Damn, need to get me one of those! Looking forward to more info, grabs, and footage!

A few questions though:

- Do you guys have a website up about the camera? I'm sure I must have missed this somewhere
- How much does the final product weigh?
- Is it still 8bit recording?
- Can the camera head be changed cheaply and easily if we wanted to upgrade in the future?

Christian, sorry if I appear to be a bit irriatable this week, but have you been noticing what has been said here in times past:

It is not a DIY CAM, it is a seriouse commercial enterprise.

It needs more work on the casing to make it really attracive to the pro cinema market, people can sit there and pull it appart, or they can make constructive comments that will make it look a lot better, hint. That case is close to their finale design, I suggested just the minium improvements to get it through, not even fancy cinema lines that woiuld make it more attractive (I dare not suggest anything here because it is far to easy to mis-interpret them, and it has to be something come up with by cinema crew themselves to stylishly fit in). In this pretensiouse market looks do matter.

They were just going on about companies that will now keep us waiting until March, but the delayed release date is today, and actually the camera won't be available until Feb, not much difference between FEB and March on the other one (that delayed to offer an Altasens product and other features). I have made excuses to people for virtually every camera on these threads because of "manufacturing delays".

"Promises", they have often promised release, website, or information in a "few days" for months. And I have said just wait and see, just wait and see, to everybody. I would not have mentioned this, but your statement is incredulouse.

And yes, I would have loved to be Leibzig too, but I am having enough problems even getting away on my long delayed break.

But for seriouse cinema work, I would recommend people look at this "package", I can tell it has been well thought out work wise. The other packages here are likely to be more primitive in workflow and on set completeness. I can tell you the tech is probably the most worked out of the present batch of cameras too. But styling will help them more. Except in this reply to the previouse post, I would not have made these comments here.

i have a question regarding the harddrive, and heat issues, and also battery life. Are the hd's hot swapable via say SATA or firewire/usb... Also how are we looking on battery life?

From the minimal exposure i have had to this camera, ie the pictures, i noticed the use of a standard computer monitor?

As we able to remove that or put our own on, or if we wish use a smaller one and so on? Also is the lens fixed on, or are they interchangable?

Finally, explain the workflow of getting the video from the camera to the computer.

Thank you,

Zac

Wayne,
my only point was, this is the first non-majorcompany HDcam (almost) out there, that seems to be ready to use and still the first posts where only somehow complaining about IMHO minor issues.
DIY for me means that people go out and try to do sth themselfes period. They did so. Yes, now they're trying to develop a "serious commercial enterprise", so lets settle for "comming fom the DIY spirit".

Next, anyone doing movies should be used to delays. This is also true for the Video/IT world. At the end i hope they'll keep all their promises.

Yes, they bitched about others. Those others bitched back.

Case: IMHO the Kinetta is as ugly as it could get. Would I still use it for a project? Of course!

Many complained about Canons XL/GL line look...

Tell a producer, "we can rent the cinealta or buy a Drake - but the Drake looks uncool". Let him/her decide.

Design should follow use here, so if rounded edges somehow help balancing on shoulder, I'm on your side!

I hope that the Drake will be usable and AFFORDABLE HDcam.
Same goes for Obins cam. Hopefully even more people will see it can be done and start building. Hey and maybe Canon or JVC will now think of sth better than HDV...

We'll see.

Shure everybody wants "all" informations. I can understand that, I hold in my hands what other people dream of. Thing is, we build the camera first instance for our film project. That has priority and the current taks in finishing a teaser will consume our time from now on until mid of january. The only really promisse we made is that we do what we talk abaout and are willing to share our experiences. I've written a lot about why we have chosen the technology bases, like sensor, resolution, recording bit depth and so on and started controversy discussions with that. I like those discussions but I'm shure when the "web site" - synonym for all informations possible, available to everybody in an instant, those discussions will start on a hight level. I would really like to be involved, because we kick the industrie in the bud and that is for a reason. So once more I must ask for patients and can promisse, this will be for the sake of quality.

