I am sorry, your posts can be abrasive, confusingly wondering, niosily preaching to the converted instead of reading the thread history and taking on objective discussion. It is more about annoyance at a couple of things here today, than about my ego, and it is not a good day for it. I can accept and concead drive wattage, clearspeed overprice, what ever is right, please do the same. I was asking for an example of a cheap, powerful enough, FPGA PCI?, instead of the cheap hardwired ADV202 compressor. After the last post, I was just aiming to reply to your next post, that I didn't want to talk about it anymore, as it is useless. You have not had to repeat anything three times but was not understanding. I have posted good stuff, people get out of it what they put into it, if they don't want to read it, it is upto them, they miss out. There are still some great opportunities in those posts that nobody has taken up.

Most of the things you just accused me of are actually issues I have been having with you.



Maybe you mean that you have the same objectives and direction as me, but the discussion has been unconstructive niose jumping defensively around. But please no more.

As it doesn't look like I am going to be doing the sponsorship drive, and got everybody in the right direction, there is no reason for me to stay around, I can easily pass case designs onto Rob, or Steve, when I get to them. Ultimately, it is not about me or about you, but about getting the project to be the most benefit to the most people, and my discussions serve that direction.

Now to wait for wrangler Rob to come along and jump all over us for disputing ;)

Bugger, you beat me to it, Rob. Sorry I was writing while you posted.

Yes your right, things do move a bit fast, I re-read the recent posts, and they do mostly seem civil enough. We both have called it quits so that is the end of it.

There is just too much volume for me to keep up, if I miss a week, I can spend over 20 hours of reading every thread and replying. Today hasn't been comfortable for me, so sorry that I am not so tolerant today.

About my threads, I don't think that was what Juan was getting at. My threads are already brief complete summaries, that is why it can take 3-4 hours to write and reduce them. I have less research nowadays, but the problem is trying to do weekly summaries instead of multiple indiviual posts (that aren't acceptable), but they are getting smaller. It is mostly a perceptual thing, if I used highlighting to break it up into individual repleis, it would help. I'll try that on one of the recent posts now, have a look and see what you think. Also, in other forums when you quote it comes out as bold indented small text. I have been reducing the amount of quoted text to reduce their size too.

On your last paragraph, design it, design boards, with interfacing components, power supply, and sockets, at this speed the interfacing can get tricky, ask Steve. I suggest people stop talking about FPGA, do the research and choose actual solutions, you'll then get your answers on the way. Brief.

About the threads, have a look at the "Home Made HD Cinema Cameras" threads, they are logically divided.

hi everyone
 

guys this is a great thread .and a great opptunity


the passions and excitment are part of this process

One local corporation taught guidelines for preserving creative energy during the brainstorming process, and I think it's applicable to where we are. Often, the best ideas have three components: creative spark, competitive edge, and ease of implementation. Generally, we self-censor our ideas in favor of practicality ... 'it's too expensive', 'it's too complex for the user' ... comments like that. All thr truly creative ideas start with an outlandish though that has practically *added later*. In that vein, you can be sure that all the most competitive ideas with the most appeal will come forth.

All this is a backdrop to the most important aspect of group thinking: don't shoot down ideas because they're complex or 'whacky'. Those are the ones that no one else has thought of. All the group needs to do is to request the originator of the 'whacky' idea to add elements that will make the implmenetaion easier. In that way, everyone stays involved and the process doesn't devolve into ego bashing.

A thought kept inside your brain is in 1 dimension. When written it can be observed and evaluated. I am in the presence of brilliant men .working for a common good , and hope that I may add something to this discourse


Thanks to All

You can do this by using [ quote ] ... [ /quote ]

Wayne look at what you do on the board and then I think you will find that what some of us are saying is true..all I ask is that you read your own posts -- you will see


I am looking for a zoom lens for the si1300 if anyone has any links ...

Rob did the adjustments, looks a lot better.

Richard I know your name.

That is the exactly the same process I apply, except I self apply practicality as soon as possbile (usually straight up while thinking/writing it). Any practical solution is on the table with me here, but the proccess is abit more straight foward here, as many of the technological, manufacturing and economical issues have known practical limitations. So any objective person, with the knowledge, can apply the practical correctly straight up. So there will still be differences, and differences in knowledge. But it would help if we had engineers specialising in FPGA, and mass manufacturing and board design, they could verify options quiet quickly. I certainly don't know enough, otherwise I would have done it myself last year.

