HV20 1920x1080 4.2.2 Uncompressed

[pat@hpnc.com]

I was reading today about using the HV20s HDMI connection and the Intensity Pro $349 to capture uncompressed 1920x1080 4.2.2. Cuts down on your mobility but still seems like an amazingly cheap way to get that quality.

http://blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/

[Bruce Allen]

I have directed something for a shot this way. Yes it does look better, yes it is also a bit of a pain in the neck... it's a good thing the people I was working with owned the setup and knew how to make it work. They were very nice and cool and knew what they were doing, otherwise I would have gone nuts. We were using Beta drivers though, so maybe it is less of a hassle now. Next time I do it, I plan on remembering to record to tape as well ;)

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Gabriel Beaudry]

RedRock Micro made a M2 35mm adaptor for the HV20: http://prolost.blogspot.com/2007/06/redrock-gets-it.html

[pat@hpnc.com]

Thanks for the info Bruce. It looked like it would be a pain in the neck. But probobly really handy for some things. It will be interesting to see what people are able to come up with. I know on the HV20 forum several people are trying to work out something portable and affordable.

Drizzt yep nice setup. I think thats the one that has all of the HV20 owners drooling haha.

[Justin Anderson]

curious, does the XH A1 have an HDMI connector?

[pat@hpnc.com]

Sorry not sure Justin. But just glancing at the specs I did not see it.

[David Mullen ASC]

curious, does the XH A1 have an HDMI connector?

I believe it has an HD-SDI-out which does the same thing, which is send out 4:2:2 1920 x 1080 59.94i without the HDV compression.

Actually, now I see that the XH G1 has HD-SDI-out, and the XL H1, but not the XH A1.

[Bruce Allen]

Actually, now I see that the XH G1 has HD-SDI-out, and the XL H1, but not the XH A1.

Yes - that's the primary difference between the A and G models.

With the A1, you have component HD, no uncompressed digital output. Not that component HD is that bad, mind you!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[P Andersson]

is there anyone that knows the difference in quality of component HD and the other options in general, is there a test somewhere

and is there a test for the A1 on this in particular, thinking of getting this camera

[Bruce Allen]

is there anyone that knows the difference in quality of component HD and the other options in general, is there a test somewhere

and is there a test for the A1 on this in particular, thinking of getting this camera

My homemade LCD monitor has both HDMI and HD component inputs. I have tried both via my Canon HV20. There is no real distinguishable difference.

Check out this thread ("A1 vs G1 for uncompresed greenscreen studio work"). People there also say it's basically the same.
http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=94071

Personally I don't think HD-SDI alone is worth the difference in price. You'll improve the quality of your footage more by spending the money on lights, etc. The other things (timecode in / out, genlock) are useful, though.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[P Andersson]

thanks bruce

[Justin Anderson]

Check out this thread ("A1 vs G1 for uncompresed greenscreen studio work"). People there also say it's basically the same.
http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=94071
www.boacinema.com

I would love to see a comparison on this. My biggest reservation with the Canon HDVs is...well, the HDV.

Anyone know of some posted video on this? I'm looking especially for a comparison for the HDV and component out.

[Bruce Allen]

You guys are just paranoid about HDV.

I have quite a few samples (comparing HDV to HDMI with motion sources, also HDV to capturing via HDMI but recompressing on the fly to Cineform and Blackmagic codecs).

Let me get permission from the guy who did the tests first though to repost.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Tom Lowe]

Since I shoot outdoors, I can't imagine the quality difference would be worth it for me, but yeah, it would be cool to see some comparisons.

[Justin Anderson]

You guys are just paranoid about HDV.

I have quite a few samples (comparing HDV to HDMI with motion sources, also HDV to capturing via HDMI but recompressing on the fly to Cineform and Blackmagic codecs).

Let me get permission from the guy who did the tests first though to repost.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

Even the sample footage from Canon's website isn't acceptable for me. HDV isn't the atrocity that it originally was, but the image blocking and mosquito noise in high-activity hand held shots is too distracting for me to want to buy it.

Are there any low cost portable HD decks out there? (A fantasy of mine for a while now has been for RED to release a small, portable HD-SDI/HDMI input REDCODE recorder.)

[Justin Anderson]

Exhibit A:
Horses attacked by mosquitoes and squares (http://www.aetherblue.com/videos/XHA1_G1_Provence_FULL_hi.jpg)

Now I'm sure the interlacing doesn't help, but the artifacts in this image are absurd.

[Justin Anderson]

....Some of that could also be the H264. The video is only encoded at 56KB per second...barely even appropriate for a single JPEG image of the same size.

[Bruce Allen]

Okay, here goes:

http://www.boacinema.com/projects/camera_tests/hv20/hdmi_vs_hdv/HV20_capture_comparisons_derek_green.zip
http://www.boacinema.com/projects/camera_tests/hv20/hdmi_vs_hdv/HV20_hdmi_vs_hdv_grnscrn_hans_bihlmeir.zip
http://www.boacinema.com/projects/camera_tests/hv20/hdmi_vs_hdv/HV20_hdmi_vs_hdv_motion_hans_bihlmeir.zip

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Justin Anderson]

Anyone know of any low cost portable HD decks?

[Bruce Allen]

Anyone know of any low cost portable HD decks?

1. Check out the Wafian recorders. They quoted me $500 per day for a very, very lightly compressed recording solution. Visually lossless.

