Thanks Ben, I am already been working in ultra-secrecy mode too, I was a member of an association, a while ago, that did most of the leg work with the lawyers and educated us. But, until it is time to afford the lawyers, I will keep it secret and just survive on my ignorance.

Note, that I am not suggesting that it is a good idea to bi-pass a Patent Attorney, very few people are that good.

The companies with illegal prior-art patents have gotten away with it, in times past, because challenging and overturning the patent was so costly the companies (even reasonably large ones) effected just paid up royalties. I have actually been developing the idea of a fairer "tribute" based system to replace present patent and copyright idea.

some links
 

Samsung presents 5 megapixel CMOS image sensor
http://www.dvhardware.net/article5561.html

2048x2048 pixel imafes at 30 frames second
http://www.sarnoffimaging.com/produc...es/CAM4M30.pdf

Low prices low resolution but worth to read
http://www.dpreview.com/news/article...02cmosraceison

Mikron CMOS against the Panasonic CCD imager from the DMC FZ10
http://www.videsignline.com/showArti...cleID=60407126

Nice finds Ronald. Not really upto reading at the moment though I skimmed through much of it. I think those Samsung sensors sound like the ones I mentioned here last year, that I tried to enquire about. They're taking their time!

The Micron 60% fill factor sounds good, and so do integrated sensors with a USB2.0 bus (thats the one I've got to read when I'm clearer).

The Sarnoff one sounds very interesting, 70%QE, 1 inch+ etc. How much is it, are you planning on doing something with it?

Started up some new threads:

Technique for Pixel Shifting single chip sensors/cameras, and technique for increased detail in primary/complementary colour images:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...561#post339561

Technique to decrease compression ratio in DV footage
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...571#post339571


Something I was referring too before about patents:
http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/


New edition of the Mac Mini is a disappointment.

Haven't finished checking out the Sony HC1 yet, nice picture, but compression artifacts, lack of proper manual controls, interlacing and rolling shutter are disappointments. Lack of cheap component capture also problem.

Pity so many CCD's have rolling shutter problems to, understand future generation of CCD and CMOS will have better solutions.


Thanks for listening

Wayne.

From:
http://www.videsignline.com/showArti...cleID=60407126
Posted by Ron above.
I think this says a lot for the situation, low fill factor can wipe out high QE benefits. Even using micro lensing to increase effective fillfactory, may stop you from using very low apertures. But does anybody know how such small sensor pads, affect well capacity, and latitude?

Ronald, I am starting to look at the Elphel camera. I remember you always wanted a Linux camera, I think it can be user reprogrammed, and it even has a linux distro disc available to use it. As such it makes for an interesting camera development platform.

It would be good if somebody tied up the capture and editor translation side (for Cineralla). It is by far the cheapest of all options with on board compression and programmability. I am wondering if it can be programmed to write directly to an Ethernet external hard drive unit. Even though I heard Andrey does not believe it is suitable for our task, you could theoretically do the adjustments yourself. Have fun.

Forgot to mention, read recent report of January release of cheaper Intel based ibook Mac, shame that distro won't work on it.

http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0511intelibook.html

Haven't been here for a while, but am still steadily collecting links to useful stuff for DIY cameras, hundreds actually. If anybody would like to sort and post the relevant ones, please give me a post, I am just incapable of getting to it.

Well, here is a thread on a comparison of new 500GB drives, there is a clear performance leader.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...606#post442606

$100 MS Development system for xbox360:
http://news.com.com/2061-10797_3-6052255.html

As you know, this system has more than enough power for your video need.

Here is a new thread about web cams being modified (sensors changing as well) for astronomy. Generally I stay away from reprogramming these things, because you have to find programming information, that may mean a lot of work decoding the hardware, but if these guys have done it already then great. Web cams are cheap, some are good quality.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...118#post455118

I post this link here for the Digital Cinema camera community subscribed to this thread, as many are not around, but it will turn up in their subscriptions, so they can take a look at the new thread. And people outside can respond to the thread directly if they are interested in the subject. As I have done in times past (but it seems that these notes are disappearing).

Here are some extra threads with relevant stuff:

AMD in talks with Clearspeed (coprocessor potential for H264/JPEG2K realtime editing):
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=62984

Ambarella h264 codec chip 15Mb/s+, 1080/720p60 9Mb/s, $1K pro versions and cheap cam.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=58391

H264 transcode acceleration
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=62434


Cheap alternative way to record component from HD cameras
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=61343
Idea for low compression camera capture, even for digital cinema camera.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=62057


Doing 25Mb/s virtual 720p on the HC1/A1.
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=49895

New 3D 720p24 RAW camera in news:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=58537

You can talk about them there.

Smooth direct card to disk 140MB/s recording Camerlink frame grabber
 

OK, something looks strange here.

But anyway, I have located a camerlink frame grabber card that has it's own drive controller and SCSI port for 140MB/s, yes, apparently seamless direct to disk picture acquisition without going through the PCI bus. The PCI bus is used for monitoring the footage on the computer screen.

Cost, well, believe it or not, I email the Canadian seller for price and ask some questions and for some reason he answers very little talks about USB cameras and tells me to contact the Australian distributor, and I still didn't get all my questions answered (a all too common "I give up" like problem these days, will phone rather then wait for emails in future) so I have not got a correct confirmed US price for you guys, but around $3KUS at maximum. Could be a lot cheaper, as 'distributors' over here tend to charge like a bull at a gate, but he did seem to indicate that was the price range.

Yes, I am peeved at all the time wasting.

This isn't anywhere is the price range that we were looking for, but if you look at it this way, as system built around this is a lot cheaper then the commercial cinema cameras out there. With one or two drives (backed up to cheaper ATA drives) a smaller computer (because it no longer needs to handle as much drive data). So, if anybody is interested, it is:

http://ioindustries.com/cameras.htm
http://ioindustries.com/cl160.htm
http://ioindustries.com/cl160system.htm

This is the baby board, they have full cameralink maxi boards as well.

