Thanks Wolfgang, i went to this side, registry and found this link to the PDF without registry need:

http://www.film-tv-video.de/uploads/...0705_Drake.pdf

..........

Wayne,
I don't know the details but there have been some serious health issues involved. I don't think they went dark on purpose. I know they are still dedicated to bringing out a moderate cost lossless compression camera.
Steve

I'm glad to see that they are getting some exposure and we already know that the camera is a working device. It's like anything, production takes time.

Just look at kinetta, the camera was all over the place and has recently fell silent and nobody really knows whats going on with that either. They were delayed for altasens and now we know altasens is in full production and that camera still isn't out.

Give them some time and drake will surely show up.

Hmm, yes, I did know of a health issue, but I thought that stabilised a while ago, hope it's ok. My head is swimming today, 5am and time for bed.

Well, I have no idea why they didn't show the working prototype if they had one, maybe the camera that you all saw was 8 bit. What I have experienced was 12 bit version of DRAKE and yes, as I said the pircture was very impressive. As I know they still used IBIS5A. Well, when I returned to my country, I called Marc if everything was going as scheduled (we agreed that I would recieve a working prototype by the end of August), and he explained that unfortunatelly they have problems with 12 bit version, it appeared that the sensor they use (I guess IBIS5A) had some internal problems and when recording 12 bit it sent out some vertical lines on the image destroing the image quality. Marc explained that they decided to find some company that would manufacture them a sensor with their own design. So he said that i would take at least 4 month to do that. Also manufacturer of sensor they currently use said that it will also take about half year to improve the error in the sensor. Please all consider that I am not a technician and I don't understand many technical details, but this is what I was explained. I really wish that there is a camera available to ship from August 2005, as in that report, but it is not, because if there was one I would be the first one to purchase, and I would recomend it to all of you, it really is the best camera available at this moment that we can afford (at least some of us).

So, if you will know any update please also let us know.

And all of you who are interested there is a Russian company that created a Digita Cinema Camera, that is based on 1' CMOS sensor, thus can use 35mm optic on PL mount, and the camera can produce 2400-1350 pixels picture with up to 150fps. It has a separate recording device. I talked to the manufacturers and the price of the camera is from 18 000 USD to 150 000 USD depending of configuration. I will be visiting the company within next week and I will let you know details if you are interested. They also promised to have some samples of what they shoot by the end of this week on the web page. www.ctt.ru . Oh, and don't try to reach them on phone numbers that you see on web page, bacause it is not the number they have in use, I had to ask my friends in moscow to find the company. I know the mobile but I can not give away on the forum, you can e-mail if you are interested and I will refer you to them.

And for 18000USD you get the HD version only.

Even thou I think the image resolution of this camera is better than DRAKE I like drake better because of its functions. Hope some day DRAKE will be available.

Yes, problem is you introduce a product and then find out customers want this and want that. We thought it curious Drake wanted 8 bits, I imagine customers said more (great 12bit mode on it).

There have been people in the forums that say they want minimal camera, even just viewfinder and couple of buttons, and that might be alright for them, but for everybody else they like the convenience and accuracy of a full set up. Look at film cameras nowadays, they have plenty of digital gear on them, and there is a reason for that.

A shame the ibis is playing up in 12 bits, but where they get there own sensor from this sounds curious? Truth is there are a number of sensors on the market, that ccd sensor that was suggested before on the technical thread looks like a good one with something like 90% QE and very good resolution and frame rate. FF doers a nice 4MP sensor that will do 2MP at 30fps, and own the custom sensor maker Smalcamera. Somebody mentioned a new Foveon sensor on the other thread. Altasens has new 1/3 inch sensor (just look at how well the HC1 is doing with their 1/3 inch). A number of options, of people with the tech to ask to make a good one for you. I wonder what it will be like?