2. Check out Panasonic's DVCPROHD deck (but why?)

3. Build your own small PC. I wanted to do that - was interested in combining it with a high-end sound recording solution so that you could record multiple channels of master-quality sound in sync to the same file as your high-quality video. But it seems that we're not there yet, software-wise.

4. HDCAM, D-5 etc are around $700 - $900 a day. Make sure you get the rental company to run you through recording with the beast. It's not as simple as a DigiBeta deck.

Or just be normal:
a) shoot compressed most of the time
b) connect to a computer if you want to do a studio shoot.
c) rent a Red if you want higher-quality acquisition

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Chris Nuzzaco]

I'm a bit curious about this whole HDMI thing. I'm reading 4:2:2 uncompressed 1080, but is this after the DSP and all those crappy internal settings for pedestal and such have already affected the footage? I currently shoot with an Andromeda DVX100 (4:4:4 10 bit Raw, straight off the sensors) and internal "look" settings (pedestal, color matrix, etc...) never affect the Andromeda output. Its a killer system by the way, it can have the dynamic range of a D200 depending on how you shoot (ie, LUT settings, exposure technique, post processing which usually costs you about 1 stop or so depending on your desired black levels). Its also virtually noise free if you want it to be :sorcerer:

Also, how big are the HV20 sensors? I can't imagine they are very large, which means the sensors photosites must be painfully tiny, which should create a large dose of noise and limited dynamic range. Just curious...

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm a bit curious about this whole HDMI thing. I'm reading 4:2:2 uncompressed 1080, but is this after the DSP and all those crappy internal settings for pedestal and such have already affected the footage?

HDMI-out is meant to go to the HD monitor, so yes, it should basically be the processed image (white balance, gain, gamma, etc.) short of being recorded and compressed by the codec of the recorder. Unless someone knows differently; this seems logical to me.

[Chris Nuzzaco]

HDMI-out is meant to go to the HD monitor, so yes, it should basically be the processed image (white balance, gain, gamma, etc.) short of being recorded and compressed by the codec of the recorder. Unless someone knows differently; this seems logical to me.

Thats what I was thinking. Someone once told me they could get raw uncompressed footage out of an HVX200 using the component output and recording to a PC/Mac. I was a bit skeptical, so I asked if they could see the affects of any internal pedestal settings etc. showing up thru that output and they said they could, and I was like, "not truly raw".... not to mention the fact that they didn't know what the sampling for the footage was at that particular stage of the signal flow. Lots of dirty details in digital cinematography, thats for sure.

[Tom Lowe]

Kind of off subject, but can I get an HDMI to DVI converter so I can monitor the HV20 on my Dell 24" LCD?

What are my options for hooking up that camera to this monitor?

Here are the listed interfaces:

Interfaces

1 x DVI-D - 24 pin digital DVI
1 x VGA - 15 pin HD D-Sub (HD-15)
1 x component video input - RCA x 3
1 x composite video input - RCA
1 x S-video input - 4 pin mini-DIN

[David Mullen ASC]

"RAW" really applies more the single-sensor photography; I can't think of any 3-CCD cameras that are designed to allow a RAW signal off of the three chips to be recorded -- even the Viper converts them into 10-bit Log. The Andromeda/Hydra Reel-Stream hack seems to be the only example I can think of RAW linear recording from a 3-chip camera.

[Bruce Allen]

The HV20's sensor size is 1/2.7. Not bad for a consumer camera.

Yes, the HDMI and HD component outputs are after all of the sharpening, white balance, etc has been done. Not RAW.


Kind of off subject, but can I get an HDMI to DVI converter so I can monitor the HV20 on my Dell 24" LCD?

Yes you can get a HDMI to DVI converter. But the HV20 is finicky - people are having lots of problems trying to hook it up to the Dells. You'll have to use my LCD monitor, bwahaha...

I guess you could use component input on the Dells actually. Their chip isn't too sharp with HD component for some reason though.

We're both in LA - if you ever want to borrow my HV20 to test it, let me know. Sounds like the only way you're going to satisfy your curiosity is to get your hands on one for a few days.

But let me finish my latitude report first!

Cheers

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[number6]

Kind of off subject, but can I get an HDMI to DVI converter so I can monitor the HV20 on my Dell 24" LCD?

What are my options for hooking up that camera to this monitor?

Here are the listed interfaces:

Interfaces

1 x DVI-D - 24 pin digital DVI
1 x VGA - 15 pin HD D-Sub (HD-15)
1 x component video input - RCA x 3
1 x composite video input - RCA
1 x S-video input - 4 pin mini-DIN

Tom, found a Phillips HDMI to DVI cable at Wal-Mart (around 30 bucks, if memory serves.) Was hoping to get from an Everio GZ HD7U to a Phillips 23" DVI-D tv. Haven't hooked it up yet, but I think it will work, although without audio included on or through the connection. Seems like I read somewhere that the DVI would still work with a DVI-D monitor/tv, but can't be certain.

edit: didn't see Bruce's post just ahead of mine, so... never mind.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Guys, HDMI is based on DVI video spec. A simple HDMI to DVI cable or adapter does the trick and don't pay too much. Literally, anything over $10 for a 3' cable after shipping / tax is too much.

However, that doesn't guaranty success. HDTV spec or specifically the EIA/TIA signal coming from the camera's HDMI port is not supported by all DVI interfaces and displays. So the HV20 isn't going to work with most computer monitors out there, just because of a lack of support for HDTV standard signaling. A lot of newer monitors are supporting these display modes though, so something to keep in mind. Where most people use DVI to HDMI cables/adapters is attaching their computer to a HDTV. Both OSX and Windows driver sets for ATI and nVidia will put out HDTV signal types to drive such displays.