Australia distributor:
http://www.adept.net.au/

Of curiosity, Epix has a PCIExpress cameralink frame grabbers. You will note, that the PIXCI® E1 version uses a very small one channel PCIExpress, similar to what the new Pciexpress laptop cards use, so hope yet that somebody will do a version for that (in case anybody doesn't know there has been a PC-CARD Cameralink card previously).

http://www.epixinc.com/products/index.htm


The guy from Adept mentioned that Coreco (I think that was the one, but check) cameralink cards had special trigger software features to ensure smooth live footage recording on PC's (unlike all that trouble we had programming other framegrabbers). He said the secret to smooth recording was a couple of simple things, I wasn't too bothered enough to ask what they were. But then again, there are always a lot of people telling me they know the answers to things, but it usually turns out different, so how can I know. Yes, it appears to be a Dalsa company, and you can predict what sort of camera he was trying to sell me ;)

http://www.imaging.com/
http://www.machinevisiononline.org/b...company_id=224

An CL to Ethernet converter:
http://www.imaging.com/Web/home.nsf/...ment=&L_FID=Gb

Well that is all for now, I am not feeling well. There might be something significant latter in the week.

Dear Wayne
 

this card I did mention in the old thread Olbin deja...2005 0r 2004
it is SCSI and the drives need a lot of power hm,
but the express cards works, there was one at the time
with dual cameralink and scsi bypassing
the PC literally only writing data to disk

Yes I forgot to mention that is where I found it, and probably why you have been so peeved lately because people are not listening, otherwise they would have seen it. You post so good links, but only a few of us takes the time to looks through links. I did not see it because I previously stopped going to that group.

If it was only a realistic price, like $500 with ATA drive support (that will equal at least 100MB/s sustained, and shortly probably 140-150MB/s, 300MB/s sustained for three drives. And such a device could be put into a Gige box easily, because only a back display channel is used through PCI bus (the camera data goes directly to drive without goign through computer) or even have display directly from the box. Eventually a device like that could fit into laptop PCIE card fro 250Mb/s display channel, but that will take a while and probably custom ASCI to get it to fit (but the Ambarella could also do it and compress the display channel through a ordinary laptop PCCARD bus). But fro now this is what we are stuck with.

Wayne,
The last time I checked, there was only a SCSI version, the PCB (single piece price) was $3500 and the software (required) was $2500. IO Industries is a very good company but they have a military/industrial leaning that is not financially in line with Indie needs. That said, I am working with one creative person who is using our older 3170 on an IO and just received the SI-1920HD. He may be making systems available for people. It might be a good answer for high frame rate recording.
Regards,
Steve

Sorry to hear that about the software. I had done enquiries and even found that to record to disk seamlessly for many hours you need an expensive version of xcap for Epix cards. Their current packs of camera/card prices are around $1K now.

It is a shame that nobody does a pro quality video recording software solution based on the machine vision software (but Lite version, stripped of all extra irrelevant machine vision features) that can be optional ship instead with frame grabber/cameras. Imagine how many extra sales they could have got as an $1K+PC alternative to video people. Telling people they can only record to main memory at system prices similar to HDV is not appealing enough.

Good to see the new camera, and wish you luck with it. Any plans for Box cameras based on the new Foveon, or new 720p Altasens?


Thanks

Wayne.

Wayne,
Actually, it was this discussion that caused us to write our own software package. The machine vision stuff is the wrong starting point. 3x3 deBayer, no log conversion, all the tools are wrong. We did the uncompressed recording in a cinema-based format and discovered that unless you have huge resources, you can't edit uncompressed. That is how we ended up with the Cineform workflow.

We will be offering the camera head & software solution for $12Kish for people who want to roll their own. 720p is possible for a next product but it seems everyone is pushing higher, not lower in resolution. I'm sure we would never reach the price you mentioned.
Regards,
Steve

It is all relevant, the resources are here shortly. Memory, Disk space (750GB pr disk) and processing power (CELL, AMD/Clearspeed, DX10/11, or future dual or quad with low powered chips) is within the realm of higher then 1080p. When we started, a couple of years ago, the sort of PC that we needed to do this workflow would be the most cutting edge (realising that Cinelerra was being used for uncompressed HDSDI 1080p 4:4:4 movies at the time). I am aiming to contact David about something that could feasibly allow cineform for much else then a thousand dollars). But for the low end 720p lossless Bayer is enough and doable with the latest computers.

So given a debayered processed file I think Cinelerra can edit it at 720. It doesn't matter, the whole DIY camera stuff is in it's twilight for the moment. Though I still hope for something less expensive alternative to HDV that the most new, or low end, videographer can run around with.

Thanks

Wayne.

Hm
 

We all do know the P III will be out November.
What vavour of Linux Sony wiil put on the disk,
who knows? If Cinarela will compile who knows ?
I will talk to Dynebolic, Jaromil to have it run on The PIII
as open Mosix will build an cluster quite easy and
without to be a network guru. To have 2 or three Cell
in a cluster config will make Cinarela fly.
Could be a Dream Machine

Wayne, don't think of it as twilight for DIY, think of it as evolution. First, I think DIY was a catalyst for the new low cost HD and camcorder releases, certainly for ours. Also, I'm old enough to have been a subscriber to Byte magazine from issue #1 in the 70's. I built a number of computers from scratch including one with paper tape and cassette storage and another with 8" SSSD drives (90K on each floppy!). I thought the cheap z80 CP/M machines, followed by PCs would kill the electronics hobbyist.

It didn't kill the hobby but it changed it. First there was a flock of home programmers - you didn't need a masters in EE or CS to program them. Then came the microcontrollers. Any clever person could breadboard a software driven motor speed controller. Not many people go to Radio Shack anymore for parts for serious projects but Digikey and Jameco still sell a lot to hobbyists.