Are you saying you work with some corporation that works for the common good. Good, can I join, it sounds like where I should be working. One of my legal freinds wants me to send my unemployment solution to the prime minister, and there are many other good ideas I have written up.

Thanks Richard

Wayne.

Groan, I do, I can't help it if some people get confused or couldn't be bothered. I spend a lot of time structuring and simplifying them. I know there is nothing really wrong with them, and I generally keep back my comments about other's inadequacies. It is all in the mind of certain people, and I am familiar with this mental problem. To read them, divide up the variouse quotes (ussually most of the message) scan the first few lines of each quote to remember the post it was from and it's subject, then read the reply if you want, then go to the next one. My sentences canbe full of information and mixed meanings, so divide them up aswell, sorry. Still, sometimes it doesn't matter how simple I make it, some people just can't understand it, even statements like "the sky is a lovely blue colour". Now it should be 10 times easier to read, and look propperly divided up in your mind instead of a page full of confusing text. Try it. Now, when I get sick, messages are a big confusing mass of text, but I still read them while I can, even if I have to read it ten times slower than normal. If I can do it, so can most. I'll try to make it easier in the future, which is easy as most of the foundations are laid and there is not much more to discuss. I have divided my past 4-5 posts up with quotes, have a look, they make a big difference in dividing up the message.

This is highly personal and I prefer not to talk about it, and I prefer not to be bothered addressing it, but I believe that it is the responsibility of a person to explain/justify/accept their actions and reasoning, and only proud, arrogant, selfish, foolish xxxs won't. Once we have strength for that, we are better off.

Hope this doesn't offend.

Simplified summary for everybody:
Uggh, Igg, Ogg, eeK ;) .

Hey Wayne,

I don't think the problem is with you or anybody else here on the list.

I think the problem is lack of focus.

I've got a great idea. Why don't we see how to get Obin's camera working as good as it can (new bayer de-mosaic filters, recording software, good lens, maybe an Altasens chip) before we jump onto this FPGA stuff. I know it sounds so nice, but I can guarantee you that you're not going to beat the Kinetta, Panavision, Arri, etc. with this home-made stuff.

You keep talking about the economics of mass-production. Well as of right now there is no mass-production and no mass-market to market to, and if a camera is going to cost $12K, you can kiss you mass-market good-bye.

There's a reason you can OEM your own whitebox computer for cheap $$$'s-there's a huge OEM market for cheap do-nothing (or gaming/non-critical task) computers!

Now how many $$$-toting producers do you know who are willing to risk their big $$$$$$'s on a shoot with your home-made camera?

None.

Yup.

No-one. Not me at least. Shoot's are waaayyy too expensive if any production value is being put into them, and the last thing that I want to happen is canceling and losing lots of man-hours and cash on a broken or not-working camera.

I think for right now Obin and Rob have the right idea. Do the simple stuff. Cheap. Leave the big stuff for the big boys right now. I find it quite comical that all the features you guys are trying to do right now and so many more are coming with the Kinetta, which is going to be a fairly cheap professional HD camera. Professional in that I can take that sucker to Mongolia and not worry about it crapping out on me or breaking, etc. It's built like a tank, has RAID-3 on it's hard-drives, a superior de-mosaicing algorithm (with de-moire software too) run in RT by a very powerful Xilinx, built in color-corrector, 10-bit uncompressed log-DPX file export (for maintaining the total dynamic range of the chip), and a very nice Altasens chip at it's core that will go from timelapse to 60fps at the touch of a button; not to mention complete sound sync with 12 channels of audio at 24bit/96khz.

You complain that cameras like that are too expensive. Well there's a reason they cost so much, and it's because you can use them on shoots that cost $$$$$$$$'s!!! Home-made put-together cameras don't get used on those types of shoots, and as a result you shouldn't be spending a whole lot of money on them, because you'll never see the return in cash in a buisness sense. Now if it's something you're curious about, or think will fill a small niche, then that's fine, but realize this isn't a mass-marketable product. If the software was there to get nice images out of these things and get them to an edit app, then I think you'd already have your marketable product. Slapping on $$$'s worth of development time in FPGA's, this, that, etc., etc. is not worth it IMHO, and that's why I feel your posts drag on too long. They're great ideas, but not for do-it-yourself projects that can't see a return in cash, and the reason they won't see a return is because they can't be used on big $$$ projects.

