Here you go -

http://www.convergent-design.com/CD_...DConnectMI.htm

Nope, sorry man, checked it out and it still needs to be plugged in and, I'm not sure, I just took a quick look around in the manual, but it looked like it needed to use a computer application for it to work.

You need to connect it to a computer to set the options, but not to run.

As for 'plugged in', I thought you meant AC.

But speaking of power, it would be nice to see this unit with the flexibility of the Nebtek monitors, with screw mounts for all major battery mounts, and a 2.1mm DC for power in. That way it will work for anybody's set-up just by adding the mount you need or running off existing battery power taps.

OK, Sony has a HDV camcorder HVR-Z7U now that records to CF cards on-board.

This is one step in the right direction, although apparently, it still records m2t's (after compression.)

Next step: can Sony please wake up and adopt the Cineform codec to record in this format, again on-board, Before Compression, on solid media?

Good luck with that! I'd expect Sony to introduce yet another proprietary system if they ever moved in that direction.

Questions
 

There are some things that I would like some clarification on:

1. Will the SOLID use any portable USB 2.0 hard drive? Will it work with the drives that use the USB port to power them? Is it possible to connect more than one drive at a time?

2. Will the SOLID upconvert/upsample the 8-bit uncompressed HD stream from my V1U to 10-bit Cineform HD? In real time?

3. Will the SOLID upscale 1440x1080 to 1920x1080, or is that still to be determined? Will it upscale in real time? (I would really like to have my video upscaled to 1920x1080)

4. How would you select to record in different frame rates such 24p or 30p, on the camera, the SOLID, or both?

5. I have a Mac and I use Final Cut Pro (version 5.1.4), what Cineform codec would I have to purchase so that I could edit in Cineform without converting to any other inferior codec to edit?

Also, this isn't so important, but is the white exterior of the SOLID going to stay white? Or is black going to be optional? (I would much rather have black)

The name SOLID sounds like something that RED would come up with. Why not name it The Cineform Medium I?

Thanks and have a Happy New Year!

Everything that can handle to data rates. If it intend to power any device that meets USB power specs. Hubs, aren't supported, so with the intended one USB slot, multiple devices simultaneously are unlikely.

Yes. The is the standard behavior for all CineForm codecs.

Unnecessary, all HMDI cameras output 1920x1080 not 1440x1080.

The DDR will record what is output over HMDI. 60i to 24p pulldown removal will be a user controlable option.

You can edit with the CineForm decoder for free. However NEO HD/2K/4K would be recomended for master and effects work.

Undecided.

Is that a compliment? :) SOLID was a joke name give by a forum user. We haven't official release the products name. SOLID might stick.

Thanks for your quick reply. I spent several hours yesterday reading the whole forum about the SOLID. I have read so many articles and e-books that say that the V1U outputs 1440x1080 through the HDMI port, but they never have used the HDMI port on any of these cameras. So I'll believe you and I'm very happy to here that my camera can output 1920x1080.

One alternate suggestion for the Audio in, is 1/4" TRS jacks, they're small form factor, balanced line, fairly rugged, less prone to interference than RCA, and easily converted to XLR, RCA, or 1/8" mini if that floats your boat. But the big selling feature is the reassuring snap that you get when you plug them in, that you don't get with RCA plugs. XLR obviously has a nice locking mechanism, but if it's cost prohibitive, 1/4" TRS would be the way to go.

A cheap alternative to the flip function would be to have mounting screw holes on both sides of the monitor so you could just mount it "upside down" if necessary. Flip the overlay menu on the screen instead of the image.

If a component version ended up being $100 more like the difference between the Intensity and Intensity Pro, I don't think anyone could really complain about that.

I think the name of it should be the CineForm F**K YEAH! :-)

that might be a tough marketing issue though.

Just found this thread - hats off to Cineform for recognizing the value of the user community in developing product functionality.

