high def ground glass?
 

Hi everyone
obin, thiis is a link to the agus 35 with the 1500 grit .
http://www.dvinfo.net/media/mellor/


this might be fine enough grain for our high def cameras

ground glass
 

this is a link to the ground glass
http://www.optosigma.com/miva/mercha...+%26+Apertures


the part number is 099-0160

combustion does support 16-bit TIFF. It also can work in a 32-bit-per-channel color space.

Rob Scott, that board looks great! it has SATA AND a pci slot..all you need...is that CPU fast enough? can you do a sata raid off 2 standard sata connections? why the need for sata anyway..I have heard that sata as it is NOW is slower then the best IDE drives by a good %...true?

7200RPM SATA is *supposed* to be able to do 50MB/sec continously. Theoretically, 1280x720x30fps 8 bit is 28MB/sec avg, about 35MB/sec peak.

In theory there is no difference between theory and reality. In reality, there is a difference.

The biggest is that drives slow down as you move from the outer tracks (outside circumference of the platter) to the inner tracks. Smaller circumference for the same rotational speed equals less data in the same time. Which way do you think the drive manufacturers spec their drives - slowest or fastest continuous spec?

If the RAID controller is built into the chip set, you will pay a $30 premium or so. Two drives will cost more but give you twice the recording time - not a real loss - use smaller drives if you need to save money.

I guess what I'm saying is that if the 2 drive RAID doesn't cost much more, it is a better option.

Steve, I got images captured from Streampix (learned how to do it) now the only problem is the color red is green and greens are red....can't seem to figure it out...bayer processing does nothing to fix it ..ideas steve?

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : 7200RPM SATA is *supposed* to be able to do 50MB/sec continously. Theoretically, 1280x720x30fps 8 bit is 28MB/sec avg, about 35MB/sec peak. a better option. -->>>


I am a bit lost here: this HD camera model is supposed to generate files that will later, in post will be converted to film via a film recorder and 24 frames/second is needed. By the way is there an option for the SI cameras to work or have a factory preset at 24fps?
Are we looking only at HDTV? Isn't that a 1080p format?


In stills photography the RAW format is the only acceptable capture for professional results. There are quite a few RAW convertes out there. The one I like is AdobeCameraRaw that works as a PlugIn in Photoshop. I don't see why not it can be ported to AfterEffects (same manufacturer and sort of similar architecture). For compositing, color correction environement, 16bit RGB files are a must. The output renders can be 8 bit.

As for capture software, a simple one is here:
http://www.bensoftware.com/btvpro.html but unfortunately is written for Mac (9 @ OSX , though OSX is a variant of Unix).

The Viper camera files are also recorded in a RAW variant. There is a converter capable to open them at www.xnview.com
If anybody is interested, I have some sample RAW captured frames from the Viper that are free to be assesed, but they are 7.9Mb each!!!!

Valeriu,
Sorry, that is me generating some confusion because I don't know the industry. Our cameras have a programmable clock generator - you can set the frame rate. I'm never quite sure when people will want 24 vs 30fps since I think the broadcast people all want 30....in the US anyway. PAL is a different rate. Then some people want a camera that can do twice the frame rate - for special effects, to drop every other frame to minimize the rolling shutter artifacts or to meet one of the new standards.

I just know frame sizes, frame rates and clock frequency.

Thank you Steve,
Yes, the PAL standard requires 25 frames, but film projection is set to 24 fps worldwide. It will be a a very daunting task to convert 30pfs to 24 or 25 especially when you deal with such a huge amount of data for a feature length project. Wouldn't be simpler to have the 25, 24, 29.7, 30 fps inbuilt or easily programable. All the HD cameras we are trying to emulate or surpass are capable of doing this...
...And I have a vested interest: I work in PAL and film environement.
Also, 25 fps can be used in projection as long as the soundtrack is altered for the 24fps lengths and the pitch adjusted. Many "films" shot with Canon XL1or other PAL cameras are done this way. There is a demand of PAL XL1 cameras among independent US film makers especially for this reason.