So, maybe DIY will transform - inexpensive time lapse, stereo, lens adapting, etreme low cost, something. In the end, everyone has benefited from the DIY in HD.
Steve

The Past:

Yes, "Byte" and "Creative Computing" those two stick out, I know there were a couple of other really good ones, but the PC industry killed them all, except for a few of the best UK ones, and the Australian Personal Computer (Aus version of Personal Computer World) (I don't know about Byte, haven't seen one for many years here).

Those CP/M etc machines did not kill the Electronics Hobbyist, but they and the ones that followed definitely did kill the computer kit industry (some of those things had such an array of components on their boards, they looked like a work or art). The only non major brand name I am still aware around of, is Super Micro, or something like that (Acorn computer might still be around). In the end it was about owning a computer rather then spending long long hours putting them together.


The Present DIY:

I am not sad at the demise of DIY for it's own sake, it was always about cheap high quality cameras, that still has not happened. I recently located a HD webcam (about $146) that claimed 24fps at 1.3mp resolution. I have been communicating with them for a development kit, and it turns out that the 24fps was a misprint (it was on all the pages, so I though it was genuine) it should be 15fps :(. Major disappointment, it might have been little better than a consumer HDV cam in terms of noise and latitude, but the possibilities for higher quality codec recording was definitely there (I did not get around to verifying if it had RAW). I have located a number of webcam related DIY webcam astro pages, and RAW and more bits per pixel should definitely be possible.


Some fruit:

But, the DIY projects have born some fruit, I feel. Since the projects were announced the market has taken unprecedented changes, that have stolen away our members as well, I feel. We got cmos HDV HC1, at such quality it has been alleged as stealing FX1 sales (a friend of mine was even looking at buying it instead of a FX1 because of size, but I was advising because of latitude, before the HC1 got canned). Although I don't think that XDCAM HD was because of us, at least it is not a 25mb/s pro version of the consumer HDV, as Sony did with the DVCAM version of the Mini-DV. I think the 18mb/s AVCHD Mb/s inter H264 may well be a reaction. Quiet frankly, under 9mb/s is what you would have expected for this (from past trends) I think the problems with motion/complex scenes, low light noise affects of compression, blu-ray and HD-DVD also has been a large part). I think that the 50mb/s hi-profile 10 bit 4:2:2 h264 version from Panasonic being rumoured to go into the next HVX200 camera is also a reaction (high profile h264 goes into many hundreds of megabits, 12bit 4:4:4 and lossless, for intent of professional work and editing). This does not even get into your and Drake's cameras. There are probably others that I am forgetting, where the industry might be hedging it's bets, and heading DIY off at the past.

The truth of the matter, is that if something with encoding quality/bitrate as good as XDCAM HD (or AVCHD) had been available instead of the HC1/JVC HD1, I would probably have gone with it instead of DIY. If it had been as good as the 10 bit 50mb/s Intra Frame h264 HD, I definitely would have. That would have been nearly ideal (I am not saying they should have introduced a h264 codec, but something with similar quality where ever upto 200Mb/s DV like codec, or 50Mbs+ Mpeg2 inter). I definitely think that the use and reliance on Mpeg2 for HDV (which was around 10 years old at that stage, where as Mpeg4, introduced after Mpeg3 was rolled, was getting old) was a mistake, as much as restricting the resolution to interlaced 1440 lines, 4:2:0 codec and data rate to 25mb/s. They should have had Mpeg4 codec, or a quick migration path to one, at those tape speeds, as Mpeg4 technology in consumer, and then in cinema camera, had been available for some time.


The Future: Cineform, H264 and Ambarella.

I see these new H264 formats as at least one step down from your camera, with lossless being the best. What I want to see now, is something of the quality of cineform bayer to replace the h264 codec. People might feel this is threatening, but what people don't realise, is that the quality of encoding is not the real underlying discriminator for the future, but the resolution you work at. It costs money to push the real physical limits to get a sensor to perform well at high resolution etc. So the market can now be stratified as: 720p to 1080p for prosumer, 8Mp (yields a better 108Op image) 16mp and 32Mp for cinema and future TV.

I have contacted David about the h264 Ambarella camera control/codec chip, as it is a large array of Sparc RISC microprocessors, opening it up to the possibility (though I am yet to obtain information to verify it, but I think it would be likely) of being programmed with any codec, like the cineform bayer codec, with the extra processing power taking up the slack of lack of cineform specific features. The chip works at over a hundred Mw for the low cost (from $25) consumer versions, and under 1W pro version. As you can see, if such a thing could work, it would mean that all pocket cameras, all camcorder, all prosumer cameras, and all industrial box cameras could use something like this, as well as your present Altasens camera. Yes, I imagine it might not be as simple as that, but I am yet to obtain a development kit in order to research it (I am looking at it for the development of other products). I don't think David was much interested though. But for your purposes in other fields even h264 is interesting.

I would be interested in your observations on these comments Steve.


Thanks

Wayne.

For all that have been here, you will be familiar with me being interested in the general video processing potential of future GPU structures. Here is the latest on the next generation of ATI GPU processing unit:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31862

It is following a year after the one that shipped in the Xbox 360, similar to what happened between the original XBOX/s GPU and a PC equivalent.

Wayne, there are many discriminators for the 'best' camera. Certainly resolution but also dynamic range, sensitivity, bandwidth, ease of editing, weight, cost, lens compatibility, ergonomics, upgradability, and many others. The importance of each depends on the user and the application. If you are backpacking your equipment for a documentary, weight is more important. If you are making a movie with your allowance money, cost is foremost.

On the processing chips, volume is usually a barrier. I have tried to incorporate DSC chips from a number of companies into low cost video cameras. 10K units/year is the minimum to get them to open the door and talk, 100K is what it takes to get to a deal. The issue is that they can only properly support a certain number of design-ins and a single sale takes the same support (almost) as a 100K sale. That is why the development kits are usually $20K+. Not to make money but as a barrier to get out the riff-raff.