[number6]

Guys, HDMI is based on DVI video spec. A simple HDMI to DVI cable or adapter does the trick and don't pay too much. Literally, anything over $10 for a 3' cable after shipping / tax is too much.

However, that doesn't guaranty success. HDTV spec or specifically the EIA/TIA signal coming from the camera's HDMI port is not supported by all DVI interfaces and displays. So the HV20 isn't going to work with most computer monitors out there, just because of a lack of support for HDTV standard signaling. A lot of newer monitors are supporting these display modes though, so something to keep in mind. Where most people use DVI to HDMI cables/adapters is attaching their computer to a HDTV. Both OSX and Windows driver sets for ATI and nVidia will put out HDTV signal types to drive such displays.

Jeff, seems like I remember some threads about using a HDMI (or DVI?) monitor in lieu of a viewfinder on the RED. Any problems as you've described above expected or being addressed?

[pat@hpnc.com]

Found a chart that might help.

http://www.millcon.nl/Harm/HDMI.jpg
Source...http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc3db62

[Chris Nuzzaco]

"RAW" really applies more the single-sensor photography; I can't think of any 3-CCD cameras that are designed to allow a RAW signal off of the three chips to be recorded -- even the Viper converts them into 10-bit Log. The Andromeda/Hydra Reel-Stream hack seems to be the only example I can think of RAW linear recording from a 3-chip camera.

Ah, yes, I should be a little more careful in using the term "Raw"... I know what you mean about DSLRS. The Andromeda system isn't quite like raw DSLR photography, though the footage output is pretty darn close in terms of performance. Raw in DSLR terms is basically everything, even sharpening information, not to mention a whole slew of other options. The Andromeda does actually give control over sharpening, but does not provide the real time preview of a DSLR Raw conversion program, at least not yet. Thats what makes the camera so cool, its pretty much software driven, the hardware is there to give access to the data, but all the control seems to be driven by the capture program, which keeps on being improved :biggrin:

As for Raw linear recording, well, its close, all the pre-made LUTs I've been using from reel stream record the information from 12 bit linear to 10 bit log (I believe the inserted hardware does this). You can also shoot 12 bit linear to 8 bit log. However, I've heard you can render the files out using an inverse curve, so I suppose you can get 10 bit linear, never tried that, so far I just render using the "None" setting, which is basically a straight line from what I understand, and so far I've had fantastic results shooting that way, but now that I think about, I'm gonna poke around those inverse curve options.....I'm always exploring :biggrin:

[Tom Lowe]

Ah, so there's no telling if the HV20 with an HDMI-to-DVI adapter will work, unless someone tries it and reports back? Bruce are you saying that you've heard it's not working with something like the 24" Dell Ultrasharp, or only sometimes working? Define "finicky." :)

[Tom Lowe]

Jeez, stupid me, I've never dealt with HDV and didn't realize the resolution was going to get crunched to 1440x1080. I guess the best idea in that case is just to plan to finish at 720p and it should be a pretty clean image, I would imagine.

I have Aspect HD on my machine, so I'm set for 1440x1080 intermediates already, I guess.

[number6]

Found a chart that might help.

http://www.millcon.nl/Harm/HDMI.jpg
Source...http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc3db62

Thanks Patrick, but I'm thinking this chart may not apply to RED. I'm pretty peach-brained (fuzzy) on this but my understanding was that the HDMI could go straight to the monitor and the recording would remain unchanged, unlike the chart you show which suggests that what one records does a pass-through of the monitor, or loses data when it also goes to recording method. I'm assuming the RED will be unaffected by the fact that some data goes to the monitor, but I'm just speculating.

[David Mullen ASC]

I don't think anyone thought we were talking about the RED, but the HV20, and the possibility of recording the HDMI-out that would normally go to an HD monitor, to a data recorder of some sort, as a way of skipping the final HDV codec and getting better 4:2:2 HD with less compression.

None of this is necessary with the RED camera.

[number6]

None of this is necessary with the RED camera.

Kinda' thought this might be the case... still wondering if RED HDMI out will co-operate with most HDMI-DVI monitors on the market or if as suggested, like the HV20, may have issues with various brands. May be something that is just not knowable at present. (Forgive my penchant for quoting Don Rumsfeld so often)

[pat@hpnc.com]

Yes sorry only talking about the HV20. The Red is special:)

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Kinda' thought this might be the case... still wondering if RED HDMI out will co-operate with most HDMI-DVI monitors on the market or if as suggested, like the HV20, may have issues with various brands. May be something that is just not knowable at present. (Forgive my penchant for quoting Don Rumsfeld so often)

I don't think anyone knows the answer to that just yet. RED has an HDMI port, so any monitor with proper HDMI input will (should) work. Since it's HDMI and it's sending out 720p, I would guess it's using a standard EIA/TIA568B signal spec since that's what most HDMI HDTV displays are going to expect. So as long as your monitor (DVI or HDMI) supports that signal format you'll be fine. It seriously should be an issue of firmware and/or a simple configuration change on the camera to adjust output timings to conform to 720p as it applies in the DVI-D standards. I'm confident this will be a non-issue with RED. Or at least it will be by the time all the features are enabled.

[number6]

Thanks Jeff, that was pretty much what I was hoping to hear.

[Tom Lowe]

So were all of you aware that the recorded tape was only 1440x1080?

