Wayne,
I wasn't really getting anywhere with this in the other thread, so I thought I'd post it here to see if suggestions could be made. I want to thank you for being a patient guy, concerned about helping a beginner. It is a testiment to you. Thanks. Anyway, here is the contents of my previous post...

Hey guys. I'm very elementary at this and I realize you guys aren't! So , if you have a chance, please let me know if this is good and proper. I'm ready to try this and was wondering if there is anything I'm missing here. Here are the links for the goods...

Camera...

http://www.edmundoptics.com/onlinecatalog/displayproduct.cfm?productID=2490&search=1

Lens-to-body adapter for Canon EF lenses...

http://www.birger.com/html/ef232_home.htm

Hard drive for CameraLink connection...

http://www.leutron.com/english/product/lvmpc_d.htm

Now what am I missing? Something to view it with! Or, should I just capture to a laptop?

What's missing here to make this work?

What we need is a way, if I'm speculating correctly to import or capture this footage into a NLE. I have Final Cut, but this seems to be PC based technology. Anybody have suggestions? Best- Frank

Unfortunately not many of them come here, so hopefully some of them will try and reply to you tommorrow.

Reading all the threads help.

At the moment, the acquistion and controll programs are the big let down to doing real film production, but as I am a novice and haven't used that system I can't comment too well. But it has been discussed in the thread. There is also the problem that the present sodftware solutiuons are for Obins camera, they have yet to be verify for other cameras, or for non SI cameras, or made for Gigabit Ethernet, firewire and usb. It is still early stages yet, but if you are an experimenter than go ahead. If I find out that a simple interface profgram could pass commands/command line arguements to the existing software I will be most dissapionted myself.


Thanks

Wayne.

Frank,
I don't think this camera you are posting would be a good candidate (I maybe wrong).

I didn't see the rest of the links, but if you go the SLR way, please try to find an adapter thas has an optical path to shrink the projected image size to fit the sensor's one.
If you can't find one and you can't make yourself one, just buy a normal C-mount lens for that sensor size.

About hard drives, The Western Digital Raptor SATA disks have a transfer speed of 72 MB per second, so you probably won't need a RAID o setup.

I'd suggest you to wait and see if Sumix makes an update of the camera Ben's using now.

Juan, I think the sensor size is 2/3 cmos. That has to be close if not exact to what I have in my Canon 10D. Anyone know of software that could get this footage in to FCP for NLE. :)

I agree with Juan about the Sumix camera, even SI will have newer cameras to compare with it soon.

About FCP, at least one of the guys has a FCP person involved to evntually get it there, but read through the 10-bit thread, there has been much discussion on workflow, NLE, and FCP there (some maybe in the other threads aswell, I forget much of it).

Thanks

Wayne.

I agree with Juan about the Sumix 2/3" Altsens camera, even SI will have newer cameras to compare with it soon.

About FCP, at least one of the guys has a FCP person involved to evntually get it there, but read through the 10-bit thread, there has been much discussion on workflow, NLE, and FCP there (some maybe in the other threads aswell, I forget much of it).

Thanks

Wayne.

So basically, when a 2/3 or inch sensor cmos camera comes out with firwire, we eliminate the need for a framegrabber all together. What I'm wondering is the adjustments on the camera, such as white balance or gain, will be handled via the software or the hradware. Check this out...http://www.adept.net.au/



They seem to have everything.

Take a look at the 10bit thread, there is some stuff there about a alledged pricing of under $2000 for the JVC Altsens Box.

About the colour adjustment, it depends on how it is made. Ben apparently has no on camera control, Obin apparently does.

Thanks

Wayne.

So Wayne, I've been out of the loop for a bit, just kind of watching the various threads and not bringing in much input do to that i'm not that tecnically inclined. At one point I was going to bring in my girlfriend's father (an electrical engineer) to see f he had any interest in helping us create what we want, but after hearing Summix and SI were so boasting about how their cameras were weeks away, then I put that on hold. And chose to get other stuff done with my craft creatively and then help you guys when I could.

So what's the status? did any of those guys ever come out with a camera that's 10 bit or 12 bit 1080p with 4:2:2 color at up to 60 fps? One with a global shutter instead of a rolling one? One at 66 or 72 Mhz? What's the scoop.

Last I heard, there were several factions starting to be formed, some people going for the 720p cameras instead, and some going all pc instead of mac and some people are supposed to be writing stuff for and etc etc. etc.