This is why we went with more conventional PC technology. The CPU speeds are now fast enough for compression and GUI. Lower volume sales are acceptable to the vendors. Development is also easier.

Steve

Of course, but that is what I meant by getting the higher resolution pixel to perform well, and basically also four times the pixels adds four times the bandwidth and storage to the workflow. With the same lens, encoder and equipment, with an optimal performing pixel (harder at higher resolutions) I think it is the resolution that is left as the difference, and the the resolution of the delivery format you are working it for.

;) (Some companies are better than others).

I think the Ambarella chip may be well thought out and flexible enough to make integration into various designs a minimum of fuss, but something still done by SI rather than them. Even if the chip was ten times it's price, say $250, it is still a lot less then a PC, or designing a FPGA system. This is probably the best re-programmable processing deal that I know of on the market presently. If it holds to be a mainly re-programmable software system (without hardwired processing stages) the programming development costs would also be similar to a PC. There is also one other market possibility, if they don't support Machine Vision directly, there is a potential market with other machine vision suppliers, for applications and drivers that do.

Still, you see that eventually, a cheaper camera is possible in future.

Have a good day Steve.

Wayne.

List of Image Sensor companies for reseaerch.
 

For the benefit of the members so they may look up different sensor information:

I have found a digital camera IC site, with a master list of companies for controllers, processor and sensors:
http://www.perfectdisplay.com/id45.html
http://www.perfectdisplay.com/zic_im...ng_999999.html

This is a master list of IC companies (search for "sensors", and you should see "imaging", or "image", besides it:
http://www.eworld.ru/ewg/icweb.htm

A list of sensors, would include all non image sensors, so some aren't of use.
http://biz.cnnet.com/archives/company/523/Sensors.html


I include a list of the companies and links on the sensor list, as the site does not look current and probably will be removed:

Agilent Technologies, ICD
Altasens Inc.
Advanced Analogic Technologies
Arima Computer Corporation
Aselsan, Inc.
Atmel
Axis Communications
Canesta
Core Logic Inc.
Dalsa
Dialog Semiconductor
Displaytech
Elecvision
Endpoints Technology Corp.
ESS Technology
Foveon
Freescale Semiconductor
FujiFilm Microdevices Ltd.
IC Media Corp.
iEagle Microsystems Limited
IBM Microelectronics
Irvine Sensors
Kodak Image Sensor Solutions
Lite-On Semiconductor Corp.
Magnachip Semiconductor Ltd.
Megachips LSI Solutions
Micron Technology, Inc.
MobilEye
Mosart Semiconductor
MtekVision
National Semiconductor
OmniVision Technologies, Inc.
Panasonic
Photonfocus AG
Pixart Imaging
PIXIM Inc.
Seiko Epson Corp.
Sharp Microelectronics
Sony
Soundpix
STMicroelectronics
Sunplus Technologies
Symagery Microsystems
Texas Instruments
Toshiba
Tower Semiconductor
TransChip Inc.
Winbond Electronics Corp.
Wolfson Microelectronics
ZMD America
Zoran


http://www.agilent.com/
http://www.altasens.com/
http://www.perfectdisplay.com/id359.html
http://www.arima.com/
http://www.aselsan.com/
http://www.atmel.com/
http://www.axis.com/
http://www.canesta.com/
http://www.corelogic.co.kr/
http://www.dalsasemi.com/
http://www.diasemi.com/
http://www.displaytech.com/
http://www.elecvision.com/
http://www.endpoints.com/
http://www.esstech.com/
http://www.foveon.com/
http://www.freescale.com/
http://www.fujifilm.co.jp/
http://www.perfectdisplay.com/id420.html
http://www.ieagle.com.hk/
http://www.chips.ibm.com/
http://www.irvine-sensors.com/
http://www.kodak.com/
http://www.liteon-semi.com/
http://www.magnachip.com/
http://www.megachips.co.jp/
http://www.micron.com/
http://www.mobileye.com/
http://www.mosart.com.tw/
http://www.mtekvision.com/
http://www.nsc.com/
http://www.ovt.com/
http://www.panasonic.co.jp/
http://www.photonfocus.com/
http://www.pixart.com.tw/
http://www.pixim.com/
http://www.epson.co.jp/
http://www.sharpmeg.com/
http://www.sony.com/businesssolutions
http://www.soundpix.com/
http://www.st.com/
http://www.sunplus.com.tw/
http://www.symagery.com/
http://www.ti.com/
http://www.toshiba.com/
http://www.towersemi.com/
http://www.transchip.com/
http://www.winbond.com.tw/
http://www.wolfsonmicro.com/
http://www.zmda.com/
http://www.zoran.com/

Pixim extended latitude Sensors
 

New Sensors:

This is the Pixim company, I have been supposed to research this stuff, but have not been able to do it. I include this is a hope that somebody else might have the time to look this up and research it for us. The Sensor is supposed to have extended slope ability (for extremely high latitude) and sounds like those smalsensor stuff. Cheap, and a list of camera manufacturers, lens manufacturers and other items included:

Sensors:
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_matrix.htm
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_chipset.htm
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_chipset_orca.htm
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_chipset_dyna.htm

Cameras:
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_cameras.htm

Camera Development:
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_chipset_cdk.htm


Lens:
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_camera_des_res_len.htm

Camera design resources;
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_camera_des_res.htm

Industry partners:
http://www.pixim.com/html/prod_industry_partners.htm

--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

DIY Projects closing summary.
 