Does anybody know of any cheap 720p+ capable camera (pref with memory buffer and pixel packing) usb/firewire/Gige for less than $400, even cameralink etc, would be tempted to have a go at it? Sensor chip prices have dropped a lot. There is no way the sumix ibis is worth the $1000.

That russian camera site looks interesting but if that camera is 18k usd for a hd-sdi camera head than your better off buying a sony or ikegami box camera for a similar price IMHO and have all that features and support.

Still have the problem of finding a way to record that hd-sdi signal - nothing cheap currently available except a big ole computer with pci-x

Keith
 

First of all DRAKE also costs 18000USD. The advantage of russian camera over sony and ikegami is that it is CMOS sensor, and since it is one 1' sensor you can use all of the 35mm optics on it and have full advantage of DOF of 35mm film, without any Micro35 adapter or something like that. Also CMOS sensors tend to record more film like pictures that 3 CCDs. Also this russian camera, is 4:4:4 uncompressed like drake. Well, yes you can buy well know brand, but what you get is actually lower quality. Well at least if you seek something that will shoot images close to film. I will have update on this camera withing next 10 days, because I am planning to visit the company soon and see the camera for myself.

It is very strainge that nobody from DRAKE team have replied to the post yet. Don't you think? and I have sent them e-mails and don't recieve answers.

Drake is a full solution not just a camera head. I was making reference to the Russian one (not drale) that seems to just be a hd-sdi camera head. Also if you open the pdf it actually says 2/3" not 1" so some uncertainty their, but it looks like a single cmos sensor solution for the same price as a full resolution 3 ccd. By 4:4:4 do you mean raw bayer or do you mean true 4:4:4 over dual link hd-sdi debayered on the camera or something similar to raw bayer over one channel of hd-sdi. I don't speak russian so its hard to figure out what they are talking about on their site.

I also don't want to start a ccd vs. cmos war so I will just say that such generalizations that cmos is more film like can easily be proven false or true depending on the sensors in questions. I can only say this because I've seen first hand how they work and what they output and understand that how the charge builds up, is held, converted, and output and understand loses at each step from an engineering standpoint. I'm not a movie maker, I'm an engineering student so it's part of my studies to understand that.

I am not technician. So I might not understand the technical process of the CMOS sensor and how it is different from CCD. All I know and can evaluate is the picture when I look at it. I have seen picutres from DRAKE and also some high speed cameras based on CMOS sensor and this is my judgment based on. CMOS has artistic look, maybe this is because it is single sensor and all the CCD cameras I've seen are 3CCDs and maybe, the prism that splits the beam makes it look more videolike, maybe single CCD camera will make a better picture I have no idea.

Well about this russian camera, I don't know wether it is bayer 4:4:4 or true dual link, I don't even know what is the difference, but if you explain it to me in brief I would appreciate and I will ask the russian guys. And what is drake, bayer or true?

The pdf on the web page is old I guess, because I discussed this with them and I know it for sure, it is 1" sensor, and you can use standart 35mm film lenses on it with PL mount.

This camera is also a solution, not just a camera head. Well of course DRAKE had amazing functions and that is why I like DRAKE so much, but this is also a camera with processor inside. It records on a recorder that is separate but it is a size of a book and not heavy at all, so you can hold it on you belt or whatever. This camera also has it's own software interface with 16 profiles for setting, and manual and automatic white balance. And the pictures you see there are old, they have ordered special cases for the camera, so it is going to look as normal camera, with it's unique design.

As I know this sensor was developed by this company in Taiwan, it is their own design, and the sensor they use in both cameras (HD and DC) are the same. They guy from the company claims that it has a quality as good as ARRI D20, well, we will see, I think they will have samples uploaded on the site on monday.

And Keith please explain in brief what are other technical specifications I have to check and ask, and I will and post what they tell me here. THX.

My take on Kinetta, is that Jeff is more interested in perfecting his exact camera than coming to market and making money. To watch just the features he discusses publically on his mailing list, you can tell the amount of time and energy he is investing.. to make his ideal digital cinema camera, not to sell it, but to have it.. so I get the sense that time-to-market for him is irellevant.

