<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Lohman : Netgear gigabit pcmcia network card (http://www.netgear.com/products/details/GA511.php) -->>>

Rob ... did you get my most recent e-mail about the SourceForge project?

Yes I sure did and I'm walking through our e-mail conversation
to see which things we where talking about earlier. Sorry to not
get back to you earlier (as promised). I will be gone from friday
morning till somewhere sunday again but will try to get it done
by somewhere thursday (my time) at the latest.

Now if I could just quit my day job.... <g>

Rob Lohman wrote:
Now if I could just quit my day job....I hear you! I've been thinking about that one myself :-)

Don't know really but let suppose this:
you have 1280x720 at 10 bits and 250 fps.

If it is not Bitpacked (so it is at 16 bit) it gives:

439.45 MBytes/s

if it is bitpacked it is:

274.65 MBytes/s

So first if you wanna record direct to disk, you'll need a PCI-X 133 MHZ FG (= expensive) and enough disks to support that bandwith.(I think at least 20 if 2.5 inch would be ok).Also another controller for those disks which needs to be also PCI-X 133 MHZ.
So you need a motherboard with support for two independent PCI-X 133MHz buses.
Other solution would be using a FG with embedded RAID controller (again $$$$$).


Second option would be using a FG with processing capabilities able to process that amount of data and a disk controller for PCI-X 66MHZ.
So less disks to record but again an expensive FG.

Hope this helps...

Lets say we go for packed 8 bit mode (just to fit into a cheaper 266MB/s 64bit or 66Mhz PCI-? card, and 4-8 3.5inch drive Main board raid canbe used). Sorry, I thought you were going to give realistic, unpadded, figures (this is when I am getting annoyed). See what I mean, it is a specialist camera not really requiring the best portability (even just transposrtable), (though using 20 2.5 inch drives over 4-8 3.5inch drives, you don't really save money, space, or power).

Well, talking a bit down the track (after the normal motion camera project is handled, and prices of drives, sensors and memory drop, and processing power increases (I am not PC limited here, I have something of much higher in performance in mind, lower powered and cheaper etc), the project could be made to support slow motion in this way (apart from a seperate slow motion camera):

Cheap option:
Normal camera + high speed sensor with 200fps+ 720p 8-bit capable FG 66Mhz or 64-bits (or cheaper 120fps 720p Altasens based system), biggest memory to buffer short sequences for film which are then saved.

Performance configuration:
As above, but with an extra module to attach extra raid drives for long slow motion sequences.

No bayer filtering/compression at these speeds, done in post.

(Processing requirements is up in the air for the moment, as I don't know what low powred dual core, dual processing systems they are planning, but a lot more advanced then now. Using the fastest low poprocessor may not be a problem, power wise, provided it has modern speed/power saving features. So during normal filming the power consumption canbe dropped and the attached/external drive module disconnected).

Only an idea!

So what do you think Jaun?

First my name is J u a n, the same as John.So if it is easier for you just call me John ;) (kidding)

Well the 20 disks are for over 400 MBytes/s, you don't need that for 280 Mbytes/s.
But you are right, I guess 8 Raptors with an Intel RAID card can get that (RAID 0)

I've never talked about portability, did I?

I don't understand what you call "packed 8 bit",sorry.
If you mean getting 8 bit directly from the camera that is ok for me, but if you are talking about any kind of packing (as putting two 12 bit pixels together inside three bytes or 24 bits) that is a different thing cause then again you would need an expensive card which supports the packing.

Sorry, but I'm not understanding what you are trying to say.
So I think it's up to you to define the needs for a high speed system cause I can't help.

Slow-motion at those frame-rates is a pretty specialized field. Why don't you just rent that slow-motion digital camera from Band-Pro (or someone else who has it)? Seems like you're going to be spending a lot of money and hassle for a dubious amount of gain.

I don't know how VGA would up-sample to HD, but we have a 640x480, 250fps 8/10 bit camera with global shutter and 9.9 micron pixels. The data rate is 80Mpix/sec so even at 160Mpix (unpacked) that isn't too scary. This will be supported on GigE in a bit (or when a customer demands it) which will include 2 pixels in 3 bytes. The max GigE rate is 100MB/sec which would be about 200fps. But, because of the packing, you are talking 100MB/sec to disk - maybe on a 32 bit split backplane or simple 64 bit system (2 SATA drives?). It is cheap (a relative word for sure) at $2495 USD - single piece without the DVInfo discount. Here is a funky sample:

http://siliconimaging.com/Samples/SI640HF/SI640HF%20250fps%20eye%20seq.avi

steve: that is very cool!

