Thanks for that Steve. While I would like Global shutter, what I am looking for is fast enough readout to reduce the rolling shuter effect to a minium. It sounds like you still end up reading out faster with no on camera buffer with the camera link version, which is OK when attached to a 64-bit card. So when is the GIGe version coming out, which you said would use a buffer?

So we have the Mac-Mini now, and dual cored VIA's out soon (unfortunately I only hear 2GHZ cores by the end of the year) and car PC's.

So is anybody planning projects based on Mac or Linux.

Ronald?

By the end of the year the multi cored 3.5Ghz (maybe) xbox2 will be out. So maybe we will see a 3.5Ghz Mini-Mac. The xbox2 would be an excellent cheap platform for a camera aswell.

If MS wants to send Sony broke the best stratergy would be to allow us to makem a camera out of there


I keep track of various things here, some people I know are, apparently, releasing a 0.5W 60 Bip's $1 processor sometime soon (maybe even faster). I have already reviewed the basic information from 2001, and it seems unsuitable, but I don't know what the present design will do.

But looking at the wider scheme of things, if all we need is VGA, GIGE, SATA, USB2.0, controls etc we don't really need a PC.

Is there anything new on the sensor horizon?

Wayne:
Our GigE cameras have been shipping for a year. The SI-1280F, SI-1300, SI-3300 and the SI-1920HD are all on GigE. There is a 32MB internal buffer so you can average the data rate.

More Wayne:
Some of the camera link frame grabbers support Linux, as does the GigE interface. Mac is still not well supported for capture but as long as the files are movable, is this a big problem?

<<<-- Originally posted by Steve Nordhauser : More Wayne:
Some of the camera link frame grabbers support Linux, as does the GigE interface. Mac is still not well supported for capture but as long as the files are movable, is this a big problem? -->>>

I think he was thinking of MacMini as a capturing platform rather than an editing platform. With its low price point, built in GigE and extremely small design, it seems almost custom made for this type of project, and a capture and camera system that could utilize it would be a step ahead (and a bit cheaper) than some of the other projects that are building microATX boxes from scratch. I think that's what he was thinking.

I remember you told me that the 1920 would have memory buffer for high-speed readout, and that how a small MB buffer costs a lot of money, but not that cameras already had it. That put's a whole new spin on things, and what I tell all those people that ask me about what's available.

How much are he 1280f and 1300 (3300 is around 2-3K and Altasens around $5k?) ?

The Mac Mini (unfortunately) is currently 100/10 ethernet. Eventually I think they would adopt GBE, and FirewireB, but at the moment Firewire A is the way to go. Eventually it shoud be a very good (and compact) HD capture (with larger and laptop faster drives). It is just for the interest of the Mac people.

Wayne,
It is only the GigE cameras that have the internal buffer. Some of the camera link frame grabbers have buffers on them.

Joshua, On MiniMac (Austin Powers flashback) - it sounds like they crippled it a bit to avoid hurting their higher end sales. With GigE it might have been interesting and worth thinking about.

Wayne, your estimations aren't bad in gigabit. People should contact me off the list for pricing.

Yes, I'll have to do that.

At the moment I am researching the hispeed sensors and price (for large area, and global and high speed shutter) this thing with IBIS5/Micron 3MP/Alatsens all have compromises. I'm not after a high frame rate (GIGE capacity would be great) but quality picture and high shutter). It would be interesting if they reduced the price of these.

Thanks
Wayne.

I have just stumbled on this one:

http://www.siliconfilm.com/

Sounds simular to that conceptHD (was that the name). Have heard of one that goes in a movie camera years ago to.

Thanks

Wayne.

Well,

I love you guys who all tried, but as I predicted, it looks like it's all going to be way too late.

STRONG rumors suggest a Panasonic DVCProHD camera coming out for under 10 k some time this year. NAB will most likely unleash it. Records to mini-dv and also P2. The quality won't meet the "uncompressed" richness of what you guys have been trying for, but for cost-effectiveness, and rock-solid reliability, and user-friendliness, the trade off will be well worth it.

