CineForm HDMI Recorder Concept Posted

Bill Ravens · November 16th, 2007, 08:28 AM

My entire interest in this device is VERY MUCH because it would encode directly to a Cineform Intermediate. I have no interest in a device that does otherwise.

Alex Raskin · November 16th, 2007, 08:32 AM

Ditto what Bill said

Tim Veal · November 16th, 2007, 09:14 AM

Regarding the LCD screen, I'm torn on the idea. On one hand I would like to get this as economical as possible which means skip the screen. On the other hand, I see the advantages of a nice screen. Would something like an add on screen work? Where the base unit has a simple display screen for menu navigation with a connector for an optional hi-rez screen that can be attached either directly onto it or to the camera and tethered?

David Newman · November 16th, 2007, 09:30 AM

Regarding the screen. It isn't intended to signicantly better than the on camera LCD, so it isn't going to be of high cost. Our thinking is a compromise between the two threads about the screen, two make the unit as cheap as possible, or to make the unit as flexible as possible. We feel the flexibility gained will be significant without impacting cost too greatly. Yet also see the potential for a different model with a larger screen so it becomes a combination high res camera monitor and DDR, yet this isn't currently the plan for the first units.

Alex Raskin · November 16th, 2007, 09:34 AM

I think I paid $50 retail for my Lilliput 2.5" diag. battery-operated LCD monitor.

Looks like a similar screen should do fine on Cineform box for menus and simple, lo-rez video viewing.

Craig Irving · November 16th, 2007, 09:49 AM

For these "first units", do you expect they may be in production as early as 3 months, 6 months, 12 months?

David Newman · November 16th, 2007, 10:04 AM

It is hard to talk about timing at the moment, as there is several factors that will move this timing around. But not as long as 12 months, that way too long for us. We see the need now, and all your interest helps prove that. The more interest there is, the more the product can be pulled in.

Craig Irving · November 16th, 2007, 10:22 AM

Good enough for me.

Although I will cross my fingers that maybe it'll be ready by NAB. =)

Joseph H. Moore · November 16th, 2007, 04:16 PM

1. Option to "flip" the image during acquisition for 35mm adapters.
2. No screen unless it is usable for HD focus.
3. Simple as possible. Don't succumb to feature-itis!
4. Rugged. Metal chassis, rubberized body, threaded for standard tripod mount. (Think Beachtek.)
5. And oh, yeah, definitely XLR connectors over RCA wherever possible.

Stephen Armour · November 16th, 2007, 04:34 PM

It definitely gains from the flexibility of the touchscreen LCD. No other input is as easy to use for setup and recording.

I can think of many ways in which it will help. Don't write this one off, it's very useful, just don't think of it as a "monitor". That's not it's function.

Think things like "audio record levels", NEO choices, video signal confirmation, timecode sync, etc.

David Newman · November 16th, 2007, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph H. Moore

1. Option to "flip" the image during acquisition for 35mm adapters.
2. No screen unless it is usable for HD focus.
3. Simple as possible. Don't succumb to feature-itis!
4. Rugged. Metal chassis, rubberized body, threaded for standard tripod mount. (Think Beachtek.)
5. And oh, yeah, definitely XLR connectors over RCA wherever possible.

1. We plan on the 180 degree flip, not just for preview, rather the acquired image will be stored with the correct orientation.

2. Sorry, you have to have a screen. :)

3. We plan on it. A simple platform -- with a screen -- allows us to optimize the unit for a range of markets. Without the screen, all we have is a nice disk recorder unit, it has much more potential than that. Wider market servability for the base technology helps lower the price.

4. Yes, sounds good.

5. Unlikely for the first product, but that would be nice for a pro configuration.

David Newman · November 16th, 2007, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen Armour

Think things like "audio record levels", NEO choices, video signal confirmation, timecode sync, etc.

I think "video signal confirmation" alone is worth the extra expense.

Joseph H. Moore · November 16th, 2007, 04:43 PM

Quote:

No other input is as easy to use for setup and recording.

Sorry, but physical buttons with tactile response are generally easier to use in the field. Just ask anyone who'd tried to use BMW's iDrive!!! ;-)

David, without physical controls, how would one actually access the screen if the decision was made to mount it under the camera? Seems like if you go the touchscreen route an arm mount will be the only practical config.