What we do is a hardcore beta testing. We have to get along with the camera and when a problem accours we need to fix it, but we can, scince we are the builders of this thing. Other filmmakers, who don't have an opto mechanical specialist, a programmer and a filmtech visioneer on set might not. So the release date of this camera will be when we are absolutly shure that it is usable in difficult situations by filmmakers and not by tekki's.

I talked to quite a few cameramen, having shooting experience with the cinealta and varicam and I couldn't find a single feature film project where ther wasn't the need to call for a technician to help fixing a problem. Be it with a setup, be it with the electronics. Optics is another problem. Camera assistants keep telling me that every day they spent two hours to calibrate the backfocus for the lenses with the "pro" HD-Cams. That's not what I call pro.

Shure, those things look more fancy. There is this basic marketing rule for consumer products: Packaging beats content 2:1. In fact, as cheaper the product, as more money needs to go into packaging. Rounded edges are really expensive in metall cases. You can do it in plastic. We want titanium. Do we want to add another 2000$ extra costs per piece just make it look like a sony? No. It's meant to be an Indi camera. For the safed money not spent for the round edges we can build a high end matte box and follow focus system, for a litte more money even a high tech auto focus, really usable in feature film work.

That's our thinking. We don't want to beat the industrie, just want to kick it in the bud. The industrie lives on selling tapes. Recording to a harddrive you can put into your editing PC and edit, without any extra device is something they fear. That makes me happy.

Many eMail have reached me to explain a little, what you see on the pictures. Well, the case is not covered with buttons and switches. It will stay this way. The only real button you can push is for tunring it on or off. All functions are software controlled. That means when we improve the software, add new camera functions, you can donwnload a file from the internet, put it to a memory stick, plug that into the camera and you have a new function.

The camera itself has the size of a betacam camcorder but weights only 6 to 7 Kg, when you detach the screen, only half. The battery is heavy. For cost reasons we use 17ah lead batteries. Highend polymer stuff weights much less but is also much more expensive. Anyway you can plug in any battery you like as long as the power is sufficuent (12V) and carry it on your back, as a belt, whatever.

You can use it as one unit, or you detach the head part (front third of the body) and put a single cable between the head and the body. That's especially usefull for crane or steadycam shots, where the head itself is about 1.5 Kg and you can use the body as a counterweight. We work on a crane sytem, you can mount on your body, it's so low weight. In the camera head there is a small high precission optical bench included (explaining the size) for easy and solid back focusing. All parts are easy to access and to change, in case something needs to be repaired. Or the sensor needs to be upgraded (yes, that's part of the plan).

One cable means, we have even extra "channels" free for remote head control. So, a 3 axis remote head, designed for this camerahead can be operated and powered by the same small cable as the head itself. That's quick to setup and easy to rig.

And yes, that is a game controller. You can attach it to the camera body on each side, or put a cable inbetween, so the assitant, controlling the camera can stand a few steps away and the focus puller has all freedom of movement he needs. It's an odd idea to controll a camera with such a device. But hey, how much time do we spent every week, practicing with such input devices? Modern camera men come with these skills. It is a logical step, as logical as the big screen. It's new and different, not a indi copy of a industrie product, but something designed from ground up.

So, I hope those informations will help to ease the pain untill everybody can have a chance to try it out for himself (next year we'll travel a lot) or at least see some films about our shooting and the actual usage of all features. Oh, one more thing. Price.

Well, also here we thought in different terms, trying to rather find a budget. A suitable amount of money a indi production can spent on a digital cinema camera system that works on set. We defined the budget with 15.000 Euro. So the question to us is, what can be build and bought to get the best out of the budget. That in the essence is "the" indi skill - make the best out of a low budget.

When we get to sell a drake system you can go the other way and strip it appart, take away lenses, screen, follow focus, filter work, whatever. But expect our defined budget for everything on top of a tripod as a usefull one, at least we think it is.