Steve can the 1300rgb be locked at 24fps or is that going go up and down as you shoot?
FILM 24fps
BROADCAST TV 30FPS and 60fields/sec
Europe 25fps PAL broadcast TV
effects shots 1-120fps
get rid of rolling shutter 60fps and drop one in two frames for broadcast TV and 48fps drop one in two frames for film production

HTH

I understand what a rolling shutter is, but what are the electronic shutters on the Sony F900, etc. like? Are those rolling, or are they single shot? Will rolling shutter look funky on the movie screen?

Also doesn't the SI1300, or at least the Micron chipp it's based off of have the option for a single-frame mode instead of rolling shutter?

Hi Guys, playing catchup, some valuable information below for a some of you.

Robs' it is good to see you here on this. (and I was just getting used to having two Steves ;)

You may notice my spelling improving a bit, as I got rid of the wireless keyboards (virtually smashed the thing) and got another usb model. Interesting thing is that I think the regional HD test broadcasts where what was interfering with it, the same time every day in particular.

Now some important programming stuff.

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : guys from what I can see sofar we need a VERY basic capture program that is easy to use unlike the camera link programs like streampix and norpix stuff...this needs to look and act as much as it can like a *normal* video capture app and we also need a way to view the live stream as it's captured on a TV or an LCD that can run by cable or wireless to the camera ..what would really be nice is if we could somehow take the cameralink signal and feed it to a harddisk AFTER we setup the camera settings via computer.... -->>>

There might be the possibility that you could control the capture program from a seperate control program written in Visual C or something. You would have to check if you can pass commands to the capture program. This saves you from writing a capture program and allows you to use the best one you want.

Yes I agree that keeping the data in Bayer (for a Bayer camera) is probably the best until you want to edit, then what do you do? Converting to a true image (and back to Bayer might not be feasable). Look at what the film industry is using, might be best. I don't like it at low HD res, too many compromises, especially when there will be 3 chip cameras cheap. With Bayer you are loosing and keeping it there is good, but with true 4:4:4 3 chip, you have 100% data and can convert it to any format desired with maximun quality.What happens when somebody hacks direct to disc off the head of one of those. People are allready talking of doing this with Single CHip HD10, so we defintely want sensors that beats it (even if they do achieve it the camera is still too restricted).

Before anybody buys anything more, remember that Sumix (if they are going ahead) maybe here within months and there also is Silicon Imaging. So a few people might like to hold on for them, and if we had real data the software could be made the same time. Otherwise if they deliver the goods you won't have the money to buy it. Still you could develope remotely, and the guy with the caera tests it. Go look at the site ofd the Russian fellow, you will find interesting stuff there and probably reference to existing Open source software, even if it is in Linux it could be converted to Windows.

Compression software must be slack if it can't compress a true simple checkerboard pattern (which would be a handful of bytes).

Rob: about the ITX boards, things are going to continue to imporove over time. Email the ITX section of VIA, they are very helpful, describe what we are doing and ask them about what features they have coming out on there mini-itx, and nan-itx boards int he future. The ITX section is spread over a few sites so I don't know who totalk to anymore, I was goign to pretty much wait until closer to the release date and look then myself. Ther make a number of reference boards for different products, while I don't know if they would make a cameralink reference baord for us (and I guess many camera vendors would also like to sell), one of the future reference designs might suit. Actually the processor uses something like 7watts per GHZ, thats nearly ten 10GHZ worth for around the same power ussage of some of the AMD processors. This makes them excellent chioce for thin blade servers, so maybe they might have a future 4+ processors MB up their sleves that could be used. Also remeber that capture should need a lot less processor than simultaneouse capture and compress. I think Intel or Micrososft also has a Mini-Itx like board coming out. Also a number of manufacturers do small boards for small cube cases (SIS is one).

As far as I know ITX has PCI in the mini-itx (but also look for AGP), and mini-pci in nano-itx (but look around for full PCI). I think it is also possible to get a mini-pci to PCI adapter. I have also seen PCI/AGP benders, that allow the cards to sit parrallel to the MB (they are a special testing tool around $30US I thiunk).

