Dear Mike,

Before developing a method to extract off the audio via the firewire port, I would want to know the signal path of both options.

I assume that the audio line outputs from a camera, such as an XL H1, would be full analog signals, If so, then you could capture the sound in whatever format you liked, such as 16/48k, 24/48k, or any other flavor.

If the above is true, then the audio would be much better than compressed audio from firewire. Excellent audio would be a great feature, to match the overall purpose of your unit, which is to improve upon the standards available in camera (which may be HDV or some other standard).

Dear Mike,

Before developing a method to extract off the audio via the firewire port, I would want to know the signal path of both options.

I assume that the audio line outputs from a camera, such as an XL H1, would be full analog signals, If so, then you could capture the sound in whatever format you liked, such as 16/48k, 24/48k, or any other flavor.

If the above is true, then the audio would be much better than compressed audio from firewire. Excellent audio would be a great feature, to match the overall purpose of your unit, which is to improve upon the standards available in camera (which may be HDV or some other standard).

I suspect they're aware of this caveat, but I would agree that it's significant.

I'm going to guess (and Mike can certainly correct me if I'm wrong) the rub is that re-clocking analog audio to the HDSDI video signal, while the HDSDI signal is being digitally transcoded and the analog audio is going through a quantization step would be trickier than bringing in another digital signal.

The fact that Canon didn't include embedded audio on the XLH1 is really unfortunate. They have included it now on the smaller HDSDI-capable HDV camera, but I suspect their original intention was to streamline monitoring with that jack and little else at the time...

Just so we are clear the XDR will record what datarates to compact flash in what formats?

Also what gave you folks the idea to make this product. Keep up the good work.

Just so we are clear the XDR will record what datarates to compact flash in what formats?

Also what gave you folks the idea to make this product. Keep up the good work.

Flash XDR can record (and playback) using the 422P@HL Profile which is 4:2:2 MPEG2 at full raster (1920 x 1080, 1280x720) at the following max data-rates:

100 Mbps in Long-GOP
160 Mbps in I-Frame Only

You can use the lower cost SanDisk Extreme III cards (133X) for 100Mbps (and lower), but will need the Extreme IV Compact Flash (266X speed) for the 160Mbps rate. (Note CF speeds are based on multiples of 150K bytes/sec, the original CD playback rate. So, 133X = 20 MBps or 160 Mbps).

Regarding our idea for this product, after the experience of our HDMI to HD-SDI converter (nanoConnect) we realized that the quality of the HD-SDI output from most cameras was far superior to the recording mechanism, even for HDCAM. Also, we saw a trend that file-based workflow, would replace tape-based ingest. So that gave us the motivation to build an external add-on box which would increase the video quality and enable fast transfer of video footage to the NLE.

Compact Flash speeds and capacities have increased dramtically and offer relatively low costs, high reliability and low-power. So, we realized that by using CF memory and the high-quality Sony MPEG2 CODEC we could build a small portable HD recorder that could mount on the back of any HD-SDI based camera.

In a nutshell, that's how we decided to build Flash XDR. (No, we didn't come up with the idea after visiting a coffee shop in Amsterdam).

Mike Schell

I'm going to guess (and Mike can certainly correct me if I'm wrong) the rub is that re-clocking analog audio to the HDSDI video signal, while the HDSDI signal is being digitally transcoded and the analog audio is going through a quantization step would be trickier than bringing in another digital signal.

Interesting take. I think you're also correct about Canon's original intentions with the H1's HD-SDI output. As inconvenient as it is to not have embedded audio and timecode like the G1 or JVC 250, IMO it's still worth jumping through a few extra hoops with regards to audio in order to be able to exploit the uncompressed video output.

HDV audio: I've never had a problem with it. It of course depends so much more on the quality of the pre-amps, converters etc, onboard the camera than the fact that it's moderatley compressed by HDV. I've even rescued some recordings that required heavy background noise reduction processing in Soundtrack Pro, and got very acceptable results. The compressed MPEG2 audio was a non-factor.

Flash XDR can record (and playback) using the 422P@HL Profile which is 4:2:2 MPEG2 at full raster (1920 x 1080, 1280x720) at the following max data-rates:

100 Mbps in Long-GOP
160 Mbps in I-Frame Only
What about 50Mbs, as used in the PDW 700?

(Though again, I see you do say "max data rates" - is it therefore continuously selectable from 50-100Mbs in this profile, or just 50 and 100?