I know that this aspect allone will start a discussion, that is usefull. I look forward to your comments. And now I need to get back to work, we will shoot a really big scene this weekend and there is a lot of work to do.

Cheers
Markus

Christian, DIY has always meant Do It Yourself, instead of somebody else (business) doing it for you, this has allways been a business, not homebrew. Please, it looks rectangular, boxish, doesn't it? If it looked like a XL1 or modern film camera instead, I would think it was marvelouse. Don't get me wrong, it is just useful feedback, so they can improve and sell more (actually I'm getting a really sexy design goign around in my head now), something big has just loaded in the email.

You got to understand you want something that suites the people around it (director, producer, camera crew, and yes even actors). When I first saw the XL1, I thought I have to have one of those (until I first used one). Maybe I will get trashed one and out camera in it. Even the Kinnetta looks "cute", but for the market these guys are after brawn matters. It is a simple equaltion, improve looks, improve salability. I'm not starry eyed over seeing the first camera, you can take it to a presentation and people will be awed by the technology and say "cool", "great piece of work", but if you want to sell it it has to fit in, or standout for all the right reasons. It is about making it functional and pleasing to the buyers eye. Believe me, as I joke, I was going to do a funny mock up case for the other projects (this is not my seriouse cases guys) a 5 inch+ black pipe with camera system inserted inside, look like a Bazzooka, definitely functional, and could be used on set, means nothing unles they like seeing and usinmg it on a set.

Yes, I allways believed they would keep their promises too, except for the time schedule. The only promises Markus/Rai made was that it was made, would be avaialble, to tell us more at set times.


Markus,

Good, I suspected it must be a teaser, but your post read like was the finale design concept, my appologies.

I fully suspected that you were not after extremely low levellow level pricing.

The case, I don't know how they shape titanium, but in sheet metal you shoudl be able to do a mold cheaply and have a batch of cases stamped from that mold very cheaply, come to that yoiuu can buy boxes with odd shaped edges. But then there might be a company, that will do it cheaply with auto configurable equipment suitable for short runs (but finding one that will not charge 5 times too much is the challenge), give them the CAD image and they can stamp out the cases in a day. Maybe cost a few extra hundred (get the wrong company, it will cost much more). We had a manesium something plant going in Australia, whatever the alloy was it was to replace the sheet metal in cars, that sort of stuff might be an alternative. Just a suggestion.

The detachable head, was something I was advocating long ago for that sort of flexibility on cases for the cameras on dvinfo, I possibly mentioned it to Rai.

Well I'm glad, but please the case shape, even hardened, UV resistant plastic would do. I even have information on a polymer coating for DVD's that is virtually scratch proof, that could be put on it (believe me, steel wool scratch proof). "The cloths maketh the man", the saying goes (which is nonsense, but people believe it).

Wayne,

Wayne, they didn't go to Altasens and asked them to build a camera around their chip.
No, some people gathered, combined their knowlegde and built something the industry doesn't (yet) offer.
If that doesn't fit your definition of doing it yourself, well, I think I made my point anyway.
Ever used a XL2 with P+Smini35, DigiPrimes, Chrosziel mattebox with rods and follow focus, Rainbow TFT and firewire to dvrack?
Well, it looks like something Frankenstein could have created, ad a brown plastic bag when it starts to rain and the beast is complete!
And still probably this setup is most Indyfilmakers dream!
Cause its affordable, yes i would shoot 35mm, but it costs to much!
Btw, the Viper looks like an oversized triax studiocam from the late 80s!

Markus or Rai:
<<<-- Originally posted by Rai Orz : Short news about DRAKE:
Timeline for presentation the whole system will be the 12.14.2004. -->>>

Will you have to postpone?

Well I don't have time for this, I've seen cinema equiped XL1's and they look great, hides that low end indie toy like image. Actually it looks more like an Arri rig.

I supposed you think that putting the lense on the XL1 makes it a DIY camera, or that the fact that Canon made it makes it a DIY project. Think. DIY has definte boundaries, Consumer Do it Yourself instead of a commercial enterprise. I suppose that bars are BYO, because the bar brings it's own beer as well instead of the customer??