I've seen these boards quote virtual Raid (also have heard of software raid). I have asked here what that was before but got no reply, does this board say that?

Does anybody know of a board with dual Gigabit ethernet, that would be good (if there was a daul GBE hookup to a camera).

By the way, as the bayer on the 1300 camerra only requires 24mbs why not just go USB.

Data Packing should be able to be done on the data being outputed by the capture software (in parrallel).

Robs, their are small book sized minpc's out there also (with big processors). Look at the partner, and design win pages of the VIA ITX pages for links )hard to find, I think in the smnall blue links on the right hand side, or go through the drop doen list). While you maybe able to hack these for extra drives, some manufacturers offer the MB seperately. Have a look in the links I posted previously, I'm sure the Cappocino PC maker is there.

Valeriu:

The Viper is a bayer pattern camera isn't it? Maybe you could give us some advise on how it processes it's images.

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini :
The Viper is a bayer pattern camera isn't it? Maybe you could give us some advise on how it processes it's images. -->>>

Wayne,
I posted an URL of a site than has a image converter that will open the Viper frames into an RGB TIFF. The original camera frames that I have are 7.9MB each. If someone volunteers to host some samples, let me know.

Here is the link again for the software that can open the VIPER frames: http://www.xnview.com
Both VIPER and DALSA are using bayer pattern chips. I would love to see a Foveon based chip that can sustain high frame rates and good sensitivity. They are probably the next gen chip, but for now, we have use what we've got.

Valeriu & Wayne

I agree with keeping the signal as high quality as possible. I think 1080 is much more important for those of us looking to do theatrical realeases. 720 is pushing it.

Also, I'm curious, there was mention of "doing the final encoding at 8 bit". Maybe I'm not thinking straight here (I'm assuming you mean final encoding of footage into a format one can edit with . . . yes, I'm a programming layman) but I think if it's possible it should stay in 10 bit. 8 bit, just like 720, is pushing it for theatrical release. Both 720 and 8 bit are MINIMUM most professionals consider for going to the screen, not hardly preferable, and would make quite a sacrafice when considering a finished product.

Another thing is that you were talking capture rates of 50 Mbps? I heard rumors Canon is coming out with a 50 Mbps HDV camera by the end of the year under 10 grand. If that's true, we all surely would have wasted some serious cash, for what the canon would deliver, complete with lens, would probably be so much more worth the convenience of an extremely cumbersome, and not nearly as feature-filled system. Again 50 Mbps is not theater screen quality really. Might get away with it, but . . . you're pushing it.

We must remember that if we want MEDIUM quality (somewhere between TV and theater movies), that's not too far away for a price similar to what we're talking about drumming up here. If we're going to all this trouble, let's do it to compete with the BIG BOYS, not just to go to the next category closer. Otherwise, somewhere between 2 and 5 years from now we'll realize we're back in the same place . . . wondering why we AREN'T making hollywood level films.

Just IMHO.

Okay: I'd like to make a couple of suggestions:

1) BB code FAQ. Please everyone read it. I've edited almost all the posts here with hyperlinks to make them clickable. Please take the time to read that short page so everybody can make their own links working. Thanks!

2) I think it is time to slowdown a bit. I think all the enthusiasm is great and all the information that everybody is digging up, but I'm personally getting a bit lost and swamped and I feel others are as well.

Let me elaborate on point 2. The only person currently having the
chip on this thread is Obin. Rob S. and myself are currently looking
into seeing if we can get hold of it as well.

After we or anybody has the chip we still need to hook it up and
get it running which Obin seems to have in the basic form. Let's
wait to here from Obin and see some pictures first.

Then we need to start working on getting frames ourselves
(to learn how the device is working). After (or perhaps in the
same time) it is time to start working on the design of software
and hardware etc.

Personally I'm not going to invest time and money into things like
mini pc's or mini-PCI/ATX boards etc. just now. Let's get a
prototype working correctly on our normal PC's first. Then it is
time to work on the whole camera package.

My guess would be that we are months away to get a working
prototype with our own software and controls and file output
working and in a format to allow it to be editted.

