nanoFlash Firmware 1.6.29 at DVinfo.net

Dan Keaton · July 7th, 2010, 11:57 AM

This thread is intended for discussions of nanoFlash Firmware 1.6.29.

We will report here any problems that we find with 1.6.29, and we invite others, if they detect any problem with 1.6.29, to post here also.

So far, we have found no major problems with 1.6.29, which was posted on July 29, 2010.

I was asked today, if MPG, specifically in SD, works. Yes it does.

Since 1.6.29 was released, we found the following small bugs in the firmware.
All of these bugs have been found and fixed, and will be incorported in our next release.

In 720p, with pulldown removal active, the timecode was getting doubled in this mode.

In SD, there is a bug in setting SD aspect ratio.

And we just fixed LTC timecode, (Linear Timecode, external timecode input), to be more accurate.

No major problems, so far have surfaced with 1.6.29.

I will attempt to report any other problems that we find.

George Griswold · July 7th, 2010, 01:00 PM

Can I set the aspect ratio to 16X9 reliably? I use SDX-900 camera and simultaneously record SD on Nano. What is the bug with the menu item?

Dan Keaton · July 7th, 2010, 01:41 PM

Dear George,

I will provide more information shortly. Our engineers are in a meeting.

Dan Keaton · July 7th, 2010, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Griswold

Can I set the aspect ratio to 16X9 reliably? I use SDX-900 camera and simultaneously record SD on Nano. What is the bug with the menu item?

Dear George,

When you set the 16x9 option in the nanoFlash menu, in 1.6.29, and most likely earlier firmware releases, we do not properly set the 16x9 bit in the file header.

The video is recorded properly, the header just reports the video as 4x3.

Please feel free to run a test to see if this affects you.

George Griswold · July 7th, 2010, 06:25 PM

Should not be a problem, just check anamorphic in FCP and it would be OK. I will test before next SDX shoot on Tuesday. All oil spill now in New Orleans, all the time. George

Gints Klimanis · July 7th, 2010, 07:55 PM

I've upgraded to the new Firmware, but I haven't used it yet. For 1.5.249, I'm seeing Nano clip start 10-13 frames after the EX1 clip for I-Frame Only at 280 MBps for 1080p30. The Nano also has an extra 12-14 frames appended to the end of the file. Is it possible to make the number of leading and trailing frames for the Nano is consistent when the Recording "PreBuffer" is not used? If so, I'd like a programmable parameter (units=frames) to reduce or eliminate it.

Dan Keaton · July 8th, 2010, 06:09 AM

Dear Gints,

We are making improvements in this area.

We are currently testing a new way to start the recording process, which is significantly faster.

We have this implemented, it just has to go through our testing process before we release it.

This was added after 1.6.29, but you may see some improvements in 1.6.29.

Gints Klimanis · July 8th, 2010, 11:31 AM

Thanks, Dan. An extra 10-15 frames at the end would be useful for takes that were inadvertently cut off. In run-n-gun, I have longed for extra time at the end of a clip. If it is possible to open a parameter for "post-buffer length", I'd like that. I would hate to see this capability disappear completely even though the additional frames (currently the number seems inconsistent) may complicate some editing situations.

Dan Keaton · July 8th, 2010, 11:48 AM

Dear Gints,

That is a very nice idea.

I would recommend that the parameter (menu item) would be in seconds.

As always, things get complicated.

I would imagine, that if the record button or timecode started rolling again, during the "extra time", then we would not stop recording, but close one file and start another.

I think this would be a very nice feature for some.

Standard Disclaimer: As most everyone knows, we are very busy.

Gints Klimanis · July 8th, 2010, 12:11 PM

Dan, that's a good description of what I'm looking for.

George Griswold · July 12th, 2010, 08:01 PM

Please don't turn the NanoFlash into another computer product with so many check boxes that it becomes unwieldy and unreliable. If someone wants to roll longer, then simply delay pressing the roll button to cut the take. Please, please don't add too many more features. Maybe we should have forum votes for any more "upgrades" in the menu.

Ronald Jackson · July 12th, 2010, 10:29 PM

I second George's plea above. Please keep it simple. Just make sure that what the nano is supposed to do it does do as efficiently as possible but don't change it.

I would like to see more by way of a manual, e.g. " A step by step guide to using the nanoFlash with Final Cut Pro".

Ron

Dan Keaton · July 13th, 2010, 05:24 AM

Dear George,

We are very much concerned with feature bloat. We want to keep our menus as simple as possible.

However, this is one of those features that is fairly simple in implement and could be buried near the bottom of a menu. We will listen to more comments before we implement this.

Dear Ronald,

It is difficult for us to produce a manual for Final Cut Pro, even if it just applies to using our footage.

A Final Cut Pro expert, maybe someone on this forum, could produce a concise Step by Step guide.

But, it is like cooking, there are many ways or methods to get to the final result.

Robin Probyn · July 13th, 2010, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Griswold

Please don't turn the NanoFlash into another computer product with so many check boxes that it becomes unwieldy and unreliable. If someone wants to roll longer, then simply delay pressing the roll button to cut the take. Please, please don't add too many more features. Maybe we should have forum votes for any more "upgrades" in the menu.

Totally agree.. and have mentioned it before.. its just going to be unending with so any people wanting this and that.. keep to the basic,s... its not an editing add on.. its for recording from a camera.. lest get that air tight first..