That kinda makes the whole True HD claim kinda bogus, IMO.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Yes, I think everyone is pretty much aware that HDV 1080 is actually 1440x1080. Just like DVCPROHD is 960x720 instead of 1280x720 and 1280x1080 instead of 1920x1080... Those lucky PAL guys get 1440x1080 with DVCPROHD though. HDCAM is also 1440x1080. If you want the full 1920x1080 raster you have to go to HDCAM SR. XDCAM was initially 1440x1080 as well, but has provisions for full 1920 raster. I don't know if Sony's latest products are capable of encoding full 1920x1080 just yet as I haven't paid attention. Most AVCHD / AVC Intra based cameras are also 1440x1080...

So, HDV kinda just fits right in with the rest of the industry. I don't know about you, but it makes me appreciate RED a whole lot more.

[Tom Lowe]

It just goes to show you what a noob I am.

But I guess this is okay if your final master is 720p.

No one is really saying that 1440x1080 will blow back up to 1920x1080, I assume?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

It blows up just fine... The majority of all broadcast HD is actually broadcast at 1280x1080. Bet you didn't know that. Comcast, Dish Network and DirecTV all use 1280x1080 as their "1080i" resolution. It looks OK, the lack the resolution is hardly as bad as the macroblocking and other artifacts. OTOH, looking at a true 1920x1080 source like HD-DVD or BluRay shows you just how much detail we're missing out on.

[Tom Lowe]

It blows up just fine... The majority of all broadcast HD is actually broadcast at 1280x1080. Bet you didn't know that. Comcast, Dish Network and DirecTV all use 1280x1080 as their "1080i" resolution. It looks OK, the lack the resolution is hardly as bad as the macroblocking and other artifacts. OTOH, looking at a true 1920x1080 source like HD-DVD or BluRay shows you just how much detail we're missing out on.

Yeah. Those discs shown in 1080p are kind of spectacular. Interesting. But for me, knowing this, no chance I would finish over 720p shooting on the HV20.

Then again, I think the same way about the RED. I plan to finish at 2K. Having seen a lot of low-light DLSR images, I think 2K will hold up better.

Give me a 6K camera and I will finish at 4K. :)

[Justin Anderson]

Or just be normal:
a) shoot compressed most of the time
We're shooting a handheld mockumentary. The fact that the camera is moving along with the other onscreen activity makes me worried about the HDV compression.
b) connect to a computer if you want to do a studio shoot.
Again, handheld mockumentary. One option we've considered is attaching 50+ foot component cables to the cameras, putting an HDMI converter on the end, and then capturing to the computers with the Blackmagic Intensity. With 3 cameras running though and so many technical things to manage, this really should be a last resort.
c) rent a Red if you want higher-quality acquisition
With the lack of auto focus and other ENG camera conventions, we don't see RED as being a viable option for something like this. More importantly, we don't have the budget. :glare:

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

All of your ideas are viable options, but those are a last resort. Anyone have any simple solution ideas?


Why does a deck cost so much anyways? It's basically a video camera with the CCDs and lens ripped out, so why shouldn't it cost less than a whole camera?

[Justin Anderson]

So, HDV kinda just fits right in with the rest of the industry. I don't know about you, but it makes me appreciate RED a whole lot more.

haha. yes.

[Bruce Allen]

All of your ideas are viable options, but those are a last resort. Anyone have any simple solution ideas?

Shoot on an HVX200 or the new 500 or get a good deal on a Varicam or HDCAM camera. Those have a higher data rate.

Since this is a mockumentary, you could get away with 60i - you don't need a George Lucas camera - maybe someone you know bought a HDW-700 and isn't using it much?

Or else, you could just try and find more funds?

Or, of course, find that HDV compression isn't that bad, really. With a mockumentary, it doesn't have to look perfect anyway. I have happily gone to see documentaries at the Arclight that were shot on SD cameras. Part of it is the perverse desire of seeing how they print it all to film ;) But mostly it's because the content is compelling. People will only notice the macroblocks if you bore them to tears.



Why does a deck cost so much anyways? It's basically a video camera with the CCDs and lens ripped out, so why shouldn't it cost less than a whole camera?

Mostly it's a rip-off. You are helping Sony / etc pay back all of the vast sums of money they've poured into employing engineers to develop HD into a viable format for DECADES. Without the work they did, the Red would never have existed. So think of it as a development tithe to all of those folk who helped drag Americans out of NTSC-hell.

But the deck does have a better mechanism.

Also, for D-5 and HDCAM SR, there is no camera.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Justin Anderson]

Or, of course, find that HDV compression isn't that bad, really. With a mockumentary, it doesn't have to look perfect anyway. I have happily gone to see documentaries at the Arclight that were shot on SD cameras. Part of it is the perverse desire of seeing how they print it all to film ;) But mostly it's because the content is compelling. People will only notice the macroblocks if you bore them to tears.

Do you have any high-movement sample footage I can look at? The H264 demo footage off Canon's website had a data rate of 550kbps, far too low for me to make an accurate judgment on the video quality. (plus, it was also interlaced footage, which didn't help the compression)

I would really love to shoot on cameras without being tethered to some complex system, I just hope HDV's compression holds up.

[Justin Anderson]

Mostly it's a rip-off. You are helping Sony / etc pay back all of the vast sums of money they've poured into employing engineers to develop HD into a viable format for DECADES. Without the work they did, the Red would never have existed. So think of it as a development tithe to all of those folk who helped drag Americans out of NTSC-hell.