Interesting take. I think you're also correct about Canon's original intentions with the H1's HD-SDI output. As inconvenient as it is to not have embedded audio and timecode like the G1 or JVC 250, IMO it's still worth jumping through a few extra hoops with regards to audio in order to be able to exploit the uncompressed video output.

HDV audio: I've never had a problem with it. It of course depends so much more on the quality of the pre-amps, converters etc, onboard the camera than the fact that it's moderatley compressed by HDV. I've even rescued some recordings that required heavy background noise reduction processing in Soundtrack Pro, and got very acceptable results. The compressed MPEG2 audio was a non-factor.

Regarding the missing embedded audio on the XL H1, I strongly suspect that Canon simply did not have enough time to finish the code development to meet the product launch date. HD-SDI embedded audio is actually quite difficult to develop (about 5X the comlexity of SD-SDI embedded audio), so Canon was probably forced to forego this feature to meet delivery schedule.

We are continuing to study the possible options to capture the audio from the XL H1. The analog approach would eliminate the MPEG1 Layer 2 compression, but could introduce other issues (A/D and D/A conversion losses) depending on the exact implementation (ie do we take the unbalanced audio out of the camera or create a complete audio subsytem with microphone inputs). Capturing the audio out of the HDV stream also requires some engineering work to decompress the audio and sync with the HD-SDI stream. We'll have to way off the pros and cons of each approach.

Mike Schell

What about 50Mbs, as used in the PDW 700?

(Though again, I see you do say "max data rates" - is it therefore continuously selectable from 50-100Mbs in this profile, or just 50 and 100?

We will probably support a couple of different rates. While the MPEG2 CODEC can technically be set to a wide range of values, we want to limit the available number of data-rates so these can be properly tested and verified.

I can say that we will have presets for both 50 and 100 Mbps 4:2:2 full-raster Long-GOP. We'll set the I-Frame rates in the near future (160Mbps will be one of the presets).

Mike Schell

It all sounds good! But does bring one further question to my mind - will these be compatible with XDCAM-HD files (at least the 50Mbs version) as far as an NLE is concerned? I believe those are wrapped as MXF files - will your product do the same?

It all sounds good! But does bring one further question to my mind - will these be compatible with XDCAM-HD files (at least the 50Mbs version) as far as an NLE is concerned? I believe those are wrapped as MXF files - will your product do the same?

MXF will be the first format we support. We plan to implement the OP-1A method where video and audio are interleaved into one file, just like XDCAM-HD. So, you should be able to import these files into most NLEs (may require the aid of some re-wrapping software).

Mike Schell

Hi Mike,

Is the timecode needed with the HD-SDI to allow the XDR to remove the telecine on the fly with the XL-H1?

I am planning to do separate system sound and will need to run the timecode out of the camera and slave my audio recorder to it.

Or am I correct in assuming I will have to loop the timecode out from the recorder and back into the Flash XDR?

Hi Mike,

Is the timecode needed with the HD-SDI to allow the XDR to remove the telecine on the fly with the XL-H1?

I am planning to do separate system sound and will need to run the timecode out of the camera and slave my audio recorder to it.

Or am I correct in assuming I will have to loop the timecode out from the recorder and back into the Flash XDR?

Hi Michael-
We don't need the time-code to remove the telecine frames. The time-code input is mainly to allow you to sync the video to an external audio device.

You should be able to loop the timecode out of the audio recorder as you described. However, since the time-code signal (LTC) is not terminated, you could actually run the time-code out from the camera through the Flash XDR box an then over to your audio record deck (daisy-chain fashion).

Mike Schell

Mike, are you planing to do simpler/cheaper device for HDMI devices?

I am thinking about HDMI+FW input only (no HDSDI input at all (so no two boxes), LTC in/out for sync to other camera maybe, this is missing in alot of smaller cameras that can be used in multicamera setup-one master+few slaves) and with MPEG2 high bitrate encoder ( maybe with some restrictions also like only 3 modes HDV, 50 or 100Mbps.)

I need simple device that can record at the same time with HDV tape (like a slave recorder) but at better (or same) quality then HDV. This device must accept batteries for Canon HV20 or Sony V1 or have some adapter to loopthru that power to camera. (sony has HDV HDD recorder that has its own Batt, and often user forget to power it up...)

Cheaper version that has no MPEG encoder and just records as a slave from FW to CF cards (but with LTC in/out option for sync with other camers or external audio) is also an good way of transition to tape less for many users.

Hi Igor-
We'll certainly consider this sort of device in a future model. We've received a number of requests for a solid-state firewire capture device that would enable a tapeless workflow. As Flash prices continue to drop this becomes an attractive option.