So instead of spouting on about speculation on this or that FPGA, megapixel, etc. why don't we figure out the simple stuff first: rolling shutter artifacts, fixed pattern noise, good software for capture and de-mosaicing, lossless file capture, etc.

So, I know your posts are with the best intentions, but right now, I think the best intension for this project is to get Obin's camera working flawlessly.

There's a reason why the evil of compressed tape and DV lives on-it's easy.

I can get a call right now, grab a camera, go to the producer's location, shoot, give him a tape that he can edit wherever he wants, and cash his check at the bank the next day.

Or if it's film, I get the film, get the camera, shoot, send film to lab, telecine, send back the tapes, pocket cash.

I'm not rendering on a computer for hours just to see what the footage looks like. I'm not explaining to the producer how he'll edit his stuff. No. Shoot, deliver tape/film, pocket cash, repeat the next day (if that's where you want it to end). Until these home-made cameras become that full-proof and that easy to use, you're going to have a much harder time making money with them, and as a result, have a harder time (or at least the normal videographer/shooter) justifying the expendature for a home-made camera that needs days/weeks of investment in assembling, and then it's a rickety pile of bolts in the field.

The truth is that producers (the one's shelling out the $$$'s for your project that you get to work on, and are paying your checks) don't have image quality at the top of their list. Content is king. No content, no money for them. So if your stuff is a hinderance to them making more content and pumping that content out quicker, better, cheaper, then it's a hinderance to them making money. Yes, the same money that you like them paying you, they must make themselves first. So if they have to settle for DV, they will, because some $$ in the pocket is better than no $$ in the pocket but "great" image quality.

Jason,
How many Kinetta's are out in production right now? Any test productions using it?
What's the price? Delivery date?

Was the demo at NAB a working camera without a sneaky umbilical cord running to a box under the desk ? ;)

I've seen no demo footage from their camera yet. I wonder if they can send or have an FTP site with some footage? Stills?
I congratulate Obin for posting short clips, albeit 8 bit, to the world.

I'm not doubting they have something, but it sure would be nice to see something from them.

True on the content, unfortunately !

I would bet that some DV PAL people would indeed risk shooting with a new camera, but you are right, it can't have a duct tape and bailing wire feeling about it. But they so desire that 'film look' so who knows what they may risk.
-Les

Jason your sooo on-the-money!! Would I use this thing for work-for-hire? HeLL NO. I will use this thing for in-house projects that I can afford to mess up and re-shoot! I am doing it because for special effects like compositing/colorwork/greenscreens/slowmotion/ etc DV DVCAM DVCPRO DvCpRO50 and even DVCPROHD and HDCAM SUCK... so I would have to rent a Viper and god knows how much that would cost not to mention I have NO idea how to use it..so back to square one - i am doing this to let some of our projects SHINE - and yes this footage SHINES when you pit it agints any of the "standard" formats ;)


ROCK ON!

Oh BTW our animation/post department LOVES this thing because now we have enough resolution to work with in post



the 1080p will only be that much better!

even if we don't have any REAL software for capture done I will be shooting a 30sec spot with this camera soon and will give lots of clips for all to take a look at ;) guess I better check and see if sync-sound works with it first!

to $$ or not to $$
 

with your permission, i wish to say a few words about big company HD and DIY HD.
i'm working in poland as film/tv director, and by chance also as a co-owner of film/video rental company.

on daily basis i'm working with film/tv/comercial crews, producers etc. we have dv,imx and HD cameras. (f900 and f750p)

yes - for now almost every producer will use $$$ HD camera. but in the nearest future? if it's cheaper and delivers the same quality? the producers really know the value of the money, so if it's worth - they will use it. even if it's not from known/respectable manufacturer(yet!).

but i beleive in this project - because it's fresh and pioneering.
how many simple guys on this planet works on DIY hd camera? not so many.
how many big $$$ companies are working on HD cameras? not so many.

