Can the V1U record in HDV via HDMI or video input?

Bob Armstrong · November 16th, 2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Green

None of the HDV camcorders or decks has any sort of high-def input (other than firewire).

Does an HDMI to Firewire converter exist? I have a Sony HVR-M25U and it can only record HDV off firewire. I'd like to be able to do this without going through a computer.

Chris Medico · November 16th, 2006, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Armstrong

Does an HDMI to Firewire converter exist? I have a Sony HVR-M25U and it can only record HDV off firewire. I'd like to be able to do this without going through a computer.

Are you trying to dub from the cam to the deck without a computer? You should be able to do that now with just the right cable.

Chris

Sharyn Ferrick · November 16th, 2006, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Ferling

I understand that HDMI has a cable limit and may be too short for even a cable wrangler and cart situation (unless you strap both yourself and the workstation to the mobile platform -anything goes). However you can go out via component into an HDMI adaptor for longer runs. That may benefit if your on rails or doing some short follow, etc.

Couple of things, I talked with the Blackmagic folks and there are HDMI cables up to about 60 feet or so and they agreed that long runs need quality cables, and these cables are not cheap at this point. I think prices will plunge when people start to want to run from HD dvd players etc to projectors or displays in larger rooms.

In addition to the component solution, Intelix has a HDMI over Cat5 system that might be interesting.

One thing that people might miss that HDMI input and the Blackmagic solution offers is that there is real time monitoring of the HDMI feed. HDV via firewire to the DVrack as many people have stated is too delayed

For simple live switching I am looking at a solution where the basic monitoring is done via standard SD displays, and the final selected feeds are viewed on a HD display, Means running more cables, but the cost of multiple HDMI displays is high at this point.

Sharyn

Peter Ferling · November 16th, 2006, 07:42 PM

Thanks Sharyn, long HDMI cables may solve issues in the future. Being able to hook via component won't limit me to either HC3 or the V1U.

I didn't know about the live monitoring, forgot to ask and will look into that further. Makes sense, and yes DVRack is not the answer for live.

Barry Green · November 18th, 2006, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Armstrong

Does an HDMI to Firewire converter exist? I have a Sony HVR-M25U and it can only record HDV off firewire. I'd like to be able to do this without going through a computer.

Why not just plug in firewire to the deck?

David Ziegelheim · November 18th, 2006, 12:31 PM

The confusion seems to be of HDMI vs HDV. That HDV has compressed video and audio and a smaller color space than HDMI. That recording HDMI through a card like the BM Intensity will allow more options in post.

One upon a time someone was going to post HDV and analog/HD-SDI/HDMI output from the same camera for comparison. Has anyone done this?

Barry Green · November 18th, 2006, 10:02 PM

But that deck is HDV. You'd gain absolutely nothing by converting the HDMI output into HDV, vs. just recording the camera's HDV output...

Stuart Brontman · November 19th, 2006, 09:48 PM

Does anyone know what the data rate will be from the HDMI output of the V1? I know the XL H1 is running at 1.5 gigabytes per second...

Also, I noticed the Intensity card does not capture at 1080p (according to their website). That seems to defeat the beauty of HDMI output from this camera if your goal is progressive images. Am I missing something on their website that deals with progressive capture at 1080?

Also, just for laughs... some Sony guys at DV Expo claimed no 4:2:2 sampling via HDMI. Others said yes to 4:2:2...

Stuart

Alex Huppenthal · November 22nd, 2006, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart Brontman

Does anyone know what the data rate will be from the HDMI output of the V1? I know the XL H1 is running at 1.5 gigabytes per second...

Also, I noticed the Intensity card does not capture at 1080p (according to their website). That seems to defeat the beauty of HDMI output from this camera if your goal is progressive images. Am I missing something on their website that deals with progressive capture at 1080?

Also, just for laughs... some Sony guys at DV Expo claimed no 4:2:2 sampling via HDMI. Others said yes to 4:2:2...

Stuart

4.96 Gbps.
The maximum pixel clock rate is 165MHz and each of the 3 TMDS video streams carries 10 bits. Therefore the aggregate data rate is 3 x 10 x 165MHz = 4.96Gbps.

625 Megabytes per second.. Fastest array on my Macpro is 500 MB per second. Need dual arrays.. :-)

Bob Armstrong · December 4th, 2006, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Why not just plug in firewire to the deck?

I've got a handful of HD sources that I need to archive. I have HD XDCAM that will work, but it requires a disc that costs about the same as a 184 DVCAM tape and only holds 2 hours of video. It would be wonderful if I could find a way to archive in HDV with my HVR-M25U putting 4 1/2 hours of footage on one tape for the same cost. It would save me a ton of money, of course that's why Sony won't allow it, tape stock is where the real money is made.

Thomas Smet · December 4th, 2006, 12:51 PM

Time...

The way HDV editing works right now is that no matter what we have to reencode the timeline to a HDV file in order to send it to the camera/deck. This takes time even on a fast system.

Many NLE's now have an option for some type of uncompressed output through a 3rd party hardware card or other device. With these devices we can view what we are editing in realtime on our HDTV's or SDTV's.

Since the entire timeline has to be reencoded anyways why not have a way to use these cheap hardware cards to send out your HDV non rendered timeline through component/SDI/HDMI and use the deck to encode in realtime?

Even if you had a superfast 16 core system you will still have to render your timeline to HDV which means time. Maybe a 60 minute timeline will only take 30 minutes with 16 cores but it still is not realtime. Even if that 60 minute timeline takes 5 minutes it still isn't realtime. It is going to take a few years yet before we get to the point of encoding a HDV timeline in 5 minutes or even 30 minutes. With the time it takes to encode you still have to add the 60 minutes it takes to actually record the tape.

