New recorder or an idea for CD

[David Rogers]

I recently saw the Cinedeck recorder that uses 2.5" SSD, records at 10bit or 12bit 4:2:2 or 4:4:4, and includes a 7" monitor. Street price less than $8K.

A Flash XDR with some of the small HD monitors currently available is in the same price range. Something for CD to think about in the future, a Nano or XDR type recorder combined with a small HD monitor. This would make a very nice package for many applications. A Nano Flash, a Flash XDR and a "MonoFlash" in the product line.

Something to think about Dan!

David Rogers (a happy Flash XDR owner)

[Mike Schell]

Hi David-
Great suggestion, we'll keep it in mind as we move forward. Glad to hear the XDR is working well.

Best-

[Aaron Newsome]

Hi David. I own both the Cinedeck and the XDR. While the idea of a built in screen sounds like a good idea, I still prefer the XDR for its weight, form factor and power draw are a few things that CD got right on the XDR. The flexibility of having a *seperate* LCD or no LCD at all, make the XDR much easier to work with than having a heavy, large and power hungry LCD.

[Mark Job]

Hi Aaron:
Can you give us an idea of what the power draw is like with the cinedeckHD versus the XDR ? Also, does not the cinedeckHD also offer uncompressed HD 4:2:2 & 12 bit 4:4:4 recording to removable solid state drives ? I also thought Charles Dautrement was going to offer a 2K option as well for his cinedeck creation ? I understood the normal operation of the cinedeckHD was compressed Cineform codec ? Is the cinedeck actually larger than the XDR ?

MJ (Another happy XDR owner)

EDIT: Aaron, I'm surprised you think having a monitor built into the recorder is a big negative

[Aaron Newsome]

Hi Mark. I'll be doing a full review of the Cinedeck and even a Cinedeck vs. XDR/Nano comparison. I won't be posting it here, since it's probably not information that CD would think is relevant in a forum for CD products. I'll post a link to the review though.

Currently (build 182), the Cinedeck is a Cineform only recorder. There are no other codec options at all. You have one choice, Cineform, that's it. I've been informed that DNxHD support will be added shortly but since that's a future feature and doesn't actually exist yet, I hate to even post that it will be there shortly. I don't like to talk about features that don't exist.

4:2:2 10 bit and 4:4:4 12 bit recording are indeed supported.

Uncompressed recording is not supported. There are no plans, that I know of, for any kind of uncompressed recording to be added at all.

As far as I know, the Cinedeck is capable of 2k acquisition but I don't have anything that sends a 2k signal so you won't be hearing about 2k in any of my personal tests. My camera sends an HD signal and I don't plan on replacing my camera any time soon, so all of my reviews will be based on HD resolutions.

Yes, the Cinedeck is quite a bit bigger than the XDR. This is also something that will be covered in the review. 120 cubic inches vs. 108 cubic inches.

Indeed I do think the monitor being built in is useless when the recorder is mounted at the camera. I hand hold a LOT. With the recorder at the back of my rig, I can't see it so the monitor is doing me no good anyway.

When the recorder is not being operated at the camera, then yes the monitor is a big plus. The only time I miss a monitor on the XDR is when I'm operating the recorder away from the camera or doing playback with the recorder, neither are things I do often.

[Aaron Newsome]

Oh, also. regarding power, the Cinedeck uses an astonishing 72 watts. Try and wrap your head around that and consider or not if that can even be considered "battery powered". Yes, that is a full 6 amps @ 12V. Consider how fast this will chew through a Dionic 90 battery.

My camera was previously the most power hungry 12v device in my collection and that uses a paltry 44 watts by comparison. My camera will chew through a STACK of Dionic 90s in a few hours. I can maybe get an hour out of a single Dionic 90. My old camera could go for over 4 hours on a Dionic 90.

As another comparison, I measured the XDR power draw at around 9 watts. Yes 9. That's 8 times less power than the Cinedeck.

I'll do some testing but I don't expect more than about 20 minutes of operation from a Cinedeck and a Dionic 90.

[David Rogers]

My bad Aaron. It sounds like a great idea. I would imagine the folks at CD could beat the 72w power consumption! My thought would be another choice in the HD recorder arsenal. I sometimes work with HD POV cameras and having the monitor and recorder together would be nice. Fewer cables and batteries. I have an idea for a bracket/power system for a small HD monitor and a Nano Flash. Handles on both end, with the monitor and Nano side by side and the common battery on the back. If I implement it (read, come into some extra cash to buy the Nano), I'll post pics of it.

Regards
David

[Aaron Newsome]

Ok, so I tried a bit of testing on battery power. Dionic 90 says maximum output, 90 watts. Maximum "lighting" 75 watts. The Cinedeck is about 72 watts but a Dionic 90 will not run it for more than a few minutes. I have a feeling that the Dionic 90 doesn't like being run at 100% max output for more than a few moments.

I also have some more powerful Anton Bauer "clone batteries". I tried running the Cinedeck on my most powerful battery and the Cinedeck took it from 5 bars full charge, to 1 bar near dead in less than 5 minutes.

It's a good thing that battery powering the unit is not something that is important to me.

Another point of comparison is the S.two OB-1. Drawing a measly 20 watts! That's impressive.