Can you give me the quick up to date as to where we all stand now. I assume that with all this going on, that at least one company will soon put out a camera much described like the one above for little $$$. Which is the most important fact to know.

So fill me in when you have time please? .....

Thanks,

Laurence

Ohh the PIB factions are going strong, just leave them to it, and see what happens ;)

I've been wondering what happened to you, I was going to email.

The status is that the Altasens is delayed, SI are very close to a 1/2 inch 3?? Mpixel camera in the comming weeks. So in the next month or so we expect to see the SI camera, and after that soon the firewireB Sumix ALtasens cameras (the new guy, Ben, has posted something in Obins thread a week or so ago). There will be firewire and faster, one chip and three chip Sumix cameras planned, but delivery is another thing.

At the moment I can't remember, so reading all the threads is best.

We have Bayer people (one with his own software), people who want comrpession, and people that want to do FPGA. They should all remember to examine their code to see if replacing any of the inner routines (particularly Wndows/C routines) with machine code would greatly speed up processing. We are talking small parts with great potentiual efficiency gains.

Now for what everybody else doesn't know. I have a number of different confidential contacts about things, so I can't really say anything. But seperate camera, compression and mainboards improvements etc should be expected this year.

Next, Fovceon is not on the horizon.

In new interfaces SI is goping the Giga bit Ethernet path, and mainboards with dual Giga ethernet, and with Firewire b ports, are starting to turn up in the industry. Steve posted pictures of dual slope 12-bit shoots recently in the other thread, and Sumix is upgrading it's fillfactory sensor software to cram in more bits and use gamma curves (via lookup table).

Obin has found fault exposure smearing with his chip. He has improved his control of the camera. Rob.S has bought a camera. Steve N has offered to upgrade them to the new 3Mp cameras The sumix USB FIllfactory chip offers less sensitivity and colour. Ben, with the camera, has improved control of it. Somebody looked at a test chart of the 2.3Mp SI they thought it had between 4-5 stop range, Obin dissagreed. I think that if they adjust it a bit more it could be more than that, though Oblin's images don't appear to be too much more than that.

Cameras maybe soon, but there is nothing inbetween them, so what were you going to ask your Girlfreinds father help with?

Thanks

Wayne.

I was gonna have him help me put together a camera for us, but I have delayed with the news that what we will basically be creating is right around the corner for about 3 k.

Man, 4-5 stops just isn't enough. Need more for film look. I imagine the new SI and Summix cameras will top that greatly.

Interesting thread about the dvx-100 mod. Looks like he's getting as many as 10 stops out of it and just over 720 lines. Maybe he could do a re-wire of the XL-2 and get something really great.

But I'm interested in the real deal. Personally, I was a bit surprised to see everyone slapping money down on these current cameras. Not good enough yet, and stuff is right around the corner. I've been reading all along, but got a bit tired of everyone kind of taking their own directions (a bit impatient I think). Plus, there's not a lot I can contribute at this point, unless someone assigns me some homework.

So what did you mean by the stuff you can reveal source wise? Cameras? Computers? That Firewire B sounds pretty good being that I just bought a brand new Mac G5 with FCP HD.

So,

How's things?

Things are a bit better, healthwise things are picking up.

10 stops, yes, if you don't rely on the auto controls you can get much more out of the Pana.

I keep asking questions about the altasens and how to read the specs of sensors, but get no answers. So I can't really tell you how much better they get, but I don't expect any better then CCD cameras anyway.

Gigabyte sent me stuff on their new range of MB with firewire B. Not usefull for us b8ut a good indicator of where the market is headed. There will be dual Gigabit E ITX like boards comming to.

The distractions are good and bad We need to support the Rob's to see real software action that jell's everything together, otherwise we can split into numerouse camps without the software to make it work properly. Eventually the softweare can support more cameras and interfaces, but thats eventually. We can't expect everything now, because it simply is not there yet.

I'm not up to assigning some homework at thge moment either, but recently I asked for voluteers to research stuff in Obin's thread, but nobody came forward. When it comes time to do it now, they will need to do it anyway, but because there won't be time they probably won't be able to do it good enough to get the best equipment. That's the problem with now people, they need future people to do the ground work for them to jump into. But if they didn't do something 90% of the people would leave through lack of interest.

Thanks

Wayne.

