the end of reel-stream and where to go from here

monday sunnlinn · December 1, 2007

ok, so if you haven't heard and actually care, juan at reel-stream.com sold the andromeda and hydra technology to an undisclosed entity. he stated on the forum that they are more than likely going to shelve the technology.

so, being special fx minded and a more-or-less perfectionist, how am i going to get 4.4.4 color in 1080 progressive HD for less than 8-10k.

the one work around that i have figured out but have yet to test is(and i caution you that i i figured this out at about 4am once when i couldn't sleep)...

get a nikon D3 or D300.

plug the hdmi(v1.3a) cable out from the camera into an hdmi to HD-SDI adapter and send that to a AJA kona3 card in a mac.

the problems with this approach(presuming it actually works) are many and varied.

1. there is only one HDMI to HD-SDI converter. it costs $800 and it's interlaced.

2. the D3 has a power adapter, but it's $5000, the D300 is $1500 but it doens't have a power adapter.

3. i presume the signal coming out of the camera is 29.97(nikon won't answer an email asking about the specs for the HDMI adapter). i need to overcrank for slo-mo....

4.the kona 3 is $3000, and the IO HD doens't send uncompressed color to the mac....

so i need a to get an HD(v) 1080 prog 4.4.4. color from a camera that's under 8-10k.

this is primarily for green-screening.

to save you the time if you were going to respond telling me that if it's lit properly etc. etc. etc. you can still get a good key at 4.2.2. color, well, i don't want a good key, i want the absolute best key i can get whether i have controlled lighting situations or not. you might say i want this especially for when i do not have good lighting situations available...

i do a lot of run and gun, impromptu greenscreening with one client, and for my own project i want the absolute best that is reasonably affordable...

thanks for your knowledge if you have any to contribute...

:-)

Walter Graff · December 1, 2007

If its for green screen than 4:2:2 is more than sufficient for your needs. Use good software in your keying and you'll forget aobut 4:4:4 real fast.

Phil Rhodes · December 2, 2007

I could point out you weren't getting 4:4:4 uncompressed 1080 out of a modified DVX or HVX, anyway. I'm not quite sure what you expect to get for not much money, anyway - you want full 1080 uncompressed 4:4:4 overcranked? There are hundred grand cameras out there that don't do that.

If you want to record HDMI, you want a Blackmagic Intensity, which is a direct HDMI recorder. Most 24p devices will actually output 60i with a 3:2 pulldown, but it's no real stress to remove that later.

I'd be interested to know if you have actually found a DSLR which will output HD-res images at a usable framerate over HDMI. Are you sure it isn't some low frame rate preview image?

Phil

monday sunnlinn · December 2, 2007

@Phil

i'm still trying to get some info from nikon on that HDMI port. the hydra technology said it's 4.4.4. color and actually larger than 1080 as it takes the signal straight from the chip before any sort of compression is applied, what do you know that no one else does? not being sarcastic, just hoping to learn something new...about everything, all the time....

@Walter

you couldn't resist could you?

:)

(i think it was you that had the link to the tutorial about blue screening in one of the keying topics, a lot of great information in there, thanks...i might also add the using a backlight on the subject that is the spill suppressor color of the screen color helps keep small details like hair from being lost in the key.)

i have used the lastest versions of AE pro and Motion with a plug-in called DVmatte blast and one called Conduit from DV garage, and pulled some good keys from the worst possible case DV footage and some really good keys from

some stuff shot on a JVC HD110u even with their chip problems and unfriendly to FCP codec.

but i don't want good, i want the best i can make within a limited budget. i was going to get the DSLR eventually to use for timelapse shots so i started exploring that option.

so if anyone has gotten a signal that's useable out of the HDMI port of a DSLR, feel free to speak up and let us know what it is.

at this point i'd like to say that i'm also hoping for anyone who knows of a camera besides the JVC GY-HD250 that has an HD-SDI out on it...(i've had a lot of frustration with that jvc line of cameras starting with the hd100, bad chips, dead pixels, unfriendly codec...)

Walter Graff · December 2, 2007

"JVC HD110u even with their chip problems"

Why is this myth still prepetuated? Some of the first models of the HD110 had a split screen problem. JVC divides the signal of the chip into two signals for processing because of the shear amount of info. Some cameras were not calibrated properly. If you got the then software update, you didn't have the problem.

monday sunnlinn · December 2, 2007

it's not a myth when it ruins a product/shoot...

i can only speak from my personal experience.

i'm glad to hear they have fixed that. you sound like you are up to date on the JVC HD series, off the top of your head, do you know what the firmware revision is that fixes that, so next time i(or anyone else) am/is required to pick one of those up at a rental house, i/they can check?