Sorry Juan, that is one of my weaknesses, is name memory (and advanced mathematics, which helps me simplify designs).

I assumed it was portability/battery life, because that is one of the main reasons people have been using the 2.5inch disks, and their has been people acting like it is going to easily fit into a portable camera before.

With the packed 8-bits, having an unclear head, I hedged my bets. Being reasonably sure you can transfers 8 bits at a time unpacked, I wasn't sure there wasn't a scheme that required 8 bits to be packed into 16-bits, so I just covered all basis. I know we can get away with 8 bits, so I wasn't bothering with 10 or 12 bits.

The rest of your post I will have to get back too (I have just written these two posts). I am just trying to hit performance objectives in the ideas for cost, fps, and size. By minimising the data rate (or buffering), and making it modular with a extra drive module, one camera system can do it all. Eventually at a cheaper price than now.

Thanks guys, slow motion isn't really my app, I have advised people to rent the things instead before, but some people want slow motion in the camera, so it is interesting to discuss things. I started this thread for such discussions, think tanking is a very good way to realise better alternatives. I don't believe in real think tanking at this level though, if we put in objective ideas and we have to be prepared to have them examined and challenged on an objective quantified, and even qualified, basis. At the same time the same goes for objective objections, we have to be prepared to have them examined and challenged on an objective quantified etc basis. Call it intelligent process - think tanking, to quickly reach conclusions, you examine down the line of thought and branch onto the next idea, by the end of it you have a handful of really suitable ideas.

Psychology: Normal think tanking is a established industry technique used to come up with new solutions and is useful to make logical leaps to new unrealised answers. In the original you all throw ideas in (don't matter how unsuitable, make a list then (if I can remember discuss them). It probably was made in that way because, by human nature, people are excitable, and you rarely find a group without them that can objectively discuss things, or be challenged to think outside the box to find new answers. So the process (rules) were there to keep the peace.

Tossing one more thought out on slow motion. You could capitalize on the modularity of your cameras here. If you were to say use a pair of camera modules that had the same mounting and appoximately the same sensor size and digital interface from a company we both know, you could change your Altasens based camera to a high speed camera for the cost of the fast camera module. Same interface, recording path and cables - it is "just software".

So, how many people rolled their eyes on that last "just"?

thank's steve : that.s realy the best part of this camera .
being able to invest in quality components , and upgrading
- when the latest technology arrives. retaing 80% of your hardware investment -and also having a state of the art
camera . and don't forget storing all this on the cheapest medium of that time . this reminds me of my custom /racing /motorcycle days . We always had a better motorcycle then anyone could buy in a store. Wish I could be of more help.

Steve Nordhauser wrote:
So, how many people rolled their eyes on that last "just"?Do rude hand motions count?

:-) :-) -- Just kidding!!! :-) :-)

Steve N

Yeah, I agree, simple, good design, I had the same idea.

Rob S, I have a question. How tied to particular sensors, or frame grabbers, is your software going to be, and can it be adapted to work on any std interface (USB, Gige, Firewire etc).

By the way haven't heard back from you for a while.

I have been reading a few things that I now realise might be significant to us.

Sony has announced developement of a 8 layer 200GB disk, and the release of 100GB disks in 2007 (so when on earth are they going to release the 200GB). Finale copies of 720p productions we complete in the meantime could be transfered to it (119GB+ for a 90 min 8bit) but with some compression it could be used for higher resolutions (268GB+ for 1080, and 1036GB+ SHD before compression).

The important thing is that they also announced that the PS3 will be shipped with a 54GB Blue Ray disk. They also aim the BR disk to be a alternative HDDVD format, I don't know which version they plan this to be.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=4534
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040924_134741.html


This opens a new way for distribution. Movies could eventually be distributed for the PS3 type devices, using a on disc codec player that plays the movie (this all needs Sony's licensing though). Even though We could use a visually lossless codec, like cinefrom is, to do it (but with additional compression rates of upto 20:1 (equivalent to 5-10:1 Mpeg2?) for higher resolutions). That would enable even a short SHD 90min to fit on one PS3 disk. Big opportunity.