Sorry guys, I think they beat you to the punch.

. . . like I predicted.

Elvis has left the building.

Yes, lately I have noticed that most people have left, probably bored of waiting for things to come through, something I was worried would happen. I am also had it with this too, and am even considering lesser cameras.

See, it was worth waiting for an excellent solution (that would stay that way until worn out) and pay more for it, but if Altasens wasn't going to be it, you might as well buy cheap and upgrade when an excellent solutions comes. I have even figured out how to pixel shift a foveon x3 (max 1080) but rolling shutter again.

It will take some more research to find out where ever the planned SI and Sumix Altasens can get around the rolling shutter problem "enough" (as JVC advertises they have done with there Altasens cameras). Maybe Steve can fill us in on the flexibility of the SI GigaE cameras in this respect.

Two things are needed:

- To increase readout rate mostly independent of shutter (to use long shutter time (24th-48th's), but fast readout (rolling shutter)).

- To reduce shutter times (good to reduce rolling, reduce exposure, special fast action frame analysis/stop frame) independent of frame rate.

And for those special effects hi-speed photography people (of which the first 100% speed increase is the most useful;l for many of us):

- To increase frame rate.

How flexible (how much can each camera achieve in figures) on this over the GigaE are the cameras? I can already guess there is very little variability on the IBIS and 1300 (included for completeness and courtesy), but what about the Altasens?

Thanks

Wayne.

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher : Well,

I love you guys who all tried, but as I predicted, it looks like it's all going to be way too late.

STRONG rumors suggest a Panasonic DVCProHD camera coming out for under 10 k some time this year. NAB will most likely unleash it. Records to mini-dv and also P2. The quality won't meet the "uncompressed" richness of what you guys have been trying for, but for cost-effectiveness, and rock-solid reliability, and user-friendliness, the trade off will be well worth it.

Sorry guys, I think they beat you to the punch. -->>>

IMO, what our guys are trying to accomplish and Pana's HDV are completely
different. I have NO interest in HDV. I am VERY interested in a hot mod
like Juan P's (turning a DVX100a into an uncompressed HD camera).
HDV is *trying* to pack 4X the amount of pixels into
the same bandwidth as DV with an OLD compression scheme.
HDV's scheme involves all kinds of voodoo, none of which is benefiicial to
image qualilty.
HDV is fine for talking heads and other lock down shots, but quickly falls
apart when motion becomes involved. Being a nature videographer I want
REAL HD and not HDV; a poser format.

KEEP ON ROCKING BOYS!

<<<-- Originally posted by Jacques Mersereau : IMO, what our guys are trying to accomplish and Pana's HDV are completely
different. I have NO interest in HDV. -->>>

What Pana is proposing isn't HDV, its real HD. The proposed HDX-100 will record its HD signal in DVCProHD, the same format that the Varicam records to now.

Is that format as good as Obin's proposed 10-bit 4:4:4 uncompressed camera? No.

Is it a worthwhile shooting format, particularly in a sub $10K camera? Yes.

Interesting. There must be some problems somewhere in this information
because as far as I know, DVCPRO HD is 100mbps which will not record
to a standard miniDV tape. (unless they turn an hour tape into 15 minutes?)

DVCPRO HD is also fairly heavily compressed (though it looks good) at 6:1 and I am unsure as to the color sampling.
HDCAM is something like 3:1:0 (?) and
only records 1440 lines, not 1920 as most seem to think.

Nevertheless, . . . semi real HD for under 10K would be a great step forward.

DVCproHD is 100mbps

It will NOT record to tape. Jan crittenden has already said this is an unviable measure. It will record to P2 solid state media.

Single chip 4:4:4 versus 3 chip compressed (is it 4:2:0 or 4:2:2), hmm. Yes RAW should still be better.

MiniDV has had the capability to record ten times as much for a while, it is just not implemented. So maybe they can improve it (but please for a full sized DVCPRO type tape). Is this the dvx100 or the 400 replacement, or cheap 900 alternative?