This is a closing summary of the DIY projects, and the quality cheap alternatives I have found to do them. I have spent much time researching things in the background, and probably have hundreds of links still that have not been researched, into interesting things, parts and possibilities, if anybody is interested? It is a bit too much for me, and I need to get on and do other things. The new, interesting, commercial alternative cameras are listed at the end.
----------------------------------

I have been doing some research into the different ways cameras could be done cheaply, and I have come up with some alternatives:


Still, Mobile, Flash Camcorders, webcams
I have come across information that makes me believe that some of those Digital still cameras, mock solid state camcorders, and phones, can do upto 12 bit raw bayer. Sure you will get the quality of something like a consumer/prosumer HDV camcorder, but uncompressed, and for many people that is all they need. At the moment HD from webcams is limited by frame rate, but inevitably webcams will get there with still cameras, phones and solid state camcorders.

Work undone: research on all cameras, sensors, and codec/control chips.


Webcam Modifications and custom Linux drivers already on the road
What will help is that there have been a history of writing custom drivers for webcams for Linux, and the Astronomy community has been modifying webcams for Astronomy work, including RAW uncompressed (I forget but I imagine higher then 8 bits) changing hardware, something dealing with sensor masks, and changing sensors for better ones ;).

This thread has links to the astro webcam modification community:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=63837


Security Camera
Can be relatively cheap with better quality sensors and compressed data. Elphel have a model people are testing, but the Elphel 423 will have better support for the Ogg Theodore video codec, so I expect might be a descent camera, not cineform or RAW uncompressed, but cheap too. There are other security cameras.

Work undone: research on all cameras, sensors, and codec/control chips.



cheap HD pixel shift
There are PC mainboards with multiple SD camera inputs, you configure a 3 chip camera with pixel shift, you get HD (ask Andromeda how it works).

Work to be done: Still working on it.


radical alternative MiniDV to HD
Looks like a washout. I did work out a possible cheap system to get HD from a MiniDV camera, but the DV codec does not record enough data, and the pixels are too imprecise, so not even DVCPRO50 will do. Priority method. Maybe it can be done one day.


Recording better quality from HDV etc HD cameras
You can record from component, I did find a card with 5:1 compression around DVCPROHD resolution around $300, mentioned earlier. Uncompressed cards I think now start around $1K, and the $300 card I mentioned, I imagine it might be able to be reprogrammed to do uncompressed. Their is an alternative, there are PC mainboards with multiple camera inputs (mentioned with the pixel shift above) theoretically they should be able to record HD component (I have confirmation from one chipset manufacturer that this was an aim for their chipset).

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=61343


As a side issue, I am trying to find out what modes and video formats of transmission come over firewire or USB2.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=68054


Now, there was a thread somewhere, that tested the video output (or did that include firewire too) of a camera when it was in memory mode (for still shooting). Suddenly the image was of better quality, but no conclusive testing was done to see if it was uncompressed from memory. If you search under my name for threads with "memory mode" and "uncompressed", you should find it easy to find. The issue is, what happens to component/firewire/usb output on HD cameras in memory mode.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=51632
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=51795


Undone work: as above, testing etc, finding cheaper uncompressed component cards etc.


Cheap machine vision frame grabber and camera combination
Quality Machine vision setups are cheaper than broadcast setups, that is why they are still important. I noticed that Epix has frame grabber and camera packages starting from less than $1K, but these have limited software. I have communicated with Epix, and if you pay for the more expensive software you apparently will be able to seamlessly record hours of uncompressed Raw footage reliably (advice talk to them and confirm it will do what you want, I think test can be arranged, but I forget if that was them). This was the Xcap software people complained about, makes you wonder why we bothered. The new PCI express frame grabbers are apparently the ones that can do it, pixel packing and buffering is used (along with simple recording software). Direct to disk recording software has been described to me, probably by another company, that the "tricks" to writing successful direct to disk recording is, simple, actually I have some of the advice in an email somewhere, or was that by phone). I wish I was upto scratch with realtime embedded PC programming I would know what he meant ;).

Yes, Gige/USB2 cameras (though USB has it's own problems with wasting away processing power, but I wonder what happens with dual core systems nowadays). Sumix is fruitless, don't even reply to email anymore. I pity them, if they ever turn up and find everybody has gone because those people thought it was dead, and virtually nobody is left to buy their marvel. Some cameras out there have FPGA and embedded processors, enough to set up record to USB/Gige caddy with some simple compression like that which I was planing? Some frame grabbers have FPGA too.

Work Undone: Looking through all industrial Camera Link/USB/GigE/frame grabbers/capture software to find the cheapest quality cameras/frame grabbers/software and system combinations (links to lists in previous posts). I would like to see Foveon in some cheaper cameras.


Existing used free software for Hollywood
Another, often neglected avenue, is the open Sourced Cinelerra, which has been used in Hollywood, and to capture motion pictures for years. It is a wonder that nobody has talked with that community about machine vision camera support. I did email them (probably twice) but received no reply, so I usually say, stuff them, to people like that, I am not trying to help people to get ignored, where ever rude idiots or not, so that was the end of that. The problem is that I think it is limited to HDSDI/component cameras, meaning high cost solutions anyway.

http://www.heroinewarrior.com/cinelerra.php3
http://sourceforge.net/projects/heroines/
http://www.heroinewarrior.com/cinelerra/cinelerra.html


Local HDSDI RECORDER
Of course, my current favorite hero, is Keith Wakeham (well where did you go Rai) who is bravely doing his own FPGA HDSDI to disk recorder unit. At the moment it is HDSDI but it could go to component (say for current, and future, HD camcorders with component) but component is a hairy (fuzzy) beast that limits it getting done, but bayer machine vision is possible. The price that Keith hopes for would make it an attractive alternative, but the price of HDSDI cameras are not. So, for the moment, guys with JVC HD250 and Canon HDXL should be kicking with joy.

http://www.engr.mun.ca/~wakeham/index.html


Makes me wonder why nobody gets a camera control chip and makes a direct to disk from USB/GIGE from that. Ambarella is a descent scheme, but they only seem to be interested in real big volume, and not talking with less, as with most.