I think Sony has this pegged, they know that their projectors will deliver better than HDTV resolutions, and their disks can deliver the detail over HD-DVD, and the PS3 becomes a game subsidised cheap SHD player, giving them a clear advantage over the competition. If they make the format cell dependent (upgradable player codec) then anybody that wants to make a player has to buy cell chips. The number of PS3 like devices may not reach 100 million for sometime, but it is probably possible that they will satuate the S/HD hometheatre market before that, if they can deliver superior picture quality to HD-DVD, while everybody else can buy the DVD/HDDVD version. Or am I too far ahead.

Is anyone making box cameras with CCD's or CMOS censors that are larger than 2/3" (closer to 35mm size), do at least 1080i rez, and have virable frame rates higher than 24fps? Last time I checked you could only find something like that in a Dalsa camera but the sensor required too much light. Anyone know of any new CCD or CMOS box cameras out there that could be applied to this project?

Why 1080i? Isn't one of the HD standards 1080 24p? I'd certainly buy one if it was available!

I think that is basically out of most people's reach money wise.
35mm CCD/CMOS chips exist, for a price. 1080p chips are becoming
available now, but they are twice as expensive ($2k+) as the
720p versions.

Rob-
Could you point a link or at least a name of the CCD/CMOS your talking about? If I understood you correctly on the price then $2k is a great deal for what you get. Please share.

Anyone else have info?

http://www.siliconimaging.com/SI%20Main3.html

It's either the SI-3300 or the SI-3170. I think AltaSens was
also coming out with a new chip soon. It might have been more
like $2.5K, not sure. If you check the other thread it is somewhere
in the last 10 pages I think:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25808

Rob-
I checked out the two models you listed and it looks like they are only 1/2" in size - not close to 35mm size. Perhaps you saw a different model. I'll keep looking.

No, it's actually what I meant. I DID NOT SAY there was a 35mm
chip out for $2K+. I said there is a 1080p chip out for that money.

A 35mm chip will probably be over $10K or something.

There was a talk about:

http://videosystems.com/mag/video_shoot_tools_26/
JVC for under $2K, but everybod Video Systems must be too lazy to email me back about it to confirm this.

35mm cinema style is expensive as Rob says (if you do a search in the threads listed in the first post for Dalsa, Arri etc you might find some older pricing info). 1080 might also get much cheaper within the next year (though probably not from the cinema companies).

OK fans of flash (with very deep pockets) 66MB/s compact flash 3:
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040927_125452.html

Nanotech batteries, far superior, end of next year:
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040928_182506.html

The ridiculouse: 1GB and 100GB email accounts, anybody want to send raw footage:
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040928_182506.html

Underclocking CPU for low power, interesting:
http://www20.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041001/index.html

Disclaimer:
I didn't say any of this was practical for the here and now.

Wayne Morellini wrote:
There was a talk about:
http://videosystems.com/mag/video_shoot_tools_26/
JVC for under $2KI'm pretty sure that was a misprint, and it's really around $20K.

I hear you Rob. But still, it's fun to hope, while they refuse to confirm or deny it (funny, the xfiles was just on, the truth must be out there ;)

hey Waine I have overcloking an AMD and it is ease to do .
but a cirix 1.3 or a via embeded prossesor motherboard for low power.
also last year I re-cell some old anton bauer batteries I have with 9000 mA cells this things run for hours and hours my camera.

well I planing to build a 1ccd cmos raw to disk camera now please let me know any news and or advise.
regards
martin

Martin, most of this stuff is just for interest until people have something current to discuss. Better batteries result is better recharge cycles and smaller batteries for lighter/smaller cameras. Recelling some of the older batteries will make them much more efficient at a cheap price (cheap Asian cell provider), but you might require more depending on how your system is setup. Some people want to use the most powerful CPU so the power savings (which can be quiet a lot) from turning the clock rate down on a normal cpu (not overclocking) to the minimum needed, especially dynamically, is of interest. We know of the low powered CPUs, but consensus is that only the Pentium M has enough Mhz (cost a fortune for the top models though), VIA will have better speeds by the end of the year or early next. Cirix 1.3, thanks I'll have to look it up.

So the thread looks at not only throwing together a camera system but how to do it better in the future. I only mentioned the nano tech batteries because they said it was going to be available next year (which is an incredibly short time span in battery research terms).