Mike

Wow this thing is amazing. Sorry I didn't see it until now. This is the perfect device for Avid Liquid users and Liquid Chrome Xe users.

Liquid has native built in support for every profile, level and bitrate of mpeg2.

I have been working on some conversion tools for Liquid users to convert uncompressed footage into mpeg2 at up to 300 mbits I frame only. The conversion tool works great so far but of course it takes time and you still need the large raid to capture the material first. I have tried to make a capture program to capture directly to this format but it needs a lot of raw power in order for it to work well.

The Flash XDR is finally the perfect solution for Liquid. Now you can shoot video to cards and import that footage directly into Liquid and edit HD that is pretty darn close to uncompressed in terms of quality. The beauty of the Liquid Chrome XE (which is Liquid with an added AJA Xena LHE board) is that everything you edit will be in RT back through a SDI port. The best part is that I would assume you could hook the box up to the SDI output from the Xena card to use it as a RT mpeg2 recorder deck to create encoded masters of your projects from feeding live from the timeline.

Heck forget the flash cards. I think you guys should make a version for editors that is a box that encodes but then sends directly to a computer via some connection such as firewire or USB2. I know a lot of Liquid Chrome users who would love to capture to a mpeg2 I frame only format to edit with instead of having to use uncompressed with Liquid.

You guys should really think of marketing this thing towards Liquid Chrome users. They will love this thing. I will let as many of the other Liquid users know that I can. Keep up the great work. Can't wait to see it when it finally is ready.

This might sound a bit strange, but would it be beneficial for the Flash XDR to record SD via SDI ?

Mike - congratulations. You guys are the true innovators in this area. The combination of this box with Sony's new EX cam looks awesome as it outputs full 1920 x 1080i and P(@24) from the HDSDI port.

I'd reckon a docking solution for that cam will be a winner. I know you've already said you'll look at it but Express card support seems a logical extension of what you are doing.

I still think NLE support will be your biggest hurdle. Avid supports XDCam HD in OP1A MXF but I wonder if they'll ever support all the resolutions your unit is capable of. As Thomas pointed out Liquid is already there, but Liquid is an Avid in name only.

Wow this thing is amazing. Sorry I didn't see it until now. This is the perfect device for Avid Liquid users and Liquid Chrome Xe users.

Heck forget the flash cards. I think you guys should make a version for editors that is a box that encodes but then sends directly to a computer via some connection such as firewire or USB2. I know a lot of Liquid Chrome users who would love to capture to a mpeg2 I frame only format to edit with instead of having to use uncompressed with Liquid.

You guys should really think of marketing this thing towards Liquid Chrome users. They will love this thing. I will let as many of the other Liquid users know that I can. Keep up the great work. Can't wait to see it when it finally is ready.

Hi Thomas-
Sorry for the slow reply. We do have a 1394 port on Flash XDR, so theoretically, we could stream out MPEG2 back to a PC/MAC. We would just need to write the 1394 drivers to accept our stream. I'll add this to our list of possible future enhancments.

Thanks for the feedback and reommendations-
Mike Schell

This might sound a bit strange, but would it be beneficial for the Flash XDR to record SD via SDI ?

Hi Stil-
While this is technically possible, most users want DV support. Flash XDR only has an MPEG2 CODEC.

Mike Schell

Mike - congratulations. You guys are the true innovators in this area. The combination of this box with Sony's new EX cam looks awesome as it outputs full 1920 x 1080i and P(@24) from the HDSDI port.

I still think NLE support will be your biggest hurdle. Avid supports XDCam HD in OP1A MXF but I wonder if they'll ever support all the resolutions your unit is capable of. As Thomas pointed out Liquid is already there, but Liquid is an Avid in name only.

I think all the major NLE vendors are planning to support the new MPEG2 4:2:2 profile, since Sony will introduce a new 4:2:2 camera early next year. Flash XDR has the exact same hardware CODEC as this camera. All we have done is extend the bit-rate and offer an I-Frame only mode. These additions should be easily supported by most software 4:2:2 MPEG2 CODECs. But I agree, complete support for all frame rates and resolutions, may take a bit longer.

Mike Schell

Mike - that makes sense as Avid normally supports Sony's high end gear in a timely fashion.

...since Sony will introduce a new 4:2:2 camera early next year...Mike Schell
Mike, any info as to what Sony camera this is going to replace in the current line up?

Great thread. I only just read it all. Mike, don't go to coffee shops in Amsterdam, your brain is too important to us.