My position (having "purchased" a camera) is that I want to let Sumix (and whoever else is interested) know what my needs are before they come out with the next-generation camera. Otherwise, the cameras "around the corner" won't do you much good, because the software will be insufficient, the interface won't be suited to what we're doing, whatever.

For example, Steve at SI has made it clear that the Altasens model they have coming out will be CameraLink-only at first (not Gigabit Ethernet, which will come later). So good luck with that on your new G5. ;)

My feeling is that if you're going to sit back and wait for the good stuff just around the corner, your wait will be never ending, because there's always better stuff around the corner.

Also, unlike consumer camera manufacturers, the companies we're dealing with (SI, Sumix) seem fine with letting us "trade up" for a price as new models come out. So if you buy now, you won't necessarily have to buy a whole new camera when the next-gen comes out...

- ben

Ya, I wasn't trying to bust on anyone in particular. But let's face it's not the easiest to get agreeance throughout. What I mean by not buying now doesn't neccessarily mean I'm waiting for something that will go directly into the G5. As long as the files are easily transferable. If they're not, well, there's not much I can do about it other than keep reiderating I in particular have a Mac and need something for Mac. I'm willing to get a mini-PC for capture and all that as long as I know it's gonna work and work right. I don't want to spend forever trying to get my camera I bought now to actually work the way I want it to. I'm not a tech-head like a lot of these guys. My stuff is gonna have to be plug and play, or I can't afford it. The last movie I shot took forever (over 4 years to complete through editing) due to the lack of user friendly equipment. Hell, if I'm gonna do that again, I might as well just sit back and write scripts for 3 years until a much more user friendly camera/capture interface comes out and then shoot/edit my next feature in the 4th year. If you can afford/ are able to get the current stuff to work well, then go for it. Unfortunately, I can't. Man, that's why I bought a Mac. I've only had it for 1 month and already realize why PCs have been labeled as standing for "Piece of Crap."

Well I'm glad to hear it, people talked to them before and they showed virtually no interest in doing better software then, that is why the Rob's are doing it.

Don't let it put you off buying new cameras though, the software canbe added latter at anytime, until then you are an experimenter though, as long as it is coming in some reasonable time. I do think, businesswise, it was odd that the capture card/software businesses did not want to do this themselves, it would be far easier and cheaper for their capture realtime experienced programmers to quickly add an interface for us, we have enough people here to test/prototype the interface for them. It's been up to us to show the way in this fledgeling relationship, until there is enough people for them to take notice of.

Sensible people wait for sufficient stuff around the corner, get it and go on, because that is all they need, not all these 1/2inch 720p wonders with moderate performance. Harsh, but true, but why complian that is all we have at the moment. The present cameras are just not enough, if we hacked a JVC GRDV3000 (that would be difficult), we could probably get within coo-ee, of them. If the Altasens are as good as they say they are, for many they will be more than sufficent. Until then most of us might aswell hangoff to see what is coming around the corner before the altasens release, it is the only sensible thing toi do, if you are going to get an Altasens straight off the bat. Still if Rob's software is only a few months, and your not an experimenter, it is probably better holding off until then.

Laurence Maher wrote:
As long as the files are easily transferable. If they're not, well, there's not much I can do about it other than keep reiderating I in particular have a Mac and need something for Mac.As far as I am concerned, it's critical to support the Mac, since FCP is one of the most affordable NLE's that supports 10-bit depth. I'm planning to add QuickTime output as soon as possible for this reason.

The ObscuraConvert (http://www.obscuracam.com/wiki/static/Convert.html) app will be released under the GPL (as free/open-source) so that anyone can add support for whatever file formats they like. It will also be cross-platform.

Bless you Rob!!!!!!

That's really great news. People like you are why there's still hope for guys like me.

Laurence Maher wrote:
That's really great news. People like you are why there's still hope for guys like me.Well, you're welcome sir!

Keep in mind that while "Convert" will be GPL'd, I will be keeping the "Capture" app (the camera's "firmware") closed-source for now. I've put a lot of effort into it and hope to sell it (for a reasonable price, of course) to people who are building cameras.

Gotchya,

Sounds good!

For example, Steve at SI has made it clear that the Altasens model they have coming out will be CameraLink-only at first (not Gigabit Ethernet, which will come later). So good luck with that on your new G5. ;)

EPIX offers a CameraLink to Gigabit Ethernet adaptor. Has anyone looked at this? As far as I can tell (particularly for Mac owners) this would probably be a cheaper way to go than buying a FrameGrabber card.