Now if you goto the first post I have set up links to the threads where these projects reside, and the website:

http://www.obscuracam.com/

Now as for the other questions I'm sure that the guys doing the cameras will be by shortly to post advise on what hardware performance is needed for the latest version of the software. One chip bayer 1080p24 should be possible on some drives (read through posts to find drive review sites that give you min sustained rates) two drives would give you better frame rates. No three chips yet or SHD single chip (that would require 4 of the fastest drives at least). Sumix plans 3chip and on camera compressed versions (which for 3chip would be most excellent). Silicon Imaging also hopes to do compression someday.

Generally two camera companies are in the running: Silicon Imaging, and Sumix. At the moment only the newer editions of the sensors are any good (lots of smear/flare, low saturation/niose etc problems depending on the sensor), and they are introducing cameras based on the professional Altasens sensors, that will give you most of the performance you need at 2/3".

Big tip, most of these cameras don't include on chip frame buffer and readout time is faster than shutter speed. So when you require high shutter speed the frame needs to be transfered across the interface at least that speed. Further most cameras only transfer in 8 or 16 bit chunks (so 10 or 12 bit pixel takes up 16 bits). So you need to choose your interface/capture card with high enough data rate to run at the speed you want. Some people aim for PCI-X (not PCI express version) for at least 266 Mb/s. Hard Disks are not much affected as they only recored the average frame rate. Another big tip, USB 2.0 tends to be a CPU hog and not very reliable (they can program around this but at CPU cost). Gigabit/FirewireB (I've been told) Ethernet delivers similar to normal sustained real world PCI 100 MB/s. But those two interfaces require the latest/best drivers. Silicon Imaging has some for Intel based GigaE.

Rolling shutter is the other big problem, where pixels are read out one line at a time while still gathering light. So any movement makes moving objects slant (as it moves between scan lines). Few cmos sensors have a solution to this, the fillfactory has Global shutter sensors (the whole frame is locked down and read out), and Altasens has a faster readfing mode. In the project people are trying to decrease read out time raise shutter speed to minimumise this.

Thanks

Wayne.

Re-edit:

I've seen your other post, and wasn't aware you had read up on it. But maybe Rob would like to insert the above as the second or third post of the thread for new people starting from "One chip bayer 1080p24 should be possible on some drives".

Hey Wayne,

Isn't this SI-3170 the camera we've been looking for? Am I correct it can accomplish 1080p widescreen, can run 24fps and over, can run between 40 and 100mhz (should give mega lattitude), is 12 bit? I thought this was pretty much our hopes in a camera.

The only thing I question is the rolling shutter. I can't remember, did we want the rolling or global shutter? One of them was good and one bad.

Anyway, give me the lowdown, man.

Thanks!

I can't remember. It is either 3170 or 3300. Obin has been using it so it is best to go to that thread and look it up. All I can remember is that it needs lots of light (standard issue for a movie set anyway), don't know about smearing and flare (I think much reduced from previouse 1.3Mp) or stop range (sample footage in other thread). Unless you want cheap, Altasens is what we are looking for. I'm not keeping up at the moment I am doing research into really cheap sensors for low end cameras, and custom prism for three chip etc.

Rolling shutter is bad, but Global tends to reduce integration time (light gathering power).

Some, people, ask about the sort of things I dabble in and can do, things like this:

http://www.tomshardware.com/business/200409301/photokina-04.html#the_future_today

I had design concept for the same thing (and a few more) stick that folds out into square display (this ones has camera, but mine would be much cheaper (try well under $100) because of my display system and doable now). Pretty good design anyway. What annoys me is that now it's defintely going to be patented territory, while I still don't have the money to do it.

And the bell rings, I just got a brainstorm:

I have known about these cameras for sometime and their Autobright adaptive dynamic diode technology (120db range, but SN, QE, etc??), but have been at a loose as how to use them effectively, as they are like near 16:4. Well it hit me, pixel shifting three of them through a prism (or string three of them Bayer style through a simpler split plane prism like the Olympus SHD camera does) would do the trick. In an optical search last year I also found an optical manufacturer in India (ones in Asia too) maybe somebody like them can do cheap prism for batch order (just stupidly, and wishfully, thinking ahead).

The problem is this I don't have hard tech data on them, they don't post much and aren't very communicative. The security camera shots don't look anywhere near as good as the sample shoots from the still camera (maybe the autobright technology is better controlled in the still cameras).

It may not be a top camera, but an interesting alternative. I am working through to find cheaper/better alternatives though. Take a look, do your analysis magic and tell me what you think (objectively, it may not be an Altasens, but if it is a good Fillfactory allternative, we have hit gold)?

http://www.smalcamera.com/pictures/index.html
http://www.smalcamera.com/w3000wide.html

Here another PAL camera, if anybody is interested in SD.
http://www.smalcamera.com/v1000camera.html

Hmm, just figured out I can click those sample pictures (blush), had a closer look they look impressive, but I have noticed a couple of things that might be worrying, but might be filtering/compression/lens.