Then it is time for the complete package and whole different
range of mainboards / computers / harddisks / connectors etc.
might be out.

Ofcourse we need to keep an eye out and do our research in
time. But I have the feeling we are now all running around looking
for information and dumping it all in this thread. It might even be
wise to setup multiple threads and I'll have some chat with this
with our great forum owner Chris.

I say it's time to get working a bit from structured with lists and
stuff to do?

What do you all think?

p.s. I will be out on sunday and monday doing things with the
family so I won't be able to attend much. Please keep it as
structured as possible in the meantime!

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher :
Also, I'm curious, there was mention of "doing the final encoding at 8 bit".
-->>>

I suspect that was referring to final delivery format such as AVI/Divx, QuickTime or MPEG-2.

<<<-- Another thing is that you were talking capture rates of 50 Mbps? I heard rumors Canon is coming out with a 50 Mbps HDV camera -->>>

Actually, we're talking about 50 MB/sec ... that is, 50 megaBYTES per second, which is 8x more than 50 megaBITS per second.

There is no question that a Canon (or other brand) camcorder will be far more convenient than the system we're talkin about here, but we're talking about 4:4:4 10-bit uncompressed data, and I don't see any manufacturer doing that for under $10K any time soon. They would cannibalize their higher-priced market.

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Lohman :
1 BB code ...-->>>

Will do.

<<<-- My guess would be that we are months away to get a working
prototype with our own software and controls and file output
working and in a format to allow it to be editted. -->>>

Absolutely true. This is definitely a long-term project and we need to pace ourselves.

Thanks!

Thank you Rob! the thing is this even if Canon or whoever comes out with a lowcost HD camera we can still apply what we learn to a 2, 3, 6, even 12 megapixel camera that will blow what the big 3 will put out away in terms of raw image quality..I seen no need to worry at al,l I for one started this whole thing because what I am about to get from a a 2-3,000$ upfront cost is good enough to work with in many ways..it's great for color work in post it's great for greenscreen shots it's great for tracking animation and when all is said and done after you compress it's size to fit a standard tv screen it looks much much more like film then cheap video AND you can get the high-framerate for REAL slomotion(this being the biggest reason our production company wanted to build this thing anyway) so is it worth it? IMOH yes. will they come marching to our door with all the features above for $4,000 or even $10,000 ?? no.


Update:

Late last night I got the capture software capturing at 24fps. Something is wrong with the colors, reds are green and everything looks the wrong hue...I will get back on it monday and see if I can figure it out...I think it's a bayer issue, looks like the streampix software does not deal with the 1300 camera's bayer filter in the right way.I ordered a 2 week trial dongle for the x-cap standard edtion so if streampix never get's working i can test the camera with x-cap...both software packages cost over $1,500...this is one reason we need that simple software made...this stuff has tons of features that we have no use for in the production markets...all I want is exposure, framerate, basic white balance, gama, ROI, and gain...thats really all we need and a bigger cmos chip atleast 2/3inch

Cool Rob and Olsen,

Thanks for clearing everything up. Makes all sorts of sense, (especially now I know you're talking bytes, not bits, lololol). Are delivery formats usually not 10 bits? (Don't know much about delivery specs).

here is a good display device for the itx system!



I bet that would be just nice!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...134438908&rd=1

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher : Valeriu & Wayne

I agree with keeping the signal as high quality as possible. I think 1080 is much more important for those of us looking to do theatrical realeases. 720 is pushing it.

give me 720p 4:4:4 anyday rain or shine over 1080i or p that is compressed like ALL of the cameras on the market are today - yes even the 100,000 dollar sony and panasonic


if you would like to spend more then 8 grand on a system you can have that NOW no question about it - go for it! i don't make feature films I make 30sec commercials for broadcast and have no need for more resolution then 720p. I know that some have shot with the Panasonic varicam that is 720p for blowup to 35mm with good success and great results - some have even shot with the little dvx100 and all of it's compression and still blown up to 35mm... it's your project not the camera that makes or breaks the show

Steve can you build a SDI HD or a s-vhs out for broadcast monitor preview? or better yet a digital interface like you have on a computer graphics card so we can jsut pipe a true hd signal to any old cheapo CRT computer display? that would be the best and cheapest for the market to use....feedback?