Hey, I just read the updated FAQ you have for the XDR, and I am even more excited about the product now. I really can't wait for this device, it definitely compliments my XL-H1 perfectly. 160MB MPEG2 I-Frame, real-time reverse telecine to 1080p24 from the HD-SDI, audio at 24bit/48khz, integrated mic pre-amps and XLR inputs w/phantom power; all in a 1lb small box that can mount on the back of the camera.

This is truly an excellent product ... finally something that handles the non-embeded audio issue with the HD-SDI of the XL-H1.

Bravo!

I have a question ... if shooting 1080p24, when you mics connected directly to the XDR, does it record the audio to match the frame rate of the video?

Convergent Designs has just released their updated F.A.Q. describing a number of significant updates to the forthcoming Flash XDR design. Interested folks can download this document directly from DV Info Net at http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=106861

Any way to connect one of these to an SI-2K mini?

Any way to connect one of these to an SI-2K mini?

Brian-
As I understand, the SI-2K mini only has GBit Ethernet output, so there's no way to stream to the Flash XDR.

Mike

Brian-
As I understand, the SI-2K mini only has GBit Ethernet output, so there's no way to stream to the Flash XDR.

Mike

That's correct. I don't know if MPEG has a 2K frame size available either...

Keep in mind that the SI-2K Mini needs the computer to run as that's where the brains are...

:-)

That's correct. I don't know if MPEG has a 2K frame size available either...

Keep in mind that the SI-2K Mini needs the computer to run as that's where the brains are...

:-)

Thanks for the clarification Tim.

Mike Schell

Mike, any info as to what Sony camera this is going to replace in the current line up?

I think Mike might be referring to the new 2/3" 4:2:2 XDCAM HD that Sony announced at IBC (PDW-700). Do a search on the net and you'll find the press release.

As we are now in the targeted delivery timeframe, is there any more info on availability?

We're chomping at the bit with our XLH1 and HHG1 ... can you see the drool coming off our chops?

Hey Mike and the CD Team:
I'm sure there are others like me very interested in recording from the uncompressed HD-SDI spigot to an on-camera source via a great codec, but the proof or value of the XDR will be in the quality difference between your 4:2:2/higher bit rates versus the cameras native codec and bitrate.

For instance, Sony's new EX1 records 4:2:0 35Mb VBR to SxS cards at $500 a pop for 8GB, which equates to 20+minutes in this HQ mode. OR I will be able to go out the sdi to Flash XDR and record to the same Sony codec (??) but at 4:2:2 and much higher bit rates (100 or 160Mb) but at the cost of $5000, plus the nominal costs of CF cards.

So, the BIG question for me and others (I presume) is:
is 50Mb, 100Mb, 160 Mb, 4:2:2 going to be that much better that I will want to buy ONE XDR instead of 10 SxS cards (or less and save money).

Quality is everything to me, so if quality is there - I will purchase. But the only way to tell if the quality of the Flash XDR substantially surpasses the cameras native codec is to see some side by side footage. I know you fellows have thought this through, and I'm curious when you think you may have some comparison footage to show us. (Cineform does a nice job of a Quality Analysis on their site that you may wish to peruse...)

Thanks for your time,
Lonnie

Lonnie,

mpeg2 based video has two major complaints against it.

1. 4:2:0 color space which is ok for true progressive but not so good for interlaced.
2. Bitrate starved with a 15 frame GOP. so video that rapidly changes a lot can get macro blocks.

What the Flash XDR does if get rid of both of these problems. There are many different flavors of mpeg2 which is why the format is so nice. The 4:2:2 color alone is going to be worth it for many people. The New high end XDCAMHD from SONY that is coming out will use 4:2:2 at 50 mbits/s. The only way to get this is going to be on $30,000 + cameras. For those who really want quality then 4:2:2 is really the way to go unless you shoot true progressive. If you shoot interlaced then in my opinion 4:2:2 is a must for high quality.

With the Flash XDR you get to either record in a higher bitrate for normal mpeg2 material or record in a I frame only format. I frame only means there is no 15 frame length GOP. All the video is encoded one frame at a time so complex motion will never have any macro blocks. This right here is a major deal for those who want high quality.

The max bitrate you can ever have for 15 frame GOP 4:2:0 mpeg2 is 80 mbits/s. At this bitrate we are talking almost perfect video when compared to raw uncompressed. The max for I frame only at 4:2:2 is 300 mbits/s which is even closer to raw uncompressed. The 160 mbits/s on the Flash XDR is lightyears beyond DVCPROHD or even HDCAM compression. Any range between 160 mbits and 300 mbits just gets rid of a tiny bit of mosquito noise for very complex scenes. I have encoded a lot of raw material using constant quality settings and it hardly ever goes beyond 160 mbits/s.

