Home Made HD Cinema Cameras - Technical Discussion

Wayne Morellini · January 30th, 2005, 08:06 PM

Thanks for that Steve. While I would like Global shutter, what I am looking for is fast enough readout to reduce the rolling shuter effect to a minium. It sounds like you still end up reading out faster with no on camera buffer with the camera link version, which is OK when attached to a 64-bit card. So when is the GIGe version coming out, which you said would use a buffer?

Wayne Morellini · February 14th, 2005, 08:37 AM

So we have the Mac-Mini now, and dual cored VIA's out soon (unfortunately I only hear 2GHZ cores by the end of the year) and car PC's.

So is anybody planning projects based on Mac or Linux.

Ronald?

By the end of the year the multi cored 3.5Ghz (maybe) xbox2 will be out. So maybe we will see a 3.5Ghz Mini-Mac. The xbox2 would be an excellent cheap platform for a camera aswell.

If MS wants to send Sony broke the best stratergy would be to allow us to makem a camera out of there

I keep track of various things here, some people I know are, apparently, releasing a 0.5W 60 Bip's $1 processor sometime soon (maybe even faster). I have already reviewed the basic information from 2001, and it seems unsuitable, but I don't know what the present design will do.

But looking at the wider scheme of things, if all we need is VGA, GIGE, SATA, USB2.0, controls etc we don't really need a PC.

Is there anything new on the sensor horizon?

Steve Nordhauser · February 14th, 2005, 09:03 AM

Wayne:
Our GigE cameras have been shipping for a year. The SI-1280F, SI-1300, SI-3300 and the SI-1920HD are all on GigE. There is a 32MB internal buffer so you can average the data rate.

More Wayne:
Some of the camera link frame grabbers support Linux, as does the GigE interface. Mac is still not well supported for capture but as long as the files are movable, is this a big problem?

Joshua Starnes · February 14th, 2005, 10:39 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : More Wayne:
Some of the camera link frame grabbers support Linux, as does the GigE interface. Mac is still not well supported for capture but as long as the files are movable, is this a big problem? -->>>

I think he was thinking of MacMini as a capturing platform rather than an editing platform. With its low price point, built in GigE and extremely small design, it seems almost custom made for this type of project, and a capture and camera system that could utilize it would be a step ahead (and a bit cheaper) than some of the other projects that are building microATX boxes from scratch. I think that's what he was thinking.

Wayne Morellini · February 14th, 2005, 10:52 AM

I remember you told me that the 1920 would have memory buffer for high-speed readout, and that how a small MB buffer costs a lot of money, but not that cameras already had it. That put's a whole new spin on things, and what I tell all those people that ask me about what's available.

How much are he 1280f and 1300 (3300 is around 2-3K and Altasens around $5k?) ?

Wayne Morellini · February 14th, 2005, 11:04 AM

The Mac Mini (unfortunately) is currently 100/10 ethernet. Eventually I think they would adopt GBE, and FirewireB, but at the moment Firewire A is the way to go. Eventually it shoud be a very good (and compact) HD capture (with larger and laptop faster drives). It is just for the interest of the Mac people.

Steve Nordhauser · February 14th, 2005, 11:43 AM

Wayne,
It is only the GigE cameras that have the internal buffer. Some of the camera link frame grabbers have buffers on them.

Joshua, On MiniMac (Austin Powers flashback) - it sounds like they crippled it a bit to avoid hurting their higher end sales. With GigE it might have been interesting and worth thinking about.

Wayne, your estimations aren't bad in gigabit. People should contact me off the list for pricing.

Wayne Morellini · February 14th, 2005, 12:19 PM

Yes, I'll have to do that.

At the moment I am researching the hispeed sensors and price (for large area, and global and high speed shutter) this thing with IBIS5/Micron 3MP/Alatsens all have compromises. I'm not after a high frame rate (GIGE capacity would be great) but quality picture and high shutter). It would be interesting if they reduced the price of these.

Thanks
Wayne.

Wayne Morellini · February 14th, 2005, 12:30 PM

I have just stumbled on this one:

http://www.siliconfilm.com/

Sounds simular to that conceptHD (was that the name). Have heard of one that goes in a movie camera years ago to.

Thanks

Wayne.

Laurence Maher · February 15th, 2005, 01:12 AM

Well,

I love you guys who all tried, but as I predicted, it looks like it's all going to be way too late.