[Aaron Newsome]

Originally Posted by David Rogers

My bad Aaron. It sounds like a great idea. I would imagine the folks at CD could beat the 72w power consumption! My thought would be another choice in the HD recorder arsenal. I sometimes work with HD POV cameras and having the monitor and recorder together would be nice. Fewer cables and batteries. I have an idea for a bracket/power system for a small HD monitor and a Nano Flash. Handles on both end, with the monitor and Nano side by side and the common battery on the back. If I implement it (read, come into some extra cash to buy the Nano), I'll post pics of it.

Regards
David

Well, luckily, it's not the LCD that chews through the power. It's the processors in the recorder. My Marshall LCD of the same size will go an entire day on a single Anton Bauer battery.

[Mark Job]

Hi Aaron:
OK 72 watts is running a workstation class laptop PC ! Therefore, I must conclude the cinedeckHD is a glorified micro PC solution. I hope Charles keeps up his product development. I sympathize because building something that you can actually send to someone to test is way harder then thinking one up on paper. I understood Intel has a new core i7 CPU which draws very little current and is designed to go only to laptop manufacturers. Perhaps the video/audio capture circuit pulls heavy current ? @ 72 watts there has to be something in their drawing more than 1 amp !

[Mike Schell]

Originally Posted by Aaron Newsome

.Another point of comparison is the S.two OB-1. Drawing a measly 20 watts! That's impressive.

Hi Aaron-
Thanks for the info on the CineDeck. I look forward to your review. Obviously this is quite a different recorder from the Flash XDR or the nanoFlash. I would like to know the positives and the negatives, as there is no perfect recorder (well, until Mark brings out his recorder!!).

There are a lot of very talented people working in the area of portable HD recorders. It's an exciting marketplace to watch and participate in.

Best-
Mike Schell

PS FYI, the nanoFlash draws about 6 Watts.

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Mike Schell

Hi Aaron-
Thanks for the info on the CineDeck. I look forward to your review. Obviously this is quite a different recorder from the Flash XDR or the nanoFlash. I would like to know the positives and the negatives, as there is no perfect recorder (well, until Mark brings out his recorder!!).

.....Well, until Mark can build a power supply circuit which doesn't fry his recording circuit board after 5 minutes ! The power supply circuit is supposed to be the easy part.

Originally Posted by Mike Schell

There are a lot of very talented people working in the area of portable HD recorders. It's an exciting marketplace to watch and participate in.

....I'm very gifted in busting stuff ! I have great ability in this area. I haven't been able to bust my Flash XDR, therefore, I can confirm to you it is an excellent product ! We hope to have a second prototype of our recorder by August to try again. It's now been well over a year and I still don't have a demonstrate -able prototype to show anyone ! Making a SSDR is a **VERY** expensive undertaking ! You need to have a bottomless pit of money ! Mike ! You must be a multi-millionaire, because it's reeeeeeaaaly expensive to do this !

Best-
Mike Schell

PS FYI, the nanoFlash draws about 6 Watts.[/QUOTE]

[Aaron Newsome]

Hi Mark. I think calling the Cinedeck a glorified micro PC is a bit of a stretch. It's a very powerful and complicated little brick that far exceeds any piece of gear that I know of at this price. A masterfully engineered little box. YES it consumes a LOT of power, but what are you getting for that consumption in return. Read more in my review.

[Andrew Stone]

Originally Posted by Aaron Newsome

Ok, so I tried a bit of testing on battery power. Dionic 90 says maximum output, 90 watts. Maximum "lighting" 75 watts. The Cinedeck is about 72 watts but a Dionic 90 will not run it for more than a few minutes. I have a feeling that the Dionic 90 doesn't like being run at 100% max output for more than a few moments.

Anton Bauer came out with a "high current" version of the Dionic within the past year. Lots of Steadicam Ops running big HD cameras are snapping them up to deal with their high draw cameras.

Looking forward to your review Aaron. I know right now that CD has throught through the form factor quite well from a practical standpoint and it has a lot of pluses over the Cinedeck and the KiPro in that regard. Weight, size and simplicity being the big ones. You can slap a nanoFlash on a Steadicam rig and not have to worry about it frying the wires in the post from too much draw, super light in weight, slap some velcro on it and just pitch it at the camera, wire it up in a minute and you are good to go.

Looking forward to CD's 422 10bit device with a solid display cover and a re-engineered card enclosure housing. ;)

[Mark Job]

Originally Posted by Aaron Newsome

Hi Mark. I think calling the Cinedeck a glorified micro PC is a bit of a stretch. It's a very powerful and complicated little brick that far exceeds any piece of gear that I know of at this price. A masterfully engineered little box. YES it consumes a LOT of power, but what are you getting for that consumption in return. Read more in my review.

...Hi Aaron: The reason I referred to it as a glorified PC, was because it draws power like some of the workstation class power PC laptops. I wasn't trying to denigrate the product per se, but you have to admit it's power drain levels for remote production are unreasonable considering it's application. I have every respect for the great development work Charles Dautremont has done with the cinedeckHD (I may buy one myself !). After all his recorder is to market while mine isn't ! This is a feat to be respected indeed !