REDdeck anyone? :D

[Bruce Allen]

Do you have any high-movement sample footage I can look at? The H264 demo footage off Canon's website had a data rate of 550kbps, far too low for me to make an accurate judgment on the video quality. (plus, it was also interlaced footage, which didn't help the compression)

I would really love to shoot on cameras without being tethered to some complex system, I just hope HDV's compression holds up.

Okay, sample coming. I gotta stop posting! I am officially dropping out of the RedUser forums RIGHT NOW to work on my 10" HD monitor and HV20 update ;)

See you guys in a few days...

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[Justin Anderson]

Cool.

I wish I knew someone who owned the A1 so I could test it. I'd basically try to destroy the image as much as I could to see how far I could push the cam in the future.

[Chris Swartz]

Couple of questions I can answer. I have an HV20 and the dell monitor.

I can tell you from experience that you cannot convert the HDMI out of the HV20 to DVI and get an HD signal. You will get an SD signal to the monitor, but not HD. I think it's something to do with HDCP. Anyway the component from the camera works great and looks awesome, no joy on the HDMI to DVI, unless Canon comes out with some firmware or something, which I highly doubt.

Secondly, I have the Intensity card and the images it capture through the HDMI are amazing. I really couldn't believe the quality I was getting, even with the free Blackmagic Mjpeg codec supplied. You can buy Cineform and go to town without noticing any change in quality from uncompressed. I've even transcoded to DNxHD 220 and edited in Avid which works like a champ. (I assume this will be the workflow for most Avid users with the Red anyway)

Once again you cannot convert the HDMI out of the Intensity card to DVI and view it on the Dell. I tried and the dell won't even see a signal. I emailed Blackmagic and their response was that it won't do it because of a colorspace conversion that would have to take place that the intensity nor the cable is doing. If you have a Dell and want to use it as a monitor for your Intensity or your HV20 then make sure you get the Intensity Pro with the component.

That being said the HDMI out to a true 1080 monitor with HDMI in looks great.


Here's how I'm recording with the HV20 and Intensity. I'll build you one if you like.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=97526

Good Luck

Chris

[Chris Nuzzaco]

I probably shouldn't be one to mention this, but isn't being tethered to something that big a bit annoying? I use an Andromeda, but I'm hooked up to a very small mac mini, and very soon it will be a shoulder mount camera (using anton bauer bricks) about the size of a regular broadcast shoulder mount, maybe a little bit smaller actually. Can you not capture to a mac mini or mac book pro?

[Chris Swartz]

Does the mac mini or Macbook pro have a PCIe slot?

I don't know, but I don't think so.

Chris

[Chris Nuzzaco]

Does the mac mini or Macbook pro have a PCIe slot?

I don't know, but I don't think so.

Chris

Good point, I don't know. Well at any rate, if your making films, then you can get away with that setup, I mean really, when is a GOOD film ever made ENG run and gun news style.... When you think about all the stuff that is setup for a film shoot, ie. lights, grip gear, cable runs, generators, actors trailers.... shooting tethered suddenly doesn't seem like that big a deal anymore!

[Chris Swartz]

You are correct there. I mean on location for a short film shoot, how many cables come off the camera or back to the camera especially if you are using onboard sound? I've read you can use up to 150ft HDMI cable, so you can get pretty far away and still have plenty of slack, not to mention one cable does audio and video. You can record to tape and the Intensity at the same time and get 2 copies. One is going to look a lot better than the other, but at least it's a backup.

BTW I can do HDSDI with this setup, just swap out the card for a Xena and add a few drives to get the full data rate.

Chris

[pat@hpnc.com]

Thanks for the info Chris I wass looking at your setup over at DVInfo while doing research for the HV20 rig I am planning on. I would love to see some nice samples.

Also glad to hear you can use 150ft cable. For most of the things I am planning that would work fine as long as I can keep the computer cool enough.

[pat@hpnc.com]

Was looking at HDMI cables and it looks like you need a booster to get to 150ft. http://hiddenwires.co.uk/resourcesnews2005/news20050929-03.html

[GlennChan]

Why does a deck cost so much anyways? It's basically a video camera with the CCDs and lens ripped out, so why shouldn't it cost less than a whole camera?
1- People will pay that much for a deck.
2- A deck will do things that a camera will not do.

-You can make insert edits for creating broadcast masters.
-The deck can record 4 or more channels of audio. In the deck, you can adjust levels and mixing and audio routing and the deck will accept digital audio in, with sync via genlock. For broadcast masters, you usually want full mix on channels 1&2 with the mix&effects mix on 3&4. (M&E mix = the mix without the dialogue.)
-A good quality real-time SD downconversion with character (e.g. for TC burn-in), edge crop / anamorphic / letterbox. Useful for dubs.
-Deck control so you can capture with (and via) timecode.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Was looking at HDMI cables and it looks like you need a booster to get to 150ft. http://hiddenwires.co.uk/resourcesnews2005/news20050929-03.html

In my experience setting up commercial AV display systems, HDMI doesn't like much more than 50ft, especially if you're pushing 1080i60 or better. I've had long HDMI cables go bad because the small contacts literally give out with that much load on them if you don't use extra high quality cables and a good booster or distribution amp with regulated power output.

If you're looking to take HDMI over about 50ft or so, you should look into fiber optic solutions. Or HDMI balun sets that work off of shielded CAT5e / CAT6. Then you're not limited on distance all that much ~ 300 to 500ft in most cases. The fiber ones are kinda expensive, but very simple. They converters are built right into the cable ends on the good ones so it's just like pluggin in any other HDMI cable. It's just a couple hundred feet long and has status LEDs on each end.