STRONG rumors suggest a Panasonic DVCProHD camera coming out for under 10 k some time this year. NAB will most likely unleash it. Records to mini-dv and also P2. The quality won't meet the "uncompressed" richness of what you guys have been trying for, but for cost-effectiveness, and rock-solid reliability, and user-friendliness, the trade off will be well worth it.

Sorry guys, I think they beat you to the punch.

. . . like I predicted.

Elvis has left the building.

Wayne Morellini · February 15th, 2005, 02:00 AM

Yes, lately I have noticed that most people have left, probably bored of waiting for things to come through, something I was worried would happen. I am also had it with this too, and am even considering lesser cameras.

See, it was worth waiting for an excellent solution (that would stay that way until worn out) and pay more for it, but if Altasens wasn't going to be it, you might as well buy cheap and upgrade when an excellent solutions comes. I have even figured out how to pixel shift a foveon x3 (max 1080) but rolling shutter again.

It will take some more research to find out where ever the planned SI and Sumix Altasens can get around the rolling shutter problem "enough" (as JVC advertises they have done with there Altasens cameras). Maybe Steve can fill us in on the flexibility of the SI GigaE cameras in this respect.

Two things are needed:

- To increase readout rate mostly independent of shutter (to use long shutter time (24th-48th's), but fast readout (rolling shutter)).

- To reduce shutter times (good to reduce rolling, reduce exposure, special fast action frame analysis/stop frame) independent of frame rate.

And for those special effects hi-speed photography people (of which the first 100% speed increase is the most useful;l for many of us):

- To increase frame rate.

How flexible (how much can each camera achieve in figures) on this over the GigaE are the cameras? I can already guess there is very little variability on the IBIS and 1300 (included for completeness and courtesy), but what about the Altasens?

Thanks

Wayne.

Jacques Mersereau · February 15th, 2005, 07:43 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher : Well,

I love you guys who all tried, but as I predicted, it looks like it's all going to be way too late.

STRONG rumors suggest a Panasonic DVCProHD camera coming out for under 10 k some time this year. NAB will most likely unleash it. Records to mini-dv and also P2. The quality won't meet the "uncompressed" richness of what you guys have been trying for, but for cost-effectiveness, and rock-solid reliability, and user-friendliness, the trade off will be well worth it.

Sorry guys, I think they beat you to the punch. -->>>

IMO, what our guys are trying to accomplish and Pana's HDV are completely
different. I have NO interest in HDV. I am VERY interested in a hot mod
like Juan P's (turning a DVX100a into an uncompressed HD camera).
HDV is *trying* to pack 4X the amount of pixels into
the same bandwidth as DV with an OLD compression scheme.
HDV's scheme involves all kinds of voodoo, none of which is benefiicial to
image qualilty.
HDV is fine for talking heads and other lock down shots, but quickly falls
apart when motion becomes involved. Being a nature videographer I want
REAL HD and not HDV; a poser format.

KEEP ON ROCKING BOYS!

Joshua Starnes · February 15th, 2005, 10:46 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Jacques Mersereau : IMO, what our guys are trying to accomplish and Pana's HDV are completely
different. I have NO interest in HDV. -->>>

What Pana is proposing isn't HDV, its real HD. The proposed HDX-100 will record its HD signal in DVCProHD, the same format that the Varicam records to now.

Is that format as good as Obin's proposed 10-bit 4:4:4 uncompressed camera? No.

Is it a worthwhile shooting format, particularly in a sub $10K camera? Yes.

Jacques Mersereau · February 15th, 2005, 11:26 AM

Interesting. There must be some problems somewhere in this information
because as far as I know, DVCPRO HD is 100mbps which will not record
to a standard miniDV tape. (unless they turn an hour tape into 15 minutes?)

DVCPRO HD is also fairly heavily compressed (though it looks good) at 6:1 and I am unsure as to the color sampling.
HDCAM is something like 3:1:0 (?) and
only records 1440 lines, not 1920 as most seem to think.

Nevertheless, . . . semi real HD for under 10K would be a great step forward.

Aaron Shaw · February 15th, 2005, 11:45 AM

DVCproHD is 100mbps

It will NOT record to tape. Jan crittenden has already said this is an unviable measure. It will record to P2 solid state media.