The EX1 at 35mbits/s still uses 4:2:0 and while 35 mbits/s is much better then HDV it can still run into problems. If you shoot a lot of simple scenes then you may find the 35 mbits/s works perfectly for you. If you ever shoot any stage productions with strobe lights and flares and stuff like that then you will insist on using either a much higher bitrate to deal with this or use a I frame only mode.

The beauty of the Flash XDR is that it gives you options. You are not locked into one form of mpeg2 recording but now have a choice based on the environment you are shooting in.

To be honest I could see a lot of people using this thing for 50 mbits/s 4:2:2 recording. It still gives decent record lengths but is a pretty good level of quality. I think a lot of people will find that 15 frame GOP at 80 or 100 mbits/s with 4:2:2 color is going to be pretty darn perfect even for complex scenes. This is a bitrate used by DVCPROHD but without the resolution reductions and a level of quality that could look like what DVCPROHD looked if it used 200 or 300 Mbits/s.

So in terms of quality this $5000.00 devices brings your current camera up to a recording format that is on par with much more expensive HD cameras. The camera itself may not be as good but the recording format will be. I have rendered a 160 mbit/s video and recorded it to HDCAM tape and the 160 mbit file blew away the HDCAM tape version when I recaptured it. So even using the Flash XDR on a HDCAM camera would be better then recording to HDCAM tape. HDCAM uses 1440x1080 with 3:1:1 color at 144 mbits/s. With the XDR you will get 1920x1080 4:2:2 color with a much better use of bitrates and quality.

With all of that great information said, I still think Lonnie has a point.

All of us who are involved in technology have come to learn to only trust what actually comes into reality.

Not to say the XDR is in any type of jeapordy, but we are in the stated "delivery" timeframe and the convergent designs website has hardly changed from last year.

At $5,000, I as well will need to see proof that the money will yield a noticeable difference in the final product.

Another factor for me is availability.

To me, the best time to buy this device is at the same time one buys a camera. That way one can skip buying thousands of dollars worth of camera memory.

The XDR would be permanently mounted to the camera and the CF cards would be the only memory used.

So for this to work, one would need to be confident about the XDR purchase decision before the camera purchase, meaning web examples are the only way to judge.

I am excited to see what this unit paired with an EX-1 can produce.

Hopefully we can get some info soon!

Tom - thank you very much for your details. I have been educated and now stand armed with more questions to go research (the more you know the more you don't know kind of thing...) I really appreciate the time!

Tim - we are in utter agreement. Regardless of how the white papers or specs will tell me of one's quality superiority over the other... even Adam Wilt uses comments like, "looks better than it has any right to..."

And that's what I'm asking for - the "looks" part of the equation. ConvergentDesign will have plenty of big boys buying their gear. But I'd imagine that there is enough of a market share of customers like me where 5k is a substantial investment. BUT, they will gladly get my money if there is visual evidence that hey, this 5k buys me so much better quality plus now knowing what Tom said - It even will make big boys cameras look better too - then this purchase would also be a future proof investment which I'm always a fan of.

Again, thanks to you both and I look forward to hearing from the CD Team.
Lonnie

So in terms of quality this $5000.00 devices brings your current camera up to a recording format that is on par with much more expensive HD cameras. The camera itself may not be as good but the recording format will be. I have rendered a 160 mbit/s video and recorded it to HDCAM tape and the 160 mbit file blew away the HDCAM tape version when I recaptured it. So even using the Flash XDR on a HDCAM camera would be better then recording to HDCAM tape. HDCAM uses 1440x1080 with 3:1:1 color at 144 mbits/s. With the XDR you will get 1920x1080 4:2:2 color with a much better use of bitrates and quality.

Thomas-
Thanks for the very detailed explanation, I don't think we could have explained the benefits of Flash XDR better!

First, some quick updates on our development. We have the prototype boards on the bench with HD-SDI I/O working as well as HD encode through the Sony MPEG2 CODEC Module. We expect to stream out the 1394 port next week, followed shortly by reading and writing the stream to the Compact Flash cards (in MXF format). Given that we are only into the third week of actual hardware debug, we are making remarkable progress.

Next week, we will have an extensive update with new images of the box, which is now in black! We have a top notch mechanical engineer designing the box to ensure a rock-solid enclosure. Since Flash XDR will be used in Fighter Jets and NASCAR events, ruggedness, small size and weight are top priorities.