<<<-- Originally posted by Christian Schmitt :
Btw, the Viper looks like an oversized triax studiocam from the late 80s! -->>>

Ohh boy, now I've heard everything (till this point in time) from what you are saying your version of a good cinema camera looks liek a coffin ;).

Wayne this is the most insane arguement I have heard out of you yet, normally I am content to just get annoyed in the shadows and not say anything but I can't help it anymore. This thing could look like a shoebox with a stick taped to it for all I care. If it works and I can afford it that is what matters in this niche. Sure a studio exec is going to scoff if I show him a camera that looks like crap, but this camera is alive for one purpose, to give HD images for budget FILMAKERS. Like Marcus said, they designed a camera system to fit their needs. I don't think that the DRAKE is the be all and end all but they are making a movie with it right now, and it looks pretty sweet. I have the utmost respect for what these guys did, and for the fact that they are doing something that it seems alot of people around here have forgotten, making films!!!

That being said, if someone is looking for an affordable HD camera to shoot commercial projects rather than scrapping up enough money to do something yourself, sure it would be nice for it to look slick on the outside. That person isn't me, and it isn't Rai and Marcus.

<end of rant></end of rant>

Wayne, case design is a long story. Canon XL have a cool look ... cool for a dv camera, but it is just a (all round) dv video camera. It made pictures like other video cameras. DRAKE is made for making cinema. Differnt Sensor, different storage. Extrem fast lenses together with the 2/3" Sensor, DOF is mutch more then S16mm, its near 35mm. For those DOF You need a external focus device. Thats all big differents. All together DRAKE is near a classical film camera, thats why we went to a classical design. Like ARRI (steal cases) and not like Canon or Sony.
Okay, the pictures show only the beta version. Final, there are some (little) changes. But we will not spend more money in a "cool" design (and in production of it). Maybe for DRAKE2, but now we have not the time for this, because 1.) Markus movie is first, and 2.) we start a ser. production of all mechanical parts this week, and there are a lot of details...

@Zac Stein: The big Viewfinder is a 1280x1024 Computer TFT with high back light. On the top is the full 16:9 (1280x720) picture (preview or playback). On the bottom are setups, histogram etc. But you can use smaller displays, also a HD Viewfinder (if you like pay more). Also more than one, or a beamer...

Next we will have a low-cost DRAKE steadie-like system with special vest and arms. We made tests with a beta version, exact with this big viewfinder. Thats a "cool" thing.

BTW: DRAKE have C-Mount lens mount

this http://graphics.stanford.firenze.it/...ng-tools-s.jpg


made this http://www.christusrex.org/www1/citta/0db-Pieta.jpg

Ok,
while waiting for a Drake sitelaunch lets get personal again:

To quote Wayne Morellini:

"I supposed you think that putting the lense on the XL1 makes it a DIY camera, or that the fact that Canon made it makes it a DIY project."
No. Never said or thought anything even close to this.

"Think."
I do constantly. Actually it's an automated process, most likely
generated by my brain, although their are other theories.
Even when I try, I just can't stop thinking. Damn.

"DIY has definte boundaries, Consumer Do it Yourself instead of a commercial enterprise."
I think you're mixing two things here:
1) Building sth yourself = DIY (equals not inventing!)
2) selling sth you build = commercial enterprise
They built a HDcamera (not invented HD), sth that so far only has been offered by major companys. They built it to shoot their movie, cause they couldn't afford commercial products already out there - thats DIY.
Now they sell it, yes, we call this a commercial enterprise.

@Rob: Word!
@Richard: Mind over Matter!
@Rai: What about the Website?

Edit: There are two other Photos of the Drake online, since they also show Rai and Markus, I won't link...
hehehe well the design really is one of a kind ;o]

Anxiously awaiting more sample footage...maybe even some raw footage to play with.

Speaking of raw-footage, any final information on fileformat and editing drake footage yet?