My background is in broadcast/corporate production... cameras costing many tens of thousands of dollars are commonly used. Like many in that market, I don't want to own such a camera, because the next project will require something different - I'll rent.

However (like many in that market), I do own a V1 and am giving serious consideration to an EX1 in the future, cameras that can work well on lower-budget and self-funded projects.

Speaking for this type of user, there are a few pro/broadcast features that make it much more likely that I'd integrate the "Solid" in more projects.

Couldn't agree more with Alexander. A robust balanced connector for low-impedance audio interfaces with the pro world. Anything else doesn't. There's not a lot of wiggle room here - audio is extremely important to working pros; including the industry-standard connection system helps open up a larger market.

Will the Cineform file container support multichannel audio? Getting camera audio in 2 channels and 2 more channels with mixer output line-level and A-D would be pretty cool.

Likewise, a robust power system is essential. The Sony prosumer battery system is very good and not very expensive (good enough for Sound Devices)... and compatibility with 11-30v 4-pin XLR systems also brings Solid into the world that pro/broadcast people understand.

Timecode!!! I tried to read every post in this thread and could find nobody talking about timecode! My understanding is that camera timecode is not present in the HDMI interface spec. (?) PLEASE don't have every clip start at "0:00.00" and call it good. You'd cut off a significant piece of the market that uses timecode for sync of multiple cameras (that'd be sales of multiple Solids!) and dual-system sound. Ideally there would be a jammable TC generator that would timestamp each clip.

Finally, and I know this has been touched on above, there are lots of event videographers out there who need media for 4 hours or so. CF is great, don't get me wrong, but only represents the piece of the market that either work on short-form projects, or can dump to laptop frequently (not as portable as some need), or can afford lots of CF. An internal or strap-on hard drive would be essential for many purchasers.

And here's the name for this product: Strap-On Solid!

Hmmm...

Smells of Steely Dan... :)

**SIGNS UP** for beta testing!

Anybody related to Oprah or Bono ? Please ask them to donate towards
African Filmmakers.

I need one of those / The HDSDI version.

Will send postcard of me, shooting whatever ..........

Put a Firewire port (6-pin) on it and I will sell both my Firestores tomorrow.
EDIT: Okay okay, I'd actually go for it with component I/O too...either way, just don't
forget the folks sitting on the border with the 110's.

Jeffery Haas
shooter-editor-JVC 110 owner
Mansfield TX

Having a Canon XH-A1 I would have to wait for the component in version but here are my thoughts.

I would like to be able to have four tracks of audio. I am not a pro on this but I guess that for they who have HDMI they get 2 audio tracks from the HDMI signal and 2 for the additional audio inputs. When using component in there is only video and hence I would only get 2 tracks of audio (using up the analogue inputs). Having four analogue inputs with the components in makes it much more interesting for me.

Make the AD-converters 24 bit and 96 khz sampling if possible. Of course make sure the AD-converters is of good quality and with excellent S/N-ratio.

Balanced audio would be very, very nice but I would accept RCA if I had to. As an alternative to XLR you can use balanced 1/4" phonejackets (very common in the music industry). I would prefer them instead of mini-XLRs. However an additionally option to keep a low profile of the device is to use a breakout cabling bunde similar to what M-Audio has on their Delta 1010LT
http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_u...10LT-main.html

In the same way you provide output power for an alternative HD-SDI to HDMI converter it would be nice to get the power to drive one (or two if I get my 4 channel audio) of these babies:
http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/DMP3-focus.html

It would be interesting if it can generate and receive timecode. I would imagine a scenario of having 2-3 cameras and 2-3 of these recordes syncing up with each other. It would generate more sales and what a neat flow it would be in post to not have to sync up all of the files. Midi devices (music instruments) have had MTC (Midi Time Code) since the 80s and I can't imagine it too be very expensive to add. It can even be propriety Cineform time code so that your devices talk with each other but then perhaps a pro version where it can generate external timecode for they who need it. Maybe firewire does this already with some cool gadget but I haven't heard of any though...