you see - this is the ELITE! never mind what will happened next. victory or failure. let's try. because it's fun. and in my opinion possible.

see what jeff kreiness did - he is not big $$$$ company. he is just simple "with many quotas" guy. and he did it. and that's why we adore him.

sony is still looking for proper HD solutions, DALSA, ARRI is still looking, THOMSON, PHILIPS, PANASONIC, PANAVISON, OLYMPUS, JVC, even KODAK... is also around in this HD world, JEFF is still working... and...
the guys from DV comunity are also working on this very thing.

this is not so bad company, dont you think?

and hey - do you think that the guys from big $$$$ companies are sleeping? no - i can bet that they are also reading our posts - they KNOW!

so, at least - TRY!

OBIN and others - keep rockin'!

filip

Hey Obin,

Thanks for the reply.

And BTW, I'm not telling anyone to stop. Yes, please keep going, it's just that as of right now I felt we're getting the discussion polluted with some pretty advanced concepts/ideas when we haven't even got the basics-i.e., really good capture software and a really good bayer algorithm (you're not going to get any good greenscreen keys with a bad bayer algorithm).

Let's get this discussion back on making a useable product AS-IS, meaning I can buy an industrial camera, hook it up to a PC (maybe even a small PC), and have the real possibility of actually using it on a professional shoot, such as something on a set where I can afford to have a camera tied to a PC. Right now I love the potential for what this footage can look like, but frankly it's still not there yet for me to start bragging about this stuff to everyone else, especially a non-tech-savy producer who only understands the end product and is shelling out the $$$$'s for the production. He'll start asking questions about the noise banding, why it's so dark or clipped, the "dots" on the edges, etc.

So I'm glad the excitement's there for future production, but lets keep this right now to what it is and what it can be here in the next couple months-a very useable system where we can hook an industrial-style camera to a PC and get uncompressed-HD quality images for cheap $$'s.

The Kinetta is coming, as of right now I don't believe the Altasens chip it's using is in mass production yet, after all SI doesn't even have their Altasens camera for sale yet. Not absolutely sure on pricing, but very reliable sources have told me a good deal less than the Varicam. And yes, the NAB model was working (without an umbellical chord under the table :-), Jeff was shopping the camera around at the conference, and I got to play with it myself (although I was in a lounge/bar at the Stardust when I got to handle it, and there was no monitor-out available, so I didn't actually see any footage if that's what you're wondering), so it is a very real product, and it has many high-end people (i.e., they have some clout) in the production community pretty excited about what it can do. It should be shipping by this fall, say around October, November.

But this is a project I've known about for almost a year now, and the electronics designer on the team, Martin Snashall, is top notch and totally on-the-ball about what needs to be done with this camera. The guy's created some of the most ground-breaking stuff back at Abekas, such as the A64 and A84, and after picking his brain for hours both in email and at NAB, he knows what he's talking about whether it's demosaicing, color correction, etc. On top of that he's a top-notch FPGA programmer and has been designing video circuitry for years. At the helm you have Jeff who's been an award-winning filmmaker at Sundance, and has shot tons of films for other documentary filmmakers like D.A. Pennebaker (one of the fathers of the cinema-verite documentary), so he knows what needs to go into a camera design.

I wonder if Jeff knows about what we are trying to do ?

I just rented some equipment to an Indy gig - it's this type of gig that would really shine with a homemade HD camera - they are using the XL1 - not to diss a good SD NTSC camera but that is NOT the right tool for a movie - yet I see people use it all the time because they can't afford better ...would they rent the "homemade" Hd camera? yes AND pay a little more then the xl1 for rental.....I think that is the best market we have.


- Indy filmmaker -

I think these cameras, with good software to make them run, will be a very nice replacement for the cheap way-to-compressed HDV cameras that are starting to hit the market.

I think that's where the sweet spot will be. And here's the thing-we don't need to make all the parts.

Here's the way I see it for this market:

1) We have the cameras already. We have the PC's to record them on. Right now we need good software. With good software we can record on commodity equipment and keep costs down, yet have a very high-quality product that will beat the pants off of DV and HDV, even HDCAM (but not HDCAM-SR, right now as a tape format it has many, many advantages in ease-of-use, especially for high-end production, and very low compression-as low as 2:1).