@Zac
Interchangable lenses with c-mount work best, we also attached SLR lenses, but found really good c-mount lenses. Great wide angles, great f-stops.
We record on regular IDE drives. The removable slot can hold a 3,5" drive or if there is a little more money available, a smaller laptop drive. Less power consuming, more shock resistant. 80GB for 50 minutes of raw film. Workflow: You pull the drive out of the camera, plug it in the editing pc, run the converter software, do the debayering, correct problems if those accour in the picture (like fixed pattern noise) and...


@christian

...export it (scince this application runs on your editing windows pc) to any codec installed on the system. We use HUFYUV with avi container or single frame tiff sequences. The uncompressed 4:4:4 8bit avi's can be read by the quantel system without a problem, so any high grade editing suite should eat it, we edit with pinnacle edition.

@all
Don't wait for the webpage. I commanded all working force still awake (Rai you don't post any more and get some sleep this time :) to focus on the shooting. We will use the full rig and document it with a dv cam. Those clips I'll upload afterwards, propably tuedsday, that should be more usefull and interesting than a quick and dirty page with less informations you can get by reading this forum. A great place, by the way. The first time I feel a cyberplace as a "place".

A last sentence: let's found a case mod group. I personaly like the bazooka iedea, but I see a lot of potential with our clean calssical surfaces. I mean, a PC case can be turned into something individual, so... and you can always load your favourite wallpapers on the screen, or a burning fireplace, or an aquarium...

<<<-- Originally posted by Markus Rupprecht @christian

...export it (scince this application runs on your editing windows pc) to any codec installed on the system. We use HUFYUV with avi container or single frame tiff sequences. The uncompressed 4:4:4 8bit avi's can be read by the quantel system without a problem, so any high grade editing suite should eat it, we edit with pinnacle edition.
-->>>

Would it be possible if you could send out a DVD sample of the raw footage to someone who requests it? I would love to have some to tinker with. Of course I'd pay for the DVD-R and shipping.

I second that, some RAW footage on DVD would be a great idea.

@Markus:
"(...)we edit with pinnacle edition."
Could you please tell us a bit more on this?
So far Edition was for editing DV only, since version 6 they
included more codecs(eg HDV - what i don't think you'll use).
What format you edit in Edition? Your going for filmout, right?
What are the hardware requirements of your Drake data to be edited with a decent workflow?
Did you build the editingbox yourself or do you use some turnkey sytem?

Now most of all: GOOD LUCK SHOOTING DRACHENFEDER!
if you need a stand-in for a bear, i haven't shaved in days ;o)
i could also do a drunk in an old tavern...

Markus: I'm glad you are feeling at home. And thanks for posting
the pictures etc.

Just a note to all: please do not go down the path where we are
insulting or attacking people etc. Those posts will be removed or
edited etc.

Thank you for your consideration!

I understand we all are passionate about these sort of things and
have our own thoughts, wishes and requirements, but let's all
stay civil.

Thanks!!

Rob La, yes, often I am "annoyed in the shadows" too and this is, probably the second insane argument you have heard from me, but is only insane because I am debating an "Insane argument" yet agoin, instead of just quiting and letting the ussual wide spread delusion of the artistic, know not too much, type reign (of which I suffer a bit, but have put many years of technical research and training to compensate for this obviouse fault ;). Well most of the particularly irritiating sickness has past, so I can sit in the shadows and wag my head at all the unobjective insanity that some times prevailes in the different threads from certain people, who should really consider paying others to write, rather than insult sensible people's intelleigence. Making the brain bigger than the ego, rather than the other way about, is good objective to strive for. If you see me debating something, remember, it is ussually because I can smell B... from a mile off, even if it can't be seen yet.