It might be obvious but running by both chord and battery would be nice especially if they are used in a studio scenario with multiple devices.

Make it possible to set naming convention of the files. A Fostex portable recorder has a nice way of doing it. I can set prefix e.g. x_03a_nnn where nnn is the take counter that adds one for each press on record. Of course I can reset that counter to 1. I think the Cineform HDLink does something similar when capturing from tape but if it's in this device I would actually rename the scene and angle.

I guess that's all I can think of now concerning the specs. Would I buy it for 2k if it had my additional specs? Mmm... most likely. I currently don't make a living on moviemaking so it's stretching it a bit. But I can't see why a pro or a semi pro wouldn't buy it. It saves precious capturing time and in a multi recording scenario it would be gold. The greatest benefit I see would be in combination with the audio since you save time in post and can get a feed different sources such as a mixer in a live concert situation.

Very interesting !
 

So far, I would buy the device as it is described on the Cineform website.

Sure, dual XLR inputs would make it just a bit more perfect, but as it is, my sound mixer can output 2 tracks rca audio as well as XLR. I could live with that !

Let's hope I can buy one soon !

Awhile back on this thread I mentioned a $999.00 price point to be a "magic" price for me. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that this device will NEVER be a standard accessory to an HDMI consumer camcorder. The general public can't even discern HDTV from SD broadcasts!

Getting this done for $2000.00 makes a $999.00 HDV camera not that much different (image quality due to lossless compression, not lens characteristics) from any of the $6000.00 pro-sumer cams... so $2k is a pretty good deal... Even turning a new SONY HVR-Z7U into a decent Pro rig.

** I would definitely BUY THIS CINEFORM RECORDER before I buy a new camera!


:)

Quality of A/D conversion for Audio
 

Interestingly, of all people who commented on audio input options for this recorder, almost no-one (including me) mentioned the Quality of AD converter.

Quality is hugely important, so:

> 24-bit 48Khz processing
> 105dB+ dynamic range
> better than -100dB THD + noise
> Flat frequency response 40-16,000 (+/- 0.1dB)

is what we need.

All this is needed to preserve the quality of the double-system audio to be fed in from the pro mic preamp/mixer at the time of recording.

Am I asking too much?

For the reference: $120 Emu 0202 standalone AD/DA box does even better than aforementioned specs, so it's very doable and should be planned.

I hope :)

I totally agree that the quality of the AD converters are important. With 4 channel audio it can be that little thing that tilts us to buy this instead of something else. And like you mentioned I can only guess that there is a lot of fairly priced high quality AD converters on the component market that makes sense to add to this kind of product.

I am eagerly awaiting what the people at Cineform will say and.. when... :)

I guess I'm still a little confused over the need for XLR connections, or even the analog connections for that matter. What application would you use these for?

I suppose it'd be great if it would allow more inputs than what the camcorder offers for recording, or better quality A/D conversion. But aren't we still using the camcorder to plug the mics into? Isn't that A/D conversion still happening at the camera end with its pre-amps and sending it out through the HDMI? Aren't we still recording the same audio to the HCR-1 that the camcorder would record to tape?

I suppose it *would* be great if the HCR-1 could improve on its pre-amps and offer something better audio-wise than what the camcorder provides, but I didn't think that was the intended purpose of the recorder. And if we were sending mics directly to the HCR-1 w/ XLR or 1/4-inch or whatever, wouldn't that mean we would need to battery-power our mics, or go through a mixer that supplies phantom power? I think I'm missing something here...

I too am eager to hear what the latest development has been at Cineform on this product. Hopefully they can tease us with a few more details to hold us over until NAB.

Yes, and on-cam mic preamps are subpar by manufacturers' design.

The video community consensus seems to be that on-cam audio is artificially kept low quality by the manufacturers of the prosumer cameras to protect their pro model lines. Remember, quality of audio makes more significant impact on the movie viewer than quality of visuals. So camera makers don't want us to get the same audio for less than $10K that they equip their $80K cams with.

