I want a video transmitter.

[Buba Kastorski]

I have an idea to add a wireless video transmitter to the EX1 on the Pilot,
anybody have any experience? I know there is a wide choice, but that's makes it even more complicated, don't want to go too crazy, but I really need something that will give me stable signal within 200 - 300 feet, would really appreciate any help,
thanks!

[Dave Gish]

Here's what I use:
900MHz 500mW audio/video transmitter [TX-900-500-Ant] : RangeVideo!, Wireless video solutions.
900MHz standard receiver [RX-900-standard] : RangeVideo!, Wireless video solutions.
900MHz dual output receiver [RX-900-dual] : RangeVideo!, Wireless video solutions.

The range is good and it can punch through steel doors and filing cabinets, but the picture does flicker now and then. Also, the transmitter gets hot.

For monitors, I use two portable 7" LCD TVs I picked up on ebay, with the smaller receiver and a battery pack gaff taped to the back. I also have a 19" LCD HDTV that I use with the bigger receiver.

Pictures here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...q-pb040005.jpg
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...tor-case-1.jpg
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...tor-case-2.jpg
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attachmen...cd-band004.jpg

[Buba Kastorski]

Many thanks Dave!

[Julian Frost]

Again... this transmitter is for use by Amateur Radio operators ONLY. You MUST have a valid Technician Class FCC amateur radio operator license in order to use it. Further, you cannot use it for any kind of commercial use -- that is, anything for which you will be paid, or any project which will result in payment (for example: You donate your time, but your employer is going to sell your work).

Illegal use of this transmitter can result in severe (read tens-of-thousands of dollars) in fines. Amateur radio operators fight to keep their part of the spectrum clear of interlopers and the FCC comes down hard on unlicensed users.

Please don't use our frequencies if you're not licensed.

Julian
(The above is applicable to the USA only)

[Peter Chung]

Thanks for the info, Julian. Is there a website or something with more information about legal frequency usage? What frequencies are okay and which aren't?

[Julian Frost]

That's actually quite a tall order... I can provide you with a link to a frequency chart which lists the frequencies set aside for amateur radio use, but the radio spectrum is pretty large, and it's split into dozens and dozens and dozens of "bands", each with its own primary user. For example, UPS has their own set of frequencies, Police and Fire have theirs, commercial AM and FM radio has theirs, TV has its assigned set of frequencies, cellular phones and cordless phone have theirs too. And so on.

What it all comes down to is that there are a few (and very few) license-free parts of the radio frequency spectrum. In the USA, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) has the ultimate word in frequency assignment and licensing. Spectrum is limited and expensive, and some bands are sold to the highest bidder (worth billions of dollars). Unless you want to get an amateur radio license and do non-commercial work, get a license to use a commercial wireless TV system. It'll cost a bit to buy, but it'll save you tens-of-thousands in fines, and confiscated equipment!

While I really appreciate Dave Gish's FAQs, information and willingness to help others on this forum, I really wish he wouldn't keep recommending these wireless ATV (Amateur Television) transmitters and receivers, as their use by non-licensed individuals (or *any* commercial entity, including "your" video production company!) is illegal and as unethical as someone using your footage without your permission.

Julian

[Buba Kastorski]

Thank God I'm in Canada :)

[Bill Ravens]

IDX | CW-5HD Cam-Wave HD Video Wireless Transmissi | CW-5HD

[Julian Frost]

I know you said that in jest, Baba, but it's the same in Canada!

Without frequency coordination there'd be total anarchy and no one would be able to use any wireless device without disruptive interference. These ATV transmitters and receivers are crystal controlled, they're not reprogrammable, so they operate on just ONE frequency, and that happens to be a very busy frequency.


<SOAPBOX=ON>

Amateur radio frequencies are for non-commercial, non-pecuniary, and emergency use only. They are frequently used by Amateur Radio Operators to help coordinate emergency responses over great distances between various emergency services who could not otherwise communicate (visually or verbally). When "Joe Blow's Video Company" decides to use an ATV transmitter to broadcast their footage across the room, they're also interfering with people who are trying to legitimately use that frequency for non-commercial, non-pecuniary and/or emergency use across the street, or across town.

So again, please don't transmit on frequencies for which you are not licensed. You may be unwittingly interfering with transmissions which are being used as part of an emergency response to a life-or-death situation.

<SOAPBOX=OFF>


And now back to your regular (interference-free) programming! :-)

Julian

[Andy Tejral]

Ya know, if you wait until Feb 18, you can get some pretty serious transmitters for really cheap! Oh, you wanted something portable...