I've looked into HD-SDI at the urging of this group. It looks expensive and unnecessarily complex. So, for camera out we will probably stay with camera link and gigE. I will be actively assisting in getting CL integrated into a usable form for filmmakers.

Since our cameras must run with a computer, it would make sense to me to attach your monitor there - there is a wealth of cheap cards with s-video ouput. I poked at that Lilliput monitor link - looks nice. Too bad it isn't 1280, but very interesting. If Rob and Rob write some software, they might be able to do some tayloring of the controls so that the buttons are coarse enough to use the touchscreen for changing exposure, stop and start recording, etc.

Rob and Rob need to program the the capture software so that it's using video overlay to display the live camera image . That way we can use a dual-head card and pipe 2nd head on the card out to a CRT/lcd that supports 1280x720 OR a converter box that will take the signal and convert it into a true HDTV analog signal for a broadcast HD monitor.

With video overlay you can have your graphics card dislpay the overlay fullscreen on the 2nd monitor out from the card - i think maybe this is a function of DirectX??

someone must know this, can we take a laptop screen that is 1280x1024 and make a homemade connector to plug it into a D-sub connection on a standard graphics card port? if so we can have a 12in and a 15in display...much better then lugging around a big 17in lcd for the itx system

i can't find ANY standard off-the-shelf screens with 1280 resolution smaller then 17in lcd

http://www.xenarc.com/product/700ts.html

This one will go up to 1600x1200, so you can definitely get 1280 resolution out of it, and it's a touch-screen to boot.

Physical Resolution: 800 (H) x 480 (V)

<<<-- Originally posted by Jason Rodriguez : http://www.xenarc.com/product/700ts.html

This one will go up to 1600x1200, so you can definitely get 1280 resolution out of it, and it's a touch-screen to boot. -->>>

nope I don't think that wil cut it

Delivery formats
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher :
Are delivery formats usually not 10 bits? (Don't know much about delivery specs). -->>>

I don't know if it's the right term, but by "delivery" formats I was referring to MPEG and typical codecs used in delivering QuickTime, RealVideo and Windows Media to the end-user (consumer). These codecs are always 8-bit (unless I'm greatly mistaken).

8 bits can certainly deliver a great picture -- just take a look at a DVD on a widescreen HDTV. In the case of films, however, those 8 bits were downsampled from a much higher bit-depth source.

Starting with a 10-bit (or greater) source gives you enough "headroom" to process the images (color-correct, darken, lighten, etc.) the image without losing detail and adding noise.

<<<-- Physical Resolution: 800 (H) x 480 (V) -->>>

Yeat, that listing was confusing. It is compatible with higher-resolution signals, but then downsamples to its physical resolution.

I haven't seen any small 1280-wide LCDs either. However, there are some interesting developments in OLEDs (Organic Light Emitting Diodes).

Note -- there don't appear to be any commercial products yet. OLED appear to be still in the development phase.

They are very flat, can be flexible and can have very high resolution. Since they are light emitting, they don't need the separate backlight that an LCD would. They can also be placed very close to the eye and "project" the equivalent of a 21-inch monitor, which would make it perfect for an "eyepiece" viewfinder. I understand that the Kinetta (www.kinetta.com) camera is using one for exactly that.

The display described in this article is 0.77" diagonal and displays full RGB in 1280x1024 resolution.
http://www.elecdesign.com/Articles/A...4577/4577.html

The company (eMagin) has a developer's kit available (http://www.emagin.com/kitsale.htm) but it would probably be expensive.

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson : Rob and Rob need to program the the capture software so that it's using video overlay to display the live camera image. -->>>

Just a note -- I would love to do this, but I have never worked with DirectX before. I think the initial requirements of the software will be ...

1. Properly read raw files
2. Apply Bayer filter
3. Write to 16-bit TIFF

... and then ...

1. Set basic presets and read real-time images from card
2. Write images to raw files
3. Provide real-time preview of images

... in that order. Does that sound reasonable?