Like i've said before.. wait for early 2006.. exciting times!

Levan

If the russian camera is true dual link 4:4:4 and it is a single sensor then it has to debayer on the camera in real time. (take the raw image from a sensor with a CFA and decode it back to 3 seperate colour channels) Their is another method I described earlier in another thread about how hd-sdi in 4:2:2 is actually 2 channels serialized and can be used to transport 1920x1080 bayer data over a single channel and ignore the other one.

Like I said I can't read russian so I am missing a whole lot of information that is listed their so I could have it all wrong.

So its hard for me to tell you what I would be looking for as I am a lamen of movie making and looks and stuff and more interested in the technical aspects. I would want to see the spectral response for the CFA on the sensor because this will completely determine how true your colours are. I'd also be very interested in if the sensor is truely global shutter and the exact dimensions of the photosensitive area. (1" optical 16 x 9 should be 14.2mm x 8mm, or 16.2mm diagonal, 2/3" is 11mm diagonal)

If it does debayer on the camera then I'd want to see the algorithim used to debayer it, and be very very critical on how the algorithim handles high contrast - poor algorithms will result in random colours at high contrast areas.

All I can say is see what it outputs and if you like it then great, if you don't then too bad.


Adam
Thanks for that little info on kinetta.

Levan,

When you were refering to the sensor being designed by a company in Taiwan, were you refering to the Drake or the Russian camera? If you are refering to the Drake having a similar sensor to the Arri d20, are you sure about that.....is'nt the drake 720p? The Arri outputs at 1080p with a 35mm sized sensor at I believe 12.5 megapixel (i think it's the same cmos chip that is in the Panavision Genesis cam that they are shooting the new Superman movie on). Is this a type of chip that they are planing on upgrading the Drake with? If so that would be amazing.

Keith, I didn't exactly understood your explanaitions but I will try to get answers anyways. So I will know if it is true or bayer 4:4:4. (and which is better? ). Oh, yes and by the way, what is the size of D20, or when we refer to say the "sensor with the size of 35mm film", what does it mean? is it 1" or more? And the global shutter thing, why is it so important? Just to know.

Omar, I was refering to Russian camera. I didn't mean that they use the same chip as in Arri D20, I said that the developer of the camera told me over the phone (and he had a very definitive voice tember) that their camera does have the same quality as the ARRI D20. It was just comparison from his side, and he stated it without any proof yet, I haven't seen the pictures from the camera yet, but he was so sure when he was saying this that I kind of believe him. well, we will see. No DRAKE I think is in search for a sensor manufacturer at this moment, trying to develop the sensor of their own design. I don't know how far they went on it yet, because they don't reply to my e-mails. I hope they are doing fine.

Levan, thank you for the clarification....I can't wait to hear and see what you find out on the russian camera. Sounds very exciting.

thanks,
Omar

35mm film frame size is 22mm x 18.5mm I think somewhere around that and It depends on if it is regular 35mm or super35. 1" optical is about a 1.6x factor so a 50mm lense will be close to an 80mm on a true 35mm camera.

ARRI D20 uses a custom sensor from FillFactory (now Cypress)
Drake uses Ibis5A (FillFactory)
Panavision has bought some years ago a sensor manufacturer, so they are supposed to make their own sensors.
Dalsa also has its own D-Cinema camera using its own sensor/s.

CMOS and CCD look almost the same.Forget about saying CMOS is more "organic".
The infamous "video look" has nothing to be with that.It is related to the after sensor image processing (border enhancements and some other several things)
A key factor for "film like" quality is called "dynamic range".
Has anyone looked at the images from DVX100 "CCD" miniDV camera from Reel-Stream?
If don't please do it now.