Gefen and DVIGEAR both have such solutions. There's a couple other out there too. For short standard cable runs, I highly recommend cables from www.monoprice.com I'm not affiliated with them in any way, but they have some really nice cables for very cheap. Their net-jacket gold plated DVI and HDMI cables are every bit as nice as the ones from Monster Cable or AudioQuest and 1/10th the price.

[pat@hpnc.com]

Thanks Jeff for the first hand advice. I tend to trust that more than what some someone trying to sell me a cable says. And its good news to. With 500ft that opens up what you can do even more.

Also just thinking if you are outside some kind of car/truck/van with a high quality powercoverter would really come in handy. You could keep your capture computer in the airconditioning while you shoot. Almost like a mini news van. Of course it would not work for ever setup but if you plan right it would work for a lot of them.

[PenGun]

Hi everyone. After a lot of fooling around I have come up with this:

It's a DIY laptop that takes 3 hard drives, Samsung 64G solid states, with a fast enough RAID array to take an Intensity in RAW at their claimed 119MB/s. An adapter for theExpressCard slot takes a PCIe card with an Intensity in it with a powersupply for the PCIe adapter setup at under 3 lbs.

So duct tape the Magma, Intensity and Powersupply to the laptop and plug in the Canon HV20 and we should be good to go (RAW) uncompressed for about $6500 including camera.

The Hardware:

DIY laptop with 3 hard drives and RAID and ExpressCard slot.

http://www.avadirect.com/product_details_configurator.asp?PRID=3620

Samsungs 64G solid state hard drives. 3 should write at 135MB/s in RAID0

http://www.samsung.com/PressCenter/PressRelease/PressRelease.asp?seq=20070327_0000332936

Magma PCIe ExpressCard adapter for the Intensity.

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

Nice little power supply for above

http://www.hechinger.com/web/catalog/product_detail.aspx?pid=232391&cm_ven=Froogle&cm_cat=Automotive&cm_pla=Xantrex&cm_ite=Xantrex-Portable%20Power-232391&cid=0AB4923490A4A42F3B0D05F3E2DDDE7B

Oh and an Intensity Pro

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/intensity/

A nice addition for dumping the laptop to SATA drives, an ExpressCard SATA controller.

http://www.addonics.com/products/host_controller/adexc34-2e.asp



I dunno looks good to me ... what do you think?

[M Most]

So duct tape the Magma, Intensity and Powersupply to the laptop and plug in the Canon HV20 and we should be good to go RAW for about $6500 including camera.


You cannot get RAW output from a Canon HV20 no matter what you do in terms of recording. RAW output is the data direct from a Bayer sensor. This is not available in an HV20. The only output available is HD video. Whether it's compressed (using HDV) or uncompressed (via the HDMI port) is not the issue. It is processed video, not RAW data. You're confusing the issue by referring to it as something it's not. The only digital motion picture cameras currently available or soon to be available that allow access to RAW data are the Red, the Silicon Imaging camera, and the Dalsa, at least as far as I know.

[PenGun]

You cannot get RAW output from a Canon HV20 no matter what you do in terms of recording. RAW output is the data direct from a Bayer sensor. This is not available in an HV20. The only output available is HD video. Whether it's compressed (using HDV) or uncompressed (via the HDMI port) is not the issue. It is processed video, not RAW data. You're confusing the issue by referring to it as something it's not. The only digital motion picture cameras currently available or soon to be available that allow access to RAW data are the Red, the Silicon Imaging camera, and the Dalsa, at least as far as I know.

Ah yes. I have seen the discussion. OK seeing RAW is a DSLR term we'll have to use ... "uncompressed".

Is that OK? Or am I in the wrong place.

[number6]

Great link for the cables, Jeff! I figure if their cables are good enough for you, then they should easily serve my needs.

[pat@hpnc.com]

Yes uncompressed is more correct and full size. Still a good gain in image quality going directly out instead of to tape.

[David Mullen ASC]

The only digital motion picture cameras currently available or soon to be available that allow access to RAW data are the Red, the Silicon Imaging camera, and the Dalsa, at least as far as I know.

And the Reel Stream hacks to the DVX100 ("Andromeda") and upcoming hack into the HVX200 ("Hydra"), which is linear data (I think 12-bit with the DVX100 and 14-bit with the HVX200) off of each CCD after the A-D conversion but before the DSP. Unless the term "RAW" only applies to Bayer-filtered images.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Great link for the cables, Jeff! I figure if their cables are good enough for you, then they should easily serve my needs.

They're good cables, or at least I've had good luck with them. I've found their component cables to be just OK. The "fancy connector" ones are usually pretty good. The cheaper component cables are almost as good, but the connectors on them really suck and often have a loose fit. Their HDMI and DVI cables have been top-notch though and out of hundreds, I've only had 2 or 3 fail on me. I've had more failures with bigger recognized brands like Etherial or Liberty.

[M Most]

And the Reel Stream hacks to the DVX100 ("Andromeda") and upcoming hack into the HVX200 ("Hydra"), which is linear data (I think 12-bit with the DVX100 and 14-bit with the HVX200) off of each CCD after the A-D conversion but before the DSP. Unless the term "RAW" only applies to Bayer-filtered images.