Part 2
 

The really too radical
Patching video cameras to make a larger image:

What do you get if you stick two 720*576p camcorders together, something better than DVCPROHD 720p.
What about if you stick three together, something much better then DVCPROHD 720p, including extra wide 720p.

This has already been done, as reported on some thread around here, I hear. But ideally you would need a prism to patch the images together (like the Olympus 8MP SHD Eng camera did with three HD chips) and to synchronise them.

An alternative, would be to use a Projection screen, like they use on the 35mm Lens adaptor projects and align the cameras to the image and record them from there in synchronisation.


Using full frame still cameras in sequence:

You may have read my Red camera price joke, where the true maximum price of a 11 Mpixel camera can be determined by aligning a number of cheap cameras together till they reached the desired resolution ;).

Another solution, I have recently come up with, but something that will probably be impractical due to the problem of angle of photography, is to put an square/rectangular array of synchronised still cameras to take pictures interleaved at the maximum rate (even circular would work). This is different as each camera is taking a full frame, but because these frame rates are like 1-7 fps, depending on model, the next cameras have to take a picture while the previous one is saving the picture. But the problem is that you will get an movement, the closer an object is to the camera the worse this shift will be. To get around this problems you can use a projection screen, but the angle of the cameras will make the screen look warped as the angle of perspective changes, as it is unlikely you can put it far enough away. So again, prism is the best solution, but the prism would have to have many output surfaces, and be complex. There is a way to make it with a series of first surface partial mirrors (these have mirror surfaces on the outside of the mirror, the partially mirrored surface transmits some of the light through instead, to be reflected by the next mirror). But each mirror has to be a different size, and different partial transmission, to capture the same amount of exposure, with different focusing distances (if you do it that way) and many of them, so it to is complex, but an interesting experiment.

Things undone: I'm not bothering ;)


Sensors, where does it end
Kodak have plenty of nice sensors, I went through just about all of them, virtually three pages to get to the basic specification of each :( (no wonder I didn't do it before). Some have at least 100K -ev well capacity. Pixim has some extended latitude stuff, and their site has development kits, and lists of box, dome and network cameras using their sensors. Micron is getting into extended latitude, on their Super Wide VGA sensor at the moment. Cypress has Ibis with extended latitude and global shutter, non cheap well capacity and descent SN, and their Smalcamera sensor company with cheap sensors with extended latitude. Extended latitude seems to be a feature on the rise across companies, which is good. Foveon has 3 colour per pixel, and I have found another, that I am trying to communicate with. Altasens has good Quantum Efficiency, SN, and I guess latitude, but what is the fill factor?. Fuji is doing a 3 color per pixel chip for next year or so, based on an more organic basis, apparently. Too, many more to go through, but this is the important ones so far.

Undone work: There are probably more than 20 other sensor companies to check all their sensors, lists in thread above :(



What resolution for shooting 720p and 1080p on the same camera:
There is a trend to producing new sensors with ever increasing resolutions, and lower resolution sensors getting left behind. So the problem is that there might be limited low cost options at 720p and eventually 1080p, so a higher resolution sensor might have to be used. What ever resolution that you want to shoot in bayer, you should have an sensor that has, or a bit more, than a multiple of the resolution you want to shoot, because proper binning will give you accurate pixel for pixel matches. For instance, 720p is 1280 pixels across, so you could use A 1280, or a 2560 or 3840 etc pixel width. For 1080p, it is 1920, 3840 etc. You see there is a match up at 1280*3, and 1920*2 and 5*768 (not a standard resolution, but one I have seen used in the past).


GPU encode enhance
I have read through the Nvidia Pure video Marketing, and it does claim GPU encode assist (not complete but only assist).


Alternative commercial cameras:
Panasonic and Sony has announced AVCHD h264 18Mb/s, for DVD, Blu-ray and SD recorders (I hope HDD also). This should be good, and hopefully fix up the problems of HDV with motion artifacting most of the time, and help with low light noise performance degradation . It does 1920*1080p. H264 is 2-3 times better than Mepg2, I don't imagine that this transfers to the problems, but the situation should be better a lot more often, and other images a bit nicer (if used on the same quality sensor etc). So prosumer version of this will hopefully be everything that HDV should have been. Going on interviews and reports (mentioned in various threads on the subject) Sony is expecting to release cameras, and Panasonic maybe releasing a SD card version late this year, or into next year.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=67127


Samsung announced a h264 around 18Mb/s, like AVCHD, last year, due August, uncompressed HDMI (a digital component replacement) output.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=58261


Ambarella has announced that a number of manufacturers will be suing it's revolutionary h264 chip for cameras starting at $799.


Still cameras will get HD video one day, Sanyo HD1 has already started with Mpeg4 9Mb/s.


Panasonic, at NAB, announced a new High Profile H264 10bit 4:2:2 50mb/s intra (it does not do inter frame compression, used for movement) codec. Cameras will be at Nab next year, maybe even a HVX200 version we hope. Even through people think h264 is purely a delivery format, the high profile was brought along to make it into a robust editing and lossless format. The profile goes to at least 12bit 4:4:4 at many hundreds of megabits. Altogether this Panasonic version will, hopefully, be a descent consistent quality professional codec, a grade step down from cineform I imagine, and two from lossless, but a step up from AVCHD. The present HVX200 with the DVCPROHD 100Mb/s goes some way to that already, but still 8 bit.

JVC showed a Hard drive Everio HD camera last year, even announcing at a dealer conference, that it was to be released around the 05/06 turnover (this is reported by member on dvinfo who was there). This camera, and a few others, have been delayed, the question was why? This new H264 stuff hopefully indicates that there might be some rethink, and hopefully we might get h264 (though JVC is not a member of AVCHD, nor is Samsung who is doing a h264 camera). If so, there are more options.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=62117
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=52458


So things are looking Rosy.


