100%, uncompressed (but motion blur also depends on shutter). Compression leads to compromises, something like cineform has very low compromises, and usually not related to this area. It is the level next to the best (uncompressed)

hard drive HDMI, Tzero has been developing an wireless HDMI standard (wavelet compression up to 200mb/s 4:2:2 possible single codec, 4:4:4 400mb/s dual codec (or something like that)) based off their Wireless USB standard, an adaptor that could take HDMI and save to an USB drive, should be easy (are there any manufacturers listening?).

I was looking forward to the Philips wireless HDMI over the Tzero because the Philips is uncompressed, but the possibility of making use of the Tzero compression is an interesting prospect for convenience over a dedicated computer or laptop.

Mike

Thanks for posting the tests. I don't know if you were aware of this, but I offered beer or chocolates to the first person to post good HDMI vs HDV comparisons from the HV20.

So... any requests?

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Well beer sounds great but Derek deserves all the credit. I got a case of chilled Molson Canadian sitting right here. Cheers!

I should point out, the existing wireless HDMI solution is just an link, but their is the possibility there for somebody to make it more. I have heard of them demonstrating it with something like 70mb/s, from memory, and it was not so impressive, but the chip and the link is capable of an much higher data rate (so remember this if you see one being demoed).

PCMCIA is too slow, so it will not work.


Express34 on a Mac?

Derek

a) what beer / chocolate do you want?

b) I want to point the Red people to your still samples but don't want to overwhelm your server. Mind if I mirror them?

Cheers

Bruce

Well beer sounds great but Derek deserves all the credit. I got a case of chilled Molson Canadian sitting right here. Cheers!

Thanks Mike, yeah... do you think you can fedex me one of those babies? ;)

Derek

a) what beer / chocolate do you want?

b) I want to point the Red people to your still samples but don't want to overwhelm your server. Mind if I mirror them?

Cheers

Bruce

Beer, yes! Seriously though, it was my pleasure posting those. I'd been dying to test that card for so long.

Yeah, go for it. It's all good. :)

Impressive. I am now sorely tempted to get an Intensity (although my camera is not a HV20 but a Sony HVR-A1U).

A couple of questions though:
1) I have Premiere, so should I stick with Aspect HD or do I need to move over to NeoHD?
2) I am not familiar with PCI express, does that mean they won't work in the normal slots? I am not looking for realtime, just quality.

Frank,

Aspect HD v5.0 includes all the features of NEO HDV.
Prospect HD v3.0 includes all the features of NEO HD.
So unless you want 10-bit, Aspect HD will be fine.

However, the Sony A1U doesn't have HDMI, although you should be able to use the analog connection via an Intensity Pro card.

As data is delivered at presentation speed, the requirement for real-time is the same as the requirement for quality -- unless you only want to shoot timelaps.

PCI express or PCI-e is the new common bus, quickly replacing the old PCI/PCI-X slot.

However, the Sony A1U doesn't have HDMI, although you should be able to use the analog connection via an Intensity Pro card.
.

That's precisely what I was thinking of doing.

I guess I should have clarified about the real time thing. I was saying that I would be glad to sacrifice real time for quality if need be which I found has given me some good results in After Effects so far.

The one question that remains if I don't have the PC express bus, does that mean I am SOL with the Intensity Pro unless I buy a new machine with the PCI/e bus action?

Frank,

Yes, you will need PCI-e.

I m a bit confused that other post say HV20 doesn;t work well with intensity
pls anyone can confirm that is working now or only sometimes working??


thanks
JY

At present the Black Magic card works sporadiclly... works for some folks
doesn't work for most folks...

The people over at Black Magic have an HV20 cam in hand and are working on
the fix and they are broadcasting that they are close to a fix...

The Intensity Pro card should start shipping very soon...

More interested in lossless performance

SheerVideo IS lossless. Mathematically, absolutely, perfectly, bit-for-bit lossless.

Andreas Wittenstein
BitJazz Inc.
http://www.bitjazz.com/

Andreas,

It might be lossless, but Wayne wants 4 to 6:1 lossless for this noisy source. That no one can do.

I should point out, the existing wireless HDMI solution is just an link, but their is the possibility there for somebody to make it more. I have heard of them demonstrating it with something like 70mb/s, from memory, and it was not so impressive, but the chip and the link is capable of an much higher data rate (so remember this if you see one being demoed).

Hmm, maybe I was wrong, that 70mb/s was an camera stream that was being compared.

SheerVideo IS lossless. Mathematically, absolutely, perfectly, bit-for-bit lossless.