JUAN,

Yes, I keep myself updated about Reel-Stream. Well, yes whatever they did to DVX100 it has a much better and realy impressive dynamic range, but if you watch close the commercial by Obin that is in the gallery on their site, you can see that it is not what you expect from film. Now download the commercial, it is about some flowers or something, well, it starts with the garden and a small fountain. When there is no movement in the picture the quality seems remarkable, but the shots of humen in the picture, where the man is sitting at the computer and the last shot, when they are togather sitting in the garden, is so video like. I think that film look is not just dynamic range, it is combination of it with DOF, motion blur etc. I don't know, maybe it is because of the beamsplitter, that splits color information in RGB for each sensor, I don't know, what causes it to look like move videolike that CMOS. Look at any camera with CMOS, even those that are not aimed to be cinema cameras, they make more organic output. For example look at footage of CineSpeedCam, it is designed for slow motion captures, it has speed up to 10000fps, it record to RAM, you can not use this camera for cinema production, because it is limited in recording time to several seconds, but anyways, if you download some samples shot with this camera, and evaluate it in terms of film look, you will understand. On NAB this year I say, CineSpeedCAM and also another high speed camera (don't remember the company) both on CMOS sensors, and both were great. DRAKE is also great, and I think it is because of CMOS.

Keith, I talked to the camera people in russia. They told me that it is true 4:4:4, but there is a recorder at this moment that supports only 4:2:2, he told me that I don't need more, but If I insist on 4:4:4 they can make one like that. I don't know about 4:4:4 and 4:2:2, I think for distinguishing by human eye there is no difference between this two, but how about color grading?! Also, It is originally Global shutter, but he told me they can make rolling shutter if needed. What is the difference and advantages of each?

Well, that's about it at this moment, I think I will have some frame grabs on my mail today and I will update to my web page, so you can see.

Also that woman's face looks like hardened clay.

Levan, you are right. RealStream is a good think for video people. But the output is just what the input produced. And the input is the sensor from a video camera. It is a very small ccd sensor without film like dof but with video like motion blur. The ARRI D20 and DRAKE is made with cmos sensors from the same manufacter. And both cameras are made for film people with funktion like film cameras. Maybe this is the trick why both make filmlook pictures.

@Juan. The new panavision genesis use a 12,5MP cdd, but with high dynamic range like cmos. I saw a article with this: The first genesis pixelrow use a different gain like the second, and so on... So the first row see the low and the second row the high lights. All together, this trick make a high dynamic range picture, like a cmos sensor.

Maybe the Drake people do it like the Kinetta people. I had a call, 4-5 weeks ago and they told me, they shoot two movies at the same time. One with a 8Bit Drake, the other with a 12Bit Drake. So it must be min. two Drake´s. And they told me, they made tests with altasens and they worked also on a full 35mm dim. cmos version.

24x18mm aperature for full frame with no soundtrack inframe, if i recall. frame height is 19mm for 4 perf (16frames per foot). 4 perf with soundtrack can vary, but 22x16 and 21x16 are common i believe.

(this is all completely out of my head, and i don't shoot film, so if i'm wrong, it's not my fault ;)

Yes, and also, if you go to www.purposelabs.com you can download some clips, that are also shot with CMOS sensor. Actually, as a whole I don't like footage on this site, but it still has a better look than CCD cameras.

And another arguement is that why would ARRI choose CMOS on their D20, it definately is not because of the price, they chose what is best, I guess.

@Frank, I don't know about DRAKE, what they were planning 4-5 weeks ago, but I wanted to buy a camera and I don't have one. I also think that the DRAKE team has plit up, I don't want to specify why I think so, but this is not my imagination, it is not my business also. They never told me if they were experimenting with 35mm sensors. Well, now that you mention it I recall that they have shown me some footage with CCD sensors on their camera, and again I didn't like it at all, but I have to be honest, it had a wider dynamic range. 8bit version of DRAKE is just not good enough, believe me, I tested it, and It doesn't have enough colors to the picture. Even 12 bit, couldn't capture color as sharp as they were in real, but I liked it anyways because I like the look.