2) After having good software, people will see that these little cameras can really work. That produces sales. Sales produce $$$.

3) Other third-party manufacturers see that there's money to be made in these little cameras, and that there's some nice holes that can be filled. Like maybe even easier-to-use software. Or smaller hard-disk recorders. Or maybe even a company is making so much money on these little industrial cameras that they are willing to fork over the $100K+ necessary to develop their own little camera that combines the whole widget.

Right now I think we're in a little bit of a chicken-egg thing. Do you make the nicest camera you can and they will come, or do you make the little cameras and get a nice installed base that produces cash and whoos other third-party after-market manufacturers into the fold? Because Kinetta's got some cash for development, they've taken the first approach, and they're doing it all-out. We don't have the capital investment, and so we need to take the second approach-create a steady income market through a saleable product by introducing the one widget that is preventing this whole thing from being useable-good, easy-to-use, non-buggy software. That will make these little cameras possible to get more money to create the big stuff or at the very least get people thinking in another direction beyond making more HDV cameras.

If somebody sees that making the back-end instead of dragging around a PC will make them money, they will do it. But nobody's going to do anything if they feel that they're sinking their money into a product that's going nowhere, and/or won't work. When this stuff is rock-solid on a PC and works, then spending 5K on an Altasens that will go up to 60fps will be cheap, cheap, cheap, instead of being afraid that you're basically losing $5K on unproven, unsupported technology that's not designed for motion-picture production.

@ Rob

Don't know if I'm the right person, but from what I've been reading if you get a camera with camera link, your board would need a LVDS capable interface.If you go the GEthernet way, you'll need a board with Gigabit interface.Anyway I'll wait for Steve's answer.

Here I've found a nice Frame grabber with Camera link which has a Virtex II FPGA included and is supposed to be programable.
I don't know its pricing, but I'm sure will be above 1k.


http://www.datacube.com/Product/Data...Aprocessor.htm

Juan: I think the idea is to NOT have it on a PCI board? Or is that
just for programming?

What is LVDS?

All of this stuff is quite confusing and I'm hoping someone can
write up a small article which summarizes what FPGA is and how
to use it.

I've indeed been wondering myself how we hook up the camera
to something like this. Either directly or through GigE or CameraLink.
Not to mention viewfinder out and harddisk access....

@ Rob L.

Well, I didn't know sorry.
I'm pointing to PCI boards because of its simplicity to work with.
And because a Mini-itx with Eden processor (around $200) coupled with a PCI FPGA board with camera link has all you are asking for!! :).
VGA output (to connect a LCD display or viewfinder), IDE interfaces for attaching disks,simplicity of programing for Graphical Interfaces,etc,etc.
All in a relative small off-the-shelf package.

LVDS is what Camera link uses internally (If I'm not wrong).
Low Voltage Diferential Signal.
So if you have a board with support for LVDS, you could work with camera link, I guess.
Hope this helps.

Google search about what a FPGA is:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FPGA

No apologies necessary Juan. I was just wondering if PCI was
an option or not etc. Sounds pretty interesting at all.

So what does this Eden processor run? A custom "OS" or
something like unix?

Eden is X86.It is a normal PC.It runs any OS a PC Intel or Athlon runs.
The nice thing about Eden is that it only needs 7 watts for a 1 GHZ cpu (passive cooler, no fan!), against 100+ watts for a P4 and around 70 for an Athlon XP.

http://www.mini-itx.com/faq.asp

Here is something I think would become very useful, a Linux Bios replacement that lets you start an operating Linux Kernel without needing a hard disk.


The LinuxBIOS Project

LinuxBIOS is an Open Source project aimed at replacing the normal BIOS with a little bit of hardware initialization and a compressed Linux kernel that can be booted from a cold start. Other beneficial consequences of using LinuxBIOS include needing only two working motors to boot (cpu fan and power supply), fast boot times (current fastest is 3 seconds), and freedom from proprietary (buggy) BIOS code, to name a few. These secondary benefits are numerous and have helped gain support from many vendors in both the high performance computing as well as embedded computing markets.



http://www.linuxbios.org/

It fills a specific niche
 

Er ... dude, that's what I'm doing :-)

You hit the nail on the head, and it's exactly what I've been saying from day one. I don't see the need to add real-time HDI, FPGA (yet), and all this other stuff we've been talking about. If we try to compete with the Kinetta, we'd have to come up with a manufacturable product and we'd end up at the same price point. I like Kinetta and I have no desire to compete with them.Again, I think you hit the nail on the head. There is a sweet spot here that we can fill. As I've said before, an ObscuraCam (heh :-) is not for everyone; if you need the professional workflow, don't use an ObscuraCam.