The Andromeda is very clever, but what it delivers on output is 4:4:4 reconstructed video, not the individual r, g, and b records. RAW data should, ideally, contain the untouched records of each of the three primary colors, which is essentially what you get when you record the data directly from a Bayer sensor. Reconstruction of the image is done after the data is saved, and is done directly from that data. That is not what is done in the Andromeda, but I would certainly concede that it's the next best thing, seeing as how the data is basically unprocessed in terms of levels, even if it is already reconstructed.

[GlennChan]

Doesn't the Andromeda record the output directly off the A-->D convertors? This lets it extract a quasi-HD image... each sensor is 720x480 but the quasi-HD image is bigger than that (1540x984).

I don't believe the image is reconstructed in the camera.

[David Mullen ASC]

Yes, I think you have to run it through their "Sculptor" software in post to reconstruct the video.

http://www.reel-stream.com/sculptor.php

[Chris Nuzzaco]

OK, I'll step in on this whole Andromeda question of reconstruction, as I actually own an operate one. The camera gives you the RAW CCD information. David is right about Sculptor HD, the program literally renders the files out into formats you can actually use, like quicktime or 16 bit Tiff image sequences. So in this manner, it is actually quite similar to a RAW photo file.

The hack merely gives you access to the data, Sculptor HD is where a lot the magic happens. At the moment, I'm using an alpha testing version of the next release of Sculptor, and it now has preview rendering abilities, so you can now quickly play a low res shot back for viewing on set, and you will also be able to set render in and out points in the footage as well. As for viewing the clip and adjusting the colors and sharpness ect.. not currently possible (but you DO control sharpening settings in the render dialog). I'm not sure why that would be a big deal anyways, as I have substantially more power doing that in After Effects.

Check this thread out if you wanna see the sheer power of the footage coming out of this little camera:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3098

[Tom Lowe]

How much money are we talking about for a nice HVX200 Hydra setup? I guess you would have to include a 35mm adapter, since it would seem a little odd to go through all that trouble just to shoot through the HVX's stock lens.

Once you throw in a RAID system, etc, the price has got to be getting up there near RED's price?

[Chris Nuzzaco]

How much money are we talking about for a nice HVX200 Hydra setup? I guess you would have to include a 35mm adapter, since it would seem a little odd to go through all that trouble just to shoot through the HVX's stock lens.

Once you throw in a RAID system, etc, the price has got to be getting up there near RED's price?

You're not too far off... thats the reason I bought my Andromeda. I assembled my system for about $4,900 and thats way under the start up cost for HVX200, and it outperforms the HVX200! I'm still waiting to see if the Hydra can match Andromeda's latitude though, I'm a bit skeptical... but thats another discussion. I think the only people getting Hydra are those who already own the camera and have paid it off. You don't need a RAID for capture, at least not from what I've heard, I shoot Andromeda to a regular old 7200 RPM firewire drive, and I've heard people using drives as slow as 5200 RPM.

[Chris Nuzzaco]

I guess you would have to include a 35mm adapter, since it would seem a little odd to go through all that trouble just to shoot through the HVX's stock lens.


Not so sure why you would bother with 35mm adapters. I thought about it, but these mods actually DECREASE your cameras ISO rating if you want the super clean footage I'm getting. My current record LUT puts my camera at ISO 160, the stock camera going to tape is like ISO 320! So if you put an adapter on it, its like ISO 80 :help: Time for HMI's.

Last but not least, your optical setup will only be as good as the lowest quality component in the system.... your stock lens. I've seen big time chromatic aberrations in footage using only the stock lens, and using the adapter. You could make chromatic aberration even more horrible if you shoot with cheap SLR lenses, as there is the potential they will produce aberrations, and then add on top of that the stock lens's possible aberrations. Just being devils advocate here LOL.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

How much money are we talking about for a nice HVX200 Hydra setup?

IMO, if you don't already have an HVX200, there's no point to a Hydra -- just buy a RED. By the time you buy an HVX and have the upgrade done as well as equip it with a dedicated record system, you're right about the same price as a RED body. Either way you still have to come up with lenses.

The HVX optics and sensor block struggle with low light and the Hydra upgrade isn't going to change that, plus you will still be fiddling with a 35mm adapter and all of its related issues (spinning ground glass, an additional 1-stop of light loss, etc..) instead of directly mounting lenses in front of the sensor. Even if it works out $5K cheaper in the end, I'd rather find a way to find the money so I can record 4K with superior optics instead of marginal 2K with extra layers of glass between my subject and my CCD. Just my opinion...

OTOH, I already have an HVX that I've been trying to sell and nobody seems interested. If I have any money left after RED, I may do a Hydra convert on it. Or I could just fire-sell the HVX and buy some new lights or something else while I wait for the RED Pro Pocket Camera, which I fully expect will be superior to a hack-job HVX both in form and function.

[Tom Lowe]

Yeah, that's what I figured, in terms of price, and having to turn the thing into a Frankenstein and all of that.

BTW, if I were you I would dump that HVX right away, unless you are needing it for a shoot or something. I did okay a few months back selling mine on DVXUser. The only thing I got burned on is that the very week I listed my HVX over there, Panasonic announced their free p2 card deal... heh-heh... what timing. :)

[PaulClements]

Has anyone ever hacked the front of a dvx to take 35mm lenses directly or is this impossible?

[Matt Garrett]

you'd still need a relay lens paul to get the 35mm dof and fov.

