Does Firestore has the same function as P2?

[spadrille]

I know that you can record onto firestore as in P2 but i'm concerned about the other functionnalities. May i read clips from firestore on the camera like i can read the P2? Does it show the clips as thumbnails in the viewfinder? Is therer a prebuffer like in P2? I believe that the answer is "no" but i hope to be happily suprised.

[Pelican]

I was wondering the same thing (on the fence, regarding the purchase of the P2 package, or waiting for the firestore).
I got the Demo DVD for the HVX200 at Resfest Chicago, and it showed how you can view the thumbnails of your takes, and delete unwanted files on the fly. That would be a great way to save disk space on the Firestore. Also as a side note, very cool to see your takes in thumbnails, playback scenes directly (ram way) and switch to recording almost instantaneously, without all that wear and tear on the transport system.

[stephenlnoe]

The answer is yes. Firestore looks like a giant P2 card to the camera. This is my understanding from Resfest Chicago.

[jdv]

The answer is yes. Firestore looks like a giant P2 card to the camera. This is my understanding from Resfest Chicago.
Does it connect directly/physically to the camera? Or does it connect via a fire wire cable? Can it be battery powered? Thanks for the info...
John

[stephenlnoe]

Does it connect directly/physically to the camera? Or does it connect via a fire wire cable? Can it be battery powered? Thanks for the info...
John

It does connect to the camera via firewire (1394) on the rear right side of the camera. It can be battery powered. It does serve the P2 view as well, or in other words the thumbnails are grabbed from the firestore hard drive and displayed in the cameras LCD just as if the firestore were a giant P2 card.

That's how it was shown/explained to me.

[jdv]

It does connect to the camera via firewire (1394) on the rear right side of the camera. It can be battery powered. It does serve the P2 view as well, or in other words the thumbnails are grabbed from the firestore hard drive and displayed in the cameras LCD just as if the firestore were a giant P2 card.

That's how it was shown/explained to me.

That's pretty cool, actually. Some have complained that it was too big, but my first reaction upon seeing the firestore is that it was pretty small (I guess a was expecting some sort of rack mount!). You could rig up some sort of a pouch to help keep it on a tripod or whatever... Thanks!

[Eurotrash]

Also as a side note, very cool to see your takes in thumbnails, playback scenes directly (ram way) and switch to recording almost instantaneously, without all that wear and tear on the transport system.


Yeah, it's a great way of working. I tried JVC's Everio several times; that thing also works with a build-in harddisk or removable microdrive, and shows thumbnails in the menu. It really changes your workflow and it saves lots of time, because you don't have to fastrewind/forward anymore.

[harddrive]

Firstly hi!

I've been using a Firestore FS4 Pro with a DVCAM camera (DSR500) for a while now, and have to say it has saved me a huge amount of time not having to digitise.

I first heard of plans for integrate Firestore with the HVX200 on another forum, and have to say that at first it was thought there to be a joke. Why? Well, firstly I'm a fan of Firestore now, but the more I use it the more I consider it necessary to use it AS WELL AS tape, and not instead of it. Generally the FS4 works well, but there have been glitches where shots have become corrupted and can't be captured - but no problem, these can just be recovered from the tape - I've still saved a lot of time. Not just that, but the reporter can use the tape copy for logging whilst I start editing, and there is an archive tape copy into the bargain.

It has occurred to me that the whole workflow would be the same if I could replace the Firestore with P2 - the only drawback would seem to be the cost/memory situation with P2 currently. In that case I would hope the P2 recording to be more reliable than the FS4 - I am suspicious of the Firewire cable connection rather than the FS4 itself. Either way, I would consider it essential to record onto tape at the same time (at least until such time as P2 is considered a consumable item).

In SD mode the HVX200 seems a clever concept - it would give me the versatility I want, certainly in a few years time when P2 capacities become more viable. In HD mode, that same versatility could be kept if the deck still functioned - I guess HDV is the only realistic option. In that case, 25 Mb MPEG HD could also be recorded to P2, immediately quadrupling run times/GB and making any use of Firestore much less relevant.

So the way it seems to me is that if I bought an HVX200 for High Definition work, it's tape deck therefore becomes redundant, and the support for Firestore seems to be an acknowledgement that P2 doesn't yet have the capacity at 100Mb/s to make it a feasible solution for general film-making! This begs the question of why bother with recording devices within the HVX200 at all? Why not make it a smaller and cheaper camera with a sturdy mounting bracket for a Firestore type device?!

At the end of the day, tape compliments the FS4, and it would be exactly the same with tape and P2 - ones advantages are the others disadvantages. But hard drive and P2 are competing technologies - they have the same advantages and disadvantages. Hence a camera capable of recording to FS4 AND P2 makes little sense, and the redundant (for HD) tape deck sitting there just rubs it in!