Now rather than debate things about any camera, and questions that can only have untactfull answers, I'll generalise about no camera in particular, but life and business. If you sell something, simple improvements to sell four times more will improve your business (even ten fold in profit from economies of scale). This is sanity (in many business circles) not doing this, if you have the opportunity, is ussually what is classified as "insanity". Unfortunately, most buyers, by human nature are not the shoebox crowd. Getting on here and trying to debate wrong statements, is like becoming "Canon Fodder" ;). If Christian wants to believe that any company that produces a product is producing a DIY product, and that the defintion of a good cinema camera is a bland squarish/rectangulish box with a tappered coffin like end, that is upto him, he knows the alternative view now.

What you seem to have forgotten, is that the threads are about making equipment for people to then make films. As part of this, getting it to be "successfull", so it can be lower priced and in the hands of our fellow citizens is part of this. So forgive the small suggestions to improve their situation. And by the way I have a lot of respect for the Drake team, and the camera, just some embelishment on the case would go a way.

BTW, Don't joke about the shoebox, oddly it isn't too bad looking ;).

Have a good day Rob.


Rai

I don't think anybody ever suggested that it actually should look anything like a Canon (did I?), it is just that somebody, out of a large number of people, thought that the Canon is a good example of bad taste. As I have said before, the camera needs to look professional, be functional, and look good in a professional way. That basically means simular to what people are used to, a squarish (but embelished to look attractive) boxish shape (with attractive angles and dimension ratios) that looks good. Not something that costs a lot more than what you have allready, just a bit more styling. If you want a fancy design instead I have one in my head since this debate started, but really it should be saved for 8MP or 3chip Altasens level camera. I think, if you are going to have a good style case you have to have the goods in it, to back it up. This is why the styling is a bit wasted on the Canon, it looks great, and gets some sales because of it, but in the end it is only minidv inside and not a seriouse threat to the professional camera market. I don't plan a camera this high end to use the case, so if you want to buy it, it is avaialble.

Rai, me mate, get some sleep, you deserve it, bigger companies have talked about delivering a camera, you did it ;)


Markus

Hmm, I have talked to Rai in times past about variouse things for his camera, and here they are on the camera, to his credit he didn't let on that he actually used them. He's a Great guy.

Now about Modding cases. Somewhere, wayback in the threads, I suggested that if you wanted a cheap case you could use a small PC case (I used to have pictures of hundreds of different cases and some very interesting and different). I also suggested that these case companies might be cheap places to get a case manufactured (but probably too big of numbers for you). Now as you are only after a squarish case with some internal structure, and they manufacture squarish boxes and add styling etc, maybe they can help.


Christian

I'm not bothering continuing this, but think what the logical conculsions your arguments are, and you don't actually know the history of this project.


Rob

I have just seen your reply, after having written most of the above. Don't worry, I am not really interested in debating it anymore. I feel a bit of bewildered at some of the pionts made, but no malice towards anyone.

Just a small comment on DIY:

The arguements presented are really quite subjective as we are talking about semantics. Since there is no meaning set in stone for any one particular phonetic utterance. Language develops all sots of semantic shifts all the time. Words that used to mean one thing now mean entirely different things today. It is therefore quite reasonable to have multiple definitions of DIY based upon a persons perception of the word. One cannot be said to be any more correct than the other. If, for maximum communcation, we wish to set one meaning in stone then we should do so but to otherwise argue about the specific meaning of a word has very little purpose.

<<<-- Originally posted by Christian Schmitt : @Markus:
"(...)we edit with pinnacle edition."
Could you please tell us a bit more on this?
So far Edition was for editing DV only, since version 6 they
included more codecs(eg HDV - what i don't think you'll use).
What format you edit in Edition? Your going for filmout, right?
What are the hardware requirements of your Drake data to be edited with a decent workflow? -->>>

You can convert the RAW footage from the Drake system to any AVI format you like. So any editor can take it on. Also Edition wasn't just for DV, at least from what I remember reading.

You can read up or test out the requirements for the Drake converted files on your own. Make a file the same resolution that the Drake system outputs and try a couple different codecs. Huffyuv will require a top of the line system to edit in that res with multi-layers. Some other codecs to look into are Aspect HD and Aware's Motion Wavelet.