Joshua Starnes wrote:
...the Altasens model they have coming out will be CameraLink-only at first (not Gigabit Ethernet, which will come later). So good luck with that on your new G5. ;)I believe that Joshua is planning to build a Windows PC just for the camera itself, and then transfer the files to the Mac, running the Convert app (which will hopefully be cross-platform by that time).

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : OK, I have found out more about the wireless version of USB, which maybe the USB3 I saw in the article at the register (or the enquirer) sometime ago.

It is meant to go beyond 400Mb/s (b for bit).

There is some movement in the wideband comms sector, but unfortunately I closed the other article and haven't got a link here.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1530522,00.asp
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1530755,00.asp
http://www.uwbforum.org/membership/membership.asp

Ahh here we are, and even firewire wireless demonstration (after how many years??)

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1528297,00.asp

Periphials by years end.
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1634014,00.asp

Other highspeed (540Mbs IEEE 802.11n) wireless stuff:
http://www.convergedigest.com/WiFi/wlanarticle.asp?ID=11995

Well, looks like you can wireless a few USB/Firewire cameras before we know it. -->>>




<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : Just did another swing pass the tape issue, no luck yet expensive for the sort of rates we want. But found this reference for 150 Terabytes of video for Lord of the Rings (how much of the budget did they blow on that??, and was that at only 2Mp or 8??)). That is why I wanted to look at tape so you could backup a couple of Terabyte of storage cheaply (compared to buying X number of drives) (The articles still say that tape is half the cost per mb (and 30 year shelf life), but I think that is compared to expensive server disk setuips rather tthan cheaper consumer drives).

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1012597,00.asp -->>>

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : I forgot to mention, if anybody has cameras they can post I will be discussing it on the Technical thread.
-->>>

Wow, that wireless stuff would be wonderful!!! Hope it all gets up and running soon.

Thanks Laurence, it starts arriving at the end of the year, but when it will be supported for us is another thing (very short range I think as well).

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Scott : I believe that Joshua is planning to build a Windows PC just for the camera itself, and then transfer the files to the Mac, running the Convert app (which will hopefully be cross-platform by that time). -->>>

That was my plan, yep.

Two updates:

Smallest ITX PSU, and very thin version, 3Ghz P4 support, and 95% efficency. There is a thin stick like model too.

http://www.digit-life.com/news.html?107750

Mini-box.com, a subsidiary of Ituner Networks, announced the "thinnest" Mini-ITX PSU, PW-120. According to the press release, without fans, the main source of noise, this PSU can be used in both home multimedia and medicine systems.

... 61x57x30mm and 155x23x30mm...12V DC-DC converter provides 200 W power

Toms hardware tests new 1394b drivers (the old Windows Service 2 drivers run at around 100Mb/s) and gives real world performance and discussion against Gigabit Ethernet. (but, it talks about bus clashes, in our application there is only the camera and the computer on the network so the capture should be able to be programmed to aviode all these clashes.)

http://www.tomshardware.com/howto/20040823/firewire-06.html

Rob,

On other sites, simular to this, I have seen urls automatically converted into embedded links when posted, without having to use . They seem to just look for www or http (which is most of them). Could we please have something like that?

Thanks

Wayne.

Some interesting news on the gigabit side. I just came back from a seminar on our gigabit interface. Some good stuff:

1 - 800Mb/sec continuous on a dedicated wire is definite. Some customers are above 900Mb/sec. CPU utilization is almost zero.

2- Using a crappy Bayer algorithm and the SI-3300, 1920x1080, 12 bit, 24fps was transmitted, received and *displayed* in real time. 20-30% CPU utilization. If we implement the every other frame dropping at the camera level, this might be nice for the Altasens too. It would seem this leaves headroom for some basic compression.

3 - The dedicated driver is required for these speeds but only works with Intel Pro1000 interfaces. There is a filter driver that runs on top of a generic network card driver that will do 600-800Mb/sec continuous with somewhat more CPU overhead. With this driver you can have other stuff on the network (not a dedicated port) as long as it is quiet during video.

4 - Data packing is done in hardware - two pixels of 12 bit data take 3 bytes, not 4.

This is mostly interesting because I think it is easier to find an embedded motherboard with GigE than to try to package a motherboard with a PCI frame grabber.

right!!!
Thanks for the news.

Thanks Steve

I've got a question. Increasing MHZ, will that mean that integration time will be reduced despite the FPS used (leading to lots of lighting)?