Lance Librandi · July 13th, 2010, 09:08 AM

Hello Dan,
Where features are concerned CD must move with market demands and this will lead other features having to be added. Perhaps the time is approaching where the use of profiles may be a better option than a set menu, this way you can make the device as simply or as complex as you want.

July 7th, 2010, 11:57 AM	#1
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	nanoFlash Firmware 1.6.29 This thread is intended for discussions of nanoFlash Firmware 1.6.29. We will report here any problems that we find with 1.6.29, and we invite others, if they detect any problem with 1.6.29, to post here also. So far, we have found no major problems with 1.6.29, which was posted on July 29, 2010. I was asked today, if MPG, specifically in SD, works. Yes it does. Since 1.6.29 was released, we found the following small bugs in the firmware. All of these bugs have been found and fixed, and will be incorported in our next release. In 720p, with pulldown removal active, the timecode was getting doubled in this mode. In SD, there is a bug in setting SD aspect ratio. And we just fixed LTC timecode, (Linear Timecode, external timecode input), to be more accurate. No major problems, so far have surfaced with 1.6.29. I will attempt to report any other problems that we find. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

July 7th, 2010, 01:00 PM	#2
George Griswold Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 218	SD Aspect Can I set the aspect ratio to 16X9 reliably? I use SDX-900 camera and simultaneously record SD on Nano. What is the bug with the menu item? __________________ George T. Griswold, Jr. www.videonow.info New Orleans

July 7th, 2010, 01:41 PM	#3
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear George, I will provide more information shortly. Our engineers are in a meeting. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

July 7th, 2010, 06:25 PM	#5
George Griswold Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 218	16x9 Should not be a problem, just check anamorphic in FCP and it would be OK. I will test before next SDX shoot on Tuesday. All oil spill now in New Orleans, all the time. George __________________ George T. Griswold, Jr. www.videonow.info New Orleans

July 8th, 2010, 06:09 AM	#7
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Gints, We are making improvements in this area. We are currently testing a new way to start the recording process, which is significantly faster. We have this implemented, it just has to go through our testing process before we release it. This was added after 1.6.29, but you may see some improvements in 1.6.29. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

July 7th, 2010, 07:55 PM	#6
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	I've upgraded to the new Firmware, but I haven't used it yet. For 1.5.249, I'm seeing Nano clip start 10-13 frames after the EX1 clip for I-Frame Only at 280 MBps for 1080p30. The Nano also has an extra 12-14 frames appended to the end of the file. Is it possible to make the number of leading and trailing frames for the Nano is consistent when the Recording "PreBuffer" is not used? If so, I'd like a programmable parameter (units=frames) to reduce or eliminate it.

July 8th, 2010, 11:31 AM	#8
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Thanks, Dan. An extra 10-15 frames at the end would be useful for takes that were inadvertently cut off. In run-n-gun, I have longed for extra time at the end of a clip. If it is possible to open a parameter for "post-buffer length", I'd like that. I would hate to see this capability disappear completely even though the additional frames (currently the number seems inconsistent) may complicate some editing situations. Last edited by Gints Klimanis; July 8th, 2010 at 12:11 PM.

July 8th, 2010, 11:48 AM	#9
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear Gints, That is a very nice idea. I would recommend that the parameter (menu item) would be in seconds. As always, things get complicated. I would imagine, that if the record button or timecode started rolling again, during the "extra time", then we would not stop recording, but close one file and start another. I think this would be a very nice feature for some. Standard Disclaimer: As most everyone knows, we are very busy. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

July 8th, 2010, 12:11 PM	#10
Gints Klimanis Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 2,222	Dan, that's a good description of what I'm looking for.

July 12th, 2010, 08:01 PM	#11
George Griswold Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 218	Beware the feature bloat! Please don't turn the NanoFlash into another computer product with so many check boxes that it becomes unwieldy and unreliable. If someone wants to roll longer, then simply delay pressing the roll button to cut the take. Please, please don't add too many more features. Maybe we should have forum votes for any more "upgrades" in the menu. __________________ George T. Griswold, Jr. www.videonow.info New Orleans

July 12th, 2010, 10:29 PM	#12
Ronald Jackson Major Player Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Southport, United Kingdom Posts: 723	I second George's plea above. Please keep it simple. Just make sure that what the nano is supposed to do it does do as efficiently as possible but don't change it. I would like to see more by way of a manual, e.g. " A step by step guide to using the nanoFlash with Final Cut Pro". Ron

July 13th, 2010, 05:24 AM	#13
Dan Keaton Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Augusta Georgia Posts: 5,421	Dear George, We are very much concerned with feature bloat. We want to keep our menus as simple as possible. However, this is one of those features that is fairly simple in implement and could be buried near the bottom of a menu. We will listen to more comments before we implement this. Dear Ronald, It is difficult for us to produce a manual for Final Cut Pro, even if it just applies to using our footage. A Final Cut Pro expert, maybe someone on this forum, could produce a concise Step by Step guide. But, it is like cooking, there are many ways or methods to get to the final result. __________________ Dan Keaton Augusta Georgia

July 13th, 2010, 09:08 AM	#15
Lance Librandi Major Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: South Australia Posts: 374	Hello Dan, Where features are concerned CD must move with market demands and this will lead other features having to be added. Perhaps the time is approaching where the use of profiles may be a better option than a set menu, this way you can make the device as simply or as complex as you want.