Edition in the previous versions could handle two formats:
DV as an .avi
DV as a .dif
At least that's what I can choose when logging with it.
Other packages like Pinnacle Liquid Chrome or Blue offer
more flexibility.

Are you from the Drake team or are you just putting together the given information so far?
Since Markus said he edited with Edition and I'm using this when editing on a PC, I was hoping for their complete workflow.
They seem to build everything on their own (Steadycam, matte box, FF etc.), I guess they've come up with their own editing system too.

@Wayne
Of course I'm also not bothering continuing this;o), I just wanna ad sth:
I understand your point, I know that these threads have not been started by commercial enterprises.
No, persons like you and me thought of nice things they couldn't afford and how to built them themselves with less money.
But building a HDcam differs a lot IMHO from building eg a homemade mini35.
a blank CD, some electronic devices, old photographic parts - well, if i put these together and fail I lost 50 bucks and some time in the basement.
If Obins DIY projekt will stay "open source"(just for the comparison) and a "HOW TO BUILD THE OBIN-HD" site will be available for the public, you`ll have to invest a lot more for the parts.
So messing up with 3000$ in parts, I can't afford.
If the ObinCam will be for sale for lets say 5000$ - it will also become a commercial enterprise, same as Drake Inc.
No DIY anymore.
So following your logic, if the ObinCam stays DIY, it will only be available to a capable few: DIY for the elite.
For the time I can concentrate on DIY movie making and not HDcamera building, I'm willing to pay.
I can't pay what sonypanasonicviper want, but maybe now I can nevertheless afford renting HD equipement: be it a Drake, a Obin or a Morellini .
Wayne, stay being so passionate about things,keeps reminding me of the people behind the letters.
Take care.

Just real quick before I need to go to bed. Now, we didn't build the editing system... But a friend of mine was involved in the core programming of edition, back when it was "Fast Studio". The render engine is really powerfull, preserving the clip format. With the 499,- software only version you only can log clips in HDV (MPEG2 and so on) but when you import clips from a hard drive they can be uncompressed, or compressed with a lossless codec, the system does not reencode them !! - they stay in their native format. That's new in the new version and really powerfull. If you want SDI output you need to buy the much more expensive HD-Version. If you stay digital the software only version will do. If our camera will get really used by other people, it might be an idea to turn the stand allone export tool into a plugin. So far you need that inbetween programm to turn the raw files into something editing systems can read. With the IBIS5 chip it makes sense to do it with an more powerfull aplication, scince the fixed pattern noise is really a problem you have to deal on a shot base, depending on light situations you need to adjust one or two paramters manually with visuall quality controll to get rid of all potential problems.
Now I need to sleep for the shooting or my producer will shoot me ;)
Cheers
Markus

Thanks !
Been with FAST since the VideoMachine;o)
So no Avid HD editing system or similary necessary?
That would allow to feed the crew hehe and maybe buy some fancy directors chair yuhuu...
Hm, for output you'll use TGA sequences on a mobile harddrive and give it to swiss effects for filmout...?
guess you sleep now...

<<<-- Originally posted by Christian Schmitt :Are you from the Drake team or are you just putting together the given information so far?
Since Markus said he edited with Edition and I'm using this when editing on a PC, I was hoping for their complete workflow.
They seem to build everything on their own (Steadycam, matte box, FF etc.), I guess they've come up with their own editing system too.. -->>>

Not really putting together, just stating their methods in which they vaguely said in this thread. I think the explaination is alittle vague because of the language barrier.

They probably use Edition because that is their preference and the new version seems to be getting real good reviews.

Also I can see how there would be some confusion about Edition since you are ruining an older version. I was not aware of only DV input. As the post above mine explains, the program is totally revamped.

Guys, you can edit with anything you want.
For example now that Premiere supports importing EDLs I use it for everything from DV up to HDCAM.
Even you can edit uncompressed HiDefinition on a PC with premiere 6.0 and 6.5, just need to specify custom format under AVI properties :)
Your only limitation will be HDDs speed and systen power...