[Afton Grant]

Although technically Julian is correct regarding the laws pertaining to transmissions, it should not be something that concerns you terribly. You'll find video transmitters on virtually every set in the country (yes, including the US). They're an invaluable tool to production, and they're tiny in terms of power output. I own one that is used on each job I work, as does every other Steadicam operator I know. I've never had a problem myself, nor have I ever heard of anyone having a problem using them for the purposes we need. Sure, if someone really wanted to use them for ill, they might attract some attention, but we simply don't do that.

The days of UHF transmission are indeed numbered with the advances in WiFi and other forms of video transmission. I for one am thrilled about this. The image quality of the UHF transmitters just can't compete. The one big card the old transmitters still hold is the number of people and departments on a set that still rely on them, and how universal they are. Any UHF transmitter will work with any UHF tuner or television picked up at Radio Shack. For that reason alone, I think they'll be sticking around for at least another year or two.

[Buba Kastorski]

Many thanks again to everyone,
lots of valuable information!

[Julian Frost]

Originally Posted by Afton Grant

Although technically Julian is correct regarding the laws pertaining to transmissions, it should not be something that concerns you terribly.

Sorry, Afton, but I have to disagree here. If someone is using ATV frequencies for paying gigs, or for a company that is benefiting financially (one way or another) from its use, then they *should* be concerned. I'm sure no one here would buy and use a transmitter which outputs a signal on local police or fire frequency, right? Then why would you illegally use one that transmits on another emergency service's frequency? Regardless of the power output of the (illegal) transmitter, the possibility of harmful interference to a licensed station still exists, and without the illegal station identifying itself (once every 10 minutes and at the end of its transmission, per the FCC regulations), how would someone contact them to resolve the issue, short of complaining to the FCC?

The video transmitters and receivers bought at Radioshack do not use frequencies set aside by international agreement to specific licensed users, but are on so-called "unlicensed frequencies," where the government affords them no protection from harmful interference. This is quite different from what we're talking about with the ATV transmitters Dave Gish has recommended in this thread.

There is no problem with operators using a video transmitter if that transmitter is on an "unlicensed" frequency, or on a frequency set aside for that use by the FCC (or other coordinating agency agency). But, if you are illegally using a frequency reserved for a licensed user, the consequences can be staggering and could easily put you, and the company you're working for out of business.

Julian

P.S. Here's a short snippet from a letter from the FCC to someone who used an illegal (unlicensed) transmitter on the Amateur Radio Service 2m frequency. The fines imposed can be on a PER USE basis (use the transmitter 4 times, get fined for each use!):

"Monitoring information indicates that you have been using radio transmitting equipment on the 2-meter Amateur Radio Service band without a license from the Commission. These transmissions came from your vehicle with Michigan plate XXXX on September 20, 2004. Unlicensed radio operation is a violation of Section 301 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and will subject you to fine or imprisonment, or both. Fines normally range from $7,500 to $10,000."

See http://www.fcc.gov/eb/AmateurActions/Welcome.html for more.

[Chris Soucy]

Interesting watching you fight a vigorous rearguard action there, most impressive.

Perhaps you and Dave could take this little argument "off board" and thrash it out in private, not that it isn't "in the public's interest", of course.

I think the original question was a "video transmitter", perhaps SD, maybe HD (haven't seen a clarification), so perhaps we could look at "legal" options, if there are any available.

Know of any?

I'd be interested in a "street legal" wireless HD transmitter/ reciever system, and no mistake.

I do take your point about amateur frequencies being hard won and equally hard defended, I'm in full agreement.

However, I don't think we need the FCC, FBI, CIA, NSA and gawd knows how many other busy bodies the US gov has to harass it's citizens, dragged through the middle of DVinfo.

Hope this is received in the spirit it was posted.


CS

[Julian Frost]

Originally Posted by Chris Soucy

Interesting watching you fight a vigorous rearguard action there, most impressive. Perhaps you and Dave could take this little argument "off board" and thrash it out in private, not that it isn't "in the public's interest", of course.

Chris,

To be fair, Dave has not entered into the "fight" as you put it, he's only made the suggestion of a wireless transmitter system. So there's really no reason for either of us to "take it off board", since the thread has been joined in by various other people who have put forth their 2 cents worth. I understand your point, though, Chris. As for suggesting legal options for a wireless video transmitter, two versions have already been suggested.

However, I don't think we need the FCC, FBI, CIA, NSA and gawd knows how many other busy bodies the US gov has to harass it's citizens, dragged through the middle of DVinfo.

It *is* thanks to the FCC that we have frequencies set aside for wireless audio which are not interfered with by CB operators, or cordless phone users; and frequencies set aside for a myriad of other (interference-free) uses, so they get a little credit from me. Pointing out that illegally using licensed frequencies while making a film can result in *serious* fines and confiscation of equipment, *does* belong on this forum, especially in this thread where two influential people have suggested there's no problem doing it.

Sorry if you disagree with my opinion, Chris... I'd be happy to discuss our differing opinions off-board, if you so wish.

Julian