(And as the other Rob was saying, we definitely need to pace ourselves. I have a very demanding full-time job, a family with three small children and various other commitments. I'm going to carve out as much time as I can for this project, but I can't make any promises.)

wow, that would be really great as a viewfinder! looks like you could hook that up to the 2nd port on a dual head graphics card and have your HD resolution overlay display output to that OLED device and mount that thing in the viewfinder!

cool.


I sen't them an email asking about price for the unit

Rob, I think your close but maybe it would go like this:


1. interact with card and camera to setup camera settings

2. display color images into video overlay

3. record raw file to keep datarate down

4. bayerfilter raw file to full color tiff with a highquality bayer filter remover

5. do your color work in Combustion or AfterEffects

6. edit your HD project!

7. make HD or SD master tape for client!

8. watch client smile as he thinks he is looking at a project shot with a 100,000+ camera rig ;)

9. note to self --> we just shot TRUE HD at 4:4:4 10bit and did NOT have to spend $6,000 on camera rental for one week!!! or get a loan for the rig and hope we use it enough to make it worthwile!

10. take the extra 6 grand we saved and spend it on a higher megapixel camera from Silicon Imaging! <--that one's for Steve ;)

<<<-- Originally posted by Obin Olson :
1. interact with card and camera to setup camera settings
... -->>>

Yeah, I think the order will depend on when I get my hands on a camera! :-)

question for Steve, does the 1300 fit into the standard cameralink spec? if so what would stop it from working with ANY cameralink software or hardware? I have been looking at capture boards and it seems that even the "cameralink" spec boards only work with certain cameras....why is this? seems like it's a far cry from USB or firewire compatibility

why not use 2 usb channels for the camera so that you could get the datarate you need for this camera? or better yet use firewire 800?? that way it would be much more plug-and-play it seems to me can't firewire 800 support the datarate we need?

or build a cameralink-to-firewire800 converter box?

The IEEE high speed serial connector is known as Firewire and i.Link (Japan). The IEEE 1394a-1995 specification provides up to 400 M bit/sec and uses either a 6 pin connector (PCs/Computers) or a 4 pin connector (camcorders and AV equipment). The latest specification IEEE 1394b provides up to 800 M bit/sec (but is slated for 3.2 G bit/s) and uses a 9 pin connector which may operate in 'biligual mode' (will connect to either a 4 or 6 pin IEEE 1394a connectors) or 'beta mode' (will connect to another IEEE 1394b system).

this looks like a good camera also but I bet it's using the ibis5 chip...

http://www.prosilica.com/cv1280F.htm

seems like it would be easer to use because of 1394 hookup

Camera Link
 

The standard camera link transceiver is rated for something like 65MHz. With just one or two exceptions, all frame grabbers will run at this speed (I think there is a 40MHz grabber out there somewhere). Some will run as high as 85MHz with the newer transceiver chips. All camera link cameras should be able to work with all the grabbers. Most of the time you need a configuration file - every grabber company has their own format. When a camera is "supported", it means that the format file is already made. Most of the time, though, you don't get a GUI interface for controlling the camera.

USB 2.0 is not appropriate for lots of streaming data, especially multi-channel. Firewire is better but fairly slow. We are doing 800mbps on gigabit ethernet - cheap PC interfaces and laptop compatibility right now. Firewire 800 is only marginally interesting. We get 100m distance, use commercial switches and hubs.

Base camera link provides either 3 channels of 8 bits or 2 channels of 12 bit. If you run them at 85MHz, you can do 1920x1080x60fps, 12 bits on a single cable. Now. What you do with 150Mpixels/sec is another story. But, I am not convinced that another interface is necessary. Just more complete support for the existing ones.

Prosilica camera
 

Obin,
You are correct, that must be using the IBIS-5. 6.7 microns, extended dynamic range, 10 bit 40MHz. That is the internal A/D converter. We use an external, faster 12 bit converter so we can clock it higher (up to about 38fps) with less roll-off - their internal A/D is the weakest point. I still wouldn't suggest it for this application unless a global shutter is required.