February 14th, 2005, 09:03 AM	#303
Steve Nordhauser Silicon Imaging, Inc. Join Date: May 2004 Location: Troy, NY USA Posts: 325	Wayne: Our GigE cameras have been shipping for a year. The SI-1280F, SI-1300, SI-3300 and the SI-1920HD are all on GigE. There is a 32MB internal buffer so you can average the data rate. More Wayne: Some of the camera link frame grabbers support Linux, as does the GigE interface. Mac is still not well supported for capture but as long as the files are movable, is this a big problem? __________________ Silicon Imaging, Inc. We see the Light! http://www.siliconimaging.com

February 14th, 2005, 11:43 AM	#307
Steve Nordhauser Silicon Imaging, Inc. Join Date: May 2004 Location: Troy, NY USA Posts: 325	Wayne, It is only the GigE cameras that have the internal buffer. Some of the camera link frame grabbers have buffers on them. Joshua, On MiniMac (Austin Powers flashback) - it sounds like they crippled it a bit to avoid hurting their higher end sales. With GigE it might have been interesting and worth thinking about. Wayne, your estimations aren't bad in gigabit. People should contact me off the list for pricing. __________________ Silicon Imaging, Inc. We see the Light! http://www.siliconimaging.com

February 15th, 2005, 07:43 AM	#312
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher : Well, I love you guys who all tried, but as I predicted, it looks like it's all going to be way too late. STRONG rumors suggest a Panasonic DVCProHD camera coming out for under 10 k some time this year. NAB will most likely unleash it. Records to mini-dv and also P2. The quality won't meet the "uncompressed" richness of what you guys have been trying for, but for cost-effectiveness, and rock-solid reliability, and user-friendliness, the trade off will be well worth it. Sorry guys, I think they beat you to the punch. -->>> IMO, what our guys are trying to accomplish and Pana's HDV are completely different. I have NO interest in HDV. I am VERY interested in a hot mod like Juan P's (turning a DVX100a into an uncompressed HD camera). HDV is trying to pack 4X the amount of pixels into the same bandwidth as DV with an OLD compression scheme. HDV's scheme involves all kinds of voodoo, none of which is benefiicial to image qualilty. HDV is fine for talking heads and other lock down shots, but quickly falls apart when motion becomes involved. Being a nature videographer I want REAL HD and not HDV; a poser format. KEEP ON ROCKING BOYS! __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

February 15th, 2005, 11:26 AM	#314
Jacques Mersereau Trustee Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 1,334	Interesting. There must be some problems somewhere in this information because as far as I know, DVCPRO HD is 100mbps which will not record to a standard miniDV tape. (unless they turn an hour tape into 15 minutes?) DVCPRO HD is also fairly heavily compressed (though it looks good) at 6:1 and I am unsure as to the color sampling. HDCAM is something like 3:1:0 (?) and only records 1440 lines, not 1920 as most seem to think. Nevertheless, . . . semi real HD for under 10K would be a great step forward. __________________ Jacques Mersereau University of Michigan-Video Studio Manager

January 30th, 2005, 08:06 PM	#301
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Thanks for that Steve. While I would like Global shutter, what I am looking for is fast enough readout to reduce the rolling shuter effect to a minium. It sounds like you still end up reading out faster with no on camera buffer with the camera link version, which is OK when attached to a 64-bit card. So when is the GIGe version coming out, which you said would use a buffer?

February 14th, 2005, 08:37 AM	#302
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	So we have the Mac-Mini now, and dual cored VIA's out soon (unfortunately I only hear 2GHZ cores by the end of the year) and car PC's. So is anybody planning projects based on Mac or Linux. Ronald? By the end of the year the multi cored 3.5Ghz (maybe) xbox2 will be out. So maybe we will see a 3.5Ghz Mini-Mac. The xbox2 would be an excellent cheap platform for a camera aswell. If MS wants to send Sony broke the best stratergy would be to allow us to makem a camera out of there I keep track of various things here, some people I know are, apparently, releasing a 0.5W 60 Bip's $1 processor sometime soon (maybe even faster). I have already reviewed the basic information from 2001, and it seems unsuitable, but I don't know what the present design will do. But looking at the wider scheme of things, if all we need is VGA, GIGE, SATA, USB2.0, controls etc we don't really need a PC. Is there anything new on the sensor horizon?

February 14th, 2005, 10:39 AM	#304
Joshua Starnes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 356	<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : More Wayne: Some of the camera link frame grabbers support Linux, as does the GigE interface. Mac is still not well supported for capture but as long as the files are movable, is this a big problem? -->>> I think he was thinking of MacMini as a capturing platform rather than an editing platform. With its low price point, built in GigE and extremely small design, it seems almost custom made for this type of project, and a capture and camera system that could utilize it would be a step ahead (and a bit cheaper) than some of the other projects that are building microATX boxes from scratch. I think that's what he was thinking.