Edited December 2, 2007 by monday sunnlinn

Phil Rhodes · December 2, 2007

> i'm still trying to get some info from nikon on that HDMI port.

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...c=27555&hl=

> the hydra technology said it's 4.4.4. color and actually larger than 1080 as it takes the signal

> straight from the chip before any sort of compression is applied, what do you know that no one else

> does?

It has 960x540 CCDs (or something). Pixel shift all you like and it still won't be 1080. Even less will it be 4:4:4 anything. It isn't even 1280x720, let alone 4:4:4 1280x720.

The HVX is a junky camera and I don't like it or the pictures it produces.

I would be far more excited to see an uncompressed mod done to a JVC GY-HD200.

Phil

monday sunnlinn · December 2, 2007

okay, so i guess that won't work. thanks Phil.

since this thread has veered slightly from my original question.

does anyone out there who's not committed to JVC for whatever reason (be it technical, experience or personal taste)have any comments about getting 4.4.4. color out of a prosumer HD camera?

i do appreciate the input from Walter and Phil, it gives me much to consider again about HDV and JVC, but i want more than just their perspective on it. so don't be shy people...more than anything, i just want to hear from anyone that has a set-up that might work. if you feel the need to critique it, please start another thread so as not to scare others away before they share their experience with the rest of us.

Walter Graff · December 2, 2007

I now own a HD200 which I purchased after extensive testing of all the cameras in the price range and am very familair with the camera and the HD100. Just did some great lens tests with my camera and the PL mount adapter that JVC makes and made some amazing pictures. Pictures of some of the many lenses we tested at the bottom of this page I link to:

http://www.bluesky-web.com/hdv.htm

As for rental houses, if a rental house has not fixed the few cameras that had the issue, then you don't need to be renting there. I don't know of any that do it anymore.

David Mullen ASC · December 3, 2007

It's an interesting experiment, hacking a prosumer camera to get the unprocessed data off of the sensors, though I've never been convinced of the practicality of it other than for limited efx work where recording uncompressed 4:4:4 HD is not as big a deal due to the small amounts of footage.

You also have to ask yourself whether, if the point is a better-quality chromakey composite, whether other factors would also come into play -- for example, would uncompressed 4:4:4 / 960 x 540 out of an HVX200 be better than compressed 4:2:2 / 1920 (or 1440) x 1080 from a decent pro 2/3" HD camera with a great 2/3" lens on it? Which would be easier to deal with on the day of the shoot, faster to work with, more flexible?

Chromakeys from pro 4:2:2 cameras are done all the time with great success, and the only reason for 4:4:4 would be for cinema release applications, and then you have to ask yourself if you really should be using the HVX200 then if theatrical projection quality was that important to you, that you'd be willing to hack into the camera to get 4:4:4.

It seems similar to the notion of putting a Zeiss Master Prime on a consumer camera, that it's maybe not the best way to get the most quality.

Although we may reach the day where most prosumer cameras allow unprocessed data off of the sensors to be downloaded, as an option.

Phil Rhodes · December 3, 2007

I am sometimes surprised that this isn't done more to pro cameras. A RAW port on an F750, for example, would be a rather significant upgrade.

Until recently all it would have taken, really, was a socket. In my (broadcast) camera the three ADCs quite literally have ten pins each for ten bit data, and a clock. It's that easy. You have to be quite careful how you load the lines, so as not to introduce too much capacitance, or you can screw up the operation of both your add on and the camera, but it isn't rocket science. The most difficult part tends to be a reliable connection without doing solderwork on the camera's main boards; there are test clamps available but they're designed for lab work and aren't very sturdy.

Ironically the amount of processing that now happens onboard CMOS sensors may mean that for many cameras, the data comes off the chip already rather processed and this whole approach may become less and less viable.

Phil

Walter Graff · December 3, 2007

"I am sometimes surprised that this isn't done more to pro cameras. A RAW port on an F750, for example, would be a rather significant upgrade."

Since most production cameras are made for the masses and there is little use by the masses for such a port, it is simply not worth engineering into a camera. Hence why niche cameras like RED would consider it for the very few that might have any need for it.

Edited December 3, 2007 by WALTER GRAFF