There is one more possibility to come, but I am negotiating at the moment.


I am not quiet finished there will probably be at least one more post.



Thanks


Wayne

I think this is a first here, a real summary of sorts.

All in all some good stuff, and unfortunately makes me feel a little bad that much less has been accomplished than I would have wished for this group. Most of the people who started with the crazy ideas have moved onward and away it seems. The most successful I think being Reel-Stream. I hope that I'll be able to migrate my site off my university server, and setup some forums like they did in the comming months and firmly establish something.

Over a year ago I started work on my project which originally was to use variable timing with a KAI-2093 CCD and transport bayer data over 1/2 a HD-SDI link. Then decode it back to data, and write the data to hard drives. The first of this came as developing hard drive control and after months of pouring over info started to make some progress. But once I went to finish off the camera side I found that money was a very limiting factor. Then I went for a more direct approad and bypass the HD-SDI with some outside help, but eventually decided back on going for a pure recorder that would be general purpose. That was 4 or 5 months ago. Lots of programming latter, multiple circuit board designs, all sorts of problems and just a little further ahead. Everything I do seems to hit a huge delay and I appoligize to everyone for that, I don't think i've realistically met a single deadline in ages - I guess i'm always way to optomistic.

Honestly I think that people out their in the big name companies know about this place. Heck, they might even know my name in some circles of these companies as the crazy engineering student working on something completely doable without big backing, and honestly they probably count on this as the reason its not done yet and hope that I never finish. I recall people at panasonic commenting about Reel-Stream negatively. So I have no doubt that when I am finished and show what i've spent a year of my life developing that I too will recieve negative comments. Nothing is perfect.

However, to all those who speak negatively about this I have to say one thing. Do you think nobody from the Red development team has ever been in this forum. I'd bet that Jim Jannard himself has been in here at some point and got some little ideas. It places like this that recognize what can be done now, what we want done, and the methods to get their -- and most of us have spent a lot of money along the way.

Since I've put up my site the biggest question I've recieved is when can people get one, but what its now turned into is people stating they have a project in a month and asking if it will be ready then. Some have even gone to stating that if its not ready by the time they begin shooting then it won't be any use to them. I'm hoping this is a reaction to the "shooting season" being upon us, but I tried to put my email out their to help people and discuss ideas and try and find the people the first units will most benefit.

Anyway, for all the crazy Ideas Wayne keeps coming up with and all the reasearh and work, I got to say he's a really good fellow. He doesn't lose faith in what people are working on, and I have to say a big thanks for not losing faith in me. I have a feeling a lot of people have and although I'm not sharing my FPGA code, I feel I have let the community down a little everyday I don't have a device or product to show or some more really proof of what i'm doing.

I'll never quit trying to improve things and ideas, and hope that someday they will make a difference.

So a big thanks to Wayne for showing us what the years of forums has given us so far even if it seems small, you never know who is listening.

Keith,
I just shot you an email, before reading this post, asking how it was going.
Thanks for the update and Kudos...Just keep going... you will conquer it.

Keith,
There wouldn't be a Silicon Imaging SI-HD-DVR (new name) if it wasn't for this forum. Two years ago we were an industrial camera manufacturer being pestered by 'some other bunch of people who wanted to use our camera in a weird way'. I started reading this group and met Jason, Davids at Cineform, Kyle, Obin and the rest of the group. When the group software didn't get off the ground, SI became convinced that the need was real and wrote our own.

Cineform completed the picture when we found that editing uncompressed wasn't easy for a budget minded Indy. So, we partnered with Cineform. It wasn't a huge leap to doing a complete camera so again, driven by the needs of the people we met here, we got a working camera to NAB, hit the press, hit the streets and should be shipping our heads in about 4 weeks and the full camera in the 3rd quarter.

So, aside from any other discussion, that is what was accomplished - a full 1080p camera with a radical workflow for $20K.

Thanks gang,
Steve

Hi to all
did someone can tell me what camera (gige, firewire usb2)
use the altasens cmos
I know only the Silicon imaging one!
many thanks
Matteo Pozzi

Yet, nobody ever started out these projects to make $20K cameras that only a few hundred would get in a year. But virtually all were aiming for sub $10K, preferably sub $5K, that they could build themselves, or would be made in 10K+ quantities. We are miles away from where we were going, led astray by some, and it looks like Pana is going to supply the minimum quality, maybe at double the price at least of the top quality.

What was not doable in 1080p editing last year is doable now or latter, and 720p could have been done sooner instead, Cinelerra has been doing for years in true 4:4:4. The PC/processing market is about to go through a major advancement in processing power over the recent advancements, and has just gone through a major advancement in drive speed. I have no problem for the numbers in 720p, even in 1080p with a bit of effort, but the advancement will make 1080p easier than before. 4K is the new target for the industry, that is where things are difficult despite all recent advancements, but something that can be done in future.

A few hundred people will benefit from direct cameras, so it is good for them, the rest of us will have to pay for the H264/XDCAM HD stuff. Thousands can benefit from the HDSDI work. Hopefully the post $10K cameras will inspire somebody to do sub $10K cameras, where you can buy double the quality compared to the regular video camera manufacturers, and force them to drop their prices.

As far as focus goes, it all comes down to who do you care about, ourselves, or everybody else. Caring for everybody else requires much more effort and less easy money, but in the long run better for everybody.

Not supposed to be posting here, but I thought I would update this. Totally possible, Sony has decided to introduce a very low res camera for the PSP. People wonder why, maybe they did read the above. Back to all seriousness. It is totally possible to do the above, without anything too elaborate. A usb camera should go into the port (even if you need a plug adaptor and separate power supply) and you have SD to IDE interfaces for storage.


But have a look at this (to keep in mind for the future):

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews...11_162423.html
http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/.../vettiger.html
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/index.php?p=1143&tag=nl.e539

The PSP is getting old and passe, many other portable devices could do the same thing.