February 14th, 2005, 10:52 AM	#305
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	I remember you told me that the 1920 would have memory buffer for high-speed readout, and that how a small MB buffer costs a lot of money, but not that cameras already had it. That put's a whole new spin on things, and what I tell all those people that ask me about what's available. How much are he 1280f and 1300 (3300 is around 2-3K and Altasens around $5k?) ?

February 14th, 2005, 11:04 AM	#306
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	The Mac Mini (unfortunately) is currently 100/10 ethernet. Eventually I think they would adopt GBE, and FirewireB, but at the moment Firewire A is the way to go. Eventually it shoud be a very good (and compact) HD capture (with larger and laptop faster drives). It is just for the interest of the Mac people.

February 14th, 2005, 12:19 PM	#308
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Yes, I'll have to do that. At the moment I am researching the hispeed sensors and price (for large area, and global and high speed shutter) this thing with IBIS5/Micron 3MP/Alatsens all have compromises. I'm not after a high frame rate (GIGE capacity would be great) but quality picture and high shutter). It would be interesting if they reduced the price of these. Thanks Wayne.

February 14th, 2005, 12:30 PM	#309
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	I have just stumbled on this one: http://www.siliconfilm.com/ Sounds simular to that conceptHD (was that the name). Have heard of one that goes in a movie camera years ago to. Thanks Wayne.

February 15th, 2005, 01:12 AM	#310
Laurence Maher Join Date: May 2004 Location: denton, texas, usa Posts: 416	Well, I love you guys who all tried, but as I predicted, it looks like it's all going to be way too late. STRONG rumors suggest a Panasonic DVCProHD camera coming out for under 10 k some time this year. NAB will most likely unleash it. Records to mini-dv and also P2. The quality won't meet the "uncompressed" richness of what you guys have been trying for, but for cost-effectiveness, and rock-solid reliability, and user-friendliness, the trade off will be well worth it. Sorry guys, I think they beat you to the punch. . . . like I predicted. Elvis has left the building.

February 15th, 2005, 02:00 AM	#311
Wayne Morellini Inner Circle Join Date: May 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 2,762	Yes, lately I have noticed that most people have left, probably bored of waiting for things to come through, something I was worried would happen. I am also had it with this too, and am even considering lesser cameras. See, it was worth waiting for an excellent solution (that would stay that way until worn out) and pay more for it, but if Altasens wasn't going to be it, you might as well buy cheap and upgrade when an excellent solutions comes. I have even figured out how to pixel shift a foveon x3 (max 1080) but rolling shutter again. It will take some more research to find out where ever the planned SI and Sumix Altasens can get around the rolling shutter problem "enough" (as JVC advertises they have done with there Altasens cameras). Maybe Steve can fill us in on the flexibility of the SI GigaE cameras in this respect. Two things are needed: - To increase readout rate mostly independent of shutter (to use long shutter time (24th-48th's), but fast readout (rolling shutter)). - To reduce shutter times (good to reduce rolling, reduce exposure, special fast action frame analysis/stop frame) independent of frame rate. And for those special effects hi-speed photography people (of which the first 100% speed increase is the most useful;l for many of us): - To increase frame rate. How flexible (how much can each camera achieve in figures) on this over the GigaE are the cameras? I can already guess there is very little variability on the IBIS and 1300 (included for completeness and courtesy), but what about the Altasens? Thanks Wayne.

February 15th, 2005, 10:46 AM	#313
Joshua Starnes Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 356	<<<-- Originally posted by Jacques Mersereau : IMO, what our guys are trying to accomplish and Pana's HDV are completely different. I have NO interest in HDV. -->>> What Pana is proposing isn't HDV, its real HD. The proposed HDX-100 will record its HD signal in DVCProHD, the same format that the Varicam records to now. Is that format as good as Obin's proposed 10-bit 4:4:4 uncompressed camera? No. Is it a worthwhile shooting format, particularly in a sub $10K camera? Yes.

February 15th, 2005, 11:45 AM	#315
Aaron Shaw Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 587	DVCproHD is 100mbps It will NOT record to tape. Jan crittenden has already said this is an unviable measure. It will record to P2 solid state media.