We are working double-time to complete the enclosure and the final PCB design. An NAB introduction still looks likely.

The creation of comparison video clips (at various bit-rates), remains a top priority. As soon as we can stream MPGE2 data out the 1394 port or write into a CF card, we plan to capture video at 25, 50 and 100 Mbps (Long-GOP) and 100 / 160 Mbps (I-Frame). We will be using a Canon XL-H1 as our source. We will post these clips on our website for download.

We certainly agree with Thomas, that most user will find the 50 Mbps 4:2:2 Full-Raster format to be more than adequate for many applications. This is the recording format of the $35K PDW700! We also agree that the 100Mbps Long-GOP rate is roughly equivalent to 300 Mbps DVCProHD, due the added efficiencies of the temporal and spacial compression found in Long-GOP. (More info coming in a white paper on this subject).

Flash XDR uses the same MPEG2 CODEC as the PDW700 (we buy the CODEC module directly from Sony). But because our recording media (CF cards) can accept much higher data-rates, we can re-program the module for the higher bit-rates. We understand that this is the 6th generation MPEG2 encoder/decoder from Sony. Due to advances in semiconductor technology and better compression algorithms, bit-rates have dropped approximately 50% in the last 10 years for the equivalent video quality. We are amazed at the size and power consumption of the Sony module, it is unquestionable the best of breed in MPEG2 encoder/decoders.

But, some applications demand even higher quality, so sometime this Fall, we will introduce a much much higher bit-rate 10-bit 4:2:2 recording option (not based on MPEG2). It will be available as an optional software upgrade. More info to follow.

On the recording media front, we have some very exciting news. High-speed (40/45 MByte/sec) CF cards will soon be available from Delkin (32 GB) and Pretec (24GB). Using four CF cards you will get 5 hours of recording time at 50 Mbps or 90 minutes at 160 Mbps. These cards are expected to be priced in the $400 to $500 range, initially. But prices should continue to drop, as they have over the last 3-4 years.

If you do not receive our e-mail updates, please register on our home page or send an e-mail to sales@convergent.com

Mike Schell and the Convergent Design Team

Thanks for your update Mike!

If I could request, (which I am sure you have already thought about) that some the video samples be geared around showing dynamic range?

Like a properly exposed scene with a hot area like a lamp or outdoor light streaming in repeated with different bit rates so we can see how much the higher bit rates help or do not help with retaining image integrity.

To me, this is the area I hope the XDR will be able to transform mid-priced cameras to higher level devices.

Looking forward to the footage!

Thanks Mike - look forward to the footage and future updates from
you and the CD Team - it all sounds very promising!

Lonnie

But, some applications demand even higher quality, so sometime this Fall, we will introduce a much much higher bit-rate 10-bit 4:2:2 recording option (not based on MPEG2). It will be available as an optional software upgrade.

Mike, this is the most exiting news. You're proving the Flash XDR will have a firmware upgrade path to newer, even better codecs! Wonderful news.

.........sometime this Fall, we will introduce a much much higher bit-rate 10-bit 4:2:2 recording option (not based on MPEG2). It will be available as an optional software upgrade. More info to follow.
I second Christophers comments above, and also think Thomas did an excellent pull together a few posts back. But I did feel Thomas's post was missing one important issue - any comment on bitdepths, and if there was anything lacking in the XDR it was the fact it was still only making an 8 bit recording. Mike's comment above obviously changes all that, and I don't think it's significance can be understated - some may feel that 10 bit v 8 bit is more significant than 4:2:2 v 4:2:0, certainly in progressive mode.
On the recording media front, we have some very exciting news. High-speed (40/45 MByte/sec) CF cards will soon be available from Delkin (32 GB) and Pretec (24GB). ......... These cards are expected to be priced in the $400 to $500 range, initially.
The speed of advance of solid state memory technology is remarkable. That's the sort of price/GB I'd expect to have been paying for 20MBs CF quite recently.

Editing 10 bit 4:2:2 HD video sounds great, but a computer as well as software upgrade would need to take place.

Do desktop NLEs edit 10 bit footage?

Do desktop NLEs edit 10 bit footage?
FCP ProRes?

Yes, as David pointed out, NLEs edit 10bit - Prores is a 10bit codec, and FCP has been able to do 10bit uncompresed for a while too.