Camera signals:
Internally the camera uses 3.3V levels for all the data. These are very succeptable to noise - they can go maybe 3" at high speed. LVDS or channel link (generic camera link) are differential signals - like RS-232. The idea is that you twist two wires together and drive them in opposite voltages. The receiver looks at the difference between them. Any noise on one is on the other since they are twisted together and does not influence the difference. Here is a link to the spec:

http://www.machinevisiononline.org/p...ink5_Specs.pdf

To use an external board for FPGA development, you would have to add a channel link transceiver to the board to get back to parallel digital lines.

This means that Juan is correct that the Datacube frame grabber would be an easy development plan. It starts at $1776 and rapidly moves up to about $4K with good sized FPGAs and memory. Plus $5K for their development environment.

So, we could develop using an existing CameraLink camera and one of these boards; and then move the design to a custom board which connects the sensor directly to the FPGA using LVDS?

Presumably this custom board would have Gigabit Ethernet output. You could then output fully Bayer-filtered, 4:4:4, 10-bit lossy-but-good images at a very high frame rate.

Processors in the data path:
The Eden might be a nice tool for the uncompressed recording method if it can supply a PCI bus with RAID. Remember that for any real-time processing (compression, display), speed is king. While 7W makes it easy to battery pack, 1GHz vs 3GHz and a 133MHz vs 800MHz FSB will make a big difference.

FPGA development:
The typical path is to define your hardware in terms of schematic or HDL (hardware description language VHDL or Verilog), synthesize it (compile, kind of), simulate it, route it, do a timing simulation and test on hardware. I don't know much about the quality or cost of some of the C translation tools like Handel but here are some numbers to chew on:
1280x720@24fps = 37nsec per clock
1920x1080@24fps = 35nsec per clock - 24 bit transfers

I have found in the past (maybe they are better now) that FPGAs are alot like early assembler programming. If timing isn't critical, you can use higher level tools. In this design, the synchronous steps (what you do between register sets) must be less than those clock rates since the data is continuous. Real-time video is a tough first project.

Could someone post our Russian friend's website with his design? I'd like to take another look at it.

Rob:
Within the same family of FPGAs, designs are pretty portable. You need the same peripherals (I/Os, memory, clocks) but yes. What I would suggest if someone got that far is that we put the FPGA into the camera with a direct digital connection to the video path - no need for LVDS. Our gigabit interface has a Virtex II in it. Now you have your gigE output. We have discussed doing something simple in there - data packing or RLE since adjacent values in video tend to be similar if you separate the color planes.

Be sure to watch the tool prices. Xlinix gives away their low end tools but the ones you need for larger designs were >$5K.

It is your business, but I would suggest getting a workable tool chain going based on software first - this can get complicated and expensive fast. As it has been said, the final parts costs are low so it is attractive but the development costs and time are huge.

No worries, I just find it very interesting. I won't get sidetracked onto this until I get the software-only system working. (And possibly never.)

I agree with you Jason, we are just coding and getting Obin's camera working at the moment. All the other stuff is just research for when we get around to doing it.

On third party manufacturers, most of the stuff is allready made, and the computer side will be mass market components, just requiring Rob's software. We are putting together the simple and reliable version. If any companies want to offer better parts, or software, tailored to us, great.

If the software and system is simple and reliable enough, we can then get the people, even the directors, and it won't be too hard to make it that simple.

I am allready discussing with the Rob's and SteveI, about aproaching companies.

12 channels, yumm.


Thanks

Wayne.

indie film maker
 

In the day, the only way the student or poor indie film maker
could hope to begin would be with 16mm film. Now, with a pc, vegas video, Obin's camera, an Agus 35, and 35m still lenses, the indie film maker gets a foothold. When added to film look techniques, you could begin your education and make a credible movie. To me this is the real breakthrough.


this would lower the barrier of entry for this form of art
and that would always be a wortwhile goal

@Steve

At the begining of this thread there are many links to FPGA designs included the Russian camera.Haven't you seen them??
There are also a bunch of other interesting cores and designs,etc.

http://www.elphel.com/3fhlo/index.html

Thank you, as always, for your support!!