If they can match FX1 price I think I will think about buying, I have priority methords around the small chip problems. One thing that is a must is a conventional detachable lense mount (we would be going after an adaptor).

Has anybody got any news links to this?

Wayne.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jacques Mersereau :
DVCPRO HD is also fairly heavily compressed (though it looks good) at 6:1 and I am unsure as to the color -->>>

Just occured to me, that this 6:1 is using simular technology to the DV codec?? If so that will not be much better than 25mb/s Mpg2 codec (except perhaps in motion artifacts). If this is 6:1 Mpeg2, then it is reasonably good. I wonder is it variable comrpession for motion artifacts, as the PS2 can take a variable rate. Are we still talking about 8 bit?

Thanks

Wayne.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jacques Mersereau : DVCPRO HD is also fairly heavily compressed (though it looks good) at 6:1 and I am unsure as to the color sampling.
HDCAM is something like 3:1:0 (?) -->>>

I believe that DVCProHD samples at 4:2:2, the same as original HDCAM.

And while it doesn't record the same no. of lines that it displays (just like the Varicam and the CineAlta) the image you do get is still pretty darn good.

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : If they can match FX1 price I think I will think about buying, I have priority methords around the small chip problems. One thing that is a must is a conventional detachable lense mount -->>>

It's not the FX-1 price they're trying to compete with, it's the Z1, so think around $7K-$9K, which is still pretty good. Really, with the camera they're offering, $4K just isn't realisitic.

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : If this is 6:1 Mpeg2, then it is reasonably good. I wonder is it variable comrpession for motion artifacts, as the PS2 can take a variable rate. Are we still talking about 8 bit? -->>>

I'm not sure, but I don't think DVCProHD uses Mpeg2 to encode. DVCPro is its own standard with its own codec. Someone else would know better.

We are still talking about 8-bit, however. The DVCProHD standard (at the moment anyway, they could change it the way Sony changed HDCAM) is 8-bit 4:2:2.

Still, anyway you slice it, it's a hell of a lot better than DV or HDV, and after everything P+K and the Do-It-Yourselfer's have accomplished with lens adaptors, putting good glass on it shouldn't be a problem.

Thanks.

Actually, if they did do sub $5K it would be realistic once they sold the P2 packs for $5K a time ;(

So what sort of image format do they record? How about handling sports action, explosions, and dry forests with billions of long leaves whitish one side, green on he other flashing around in the breeze (like we have here) with things like varaible comrpession (for motion)?

You won't have the motion problems that HDV has. The format compresses each frame individually. It's the same idea as DV compression - just less compressed.

Yes, DV is around 6:1 compression, how is it less comrpessed than DV? I actually don't like the comrpession of DV either, so something twice as good would be good (even if just on the DV motion problems).

Thanks

Wayne.

I think you mixed things a bit. DV is 5:1, the camera above seems
to be 6:1 (higher levels). The end quality is what counts though...

So seriously, we are saying that it is not an enhancement over the DV condec, just more resolution? Lower compression for 720p would be good.

It is lower compression. It's a 4:2:2 codec. It would be impossible, I would think, to have higher compression on a codec with more information. Who knows though.

In any case, there's twice as much color information as in DV which is a very, very good thing.

I understand that this is the 960*1080 one, that puts a bit of an unfortunate sting in the tail.

Wayne.

I have been reading of an 300GB drive that spanks the Raptor drive in performance.

http://www.storagereview.com/php/benchmark/bench_sort.php

http://www.storagereview.com/articles/200411/200411028D300L0_2.html


I have also figured a new scheme that should help the capture schemes maximise drive performance and get more.

As we know the outer tracks record faster than the inner tracks, as that is the bottle neck the max throughput is number of drives * inner track performance. But if you start recording across all the drives at once, but recording from the inner track on half the drives, and the outer track on the other half, you get a higher average performance in between the inner and outer track rating (which can be quiet high). So you can easily increase the data rate of a 200MB/s system, and do wonders on a two drive systems.