On the other hand, quality audio is actually, truly difficult to achieve, and only a few reasonably priced mic preamps are available that feature good specs.

So the name of the game right now is to get a sub-$10K cam that has pretty good video quality, and pair it with the quality external mic preamp, and then multiplex these video and audio streams into one synchronized video file.

That's why Cineform Recorder box must have quality audio bus, on top of video.

He he.. you beat me to it. :)

Additionally I would like to add that the more audio inputs you have the more mics you can use e.g. wireless, boomoperator, ambience, feed from mixers et.c.

The obvious benefit of what Alex mentioned is that you save a lot of time in post production since you don't need to sync video+sound manually.

Yeah all those advantages sound great.

But if we suppose that Cineform will stick with the analog audio connections, if I don't use them, can I still count on it to record the audio in sync with what's coming from the microphones I've attached to the camera. While still being identical in audio quality with what I would be recording to the tape?

I guess I just want to make sure that there wouldn't be any drawback.

If you are using HDMI it will be the same quality (already digital). Don't know if it will be post sound compression in this case or not.

If you have component i.e. no audio transmitted you will probably loose some quality since it will go like this: mic --> camera --> recorder
There will be a quality loss but it might not be audiable.

Pardon my ignorance,
 

but, while I've learned a lot from this thread alone, the more I learn, the more I realize how little I still know. It seems the "benefit" of every little tidbit I learn results in more questions in an inverse degree of magnitude to my newly learned info. (In simple terms, I'm uncertain that I "know" anything at all)!
I've never worked w/component. But, for the lack of audio,
what would be lost/sacrificed if the chain were
mic -> mixer -> recorder?

TC maybe?

(Any replies will be my lesson for today).

Thanks.

Well, that would be a nice flow but you would probably use a dedicate mic pre-amp with better quality. A mixer has the option of sending the signal all different routes to sound effects, inserts et.c. so it will probably have a longer signal chain than a clean pre-amp. Though it might be a field-mixer which is I guess somewhere in between a pre-amp and a fullblown mixer...

The best flow would be:
mic -> pre-amp -> recorder

since inside your camera you will probably have poorer mic pre-amps and it might even be encoded to digital signal on the input and then decoded to analog on the output (maybe not since the video signal is uncompressed on the output).

BTW, you have to watch-out with the specs on those small, cheap "24/48" recorders . . . often times the specs they list as far as dynamic range, etc. are based more off the combination of parts in laboratory and spec-sheets vs. the "real-world" scenario . . . not that they're not "good", but just that a lot of times when they list 105dbA, etc., it could be more along the lines of the theoretical dynamic range of the chip inside that is doing the A/D conversion rather than the actual measured response from the recorder. This is not disengenuous, I mean the A/D converter, and even the electronics themselves might have that theoretical limit, but that may not be what you really get once everything is combined into one package and you're recording in the "real-world".

Also sometimes total dynamic range is measured by the absence of signal, and then the maximum signal, vs. what the possible "captureable" dynamic range is (i.e., what the electronics can capture in dynamic range all at once) . . . for instance some LCD manufacturers get their higher dynamic range numbers not by making a darker display with better black levels, but by making a brighter one and then measuring from when the monitor has been dimmed all the way down to the brightest the monitor can deliver . . . but the "true" full-swing dynamic range when the monitor is on is less than the advertised numbers since the backlight washes out the black-levels (i.e., black against white on the same screen at the same time).

Another thing to consider is that you can get a very high-dynamic range A/D converter, but if you do not properly isolate those electronics, and there is something noisy near-by on the PCB, you're going to lose the benefit of the higher-dynamic range gain that 24-bits gets you over 16-bits . . . in other worlds it does not take much noise (and for most intents and purposes, it would be hardly noticeable) to eat up those lower bits with an A/D converter that has a linear response, making the gain in bit-depth simply a gain in the ability to digitize noise.