@ everybody

I'm not saying that the Eden processor will do the compression part.That's why we still need the extra power of a dedicated FPGA design to do the trick ;).
I don't know, but, Does any kind of PCI card with a CPU on it exists ata reasonable price?
The Eden could well perform the task of showing a realtime video on a display using a really simple DeBayer method.
Also remember that to record a realtime RAW Bayer video of 1280x720 there is no need of a RAID configuration.You can use a 10,000 RPM IDE Drive.
And that for a more or less safe RAID system you'll need at least 3 disks.


A couple of FPGA tutorials:

http://klabs.org/richcontent/Tutoria...A_Tutorial.htm

XL2 info that used to be here
 

I have split that off into this new thread.
Continue the discussion there if you want. No XL2 talk in here please.

For Steve,

I am interested in your camera products, and I think most people are. Can I ask a few questions:

How much does the Altsens sensor cost? Is there any prospect of a cheap 3 chip camera using this, or even the 1/2 or 2/3rd inch Micron sensor (even the 1.3Mp version), I've heard of cheap prisms?

About the new HD camera. Is it really too much worse than the altsens version, and in which ways? There was a 2/3" Micron MI-MV40 4MPixel micron sensor, what happened to it, and would it be better? Is your new camera the SI-1920 version mentioned by Adrian White, a while back? Will it have Gigbe, or the Serial-ATA he mentioned?

As you will be integrating Gigbe on cameras in the future, will you be using simple pixel packing to maximise it's throughput? Can we get 800Mbps thoughput to a integrated PC Gigbe port?

What is the problem in getting a natural image with dual slope (is that the same as Smal's "Autobrite" technology)? Could we allign the range of both slopes so that it looks natural?

Sorry for all the questions, but I have been asking them for a while.


Thanks

Wayne.

Wayne on Altasens:
We are getting new pricing on the sensors - I don't know the current answer.

Wayne on 3 chip:
We have considered a 3 chip. The Micron 720p is probably out - the color smearing with oversaturation will be too big an issue to invest $20-50K in a new optical path. The 3.2MPix Micron (new camera - the SI3300) sensor is color only. That leaves the Altasens. We want to figure out what to do with 300MB/sec on a single channel first. It is a possibility though.

Wayne on GigE:
We release on camera link first. Fewer data rate headaches since it can handle the bandwidth. We will move cameras to gigE as the opportunity arises. No serial-ATA support at the camera. We can do 800Mbps on Intel Pro1000 based interfaces with a custom driver. If you can't use the custom driver, your rate drops to 200Mbps and uses more CPU time due to the windows drivers.

Wayne on dual slope:
Fill factory is the only vendor with dual slope. Back to IBIS-5 or our SI-6600 (pretty noisy). Yes, with enough tweaking in a scene you can get a respectable image. I wonder if you could take a micron sensor and alternate frames of long exposure and short exposure and combine them to do an artifical dual slope..... I haven't tried to change parameters every frame but you might corrupt the following frame with a change to the exposure - it would have to be checked. We know the micron can run at 48fps at 720p. More thinking says this probably won't work with a rolling shutter.

Wayne on MI-MV40:
I talked to micron about their MT9V403 and they told me it was expensive, noisy and made for high speed - not to use it for cinematography. My guess is that they use an entirely different pixel architecture. I don't have pricing on the MI-MV40 but it was originally a Photobit design - it puts out almost a GB/sec of data - this is a money is no object part and is rolling shutter. Here is the datasheet:
http://www.fast-vision.com/cameras/PDF/PB-MV40_Product_Specification.pdf

Software update
 

Bad news ... my PC died last night. It appears to be a failed CPU or defective/damaged motherboard. I have a copy of the source code on my laptop, but it doesn't help much since I don't have any other systems that will take the frame grabber card.