Thanks

Wayne.

Just examined most of the rest of those images, it seems I picked a pretty good batch the first time. But most of the ones with problems look like they are done with another sensor/camera/lens (maybe the $69 camera) or have had bad photographic technique on exposure levels. Still even those are pretty good, especially for the price range (except for the one with lines in it, defective circuite I think).

Anyway, over and out, have a good day.

Something unexpected came up. Sometime ago I sent email to Fillfactory enquiring what they had. Recently I recieved another reply from them saying they were surprised anybody was considering the IBIS5?, and that the new IBIS5-A version had improved performance (as we knew). They gave me some links to different companies, and though most won't run at 24fps, some the Phillips cameras were quiet a surprise, and I think they are "inspirational" at least:

A mixture of on camera interfaces: firewire or Ethernet 100, VGA output, CVBS, RS232. The twin Firewire camera though doesn't have most of these.

What is most interesting though is the, likely, high end Volante vision processing cameralink PCI 32 capture board (so most likely out of our price range, but it shows what is out there). It has 1.2MB frame buffer for 500Fps, it also has Trimedia image processor with 32MB of ram but apart fro it's own 4 FPGAs for image processing it has optional FPGA/DSP module. Apart fro t hat it has external triggering, SVGA, RS232 etc. Makes me wonder, is anybody ever going to do a low end PCI capture card with memory, media processor or redefinable image processing FPGA?

http://www.cft.philips.com/industrialvision/products.htm
http://www.cft.philips.com/industrialvision/products2.htm

I'll have to read through the data from the other manufacturers some other time, a bit of a mess.

Altasens is still the way to go, but IBIS is cheap.

Wayne, you are right, I think everyone using the IBIS-5 switched to the 5A about 9 months ago. It is "better crappy" for cinematography. We haven't heard from Ben in awhile - he bought a Sumix and might have opinions. The trouble you get into is that it is not very sensitive so to get the frame rate up and have as long an exposure as possible to get a reasonable exposure (sequential with the read cycle) you want to read at a high clock rate - bad for interfaces and image smearing. Micron's TrueSnap global shutter does simultaneous exposure and readout, improving this quite a bit.

One of the reasons I like our gigabit version is that it has a big memory buffer and an FPGA - not user accessable yet but sometime. The cost isn't bad if you take out the FG requirement.

Hey guys, sorry for the inactivity -- there's been no news to report for a while, and I've been busy with other projects... Sumix finished the new camera and offered to ship it to me, but I wanted to wait for the updated software to take advantage of it. That should be done in the next month or so, at which point I'll definitely give you guys updates.

From what I understand, the new cam will output 10 (12?) bit. I'm not sure on the IBIS-5/5A issue, but I assume they'd use the latest chip in the update, if not the original cam that I have.

I'm excited to check out the new version, especially if I can leverage the higher bit depth, but the camera I'm really excited about is their FW800 Altasens model. From what they tell me, they're concentrating on that cam now, and should have something pretty soon.

Right now, I'm working on some scripts that I've planned for a while but haven't attempted due to the crapulence of DV... In my opinion, sub-$5k industrial HD cameras are really going to shake things up in the next 12-18 months...

- ben

I hope so!

I'm really looking forward to the day when I can get RAW HD video from a decent chip utilizing good glass!

That day will come in the next month or two -- it'll only take 12-18 months for other folks to catch on. :)

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser :Micron's TrueSnap global shutter does simultaneous exposure and readout, improving this quite a bit.-->>>

Steve I wasn't aware they had global shutter, is that new tech for them and what has it?

I have been told of one guy that got a IBIS5A camera much better than the Sumix, but I don't know which company. As the AD convertor is the only component to really affect this performance I wonder does a better AD allow it to lower the niose floor and register lower light levels?


Ben:

A big welcome back buddy glad to have you around.

I am eagerly waiting to see what they do, have they shared with you what capture solutions they are using (capture software in particular)? As far as I know they haven't been in contact with Rob, so I am interested in what pro video/cinema solution they are going to present, and at what cost.

Thanks

Wayne.