The rolling shutter shutter problem. I think the problem is that it is in the wrong direction compared to the film shutter (causing the slant on horizontal movement). If we rotated a 4:3 camera 90 degrees and used the right anamaorphic convertor lense to covert to either 16:9 or 2.35:1, we would get a shutter effect simular to film and more freindly to horizontal movement.

I know the screen size in pixels is no longer right, and there is a capture speed hit because all horizontal lines (now vertical) have to be entirely read, but good as a specialist solution.

Thanks

Wayne.

I forgot to ask, for the 20-30% cpu utilisation, what processor and MB were they using?

I'm impressed by the figures you gave, they are everything I hoped for.

Thanks

Wayne.

GigE CPU utilization:
2.8GHz P4 with HT. You don't need too much memory (512MB??)

Thanks, my question on increasing SI-3300 Mhz, is it correct?

Wayne,
The SI-3300 has been tested to about 60MHz (1920x1080 @24fps). It *might* go to 75MHz (30fps) max. Keep in mind that you can get more color smear as you increase the clock rate beyond what the analog components can handle (shift register, amps, gain stage, A/D).

You could rotate the camera. The frame rates aren't quite symetrical, but you can still do a window. For example on the 3300, 1280x720 can run at 49fps but 720x1280 runs at 42fps (60MHz).

Steve, when will you have a product that is Gigabit? like the 3300?

Gigabit ethernet:
We already have two box solutions for the SI-1280F, SI-3170, SI-1300, SI-3300 (beta). The group has a 1920HD but hasn't started with it yet. A single box solutin is about 12 weeks away.

Thats good, look forward to hearing about it then.

I was asking about where ever it was right to say that increasing Mhz reduces integration time, whatever fps is used. But it doesn't matter any longer, thanks for your help anyway.

For everybody that wants to know more about sensor specs I have discovered this page:

http://www.ccd.com/ccdu.html

Silicon Imaging also has some basic tutorial pages on their site.

GPU programming.

In case anybody is still interested in learning more about GPU programming I found this article at gamasutra:

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20040716/mccool_pfv.htm

The reference to the toolkit are:1. Sh Web Site, http://libsh.org
2. Michael McCool and Stefanus Du Toit, Metaprogramming GPUs with Sh, AK Peters, 2004, http://www.akpeters.com

Steve,

I'm still trying to figure out this rolling shutter with the higher-clocked Mhz issue.

If I'm understanding it correctly, you can run the chip at a higher Mhz, (like its max) to reduce rolling shutter artifacts, but use as long an integration time as you want for variable frame-rates and actual shutter speeds? In other words, can you run the chip at the Mhz that would be for 60fps, but only shoot at 24fps with a 1/48th second shutter (that shutter is slower than the 60fps the chip is running at, hence I'm wondering if this is possible)? Or does the chip need to be run at a Mhz that will enable a multiple of the frame-rate, and long enough to accomidate the shutter speed (so no faster than 48fps for a 1/48th of a second shutter speed).

I'm wondering if the problem becomes once you clock the chip too high, you can't get the shutter speed down (but you have reduced rolling artifacts), and you get what I call the "Saving Private Ryan" effect of a really jerky, shuttery camera image from too fast a shutter that doesn't allow enough motion blur (albeit with reduced rolling shutter artifacting).

Hi Steve,

Another question. I saw this in the brochure:
Sub-sampling Readout

Subsampling can be used to readout fewer pixels in the imager at increased frame rates. Four subsampling modes to provide 1.5X, 2X, 3X and 4X lower resolution as shown (1280x720 @ 120 fps, 960x540 @ 240fps, 640x360 @ 540 fps, 480x270 @ 960 fps). Due to the use of bayer patterns, only the 3x subsampling cab be used to produce a color image. What does it mean that only 3x can be used for color images? Does that mean that the 720p version will only be in monochrome-I thought I'd heard otherwise. Either that, or I had thought we wouldn't have to resort to windowing to get 720p, thus reducing the effective optical size of the sensor.

Thanks.

Jason Rodriguez wrote:
I'm wondering if the problem becomes once you clock the chip too high, you can't get the shutter speed down (but you have reduced rolling artifacts), and you get what I call the "Saving Private Ryan" effect of a really jerky, shuttery camera image from too fast a shutter that doesn't allow enough motion blur (albeit with reduced rolling shutter artifacting).If you can get the equivalent of 48 fps, you should be able to skip every other frame to get the equivalent of 24 fps with 1/48 sec exposure.

