Mike Brennan

Yes pixel count comparisons between Bayer filter and 3 chip are a somewhat apples and oranges comparison at the moment. And quoted output resolutions could be derived from a sampled lower (or higher) res image so they are not to be trusted either. Also like a prism system there are comprimises with Beyer colour fidelity that are subject dependent, which one is better? is another apples and oranges comparison. Mitch which prism test do you refer? Mike Brennan

being an avid subscriber to American Cinematographer for 3 years now Err you don't believe everything you read do you? 1 cmos chip a bit larger than a 35mm frame since it is cmos and not ccd it is capable of fps of 1-200 (the original prototype went to 72fps) (6million pixels) There are 1K CCD digital slo mo cameras around that do 1000 fps. They wouldn't tell you that in American Cinematographer... until Arri launched a badged version of such a sytem:) "32 (12 bit ) a/d converters working parallel to upload data @ 10Gbit/sec (hd is 1.5 Gbit per sec) same dof and field of view as 35mm" Gaffers will love double the quantity of light needed with this camera to get same depth of field as HD 2/3 inch. Ohh Arri make lights too!Pity we can't have our cake and eat it too and have a choice of size of imageRr "uses any lens mount for high end optics and has thru-the-lens viewing" Jury is out that existing film lenses will be good enough for aquiring images that will be digitally projected at 2k/4k interestingly enough, you have to "develop" the raw data to see it wysiwyg, combining all the "layers" of data per frame. otherwise you can preview it in b&w. Sounds like a step backwards from quality monitoring from existing HD "also, ARRI is very smart in the development of such an ambitious endeavour, cunsulting all the top cinematographers and their respective organizations, I.E. the ASC, BSC, etc...this is because" Savvy is the word as they are protecting their existing customer base. "unlike corporations like sony, jvc, etc (i have nothing against them) this is being developed specifically as a tool for the DP, not JUST an experiment in technology." You give Sony ect too much credit! The word develop should be replaced with cobble together! But a new set of bias, vested interest issues ect will become apparent with cameras developed by film companies with a significant client base currently using film. Launch date will be strung out. Initally there will be compromises in design to conform with existing working practices. Imager and processing design will not highlight any issues with using existing film lenses for instance. (There may not be) In otherwords it could be a lot better. The digital camera of the next decade will be cobbled together from film bits and pieces and based on a melting pot of working practices designed to keep the current crafts and trades in employment. Probably a decade away from a truely ground up camera lens system. In a capitalist world there are not many developments that go as far and fast as they could. Mike Brennan

"have a question. Can you take one of the Panasonic portable recorders and record to it from a POV box camera?" Absolutley! A effects, stunt, remote head system for $40k plus lens. Also a viper or HDC950 recorder. Also it could record images from the $5k HDVcams if what Sony allude to is correct (that the HDV cams will have a interface to HDCAM. They probably will make the HDSDI output available for replay only if we shout out too much that we would use the HDV camera as a low cost HD head and record onto a Panny recorder :( Sony's coming out with one with 1080/24p/25p/30p/50i/60i, 1440x1080 for $20K. Actually the spec is that the chip is 1.5 million pixel 1440 x1080, it is uprezed to 1920 x1080. With so many 1440x1080 sampled pics about one wonders why it isn't a strandard in its own right! Of course a 1920 x1080 image sampled to 1440 x1080 is better than a image from a 1440 x1080 imager. "Do you know how much can you adjust the box cameras locally or do you have to use a camera control unit?" Ikegamis HDL40 can be used with any of its remotes. Don't know about the other, expect the Panasonic box cam can too. "There is also this new $2K HD card for PC that is supposed to be available soon. So you could actually record to HD arrays." Can do this now but tape is still more field and production friendly than arrays. "Do you know if it is possible to use the Sony camera with the Panasonic recorder or a computer to create inexpensive CineAlta, with double sound system of course?" Shouldn't under estimate the amount of signal processing that exist in bigger camcorders. Shouldn't forget that cinealta is just a marketing name that excludes equipment and formats from others. "Do you have any idea on cost of the #120. I could not find any info on it on Panasonis's US site." The 130 is around $25k? So perhaps the 120 wil be similar? Mike Brennan

"Then if you'd like to play it at 24 fps, you'd have to discard every second frame. This is what the Varicam does. It always records at 100 Mbps at 60 fps and and at 24 fps the rate convertor discards 36 frames" The 1700 and the new for NAB 120 portable change sampling. At 50i 25p they do 1440 x1080 8 bit 4:2:2 then 6.1 to 1 At 60i they change to 1280 x1080 8 bit 4:2:2 then 6.1 to 1 720p is same as Varicam camera. So the 120 will be a good quality portable deck that can record viper HDSDI pics. Is this enough for US fimmakers to shoot on 25p? Mike Brennan