Andreas Wittenstein
BitJazz Inc.
http://www.bitjazz.com/


Took me an while to find what you guys are referring too. I was not referring to sheervideo, but that I was more interested in the lossless performance than the processing requirements in Microcosm, which David would know.

Whale I respect your work David, even promote it, I do not think that the compression industry is anywhere near it's max efficiency or potential, their is much gain left to be gained in new approaches. The problem with industries is they go down paths and start to perceive they can't see much more improvement, and refinement of the existing becomes harder and harder. But despite that, I still think that an bunch of pixels that is 50% accurate according to the original pixels is better than an bunch of pixels that is 20% accurate because of noise. I appreciate your comment about how much can be done in post, and realise that better processing techniques can deliver that on camera in future. The discussion was originally an comparison with Microcosm (in quality and compression). So, it is probably best to get away from this circular debating on compression philosophy.

Microcosm may be able to get the file sizes a little bit smaller but it is ultra slow and will never be able to capture video live. It was intended as a perfect format for archive reasons and isn't even recommended to edit with let alone capture to. Sheervideo on the other hand can sometimes run faster then even uncompressed codecs. Microcosm works great for high quality film sources and computer rendered graphics.

Some say a 2:1 compression rato isn't very good but I think it is much better in terms of bandwidth. Using Sheervideo can mean getting by with a 2 drive raid-0 or even a cheap raid-5 compared to uncompressed needing a 4 drive raid-0.

Beyond that Cineform really is the next best option because the quality is pretty darn near uncompressed and visually lossless and it is fast and the file sizes are even better to deal with. Cineform really is the ultimate balance between ease of use, quality and speed.

I would like to know a bit more about this to. Any owners care to clarify? I have the vision of it being very similar to an analog capture card (only digital :P), thus allowing me to select any codec's for a/v i want (and even the software i use to capture). Is it not like this?

Any owners of the Intensity able to shed some light for me on this? not sure what to expect. Will be getting the Pro versions things go as planned.

Thanks

Microcosm may be able to get the file sizes a little bit smaller but it is ultra slow and will never be able to capture video live. It was intended as a perfect format for archive reasons and isn't even recommended to edit with let alone capture to. Sheervideo on the other hand can sometimes run faster then even uncompressed codecs. Microcosm works great for high quality film sources and computer rendered graphics.

Some say a 2:1 compression rato isn't very good but I think it is much better in terms of bandwidth. Using Sheervideo can mean getting by with a 2 drive raid-0 or even a cheap raid-5 compared to uncompressed needing a 4 drive raid-0.

Beyond that Cineform really is the next best option because the quality is pretty darn near uncompressed and visually lossless and it is fast and the file sizes are even better to deal with. Cineform really is the ultimate balance between ease of use, quality and speed.

The rate of processing power increase, soon Microcosm will be able, even on small systems, at the moment maybe large systems, and if they converted to use powerful GPU. But I don't plan on using last generation processing, but next. With cineform, I noticed softness and lower contrast, has this been improved in the last couple of years? I am still happy with cineform (particularly the Raw Bayer) but to me uncompressed still looks an bit more pleasurable. But if cinemas stream digital cinema in highly compressed formats, the difference will be even more away from uncompressed.

However, the noise removal debate is an future debate, I plan of instituting techniques to reduce the noise to an minimum while filming anyway, so I would expect the max out of whichever codec. Just picked up an Sony Bayar mount lens the other days fro around $4US (they wanted to sell it to me for around $1.5US, but I gave them $5 Australian). Quiet good, might see how it goes for resolution in an adaptor. Aperture of 1.4:1 zoom lens, their was an better one somebody took off with before I got there.

There is a post on the wearable post thread about Adjusting quality on the MJPEG codec
http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?p=723318&highlight=quality#post723318

>>>>>>>
The cpu, T7200 with 667 MHz RAM, has enough power to record 60i without dropping frames using BM MJPEG. The data rate seems to be 13 MB/s. What most people may not know is that BM supplies a second MJPEG codec that isn't used with their recording app and has selectable quality values. Upping the bit rate to 20MB/s makes a noticeable difference in visual quality. They number used is similar to JPEG compression quality numbers, where 100 is supposed to be lossless, and 80 is default. 20 MB/s is 92 on the scale.
>>>>>>

Kevin seems to have disappeared - just wondering if someone knows how to do this.. Perhaps a comparison with a higher quality Blackmagic Intensity codec will be helpful..

Cheers!