Now the other things is that the benchmark used in some of these max datarate tests looks like a read benchmark, rather than testing write performance. What goes here?

http://www.gizmag.com.au/go/2539/

Fuel cells are the way to go for us, but have been limited and expensive, this looks like a real break through. I don't know their release date, so maybe it will miss the first round of fuel cells (really soon).

I also remember, at the begining of the year (tomshardware news), one company (I think mentioned in the origional Phyorg article I posted here) has shown off a prototype of their 1 terabyte optical drive.

New 320GB drive from Western Digital, fast.

http://www.tomshardware.com/storage/20050217/wd3200jb-05.html

Wayne:
In a other thread you wrote this:<<<--Looking at the Lupa 4000 as well, interesting.-->>>

We use now the fillfactory 2/3" IBIS5a sensor for our DRAKE camera. We capture 1280x720 at 24fps with it.
One goal for us is (at the end of this year) a real full size 35mm sensor camera with min. 1920x1080. So lets play with the LUPA 4000 data sheet:
max. 15fps!! To slow. No, its a 4M/Pixel ship. At 1920X1080 it runs at round 27fps, global shutter. At 24fps we can capture some more lines (usefull to show outside areas at viewfinders). Is more light sensity, 4 times higher than IBIS5a. But the best thing is the size: It comes with a realy full 35mm size. A sample sensor (not a camera) cost under $ 1000,-. Bad news is: At this time, they produced only mono versions. Okay, with RGB prism its ready for a 3Chip camera. (3x 2Mpixel = 6Mpixel) . This means at 24fps 8Bit = 150MB/Sec, 10Bit = 187MB/Sec, 12Bit = 234MB/Sec.
Well, i see a diffent way: Lets call it a electronic bayer filter. We have 3 Sensors, but we do a software pixel mix, same way optical bayer filter work. At the end we have only 2M/pixel, same as a single color sensor. With those camera we can every time switch to 6M/pixel (or something between it). A feature for the future.

Rai

I wasn't really getting at anything, with that statement, just stating an interesting chip you mentioned. I have done most of the same calculations, and yes, at half res you are cooking for 1080p. I would be interested in a real picture/sensitivity performance comparison between it and Altasens (beyond the aperture and rolling shutter issues).

If you really are going to combine 3 chip to do artificial bayer, then remember my suggestion of getting better accuracy out of bayer (and also as a compression method) by recording the difference in the bayer assumption to the real value as well as bayer. (the assumption being the non tested primary colours at each location, a sort of upscaling). Still, you could also bin to lower resolution, use half, or third, shift to get hi-res, and still get lower than Bayer rate.

I have been working on techniques that could be used to apply a bayer pattern on a monochrome sensor. But a simpler one is, on a DOF adaptor you have a projection screen, on one side you could put a bayer pattern filter for single chip. Problem is thermal/shock shifting alignment, and that you are already using a 35mm chip.

My interest in 3 chip is:

A) With true pixel shift, getting better picture and image/light pickup than Bayer for same datarate.
b) Getting higher resolution for post 1080p cinema picture and Imax type theatres.

This leads to reduced cost and increased performance over 6-18mpixel video sensor. For top end camera, good single chip cameras being mid end product, and something like Micron etc etc being lowend. So I advocate these three levels for different consumer levels out there. I am currently looking into wide aperature problem solutions.

Rai

From the Drake thread about the Ibis performance and previous pictures posted from another Ibis based camera.

I see, I wasn't aware (or forgotten) that the Ibis used was actually the Ibis5, and wasn't aware that global was not on it, as I thought Ben used it on the really bad examples. Well that explained things, I did some calculations that the sensitivity of the Ibis should be upto half that of the Altasens (which also has higher SN ratio). Still, again, are FF's figures for the internal dac, or with an good external dac.