Aaron that has been my thought, it is a matter of semantics, so it was not worth carrying on, he can believe what we beleives. But you must remember that the (I forget the term for relative meaning, used in language interpretation, connotative) meaning of a term like this is given by it's usage and in this the root usage of that type in this application, rather than the denotative meaning of the individual words, where it came from, to the best of my knowledge, is what I am saying, and current usage. Maybe in German the term never had that this widespread primary meaning, but that is how it is being used. So yes, lets move on. But when you think of it every capture software and camera project here is now a commercial enterprise requiring payment, except for Rob's export tool, and Ben's attempt, and Obin's origional camera setup.

I hope I got that correct, I have been operating at down to 10% due to this flu, and am still at around 50% of my ussual non optimal.


Markus

Good to hear about pinnacle edition, I think all the projects need stuff like that, from what I can understand.

Wayne.

Juan, interesting, what is a EDLs, and are you meaning it is now possible to define raw pixel and file formats to import. Is it possible to define anything beyond raw formats?

Wayne please don't get confused.
EDL is a standard file format, really old (I guess it is from early 80's late 70's).Edition/Editor's Decision List.
It is a human readable list of every take/shot used to make a full edited movie, like the digital version of cutting and pasting negative to make a whole movie.right?
Professional Edition packages support that format.Premiere always had the capability or exporting EDL, but because of some strange marketing strategy from the " Illuminated Geniuses" at Adobe always lacked of the EDL importing feature.Since last version they added it ( I always wonder if it have something to be with my continuos e-mails through 5 years asking for it :) )

" are you meaning it is now possible to define raw pixel and file formats to import? "

Who said that?
I said "uncompressed" not "RAW".for example you can use Uncompressed 1920x1080 on any Premiere.You can even use any strange resolution with it.At least if you know exactly what you are doing..
May be a made a mistake when I said format, I should have said: aspect ratio,resolution and fps.Sorry Wayne.

"RAW" to keep it clear, means nothing else than that the RAW data lacks a "Format".So anything "RAW" have no extra data like info, headers or the like. So a computer ,or software if you prefer, has no way to know by itself what that "RAW" data means.
RAW data can be anything. Compressed data lossy or lossless, a text file,etc,etc...
That is the reason of the existance of headers and the like...

Thanks for that.

Seen more pictures of the drake, and it does look a bit better from a distance.

Wayne.

Hey folks. We had a hard shooting in a very cold castle. I'm still not 100% recovered and will edit the "making of" video with comments tomorrow. Meanwhile, here is a quick and dirty clip, showing drake in action in "crane mode". When you pause the clip you can see some details on the drake screen and get an idea, how it sees the world. I'll finish one or two original shots tomorrow, to go along with the "making of" flick, that should give some extra ideas, what can be done with the this setup.

www.drachenfeder.com/int/drake_clip2.avi

Cheers
Markus

@ All who downloaded the last clip from Markus:
Its updated now with more pictures and also in a better quality (DIVX). So please download it again (12MB)

I haven't downloaded half the clips on these threads because they are in Divx, I find it produces irritation on my system (not a MP fanboy or anything, just find DVIX annoying). So if everybody in accross the threads would like to offer MP, or QT versions alongside Divx that would be good.

Wayne,

try this:

http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

no additonal codecs required. Good stuff

Thanks I'll look that up. I thought it only did mpeg2 streaming.

Rob, the reply function is playing up again on the other thread.

Wayne.

"...small step, great leap..."
 

Markus, Rai & Co,
Great achievment, hat off and good luck with your project!
"...it's a small step for..., great leap for....." as was said a while ago.

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : I haven't downloaded half the clips on these threads because they are in Divx, I find it produces irritation on my system (not a MP fanboy or anything, just find DVIX annoying). So if everybody in accross the threads would like to offer MP, or QT versions alongside Divx that would be good. -->>>

Install FFDShow also, that will clear up any problems.

If you are on a Mac, install VLC player.

Thanks Guys.