If you could get 96 fps (as you could with the AltaSens @ 720p), then I wonder if you could "average" two -- or four -- frames together ... ? This would reduce the rolling shutter artifact and (I think) give the right amount of motion blur as well.
What does it mean that only 3x can be used for color images?I was wondering the same thing thing -- as I recall, Steve said that AltaSens had a 720 mode that used binning and used the entire chip in a "higher sensitivity" mode; and was still a Bayer pattern, albeit a somewhat odd one. At least, that's what I think he said.

Yah, I'm a little confused myself since I know that JVC is using these chips in their new 3-chip "broadcast quality" HDV camera, but the specs on that camera are 1280x720-so you can use the Atasens 3560 at 720p, but I'm not sure what the size of those chips were (if it's windowing, then the effective optical size becomes a 1/2" rather than 2/3").

Jason Rodriguez wrote:
if it's windowing, then the effective optical size becomes a 1/2" rather than 2/3"What I recall is that it does row skipping/binning to get 720p at the full (2/3") size of the chip.

Jason on Subsampling:
You are correct about the binning mode - it is only useful for monochrome sensors - I was wrong about the reduction. I'm not sure but I think you might be able to create a new Bayer interpolator for the 2/3 format (getting you to 1280x720 subsampling so at 2/3"). Row 0 is RGGRRGG. The next row is GBBGGBB. Then a row is skipped so the next is blue again, and then red.

Jason and Rob on rolling shutter:
There is usually a programmable horizontal and vertical blanking time. On the SI-1300, that can be set to a full frame time. This means that it is possible to set the clock for 60MHz, extend the vertical blanking to get the readout+blanking time to be equal to 1/24th sec. You should be able to expose during the blanking time (this is just a non-readout time). Since the readout happens very fast, you get minimal RS artifacts. Of course you also get a 60Mpix/sec bus load which will be too fast for 32 bit machines (2 bytes per pixel unpacked) but you could drop to 50MHz and set it up so a frame is moved to memory and then to RAID during the blanking time.

Steve, thanks for answering that here.

The 1920HD PDF that Steve posted earlier has the examples of the 2/3 process.

The process should be suitable for 720p conversion using the standard bayer filter.

720p bayer pattern after skipping:

GR-RG-GR
BG-GB-BG
---------
BG-GB-BG
GR-RG-GR

- Is the skipped pixels in the bayer pattern.

The combining process would result in the pattern seen in the PDF.

I am wondering,we have motherboards that can take between 4 and 8 GB of memory which is around two minutes of bayer 1080 footage. Maybe we can save money by using Rob's idea of saving out during pause aswell. We could then use slower cheaper higher capacity single/double consumer drives (you will need lots of them for a movie).


Thanks

Wayne.

Another interesting article on using GPU programming for audio processing.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040902_135943.html

http://www.bionicfx.com/

Re-edit:

I seem to have found an article that says that the AGP backchannel is 266MB/s peak, more than enough to save out a comrpessed SHD stream (but the card/chipset architecher would have to be built to take advantage of this, ie. it could even be as slow as 32MB/s in some real life cards). Still PCI-E should be better.

http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/pcie-09.html

http://developer.nvidia.com/object/General_FAQ.html

On high 3D card power requirements. We don't nessacarily need to use the latest and greatest GPU, even a low powered integrated one might offer enough performance assistance.

Thanks

Wayne.

Here is something more interesting than relevant to us (only has HD component in). High DEF (3D I think) PVR with full Intervideo suit.

http://www.via.com.tw/en/Digital%20Library/PR040901_OmniC-Club3D.jsp

http://www.s3graphics.com/pressrel/2004_06_03.html

http://www.club-3d.com/en/club-3D.html

Wooh Hoo, Wooh Hoo (thats sarcasm, I'm not that big of a Oprah fan). The new Sony HDV camera is finally here (on time not liek all those people saying it would be next year). Now, maybe, they will ALLOW, JVC and Sharp to release their new HD cameras. Got to read the specs, but I doubt it will allow raw output.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Sony-Announces-High-Definition1080i-HDR-FX1-First-3-CCD-HDV-Camcorder.htm

Quiet an improvement over the pd170, but In comparison to our project, the camera looks hobbled, the article says 960*1080 pixel chips, but has 3 lux performance.