4:4:4 has each colour given its own whole channel in RGB normally while 4:2:2 is YUV and the U and V channel or only half the width of the Y channel.

Rolling shutter is something to be avoided, so if it has global that is better and you really don't need to even think any more about rolling.

On a note about IBIS5, if you check the CFA wavelegthn response you see some bad overlap on green and blue which will cause some difficult colour response.

Hm. I've seen various images from the Reel stream and while they look better than images from the normal camera they still have that video sheen to them and not as good as the CMOS chip footage. The main problem is latitude of the 1/3 inch ccd compared to the 2/3 inch CMOS (or even the 1/3 inch in the HC1).

As you said, there are many factors involved, even the fact that Ibis has 100% sensor fill factor compared to normal ccd. Apart from the well capacity, SNR and QE, one of the best bets would be to compare the response curves of the different colours in film to the sensors. This determines much of the look.

I imagine that Obin is going to be using that sanfor?? CCD sensor that what's his name posted to the technical thread a few months ago. The one with industry leading statistics (escapes me at the moment but you would know Juan). Though Ibis also has another large sensor capable of 1080p in it's lupa range.

I am curious about this as well, I discuss different things (new cameras) then everything, everywhere, went quiet all of a sudden. Let's hope the calm before the storm. I don't think they have much need to come here, as people here, in general, are looking for below $10K cameras rather than $18K camera.


Keith:

About the colour overlap, I did a post somewhere about it, how a little bit of overlap could be used to register edges/and detail in Bayer footage, and filtered out during saturation enhancement. This would be particularly useful for monochromatic, and complementary, coloured surfaces and low light, and I guess that might have been their intention.

How's your project going?

dammit.. so inappropriate.. yet so funny.

Wayne:

I'm sorry to say that I'm under obligations not to reveal details of what I am currently working on or the current status of my project only that things are happening and they are getting really interesting now.


Also never really though about using the colour overlap to any use, always though of it as a hinderance.

UPDATE on Russian Camera
 

I went to Moscow and saw the camera. It is working, and has great picture, and most importantly very good color information. It is 1920X1080 10 bit 4:2:2 with 1" CMOS sensor. You can use any standard film camera lenses on this camera, the configuration I saw in Moscow had some Arri lense on it. It has great DOF. As the developer explained it is true 10bit, he compared his camera to D20, and he said that D20 has higher resolution and 14bit, but he said that it is not true 14bit, it is some mathematical calcuation of 14bit, he said that in future he will also have 14bit. As a recording medium the camera uses flash recorders. Each recorder at this moment is capable of recording 3 minutes of video. This flash recorders are detachable and you can own several of them so that this way you get as many recording minumutes as you want, it is just that the cost of each recorder is 2000. He is also writing some looseless codec and it two month the same recorders will be capable of recording of up to 20 minutes. He said that upgrade will be free, with no additional costs. The standard camera can record all know standard formats, like 24p, 25p, 30i, 60i or whatevere. The maximum speed of the camera in HD is 50fps progressive. The standard cost 18000USD. I decided to purchase the camera and I will have it by the 18th of October, but I customised it, my version will also be able to work in SD and record up to 1000 FPS progressive.

On october the october the 17th, if I remeber it correctly, there will a tennis championship in Moscow, Cup of Kreml, it will be on satellite on air and this camera will be shooting the championshi, specifically some slow motion effects you going to see there.

I liked the DRAKE functions, but the picture quality of the russian one is much, much better.

When I shoot first matterial with this camera I will post the links to the matterial so that you can watch.

btw, any news about DRAKE ?

i m still waiting a official news about avaibility to purchase it...

That is great news Levan! Please keep us updated on how everything goes and definately try to post some pictures of the camera as well as some clips for it. A couple of questions....will it output 4.4.4 RGB? Also what do you think that0 you will be able to edit that kind of footage on? Dual core mac G5 maybe?

