Juan never responds to my PM's or emails so F'em. That's exactly how you lose customers. Red or bust!

July 22nd, 2007, 09:54 AM	#37
Jason Boyce Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 77	I don't know the guy doing this personally, but I know he has been active @ DVXUser though popping up only time & again to answer questions - the people that bought his Andromeda mod for the DVX (same thing but just for SD) are totally happy with it, so I think he's just swamped right now - they sound like a ridiculously tiny company, maybe just him and someone else? Wayne, I think the R&D involved in designing the apparatus, doing the installs and testing will likely be too prohibitive to allow them to spread that far that quickly, plus the cost of the mod would exceed the cost of the camera itself. Plus, and I might be incorrect here, but the reason Juan is able to pull off 4:4:4 colour is because of the 3chip CCD, so that each chip does one colour. The whole thing works by pulling each frame directly from the chips (one red, one blue, one green) and then combining them in-computer later where they won't need to be compressed, as opposed to your camera combining the three images in-camera and compressing them down to 4:2:2 before getting to the codec. If you're going with a one chip camera, the mod probably won't be able to do nearly as much as it can with a 3 chip, so it really has to be cost-effective.

July 23rd, 2007, 09:13 AM	#38
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	The product has been around for a few years, there is enough time. There are just an handful of preferentially suitable cameras to support. Most of the work/experience done so far makes it easier. I know an bit about small companies, and there are an few different things that maybe happening. I would say, if they haven't already, get an few good, particularly competent in their areas, people that are on top of things to look after customers and the various areas. The product might be more than an cheap camera, but some lateral diversification can bring overall costs down, and make it as much, or less, than the camera. There are an lot of people out there that would prefer an cheaper camera. If such things, as $500 cameras, had descent SN and dynamic range, aperture and lens, would be preferable to an HV20 with HDMI recording. Of the cheap HD cameras, the GO-HD seems to offer significant SN and range, but the layout of handling and case is another thing. I personally am interested in the upcoming low end Panasonic HD shoulder cams (usually below $2k). I think such an thing (apart from the HV20) offers an significant target. Businesses are complicated systems, and you have to treat them as such (and streamline) to get them to work more effectively (hence the diversification and specialised employees over areas).

July 23rd, 2007, 09:30 AM	#39
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Forgot to mention. Though I say that the GO-HD has "significant" SN and range, it is in reference to the other really cheap HD cameras, not that it is particularly good or anything. Also, maybe they should wait and find out what Red is doing with their pocket pro camera. I think that sculptor is an significant program, and if they ever stop making the hardware, they might consider releasing the source to the public domain for other projects to experiment with (putting together an cheap 3chip pixel shifted SD camera, that would be suitable for sculptor, is not out of the question, maybe reel-stream should consider this, I have, and have an number of top performance for price parts in mind). Actually, is sculptor available separately for an cheap price Juan, or as an developer freebie? When I think of it, this would make some of my past cheap plans much easier.

July 25th, 2007, 05:31 PM	#42
Gene Crucean Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 295	Yeah sorry that sounded worse than I really meant it to be. You can't guilt me out of my opinion though Matt. I have tons of respect for what they are doing. I was just voicing my opinion (you all know what my mom says about opinions!) about how I feel. I personally don't want a product from a company that won't be there for me if I need them. Period. Like I said, I'm stoked about this product... but probably not buying it anymore. Maybe something will change that. Who knows.

July 25th, 2007, 09:21 PM	#44
Robert Lane Go Go Godzilla Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Scottsdale, AZ USA Posts: 2,823 Images: 15	A few forum members had forwarded this thread to me and asked me to chime in about the possibilities of this proposed system. At first look it seems to be an ambitious project just as the DVX100 mod was however the three major drawbacks that I see are: 1) Because the Hydra is going out GigE that means you're always shooting tethered to either a laptop or desktop system which obviously limits the location capabilities and makes any hand-held, run & gun operation completely out of the question; 2) Since the signal is going out a third-party connector that means you're no longer recording to the P2 cards. That may seem like a bonus to many since most P2 users have always complained about the cost of P2 media (let's not use this as a segway to start that debate again, please) however that also means you're losing the benefits of having solid-state-type media. 3) You're voiding the warranty which means the only people who would - or should - consider the mod are those who's cameras have already fallen outside the 1-year factory support. Never, for any reason would I ever suggest trashing a warranty's usefulness even for the holy-grail of acquisition. There's also the concept of bang-for-the-buck; since pricing for the Hydra hasn't been announced yet (that I can tell) it might not make sense if the mod is beyond $3400; higher than that plus the original purchase cost of the HVX itself and you're closely approaching the cost of the HPX500 which has far greater capabilities than the HVX anyway. Not to mention the additional costs of having enough HDD storage/horsepower to capture and edit the uncompressed files (assuming you went that route). So while the Hydra does have it's place in the market - and I sincerely hope it does come to fruition for those who would take advantage of it's capabilities - it's not a mod that I'd recommend for 95% of HVX users.

July 26th, 2007, 10:30 AM	#45
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	It maybe an little worse. The new Red pocket, the new Sony HD XDCAM EX, the replacement for the HVX200 using H264 Intra, inter, have the potential for delivering quality at an much higher point. Yet again, there is plenty of superior sensors out there to what Panasonic is probably using. I have seen the spec sheets on some and read about some others. Forgetting Kodak for the moment, Altasens have cheaper sensors available for this market, Foveon have finally started to branch out into different sensors, and I suspect that Altasens at least, will turn up in some name brands. Cypress can still deliver with it's acquisition of FF and Smal. HDR and Planet 8 have some very interesting technology which I suspect to come to HD, and Micron is moving closer to enough technology. But as I indicated before, the development of Hydra could be directed to another camera, like the better ones coming out. So, all is not lost, but price is very important, and unless I can gather an HVX200 for $1K-1.5K secondhand next year, + conversion, I suspect that it is going to be close to the new improved models. Ironically, this might be the sort of price we see when they come and the HVX200 is replaced.