[M Most]

The camera gives you the RAW CCD information. David is right about Sculptor HD, the program literally renders the files out into formats you can actually use, like quicktime or 16 bit Tiff image sequences. So in this manner, it is actually quite similar to a RAW photo file.

Well, I stand corrected. Happily so.

[Poi Boy]

Check out hd for indies on hv20 from today, the red rock set up is awesome !
Aloha
-A

[pat@hpnc.com]

Thanks lots of good info. Oh and here is the link for those to lazy to find it:) http://www.hdforindies.com/

[ahusain]

You're not too far off... thats the reason I bought my Andromeda. I assembled my system for about $4,900 and thats way under the start up cost for HVX200, and it outperforms the HVX200! I'm still waiting to see if the Hydra can match Andromeda's latitude though, I'm a bit skeptical... but thats another discussion. I think the only people getting Hydra are those who already own the camera and have paid it off. You don't need a RAID for capture, at least not from what I've heard, I shoot Andromeda to a regular old 7200 RPM firewire drive, and I've heard people using drives as slow as 5200 RPM.

reading some of the other posts on this thread, it's interesting that many people don't consider that the modded dvx actually produces BETTER output than the modded hvx.

[Chris Nuzzaco]

reading some of the other posts on this thread, it's interesting that many people don't consider that the modded dvx actually produces BETTER output than the modded hvx.

Well, I'm betting that Andromeda will be better than Hydra, but no one has actually seen Hydra footage yet, so its all still just a bunch of educated technical speculation at best.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I think Hydra will do some things better and it will have a bit more resolution. I don't know if that will translate to truly larger images, but hopefully they'll be sharper than what the Andromeda produces. The Andromeda is still going to have the edge in terms of sensitivity and use in lower light levels and I don't see where the Hydra will improve on dynamic range. I guess we have to wait for the footage to see what it can really do.

[Chris Nuzzaco]

I think Hydra will do some things better and it will have a bit more resolution. I don't know if that will translate to truly larger images, but hopefully they'll be sharper than what the Andromeda produces. The Andromeda is still going to have the edge in terms of sensitivity and use in lower light levels and I don't see where the Hydra will improve on dynamic range. I guess we have to wait for the footage to see what it can really do.

You know, I've actually upresed some Andromeda footage in AE carefully using some sharpening tools, and it looks very good, substantially better than HVX200 going to P2 at 1080 24PA. I'll dig around and upload some frame grabs. The main advantage to Hydra would be variable frame rates and and synced audio, but I'm still a skeptic on it beating the dynamic range of Andromeda. I'm not so sure about low light. The best Andromeda record LUT puts the camera at ISO 160....

[KETCH ROSSi]

Cool.

I wish I knew someone who owned the A1 so I could test it. I'd basically try to destroy the image as much as I could to see how far I could push the cam in the future.

Hi Justin,

I have an A1 purchased to be a behind the scene camera shoot for my RED's but now I was thinking of using this camera for an up-coming project, so if you are not to far from me we can meet up and put the A1 to the test.

My location is LAKE ELSINORE, California in Riverside County.

Take care.

Ciao,

KETCH ROSSI
www.KETCHFRAME.com

[Gary Ploj]

Couple of questions I can answer. I have an HV20 and the dell monitor.

I can tell you from experience that you cannot convert the HDMI out of the HV20 to DVI and get an HD signal. You will get an SD signal to the monitor, but not HD. I think it's something to do with HDCP. Anyway the component from the camera works great and looks awesome, no joy on the HDMI to DVI, unless Canon comes out with some firmware or something, which I highly doubt.

Secondly, I have the Intensity card and the images it capture through the HDMI are amazing. I really couldn't believe the quality I was getting, even with the free Blackmagic Mjpeg codec supplied. You can buy Cineform and go to town without noticing any change in quality from uncompressed. I've even transcoded to DNxHD 220 and edited in Avid which works like a champ. (I assume this will be the workflow for most Avid users with the Red anyway)

Once again you cannot convert the HDMI out of the Intensity card to DVI and view it on the Dell. I tried and the dell won't even see a signal. I emailed Blackmagic and their response was that it won't do it because of a colorspace conversion that would have to take place that the intensity nor the cable is doing. If you have a Dell and want to use it as a monitor for your Intensity or your HV20 then make sure you get the Intensity Pro with the component.

That being said the HDMI out to a true 1080 monitor with HDMI in looks great.


Here's how I'm recording with the HV20 and Intensity. I'll build you one if you like.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=97526

Good Luck

Chris

Hi Chris,

I was searching on the net and I found this product called "HDfury" and I thought this would help you to connect HDMI (HV20 or whatever PS3) to your Dell 24 inch monitor. I even saw a YouTube video of this product (converter) from a PS3 HDMI to Sony monitor. Check it out...so far; ton of reviews.
Let me know if you like.

http://www.curtpalme.com/HDFury.shtm

YouTube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dAUwAGMtyE

Enjoy.

[jbeale]

The main problem with all the samples I've seen from the HV20 is not HDV artifacts, it's oversharpening, color fringing (CA from lens) and blown highlights. Is anyone serious enough to be using a Red, finding the HV20 quality really acceptable?

[John Godden]

The main problem with all the samples I've seen from the HV20 is not HDV artifacts, it's oversharpening, color fringing (CA from lens) and blown highlights. Is anyone serious enough to be using a Red, finding the HV20 quality really acceptable?

Given the right type of shot the HV20 can be quite usable. I.e. locked-down talking head interviews or any shots that don't push the codec very hard and have decent lighting.

Regards
JohnG