Mike, are you contemplating using the DNxHD codec? I'd hate to hype if it isn't your plan, but I can see that being implemeneted - great codec, planned to be HD codec standard, free(?). I have no idea what hardware would be needed, but I think DNxHD is a codec that can't really be disputed! I use Prores (DNxHD cousin as far as I'm concered), and no complaints.

Another sample footage request/suggestions to show off the XDR improvements:

- Shot of leaves blowing it the wind

- Water in a river or sunlight reflection on a moving water surface

- CU of fire

Long GOP just hates these type scenes

(and the 10 bit software upgrade coming down the pike is awesome! Makes our Que Investment even more valued - kicking around a second one)

Hey 10bit is great but does your camera pump out 10 bits from HD-SDI? The only sub $10,000.00 camera that does is the SONY EX1.

Also 10 bit is great but pros have been dealing with 8 bit DVCPROHD and HDCAM footage tape material for years. I do find 10 bit to be better but it isn't as earth shattering better as some would think it is.

Take the SONY PDW700 for example. This still shoots in a 8 bit format and it is not cheap and will be used on some pretty high budget projects. The camera or format is nothing to laugh at either. Even at 8 bit it will create material that will blow people away. There is nothing wrong with 8 bit material. If you have a 8 bit camera then 10 bit recording is going to do nothing for you at all.

The XDR allows you to shoot material that compression wise is equal or better to 8 bit material from a $35,000.00 camera.

If a $100,000.00 Cinealta F900 shoots 8 bit to tape is 8 bit really all that bad? I'm sure none of you would complain if somebody gave you a F900 to shoot 8 bit tapes with.


Tim,

What does the recording format have to do with dymanic range? A recording tool just dumps what the camera sees into a format we can use. mpeg2 or pretty much any other codec try to mirror what comes in as best they can. If your camera itself doesn't handle dynamic range very well then the XDR cannot make your camera better. If your camera has great dynamic range then the XDR should record it as that.



If you guys want to see how good higher bitrate mpeg2 is then take some SD footage you have that has a hard time compressing on a DVD and encode it at 15 mbits/s main level/main profile with your encoding software. You will see those areas that break up at 8 mbits are now rock solid. 15mbit/s SD mpeg2 footage is like 80 mbit/s HD mpeg2 material.

HDV is like a DVD at 6.25 Mbits/s.
XDCAM HD is like a DVD at 8.75 Mbits/s.
XDCAM HD EX1 is like a DVD at 6.55 Mbits/s. (due to higher rez then normal XDCAM HD)

Encode a complex SD scene at 6.55 mbits/s and then encode that same scene at 15mbits/s and compare them. Simple segemtns should look very close but once the video gets complex the higher bitrate will shine.

If you guys want to see how good higher bitrate mpeg2 is then take some SD footage you have that has a hard time compressing on a DVD and encode it at 15 mbits/s main level/main profile with your encoding software. You will see those areas that break up at 8 mbits are now rock solid. 15mbit/s SD mpeg2 footage is like 80 mbit/s HD mpeg2 material.

Thomas - you lost me.

You're points are terrific and I got the education except how:
15mbit/s of SD mpeg2 = 80mbit/s HD mpeg2

Is HDmpeg2 almost 6x worse than SDmpeg2?

Also 10 bit is great but pros have been dealing with 8 bit DVCPROHD and HDCAM footage tape material for years. I do find 10 bit to be better but it isn't as earth shattering better as some would think it is.

If a $100,000.00 Cinealta F900 shoots 8 bit to tape is 8 bit really all that bad?
It depends what you're doing with the footage. 8 bit certainly is not "bad", and for straight viewing I doubt you'd see much difference between 8 and 10 bit. But it's when the footage comes to be graded that 10 bit comes into it's own, and allows adjustments to be done that would cause contouring etc in an 8 bit system.

When used in conjunction with the EX, a device like the XDR theoretically can allow three areas for improvement: lower compression (including I-frame only), better colour space, and better bitdepth. Colour space improvements will be of most benefit for keying etc, bitdepth for grading.

Until Mikes announcement above ("sometime this Fall, we will introduce a much much higher bit-rate 10-bit 4:2:2 recording option") it looked as if the XDR would offer the first two out of those three options over a raw EX1. That wasn't "bad" by any means, but 3 out of 3 is better still.

Hey 10bit is great but does your camera pump out 10 bits from HD-SDI? The only sub $10,000.00 camera that does is the SONY EX1.

Also 10 bit is great but pros have been dealing with 8 bit DVCPROHD and HDCAM footage tape material for years. I do find 10 bit to be better but it isn't as earth shattering better as some would think it is.