It is interesting FF's FF*QE ratio, I guess this is saying the surface area percentage times QE, where as the Altasens doesn't use all it's area for fill (like traditional sensors) but gets double the QE. So the capacity of both are closer together. But then you get the problem with the secondary sensor function, around the main sensor, on the Ibis, just how good is the information derived from it.

Some new removable cartridge drive systems in the Iomega road map.

http://crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml?articleId=60402260

http://gamesradar.msn.co.uk/news/default.asp?subsectionid=1586&articleid=32776&pagetypeid=2

There are other reports of this. I don't know wherever this will be PC based, or based on the xbox2 power pc architecture with an PC emulator, like they make for the Macintosh. It might even hit this year.

Now Microsoft has a cross platform development system (apart from .net) called XNA, so even more efficient code, theoretically, could be made for this system.

This means the Windows capture software, could be run, or even possibly recompiled for the xbox2 pc. Please note that this has over ten times more performance then a high end computer system.

Anybody For Xbox Cam HD, Sony certainly wouldn't be?


Other Platforms:

This brings up another thing, the XNA and .net are used to develop software across different MS OS's and processors (like ARM and probably Power PC). There is also a clone of .net available for other platforms.

http://www.Microsoft.com/XNA/

This allows for software to be recompiled for embedded platforms, handhelds, even mobiles. So we can look at using a small Pocket PC with 720p display eventually.

Wayne.

Will it ever stop.

http://news.spong.com/detail/news.asp?prid=8385

Nintendo has a Sony PSP like Gameboy Advance(d) SP to be released this year. The DS is just a monkier that they hope to make a Palm compatible PDA. They claim it will be based on the Power PC based Gamecube, and be the most advanced game console on the planet. Is this like, yep, will it beat PSP, did the more advanced Gamecube beat the PS2.

So if you want a handheld capture machine with a display to connect a camera and HDD too, here is another.

Thanks

Wayne.

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : Is this like, yep, will it beat PSP, did the more advanced Gamecube beat the PS2.

Wayne. -->>>

To digress for a moment.

It's a different market situation than PS2 versus Gamecube, though. The PS had already made tremendous strides against Nintendo when the PS2 debuted, so they had that brand name going for them.

Gameboy, on the other hand, has been a powerhouse in handheld gaming for 15 years. There've been more Gameboys sold than Nintendos, Playstations, and XBoxes combined. That's brand power. Most of the people (parents) going to look for them don't know its a Nintendo product, they just know they've got to buy a 'Gameboy' It's a name brand all of it's own.

Nintendo has more or less given up the #1 console position for good, but now Sony's coming to play on Nintendo's home turf, and they're not sitting back on their complacent haunches like they did in the 90s. Imagine the battle the first time if, instead of hanging onto the Super Nintendo too long, Nintendo had unleased a 32-bit CDROM based system with a full array of titles at the same time or close to the same time Sony did. We'd be looking at a completely different playing field right now.

Every console maker and his brother has made this attempt - Atari, Sega, Turbografix, now Nokia trying to get into the game - but no one has been able to dislodge Nintendo from this niche. It'll be a battle, make no mistake, and Sony will spend a ton of money to fight it, but in the end, I don't think they'll win.

Thanks Joshua. Game cube was superior to PS2, but PS2 beat it to market, with the right feature set, and the loyalties of the GB owners didn't save them. The DS is an expensive (to make) slap in the face for GB fans, as now they have forked out for the inferior machine (that PSP is already starting to outsell) they are told that there was a better machine they would have preferred just around the corner, and with what discernible difference over the PSP in game play? This might lead people to say "stuff it, I'll just go and buy a PSP, now!" and not wait around with a dodgy (in terms of old technology) DS. The DS (without extra screen) is what the GBA should have been. The game-cube portable was rumoured around the time of the GBA launch. A DS power style model, was talked about before the Color Gameboy came out (being based on advance 3D chip technology from the early 90's). Nintendo has been playing a dangerous game for years, PSP is a wake up call to the real state of play.

The original Playstation design was the 32bit CD version of the SNES. Nintendo decided to go with the Silicon Graphic N64, and Sony decided to advance to the PS design.