"You need to talk to some knowledgeable people about how the Varicam works." Steve Mahrer from Panasonic has accurate information. Many vendors and even owner operators do not. " You do not throw away 60% of the information the way you describe. It's more like 10%." At 24p each of the 24p frames are the same quality, as are the other 36 frames to pad out the recording. "So each frame of DVCPROHD at 720p is 1.65Mb per frame. Multiply by 24 to get 39.60Mb/s at 24p" (source BBC) "The camera knows what speed it shoots at and subrates out the data to make best advantage of the 100 data stream." The new decks can record different standards, ie @25p the 1700 records 1440 x1080 4:2:2 then compress 6 to 1. But the camera at 60p is as described above. I've posted the numbers at http://www.hd24.com/compression_numbers.htm "Talk to a Panasonic rep to learn more--they won't lie, they'll just explain it more clearly then whoever told you the other information. They don't appear to have explained it clearly to you Mitch :( Really, Kodak, Panasonic and Sony are three peas in a pod. The old adage "let the buyer beware" has an echo "let the forum reader beware". Mike Brennan

John, What cameras are available to create content for this device? cheers Mike Brennan

"My post stated that Kodak factory is producing 60000 units of pro slrs a month." Opps that should read Nikon Factory. Here is a tour of the assembly line of the Nikon factory by a photographer. http://dpmac.com/factory/index.html Mike Brennan

"Why do you think that digital will go beyond 35mm soon?" My post stated that Kodak factory is producing 60000 units of pro slrs a month. Need more proof? "It hasn't even reached 35mm by a long shot (on set)" I agree that it has not reached 35mm on set yet but it is closer than a "long shot". Resolution is something that video manufacturers are fist going to try to reach because it is the most obvious thing and can fool a lot of people (it's clean numbers) into beliving that they have film qualitty if they match its resolution only." You are correct that they are improving resolution before anything else as this is what the viewer notices the most. Will they improve dynamic range soon? Fuji have a two pixel per sensor photosite that looks promising and then there is CMOS. Question, how could a bunch of numbers fool people into thinking a digital (inferior) picture is equal to film? "But just to isolate this problem (the resolution), there is a very good reason why some digital scanners support even 6K resolution." I'm not isolating it, you are. And as a 6k scanner is in fact a digital camera you can see why I think digital technology can soon equal then better film. Latest imager called the v(nu)MAICOVICON from Panasonic being churned out *now* has 2 megapixels in 5.6 diagonal sensor. That is 4 or 5 times the density of a current HD chip! Oh it is more sensitive and uses less power than ccds and higher quality than CMOS. Thats their sales pitch anyway! Digital imaging a "long shot" away from 35mm motion picture film? Mike Brennan

In side buy side comparison, you would not see any differnce on nearly any material. Exactly my point. Who can see the difference between HDCAM palyback and live HDSDI 4:2:2 output on TV. Yet to see enough real world examples of how 444 transfers to film where, if signal is kept pristine throughout post process their may be a noticable difference. Mike

What do you mean rivaling 65mm? I wrote " they are rivalling 65mm but haven't got past 35mm yet" Maybe I should have added a :) Underlying point is that we use 35mm as the bar, digital will soon go beyond that, (on set) but like cinema distribution the *delivery* quality of digital will be at the lowest possible standard. Mike

"God. No. There are absolutely no correlating factors between the kind of bitrate reduction used in Digibeta and MPEG-4. They are not at all comparable." Can you explain more Phil? Is it an apples and oranges comparison? Mike Brennan

"I think that any image system that is supose to rival 35mm film" They are rivalling 65mm, but haven't got past 35mm yet. It has been reported in DPreview forum the Kodak are knocking out 60,000 pro digital SLR cameras a month from one of their factories. Like Sony, Kodak will become box shifters (of forever improving digital cameras) rather than roll shifters. Mike Brennan

Anyone used the Abekus Stadium or Theatre lens. I have a forthcomming job where we need more than 110 degrees horizontal. When I saw them a few years ago I was not impressed with the quality, but they were early models. Mike Brennan

Looks like no one has changed heads on a f900? Mike Brennan

A extraordinary achievement the SR recorder may be but the difference in picture quality is not anywhere near the increase in data rate. Who can tell between playback from a f900 and a live picture? Considering its cost, no camcorder available, why bother with 444 but for bluescreen? The post houses love it becuase it will add $$$$ to their charges. The SRW1 4:4:4 recorder is probably designed to record a (compressed) 4k image from the next camera. Now we are talking! "Varicam, converted to 24p (from the recorded stream of 60p) has an effective 40 Mbps bit stream, 4:2:2 compression, 1280x720 pixels. Compared to CineAlta SR it is like night and day. Joe" Varicam records 960x720. if we are going to talk numbers lets make them accurate! Mike

Anyone changed drums on HDCAM f900? What is the average life of the upper or lower drum? Mike Brennan

Interface looks good Tim and registration took all of 90 seconds. Look forward to unbiased and informative posts regarding HD. Mike Brennan