Hi,

Has anyone considered or tried this on a MacBook Pro:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/497442-REG/Magma_EB1F_ExpressBox1_Pro_ExpressCard_34_to.html

http://www.magma.com/products/pciexpress/expressbox1/

Technically, the Intensity Card only requires a 1x PCIe slot, and the Magma provides exactly that.

I can see storage being a bit of an issue but if you used DVCPRO HD 1080i it might be possible, as the disk requirements are not as onerous, so FW800 would work.

Andrew.

It has been mentioned ad nauseum here, mostly by people pointing it out as if no one knows about it but them. The thing is the price is ludicrous, so not many are willing to pay almost what they paid for the HV20 for that. I have seen one person say they are using just fine however, so it does work, as you would expect. We are all hoping and praying for an ExpressCard version of the Intensity.

Hi Mike. There are reports stating that the HDMI input is after the DSP downrezzing i.e. it is 1440 to 1920 upconversion.
Any idea if its the same for component ?
It would make sense for the component to be the signal after the sensor as its analog anyway..

Just wondering if I could use Intensity Pro with component and actually capture 10-bit 1080p ?
Love to hear your view on this..


I made some comparisons of Derek's footage and found what to me looks like very positive results as to whether or not 1920x1080 is downrezzed to 1440x1080 and back to 1920x1080 before HDMI output. I used Photoshop to zoom in 1600% on a target area of the HDV sample which we know has been through the down-conversion process due to the HDV codec. As I examined the pixels, both closely and at a distance, I saw vertical lines. I highlighted them to reveal that they were evenly spaced at every 4th horizontal pixel, which happens to correspond to pixel interpolation of every 4th pixel associated with a 25% horizontal pixel contraction and expansion in the conversion process.

Then I examined the same area on Derek's uncompressed sample and did not see any evidence of vertical patterns, which is a very good thing because that means down-conversion before HDMI output is not evident within these samples.

I uploaded the highlighted comparisons to http://thomann.net/hv20/interpolation/

EDIT: What is most notable about these comparisons is that each pixel within the uncompressed sample sharply appears to represent a single individual color on its own, especially when compared to HDV. That is some incredible footage. I am extremely impressed.

EDIT: I have also examined NEOHDV against NEOHD and Uncompressed. As expected, since NEOHDV is 1440x1080, the same lines are evident every 4th horizontal pixel; whereas they are not evident with NEOHD and uncompressed which are full 1920x1080. This is further evidence that HDMI out has not been down-converted to 1440x1080. I have added these comparisons to the link above as well.

This is an old test and since then more recent discussions have lead to the general acception that there is no 1920 sensor -> 1440 dsp -> 1920 HDMI taking place. The purpose of my comparisons with Derek's samples was to see to what extend that can be determined. To me it is clear that the results of the comparison of 1920 samples next to known down-rezzed 1440 samples illustrate that no down-rez/up-rez had taken place on on the 1920 samples.

Just wondering if I could use Intensity Pro with component and actually capture 10-bit 1080p ?
Love to hear your view on this..

I second what Mike said regarding HDMI - it appears to be full 1920 being fed to the HDMI port rather than upscaled 1440.

It's also been verified that the HV20's HDMI out is 8bit, not 10bit. The only 10bit camera w/digital out under $10k is the EX1 (and that's HD-SDI). Also, the Intensity Pro's HDMI is 8bit as well from what I know, so, it'd take a new version of that card to go to the next level.

As for 10bit analoge out of the HV20, that's a good question!

I own the Decklink HD Exteme - the older cousin of the Intensity cards - analogue in as well. If the Intensity can't go above 8-bits component in, the Decklink HD Extreme might be able to (just to be able to check). I'm positive that it has 14bit analoge component out - which means it may have a high bit-depth input as well.

My HV20 is out of comission again thanks to Canon ( http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=98298 ) but I'll check the analoge input once it's back.

Can someone test with their HV20 and Intensity Pro in the meantime?

Hiya,
you see the HDV shot in the photoshop file - look round the eyes and there is horizontal lines in the curve that seem like compression.
this is exactly what im finding when i convert my hdv DOF adapter footage with hv20 to computer... (actually even without the DOF)
on the tv it looks great no banding, but once its in the computer everything bright red has this slight horizontal banding that looks like jpeg/mpeg compression, is it something im doing wrong? ive tried tests with cineform and raw m2t files but both the same... im sure it never used to do this, the television i linked it up to with hdmi from the camera has no enhancements turned on and raw footage looks nice, with no red problems.

pic attached is from a fullframe grab its something in the background out of focus but open it 100% and you can see the red lines im talking about, hv20 problem?.

any ideas?
cheers
Oli