Nintendo has maintained it's lead, not only on young games and brand loyalty, but because their technology has long battery life and is very portable. Now the DS is not so portable, and could have been better (in my opinion) while still maintaining he same battery life, things that would have appeased GB fans over a more powerful PSP. The move to PowerPC GB is a mistake. The Arm still maintains the lead in mips per watt, and the game cube was not a success. Either it is going to succeed over the PSP or it is going to backfire.

Now, my post is there to mention the potential of the GBA2 as a handheld capture, view, control and storage device, for the future. So let's stray back there.


Thanks

Wayne.

I hope to be on topic here. I found this one:

http://www.isgchips.com/Templates/t_quadhdtv.htm

and with as much info avail on the net it would have not been hard to have missed it. Hope it helps.

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : Thanks Joshua. Game cube was superior to PS2, but PS2 beat it to market, with the right feature set, and the loyalties of the GB owners didn't save them. -->>>

Yeah, but GB owners don't buy Nintendo consoles, they buy more GBs. GB owners cross over the whole width of the console maket, including PlayStations and XBoxes, because it is seen as it's own seperate thing. That's what the PSP has got to fight against.


<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : The original Playstation design was the 32bit CD version of the SNES. Nintendo decided to go with the Silicon Graphic N64, and Sony decided to advance to the PS design. -->>>

I know, and that was their mistake. They decided they could spend FOREVER developing their console and their games and the public would wait for them, because they were Nintendo. The N64 was a better machine than the Playstation, but they took to long to put it out, and then they had hardly any games for it. What games they did have were usually good, but to create a large installed base you've got to have a large library. Nintendo got complacent and they got creamed. They're not going to make that mistake again.

Dan,
there is a Panavision QuadHD™ Sensor inside. Its a very interesting, but also dramatically story behind this sensor, maybe the same story like we will see about altasens.

Panavision wonted build a sensor for HDTV application, for example sports: To capture a whole stadion, and zoom in later. They saw big big, business. See they press releases, but then.... The chip was completed and work, but.....it work only in rolling shutter mode.
They dont understand the different to movie cameras although they wrote it in the technical data sheet. The rolling shutter was not so fast as a movie camera shutter and thats why... no businesss. And now, at the web side, the listed application are only Biometrics, Security, Medical, but no TV.....

Thats the story of a great, but rolling shutter sensor....

http://www.panavisionsvi.com/imagers_Quad.htm

one example of a old press release is here:

http://ultimateavmag.com/news/11262/

I don't want to get too side tracked but.

>I know, and that was their mistake. They decided they could spend FOREVER developing their console and their games and the public would wait for them, because they were Nintendo. ... Nintendo got complacent and they got creamed. They're not going to make that mistake again.

Yes that's also my point, about being complacent with the GB. Making a model that deviates from their low powered small, cheap to produce form factor and falls shorter than the PS2 by such a margin. Maybe the delay for the GBA2 is to bring it closer to this form facrtor. But luring users to the DS along side the old model (as done in times past) when it's so close. PS2 loyality is just enough to steal the market from the GB. But enough speculation, we will see, in time.

The problem with the 64 was going cartridge instead of CD. It restricted the size of games, made the games cost a lot more to produce, and lifted their price. I know there was talk of technologies at that time, that would allow for low priced mass storage of games on cartridges, that never came through. Maybe that is what they were intending.

Dan:

This sensor has been mentioned a number of times.

Rai:
Zoom in lattter, yes I had that idea years ago, big sensor then do pans/zooms. I can still see big use for it (for my original application for it).

<<<-- Originally posted by Wayne Morellini : I don't want to get too side tracked but.

Yes that's also my point, about being complacent with the GB. Making a model that deviates from their low powered small, cheap to produce form factor and falls shorter than the PS2 by such a margin. Maybe the delay for the GBA2 is to bring it closer to this form facrtor. But luring users to the DS when it' so close. PS2 loyality is just enough to steal the market from the GB. But enough speculation, we will see, in time. -->>>

Well, I dont' want to get too side tracked either, so this will be the last bit on this - but I don't think PS2 loyalty will transfer to PSP loyalty. History has proven to date that console loyalty has nothing to do with portable sales.