Wayne on Micron:
At their web site:
http://micron.com/products/imaging/
They have a column for shuttering - ERS is rolling shutter.
They have the 1.3Mpix 12 micron screamer (500fps, 10 tap) and the VGA 250fps (we have a camera with this one).

On the analog pipe, some of the more interesting sensors require an external analog pipeline - amp, programmable gain amp, A/D and there is quite a bit of differentiation in the camera's image quality from one manufacturer to another. Other sensors include the image pipe right on the silicon - like the Micron. Then, the only image differences are in clock generation, power supply design and camera control. A few, like the IBIS-5A have the analog circuitry built in but bring the analog signal out in addition to the digital output of the A/D. On that one, we put a faster 12 bit A/D to replace the internal 10 bit.

This post has links to a codec comparison test, lossless codecs are covered, including sheervideo and microcosm.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&postid=229658#post229658


Steve:
Thanks

Transmeta 2GHz: SSE3 (http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20041006_143645.html)

2.0 GHz: 25W, 1.5 GHz: 7W, 1.1 GHz: 3W

Dual CPU VIA Mini-ITX (Epia) mainboard (http://www.mini-itx.com/#story0366)
Eden-N processor, DVI, ethernet, USB one PCI

Good Rob! This is what VIA told me in confidence before. We also know that 2Ghz+ CPU are coming, and 64-bit with beter FPU processing powers, is coming (mentioned on that page what else I can't remember). It has Gigabit Ethernet this time.

I'm still curiouse what the extra processing functionality (mentioned in previouse article at Linux Devices) in the system will turn out to be. They have encryption, HD signal dycrption etc, I just wonder how far it will go.

Here the 64bit article:

http://www.via.com.tw/en/resources/pressroom/2004_archive/pr041005_fpf-isaiah.jsp

I just accidentally tripped over another article, looks like big processing improvements:
http://www.mdronline.com/rh/edn/watch/watch_abstract.asp?volname=issue%20%23183&sid=1325&on=1&SourceID=00000385000000000000

Update: Dooh, 2006!


But here is an article on up coming Image Sensors/stuff, unfortunately it is to big to read at the moment, but it looks good.

http://www.reed-electronics.com/ednmag/article/CA450596?spacedesc=staffFeature

Thanks

Wayne.

I realize that a lot depends on what you expect from the CPU (resolution, preview, compression) but I was looking at laptops and a few are just coming out with the Mobile P4 processors which are different from the P4-M. They have HT and a fast FSB but are supposed to be less power hungry than the standard P4.

http://www.intel.com/products/notebook/processors/mobilepentium4/

The Mobile Intel Pentium 4 processor is called model 548. The novelty operates at 3.33GHz, features 533MHz Quad Pumped Bus, Hyper-Threading as well as SSE3 technologies. The chip can be plugged into platforms based on Intel’s 852GME and 852PM chipsets. The new Mobile Pentium 4 processors feature power management Enhanced Intel SpeedStep technology that enables lower thermals than its desktop counterpart providing more reliable system performance in a notebook. Thermal Design Power (TDP) of the Mobile Pentium 4 processor 548 is 88W, which is lower than that of a 90nm desktop chip running at similar clock-speed.

Yes, I know, 88W is much more than 25W, but if you do RT compression and drop some disk drives, it looks a bit better.

Anyway, if I'm not too wrong, there is a Pentium-M with 533 MHZ bus too...

No, there's no 533Mhz bus yet for the Pentium-M, but the Dothan core is much better than the P4 Mobile chips (Netburst). I posted a link on the other threat about some guys talking over the Pentium-M vs. P4-M over at Andantech.

BTW, the dual Via boards are absolutely no use if you're trying for high-speed 1080p because there's no 64-bit PCI-X slot for a frame-grabber. That and the Eden-N processors are horribly slow.

Also the chipsets that you can get with the Penitum-M (855GME with 6300ESB) are much better.

Wayne wrote:
"I am eagerly waiting to see what they do, have they shared with you what capture solutions they are using (capture software in particular)?"

Sumix is writing all their own custom software, and are very receptive to cinema-oriented features...

Thanks Ben, I long suspected that was the case. It is a pity that different companies didn't co-operate with Rob to establish his software as a defacto standard to shift with their cameras. Si has been great in co-operating with Rob though. The problem we now face is probably format. I would imagine everybody has his own, and their is not a standard one third party NLE's can plug into as things grow in the future. So they will all have to use convert to which ever compatible format they have on their list of file types, but still, it is very eartly days still lots of time left.