Recently Ultra Mobile PC's (UMPC) have been turning up with inbuilt mega-pixel cameras. One with a suitable camera and programming might turn up, all that would be needed is a lens adaptor with condenser set, and wired lens (as we have seen in the thread all doable/available).

-------------------------

How has it being going on my front?

Well I am getting a few useful hours a day of limited health a lot of the time, if I take it easy, and even more if I don't do much. I even feel happy sometimes (though with all the health product I am pumping through myself I should feel like Clark Kent). Things have been slowly improving for months, at the moment very slowly. Hopes are for improvement to full days of full health long term, not just a few days or weeks, a few times a year, before I relapse.

What has been happening on the project side:

I have been trying to negotiate an OEM software developers license for camera hardware, where I can develop quality camera capture/control 3rd party applications for various platforms, that manufacturers can pack in, or end users buy. But negotiations are going slow, so I don't know how it will go. I for see a market out there that limitedly competes with the machine vision sector, but also for other non-video professionals requiring better image quality, as well as video professionals. Still a long way to go.

out. no worries!

I liked that Furp animation of yours, but can't find it anymore. But what does "out." mean?

You know, I would love to see that on TV, I could point to the screen, and say, "I know the guy that was responsible for that". Ren and STi, and Crazy Frog can stand aside.

What is the latest on that line?

back to basics
 

Found just some settlement reading about image sensors overall and about my present investigation subject what sensors for what CMOS vs CCD.
All from Dalsa:
http://www.dalsa.com/dc/documents/Im...8-00_03-70.pdf
http://www.dalsa.com/markets/ccd_vs_cmos.asp

Microsoft 1.3MP HD 30p video Webcam VX-6000
 

Thanks Frank.

Here is a new HD video Webcam.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...337#post535337

HDMI uncomrpessed capture for around $250.
 

For those Digital Cinema camera people still subscribed to this thread, I have some major news.

Declink has released an uncompressed HDMI capture card fro around $250US. Apparently you can select a codec to compress the footage during compression. It includes a free photojpeg codec, but something like Cineform o a free open sourced codec might be preferable. People are also talking about using a a component to HDMI converter fro older cameras without HDMI.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=75102

I would liked to have started a thread on this in alternative imaging for the other Digital Cinema camera people not subscribed here, but somebody beat me to a thread in news. But people are spread across the SI and Red forums now, that would have been interested.


A word of caution, I would be wanting confirmation on which cameras output pre-compressed/uncompressed HDMI. I would be wanting confirmation about the format that it records in and wherever it can precisely lock onto the exact signal format the camera actually uses.

Have contacted them. It looks like HDMI cameras are currently 8 bit 4:2:2 at the most. So, this would, in practicality, be a step down to what we would expect to achieve with machine vision cameras and the Elphel project (which currently is goign towards hard disk interface and bayer in the other thread) . But as a solution a step above what we are likely to achieve from a webcam without 10 bit uncompressed.

Notebook version is yet to be planned.

I'm impressed, definitely a budget uncompressed solution. But a notebook version for similar price, or budget field recorder, would make life a lot easier.

Windows CE 6.0 embedded OS
 

This is only really for people interested in design of digital cinema cameras for volume manufacture, or manufacture based around existing micro-controller boards.

For those interested in embedded Windows operating system for a camera project, here is some news on the latest Windows CE, which now has shared source a total re-write of the core, 32 thousand thread support with 2GB of virtual memory each etc. It is noted that it is good for realtime deterministic processing, something that XP cannot achieve without expensive code add ons (something people around here have discovered). The cost per device is measured in dollars.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35478

I have been watching Windows CE for sometime, as I was not impressed with earliest versions then they adopted Tron realtime parts in the operating systems in version 5, I think. Tron was an old time favorite of mine, it was an attempt by the Japanese to take over the Operating System market. It included a more correct emphasis on realtime deterministic delivery and very fast response, and probably efficiency, etc, something some American OS's were severely lacking in. If this latest release can bring these Tron values through it should at last be a much needed OS.

Contrast to Windows XP Embedded, confusing situation all these separate embedded OS's (that are to be combined, or not, I don't know the current strategy). If it gets the same advantages great, it will also get PC support. Previously, CE has been available in PC version in times past, it will also work on Arm etc etc etc architectures. These architectures will be coming in Ghz+ multiple core configurations, with all sorts of embedded data processing units (alternatives to many of the PC processing units, including media acceleration). There are a number of reference designs, and micro-controller boards that may attract substantial discount in volume. A device based on this will undoubtedly offer lower power requirements and lower price. A handheld is possible with this level of technology (or make one based on a HD web cam).

As I stated, this is only for people interested in volume manufacture, or based on existing micro-controller boards, and their are undoubtedly other realtime OS's that shift with micro-controller boards people might want to use.


Thanks

Wayne.

Finally, alternative Machine Vision Foveon X3 cameras.
 

A major side note update for all the readers of the thread.

http://www.net-gmbh.com/e/3LayersCMOS.htm
http://damien.douxchamps.net/ieee139...ras/search.php

There has already been Foveon firewire cameras, but at greatly huge prices with SD like video resolutions. I wish somebody could do full featured machine vision HD cameras (and full customisable capture software) for less than $500. If they sold it as a security camera as well they would get the volume to do the price.

I have viewed the latest 14Mp sensor spec that was sent to me months ago, and I can tell you that even at that resolution, the spec seems to exceed most machine vision alternatives. I have also read that they are planning other products. If this is a new product using recent advances (not based on older X3 designs) we could possibly expect similar performance. This performance could greatly exceed the Micron sensors we have been used to.

There is little information, it is based on an Hitachi product, but no price or further details yet (I have contacted the company). The Firewire may limit the camera somewhat. But this is a first camera, even if ti is not suitable we may see something better in future.