..........

@Omar

No, standard version of the camera can not record 4:4:4, but as I was explained the stream is 4:4:4 and if I wanted I could order the special recorder or use any standard recorders with dual link. But at this moment I go with 4:2:2.

About editing, I have G5 dual 2,7, with 4GB ram, Deckling HD pro and Huge Raid. But to tell you the truth, I have problems with editing HD material in real time in Final Cut Pro. I don't understand, why apple keeps advertising that FCP can edit uncompressed 8 or 10 bit 4:2:2 in real time, it is not true, at least not in my case, I am so disapointed. I might have some setting wrong, but I don't know, I think I tried everything and it doesn't do real time.

I will keep you updated about the camera and post pictures.

@Jeremie

Why are you waiting for DRAKE to be on sale? Last news from them was that the camera is not working. Do you know anything else? As I know the team is splited up. I recieved e-mail from them that Marc Oliver is not a part of the team any more, but on the other hand if you go to their web page, the contact info is still on him, and their site has not changed a long time, and they have not replied to so many post in this forum. I don't think that DRAKE is reality any more, unfortunatelly.

I think the sad truth is, that when operations like this get this involved and spend the amount of time and money on it that they have, all else becomes an after thought. Then there is the problems associated with this sort of business, and personal things that happen. Pity I liked these fellas.

I know they were looking at alternative sensors and customisations that cost money, maybe this is the hiccup stopping/holding up the new version of Drake.

But the problem is they are going for the upmarket sector (well down market compared to normal film production) but so many companies are also going for the same market, where it is very expensive to offer the absolute best, to compete with the big guys. The real market is something similarly priced to HDV cameras but greatly out performing them with full film and video feature sets. I feel the cinema emphasis in the forum is "cooking" a lot of projects, in marketing terms. But now the problem is that a HC1 with 35mm lens adaptor and analogue component recording, offers a viable alternative in the low end. So that market is becoming very competitive also.

http://www.ctt.ru/files/images/HD_Op...moframe001.bmp
http://www.ctt.ru/files/images/HD_Op...moframe002.bmp
http://www.ctt.ru/files/images/HD_Op...moframe003.bmp

These are the frames from russian camera, they have uploaded them on their web page. I was there when they did the shots, it was in a office room, without any lighting, just the room light.

What do you think?

Ok, lets presume that Drake is dead ( too bad ), well what are the other alternatives ?
The russian one ?
and ?

for under 20 000 $

Sumix for under $3K (hopefully) which is playing dead from what I can tell, everytime I prod them I get no response.

Wayne, I can't agree about the market. I don't see too many competetion in the market. If you only mean the price range, yes, there are many cameras under $20000, but they are no close to the quality of either DRAKE had or the Russian camera has. Well, at least I don't know of any, even for $50000. Yes, you can say that Drake had less quality in some aspects, but it was very filmlike, and if you are an artist, and you shoot something that must look beautyfull, the HD studio cameras are not going to do any good for you. I don't even see Cinealta or Varicam being an alternative. Maybe only Viper is good, but still, even Viper has video like look. I now am sure that only CMOS and only Single chip is capable of achieving the film look, and it will deveope in future rather than 3CCD. Because the prizm is ruining the picture, I don't know why. So at this moment, the only camera I know that is alternative to DRAKE is this russian one. And Sumix or SI cameras, are not complete systems.

Yeh, but russian camera on the other hand is not so cheap. The camera is 18K and you need flash recorder, with 5 minute capture time it costs 3K, and you need at least 2 of them. Plust to that it uses film lenses, not c-mount, which are more expensive, but I found good lenses, ELITE, they are of a very good quality, I would say one of the best, and they primes cost 5K, so the camera itself is 24K and you need lenses, more expensive ones than drake would use.

Theres always those of us pursuing our own projects. DIY HD <$2000? Maybe.

So tell em about those, I am "most" interested.