Why go with RCA over XLR? Price?
The reason why I'm pestering on this issue is that you can always convert XLR to RCA and not give up anything, but you can't do vice-versa and retain XLR's benefits. Every RadioShack in the country sells adapters for a few bucks, so it's not like this choice would lock anyone or any equipment out.

It seems to me that most consumers willing to drop $2k on a "recorder" are also looking to use quality microphones.

P.S. I didn't say it before, but this thing will ROCK! However the details shake-out, you're gonna sell a bajillion of them.

Stephen Armour · November 16th, 2007, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Newman

I think "video signal confirmation" alone is worth the extra expense.

definitely a biggie. But there's more...lots more

Jason Rodriguez · November 16th, 2007, 05:01 PM

Is the issue the actual XLR connectors themselves or the issue of balanced audio inputs vs. unbalanced audio?

XLR's are pretty big . . . other connectors could be suited to work if the issue is mainly having balanced audio inputs over unbalanced.

November 16th, 2007, 09:30 AM	#79
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	Regarding the screen. It isn't intended to signicantly better than the on camera LCD, so it isn't going to be of high cost. Our thinking is a compromise between the two threads about the screen, two make the unit as cheap as possible, or to make the unit as flexible as possible. We feel the flexibility gained will be significant without impacting cost too greatly. Yet also see the potential for a different model with a larger screen so it becomes a combination high res camera monitor and DDR, yet this isn't currently the plan for the first units. __________________ David Newman -- web: www.gopro.com blog: cineform.blogspot.com -- twitter: twitter.com/David_Newman

November 16th, 2007, 10:04 AM	#82
David Newman CTO, CineForm Inc. Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Cardiff-by-the-Sea, California Posts: 8,095	It is hard to talk about timing at the moment, as there is several factors that will move this timing around. But not as long as 12 months, that way too long for us. We see the need now, and all your interest helps prove that. The more interest there is, the more the product can be pulled in. __________________ David Newman -- web: www.gopro.com blog: cineform.blogspot.com -- twitter: twitter.com/David_Newman

November 16th, 2007, 04:34 PM	#85
Stephen Armour Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Natal, RN, Brasil Posts: 900	It definitely gains from the flexibility of the touchscreen LCD. No other input is as easy to use for setup and recording. I can think of many ways in which it will help. Don't write this one off, it's very useful, just don't think of it as a "monitor". That's not it's function. Think things like "audio record levels", NEO choices, video signal confirmation, timecode sync, etc. __________________ http://lightinaction.org "All in the view of the LION"

November 16th, 2007, 08:28 AM	#76
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	My entire interest in this device is VERY MUCH because it would encode directly to a Cineform Intermediate. I have no interest in a device that does otherwise.

November 16th, 2007, 08:32 AM	#77
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	Ditto what Bill said

November 16th, 2007, 09:14 AM	#78
Tim Veal Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 70	Regarding the LCD screen, I'm torn on the idea. On one hand I would like to get this as economical as possible which means skip the screen. On the other hand, I see the advantages of a nice screen. Would something like an add on screen work? Where the base unit has a simple display screen for menu navigation with a connector for an optional hi-rez screen that can be attached either directly onto it or to the camera and tethered?

November 16th, 2007, 09:34 AM	#80
Alex Raskin Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,435	I think I paid $50 retail for my Lilliput 2.5" diag. battery-operated LCD monitor. Looks like a similar screen should do fine on Cineform box for menus and simple, lo-rez video viewing.

November 16th, 2007, 09:49 AM	#81
Craig Irving Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Toronto Posts: 539	For these "first units", do you expect they may be in production as early as 3 months, 6 months, 12 months?

November 16th, 2007, 10:22 AM	#83
Craig Irving Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Toronto Posts: 539	Good enough for me. Although I will cross my fingers that maybe it'll be ready by NAB. =)

November 16th, 2007, 04:16 PM	#84
Joseph H. Moore Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 362	1. Option to "flip" the image during acquisition for 35mm adapters. 2. No screen unless it is usable for HD focus. 3. Simple as possible. Don't succumb to feature-itis! 4. Rugged. Metal chassis, rubberized body, threaded for standard tripod mount. (Think Beachtek.) 5. And oh, yeah, definitely XLR connectors over RCA wherever possible.

November 16th, 2007, 05:01 PM	#90
Jason Rodriguez Trustee Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 1,095	Is the issue the actual XLR connectors themselves or the issue of balanced audio inputs vs. unbalanced audio? XLR's are pretty big . . . other connectors could be suited to work if the issue is mainly having balanced audio inputs over unbalanced.