Re: indie film maker
 

<<<-- Originally posted by Richard Mellor : In the day, the only way the student or poor indie film maker
could hope to begin would be with 16mm film. Now, with a pc, vegas video, Obin's camera, an Agus 35, and 35m still lenses, the indie film maker gets a foothold. When added to film look techniques, you could begin your education and make a credible movie. To me this is the real breakthrough.


this would lower the barrier of entry for this form of art
and that would always be a wortwhile goal -->>>

very true

H E L P !!!
We need a working HD solution NOW. At the beginning, it can be a camera head in a shoe box with the cameralink cable going to a PC in a barrow, car, or whatever. We need 24fps, 10bit (or more), 1280x720 (or, 1920x1080 a dream?) and loss less or loss free HDD storage, because all pictures go to post. No audio, no viewfinder, no touchscreen, etc.

If this really work what i read here, we need 2 to 3 sets NOW, because this is the chance to shot the first big movie with it. I work together with a filmproducer and a director and i have the okay to try it. They also think it is a great idea to shot at the beginning with a adventurous new cameraset, develop and change it during the shots and end with a new HD camara. (The only thing that may not change is the picture quality)

We developed since years parts you never saw before, also a 35mm GG solutions work up to 1920x1080 with wireless controlled focus follow systems for every kind of lenses and so on. At the end, we will make a camera case like a 35mm movie camera and we can make all parts in series and in high quality. We can bring our parts together with orbins´s cam.

Steve Nordhauser wrote in a email:
"...System bandwidth - to do 1920x1080x24bits@10 bits per pixel, unpacked you get about 100MB/sec. This will take a split backplane system (one pass to memory from the frame grabber, one pass to the RAID). 8 bit is still pushing it (50MB/sec) but possible. 1280x720 is easier - 23MB/sec in 8 bit, 46MB/sec in 10 bit - probably fine for recording on a 32 bit machine with Streampix and a two drive serial ATA RAID - maybe OK on a single drive..."

But now, the time go on and we need help. What hardware/software is tested and available, now?

So please help. I have the okay, but thats the Condition: We must found (low cost?) parts, hardware and software for a system to storage loss free or near loss less on HDD in the next days (Post ist not the problem, it can wait, but the actors can´t). Ones more, We need information about working parts, not theory, not maybe. It must really work (otherwise they kill me). If we begin shot the film with it, all our manpower move on to develop further the system.

Thanks for the quick reply Steve.

So the MI-MV40 is the MT9V403?

I'm not familiar with that Gigbe Intel part, is it the integrated one?

So Smal must be using something else for autobrite. I think Movement would probably wreck double exposure because of dual exposure lengths.

For me, and hand held case design, Gigbe versions with extra capacity through pixel packing are the best. In this I could fit 1 chip 1080, or three chip 720p in handheld.



Thanks

Wayne.

@Steve N.

At SI's Home page there is a Mechanical shutter called DSC Mechanical Shutter (SHT914).
It says it has a frequency of 133 Hz.
Can it be used for this project?
If no ,Why?

What's the problem with the SI3300 at this moment, Isn't it working yet?


@ Everybody

Has anyone thought about using a RAID 0 with 10,000 RPM disks??

The sofware I'm working on sounds like it's exactly what you want, but unfortunately I'm nowhere near a production version. Exactly how many days are we talking about? :-)

Wayne:
Sorry for the confusion - they are different sensors - both high speed from the same company. There was a lot of talk about the MT9V403 awhile ago by people really wanting global shutter. Micron told me not to go there. The MI-MV40 is a rolling shutter.

Wayne on GigE:
I'm inclined to agree with you - pixel packing and maybe lossless compression at 2:1 (visually lossless at 6:1??) could really extend GigE and we will probably go that way in a bunch of months. This is mostly useful for remote head cameras (remote from the PC) although we could possibly migrate the FPGA into a simple digital interface or camera link. That might make the 3 chip Altasens make some 'sens'.

Rai, the other guys know more about putting together an actual system than me, but I am the person looking at doing cases. If your people would like to work with me on commercial cases for these cameras please let me know, I need the help. I was planning on doing designs and finding a low cost enclosure manuafcturer to take them on and finish them.

Thanks

Wayne.

I think we've thought about it. At the moment, I'm focusing on a software equivalent of RAID 0 using more affordable 7,200 RPM disks. Or I was until my system died on me.