Take the SONY PDW700 for example. This still shoots in a 8 bit format and it is not cheap and will be used on some pretty high budget projects. The camera or format is nothing to laugh at either. Even at 8 bit it will create material that will blow people away. There is nothing wrong with 8 bit material. If you have a 8 bit camera then 10 bit recording is going to do nothing for you at all.

The XDR allows you to shoot material that compression wise is equal or better to 8 bit material from a $35,000.00 camera.

If a $100,000.00 Cinealta F900 shoots 8 bit to tape is 8 bit really all that bad? I'm sure none of you would complain if somebody gave you a F900 to shoot 8 bit tapes with.



Hi Thomas-
Thanks again for the detailed explanation! Just as an additional clarification, all MPEG2 video is by definition, only 8-bit. So the recording mechanism in HDV, XDCAM and HDCAM is only 8-bit. However, for a mere $90K, you can use the HDCAM SR deck to get 10-bit recording.

I think most users will find that 50 or 100 Mbps 4:2:2 Long-GOP will provide outstanding video quality. At 100 Mbps we're talking 4X the bit-rate of HDV and 3X that of the EX1. A 3X to 4X increase in bit-rate, combined with 4:2:2 color space and full-raster (1920x1080) will make a dramatic reduction in motion artifacts and mosquito-noise. Due to the added advantages of spacial and temporal compression, I expect we will find that 100 Mbps Long-GOP = 300 Mbps I-Frame. XDR offers both Long-GOP and I-Frame modes, but Long-GOP will likely outperform I-Frame in most applications.

Sony has a very interesting white paper on MPEG2 technology with a comparison to AVC Intra at: http://bssc.sel.sony.com/BroadcastandBusiness/markets/10014/xdcam_overview.shtml
go to support and Tech info and download the CODEC technology paper.

We agree that some applications demand ultimate quality, so we are working on a very high bit-rate 4:2:2 10-bit capture. I hope to have details this week after some more tests.

That said, I think most users will be more than satisfied with the 50 / 100 Mbps 8-bit 4:2:2 1920x1080i/p results. Remember, we're using the same Sony CODEC found in the $35K PDW700, with the option to dial up the bit-rate.

Mike, I have a small question:

Since it will be quite hard to edit those capture codecs natively (FCP, which is the system I use, doesn't support nativelly any of the high bitrate codecs, does it?) will there be any sort of conversion software available? I do not mind long conversion times, as long as the material is in the best quality possible... Do specially include a software that can convert the Long GOP and High Bitrate files to Prores in a "lossless" manner! I believe Avid Users will want an Avid codec converter...

Thomas - you lost me.

You're points are terrific and I got the education except how:
15mbit/s of SD mpeg2 = 80mbit/s HD mpeg2

Is HDmpeg2 almost 6x worse than SDmpeg2?

I am talking about the amount of compression for that type of video. SD resolution material needs less bits because there is less information there. A SD resolution video at 15 mbits/s is about equal to HD resolution material at 80 mbits/s. Since HD can have as much as 6x the amount of pixels it needs around that many more bits to have an equal level of compression.

If you want to see "about" what HD material would look like at 80mbits/s you can see what SD material looks like at 15 mbits/s. This will give you a visual on how good the compression is.

Hey 10bit is great but does your camera pump out 10 bits from HD-SDI? The only sub $10,000.00 camera that does is the SONY EX1.

Also 10 bit is great but pros have been dealing with 8 bit DVCPROHD and HDCAM footage tape material for years. I do find 10 bit to be better but it isn't as earth shattering better as some would think it is.

10-bit could make or break a purchase of the Flash XDR for a company intending to use this in high-end commercial production. Glad you're planning this kind of depth for your product, Mike!

And besides, who say we have to own a 10-bit camera? It'd make a lot of sense to own the XDR and if need be, when the time comes, rent that higher end so you can do proper 10-bit.

And since 10-bit will no doubt become standard across the board for video electronics over the next 5-10 years, it'd be unwise to limit a device to 8-bit. I do agree though - 10-bit, despite being at 1024 vs the 256 (and yes, these numbers are less in the real world) isn't as ground-breaking as it sounds, but I'd take it if I could get it, no doubt about that.

You're giving your product expandability Mike! It's potentially almost too good - a product that lasts forever limits your future sales ;)

Kidding - I own your HDMI to HD-SDI convertor (nanoConnect) - great device. Of course, it's 8-bit HDMI, so if a 10-bit HDMI camera comes along, I'll have to upgrade my nanoConnect... ;)