I'd also point out that the DS, while a mistake as an interim solution, is not a Gameboy and is not replacing the Gameboy. The GBA SP is still available and is still selling strong.

http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/processors/luke/

Better specs than ever, but still waiting for new processors with dual core. I don't know what they mean by Fast Ethernet (hopefully note 100/10 again) and it does have dual PCI-E. I wonder when there will be cheap cameralink PCI-E cards?

It is meant to be for those panel computers (IE LCD viewfinder). If it does have Gige/s, then it might be suitable for 720p camera going on the (GPU shader assisted) performance people are getting in capture.

Wayne.

The Xenon will reportedly have 1 Tera-Flop of processing power according to spong, about 5 times more than what I have previously heard (and as much as I have heard for eh Sony PS3):

http://news.spong.com/detail/news.asp?prid=8436

Release date is 2005 holidays, but does that mean Christmas or summer holidays?

1 Tera-flop is 1000 Giga-flops, or over 20 times what we need to compress a HD digital stream live (and somewhere between 20-40 times that of the top Pentium 4, I think). So this should be able to handle capture/compression/editing UHD/IMAX type images, if enough Hard drives can be attached (the big question) and a interface can be made to the camera. At the moment no details of Gige/etc interfaces has emerged, needed for next HD cameras.

Programming for the system can be done on a PC in MS's XNA, and transfered across (so maybe some compatibility with present code). Alternatively, if a PC emulator ever comes into existence for it, it could run existing software (given the interface issue is solved).

There, apparently, is some sort of XBOX PC planned as well.

I am quiet surprised at all this, so I wait to see if it's true.

I expect upto dual 2Ghz processors by the end of the year.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050310_120805.html

Now what do I do, Apple Mac Mini, or dual cored VIA?

Thanks

Wayne.

DUAL CORE

Yes, I believe it is dual core, that is what VIA told me 4 months ago, but this article doesn't seem toi clear, plus I wasn't in a very reading state of mind when I read it.

The thing is their new cores will be 1W @ !GHZ, they could add 4, 8, or 20 cores and still be low powered. 2Ghz will be 7W each core. That is the same reason that ARM embeeded chips are clocked down so much, to give them mvery low powered specs.

Here is an interesting article on IBM Millipede technology:

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050311_162423.html

Basically they can put 100GB on a chip sized device (inside a SD card). Now if they can keep the cost comparable to HD (they might be able to undercut it I think) low capacity hard disks, and high capacity SD cards, might have a hard time. Put 10 together you have 1 terabyte is the size of less than a 1.8 inch drive. Triple that and we could be talking about capacity for Ultra HD.

Now the downside, been waiting for this technology for years, and it will still be a couple of more years before it is scheduled to come out. I find it remarkable they did it at all, considering how fiddly the technology is compared to a circuited alternative (and I wonder what happens when you drop one of these).

Obin, dual processor, unfortunately.

Wayne.

Read over Tomshardware Cebit coverage.

Would be interesting to know what you can do with 12Mb/s plus on Dual Layer now days.

JVC and Panasonic are introducing sub $10K cameras. I Imagine they are to be sub $5K too. They are finally moving beyond the limping HDV-1 with 50-100Mb/s. Hopefully somebody can do this at Mpeg2 variable compression with true RAW component output. They could easily record this 100Mb/s to HDD with this.

http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/jvcprohd/hd100teaser.php

Now a question comes up, is wide aperture (for shallow DOF) 1/3 inch (just question, I prefer at least 1/2 inch) with dual slope good enough? Dual slope provides more range, though not more sensitivity at the low end. So the question arises, like what Rai did with wide aperture lens on Drake, can it be done to make a dual slope 1/3 inch look like a 2/3 inch?