Just to mention that my Z1 does have a HDMI plug !

all the best

Hervé

AES audio inputs
 

Please offer AES audio inputs. That is the only way to preserve the quality of audio collected by audio professionals.

I agree, I would prefer AES inputs instead of any analog, simplifies the design. That is not the only driving factor.

I have no problem with only digital inputs and I can imagine that it's a lot easier to develop an all-digital version than one that need to consider the digitization of analog data. However I think it's important is to consider how it can fit into a reasonable flow and who is the target market for this product. I did a search on field mixers that provides digital outputs and it landed on 3800 USD as I recall it. That is definately out of my budget and I couldn't find much else on it. It would be nice to have suggested flows and what products to use.

In my opinion, the whole point for Cineform recorder is to accept Analog audio and process it in high quality into Digital audio.

It's not about what's easier, it's about what users actually need.

Sony implements mpeg2 compression because it is easier, but users really need Cineform on-cam.

Cineform recorder should have high quality analog audio inputs (whether xlr or rca, balanced or unbalanced) because analog output is what most of the mic preamps' provide.

Any ETA on this baby?

I agree, and I still say that XLRs are the way to go. Most pro mics are this way and there is no logical reason to go with another type of plug.

Then if the CineForm box doesn't take analogue, then we need an A2D converter which would make the "workflow" more cumbersome.

Forcing the audio to go through the camera seems like a great idea if camera makers would make great pre amps in their lower end cameras which they clearly do not because of tiered pricing for their products. HDMI will be top notch video quality, lets make sure we have top notch audio as well.

The CineForm product only becomes cool because it could allow quality at a certain price point of cameras. Add quality XLRs to the HDMI workflow, we will get an unprecedented level of quality and portability.
M

Second the motion for high quality analogue audio input even if it costs a bit more. I'd be willing to compromise on the connector type in the interest of compactness - ie mini XLR or 1/4" TRS - but, of course, XLR is first choice.

Would a multi-pin connector (eg Hirose) and breakout cable like you would use with a mixer (2 x balanced audio + mic return) be a way of simplifying connections, if this is the problem?

The field is heating up.
 

Not to hijack this thread, or take away from the promise of the CF recorder, but to point out our options are growing. (I'm looking forward to the CF box; I just hope they've decided on the final version and it doesn't end up in perpetual design mode, meeting the same end as the CinePorter). This seems to be the newest tool from Focus Enhancements:

http://www.focusinfo.com/solutions/catalog.asp?id=183

I got this in an e-mail yesterday. While it's not the same as the CF recorder, hence not really competition for it, and is intended for a different purpose, I think it proves that the manufacturers realize we're serious about wanting the ability to produce better images to capitalize on the promise of HD.

It takes either component-out or HDMI and converts it to SDI, for both SD and HD. It doesn't create a CineFormed output, and it has no USB or firewire ports to record to an external drive; the web page describing it shows the intended flow to be either:
cam -> firestor converter -> switcher, or
cam -> firestor converter -> VTR, or
cam -> firestor converter -> monitor.

and it attaches between the cam and tripod head. It takes 2 audio inputs and embeds them in the SDI out. MSRP = $ 699.

I wasn't aware they were working on this. I don't have SDI, so likely would not have paid attention to announcements about it, but it could prove helpful for those who do.

I take it as a good sign that we are likely to see more similarly helpful tools in the future.

Sorry, I fail to see how the aforementioned device correlates to Cineform recorder box, or it's concept, in any way at all.

The correlation I see is simply this:
 

I like the fact that we're being presented with more tools to make better/broader use of equipment that many of us already own. If FE is willing to do this, what else might they, or others, have on the drawing board? It's not earthshaking, for sure, but, speaking for myself, I find it encouraging. I thought others might, too. (Didn't mean to annoy w/my naivete).