With letting the deck do the encoding we get to use a dedicated hardware chip that was designed for realtime HDV encoding. The 60 minute timeline will only take 60 minutes to record to tape. On some systems you may not even have to render any of the effects.

HDMI is nice because it is cheaper then SDI but is perfect digital compared to component. HDMI also has copy protection so bad people wouldn't be able to use it to record HDTV programs off of cable. I can kind of see the lack of trust in wanting to give us a deck that can record HD component since there isn't any copy protection but with HDMI there should be very little concern.

Many of our editing systems for a few years yet are going to need many many hours to record video back to tape and it sure would be nice if we could have a option to speed this up and make editing fun again. Just when we all got used to realtime editing we all take a few steps backwards again and have to render our entire timelines. If the argument is that tape is going out then why sell us HDV decks in the first place? Clearly we will be using HDV tapes for a little while yet so why not make the decks more usefull for the future.

Bob Armstrong · December 5th, 2006, 12:51 PM

Many good points. My theory is that they aren't primarily concerned with usability or customer satisfaction at this point in the SD-HD transition but are doing things with business strategy in mind. What ever they implement at this point is crucial to the success of the business way down the line. For example, we purchase a Betacam SP deck 15 years ago. How many new decks have we bought since then? Zero, how much money have we spent on tape? I don't even want to see that number. I think they would prefer you to get comfortable with the format that is going to around for the long haul to develop a loyalty to it.

November 16th, 2006, 07:42 PM	#19
Peter Ferling Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Wyomissing, PA Posts: 1,141 Images: 57	Thanks Sharyn, long HDMI cables may solve issues in the future. Being able to hook via component won't limit me to either HC3 or the V1U. I didn't know about the live monitoring, forgot to ask and will look into that further. Makes sense, and yes DVRack is not the answer for live.

November 18th, 2006, 12:31 PM	#21
David Ziegelheim Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Warren, NJ Posts: 398	The confusion seems to be of HDMI vs HDV. That HDV has compressed video and audio and a smaller color space than HDMI. That recording HDMI through a card like the BM Intensity will allow more options in post. One upon a time someone was going to post HDV and analog/HD-SDI/HDMI output from the same camera for comparison. Has anyone done this?

November 18th, 2006, 10:02 PM	#22
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	But that deck is HDV. You'd gain absolutely nothing by converting the HDMI output into HDV, vs. just recording the camera's HDV output...

November 19th, 2006, 09:48 PM	#23
Stuart Brontman Contributor Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 228	Does anyone know what the data rate will be from the HDMI output of the V1? I know the XL H1 is running at 1.5 gigabytes per second... Also, I noticed the Intensity card does not capture at 1080p (according to their website). That seems to defeat the beauty of HDMI output from this camera if your goal is progressive images. Am I missing something on their website that deals with progressive capture at 1080? Also, just for laughs... some Sony guys at DV Expo claimed no 4:2:2 sampling via HDMI. Others said yes to 4:2:2... Stuart

December 4th, 2006, 12:51 PM	#26
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	Time... The way HDV editing works right now is that no matter what we have to reencode the timeline to a HDV file in order to send it to the camera/deck. This takes time even on a fast system. Many NLE's now have an option for some type of uncompressed output through a 3rd party hardware card or other device. With these devices we can view what we are editing in realtime on our HDTV's or SDTV's. Since the entire timeline has to be reencoded anyways why not have a way to use these cheap hardware cards to send out your HDV non rendered timeline through component/SDI/HDMI and use the deck to encode in realtime? Even if you had a superfast 16 core system you will still have to render your timeline to HDV which means time. Maybe a 60 minute timeline will only take 30 minutes with 16 cores but it still is not realtime. Even if that 60 minute timeline takes 5 minutes it still isn't realtime. It is going to take a few years yet before we get to the point of encoding a HDV timeline in 5 minutes or even 30 minutes. With the time it takes to encode you still have to add the 60 minutes it takes to actually record the tape. With letting the deck do the encoding we get to use a dedicated hardware chip that was designed for realtime HDV encoding. The 60 minute timeline will only take 60 minutes to record to tape. On some systems you may not even have to render any of the effects. HDMI is nice because it is cheaper then SDI but is perfect digital compared to component. HDMI also has copy protection so bad people wouldn't be able to use it to record HDTV programs off of cable. I can kind of see the lack of trust in wanting to give us a deck that can record HD component since there isn't any copy protection but with HDMI there should be very little concern. Many of our editing systems for a few years yet are going to need many many hours to record video back to tape and it sure would be nice if we could have a option to speed this up and make editing fun again. Just when we all got used to realtime editing we all take a few steps backwards again and have to render our entire timelines. If the argument is that tape is going out then why sell us HDV decks in the first place? Clearly we will be using HDV tapes for a little while yet so why not make the decks more usefull for the future.

December 5th, 2006, 12:51 PM	#27
Bob Armstrong New Boot Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: East Lansing, MI Posts: 21	Many good points. My theory is that they aren't primarily concerned with usability or customer satisfaction at this point in the SD-HD transition but are doing things with business strategy in mind. What ever they implement at this point is crucial to the success of the business way down the line. For example, we purchase a Betacam SP deck 15 years ago. How many new decks have we bought since then? Zero, how much money have we spent on tape? I don't even want to see that number. I think they would prefer you to get comfortable with the format that is going to around for the long haul to develop a loyalty to it.