[stephenlnoe]

That's pretty cool, actually. Some have complained that it was too big, but my first reaction upon seeing the firestore is that it was pretty small (I guess a was expecting some sort of rack mount!). You could rig up some sort of a pouch to help keep it on a tripod or whatever... Thanks!
If you haven't seen one, the firestore (HDD) is about the same size as a standard 5 1/4 hard disk drive with an outside case and some control buttons. I didn't quite get how they'll tap (of if you can tap) for power with the Panasonic. On the JVC HD-100 there is a power tap on the A/B mount for the firestore mated to the cameras cradle. I like the FS cradle for the HD-100, some people don't. To me it is convenient (and thoughful) to have a cradle solution for the FS if the purchaser opt's to go with a hard drive solution. Otherwise, you could put it in a belt pack, but don't forget, it is a hard drive with moving parts. A camera mount may be more ideal than a belt pack simply because the camera will be steady.

[harddrive]

.........you could put it in a belt pack, but don't forget, it is a hard drive with moving parts. A camera mount may be more ideal than a belt pack simply because the camera will be steady.
Following on from my post above I don't think that's such a good idea, because of the Firewire cable/connector more than the hard drive. It's fine with a big pro camera like the DSR500, and even improves the already good balance and ergonomics of the JVC HD100. Less good with front heavy cameras like the Z1, and I suspect with the HVX200 as well.

[redindian]

Doesnt Firestore need more space to record the same data as P2. In P2 you record only valid frames, but in Firestore u record ALL redundant frames. Isnt that true?

thats a big point - that 100GB will not really be a comparative 100GB.

[stephenlnoe]

Following on from my post above I don't think that's such a good idea, because of the Firewire cable/connector more than the hard drive. It's fine with a big pro camera like the DSR500, and even improves the already good balance and ergonomics of the JVC HD100. Less good with front heavy cameras like the Z1, and I suspect with the HVX200 as well.
You are right about that and I don't know what the Panasonic solution is as far as mounting or tapping for power. We'll see....


Doesnt Firestore need more space to record the same data as P2. In P2 you record only valid frames, but in Firestore u record ALL redundant frames. Isnt that true?

thats a big point - that 100GB will not really be a comparative 100GB.
I just don't know. The response I got was that it was a giant P2 card and don't know the interoperability of it as far as retained frames compaired to an actual P2 card. The P2 scenario is true for the SPX800 so I would think whatever is true for the SPX800 would carry over to the HVX200. It is completely speculation on my part.

[Haakon]

As far as I understand, the Firestore is simply there to save the video data to a hard drive. You don't get thumbnail clips on an LCD, there's no random access, and you lose all of your P2 metadata. I could be wrong, but that's the last I remember hearing from Jan...

[stephenlnoe]

As far as I understand, the Firestore is simply there to save the video data to a hard drive. You don't get thumbnail clips on an LCD, there's no random access, and you lose all of your P2 metadata. I could be wrong, but that's the last I remember hearing from Jan...
We have conflicting information from the same source.

[harddrive]

Doesnt Firestore need more space to record the same data as P2. In P2 you record only valid frames, but in Firestore u record ALL redundant frames. Isnt that true?
I wouldn't think it would make any difference, and I think yuou're coonfusing a few points. Used for HD, P2 records according to the DVCPRO HD spec - 100Mb, and records every frame discreetly, albeit quite heavily compressed - this is "I" frame only recording. The Firestore should just dump to disc whatever the camera throws at it, so with the HVX200 it's likely to be the 100Mb DVCPRO HD signal.

HDV records HD at a quarter the DVCPRO HD bitrate - 25Mb, the same as DV. At first sight this would seem to mean that it would be far lower quality than DVCPRO HD, but the structure is MPEG2, "long GOP". This means that only one or two frames every second are compressed and recorded discreet - for the others, difference information between the complete frames is recorded, from which the original sequence can be reconstructed.

The advantage is that comparable quality can be achieved with far lower bitrates. The disadvantage is that more processing is required, especially for editing. A few years ago, it was all most computers could do to handle I frame only streams, nowadays they've moved on, and MPEG solutions begin to look far more satisfactory. Given the cost/GB of P2, many of us are amazed that Panasonic have not gone down such a route - HDV would also have allowed the deck in the HVX200 to record HD to tape as well as P2. That would have made it a product worth considering for me.

From my SD experience of Firestore, I think it extremely unlikely that it keeps the thumbnails. If you want that facility, you'll need to shell out big money and buy the P2 cards!

[stephenlnoe]

...HVX200 it's likely to be the 100Mb DVCPRO HD signal.
There were some long discussions about how 24p is processed into a file from 60 frames (pulldown) on another camera and whether that would carry over to the HVX200. The question was wheter the full 60 frames would be recorded or just the 24 with place holders. Anyone that was a part of that discussion could chime in with more input.

Also remember, as you said, the data is actually a DIF file (in MXF wrapper) where each frame is independent but in the scenrio of DVCProHD when recorded at 720p24 the data rate is 40Mb, not 100Mb. So in essence the question remains about what exactly is pushed out to the firestore.

As far as the thumbnails to view, it is stored in the MXF which would be their on the P2 or the firestore so it is likely (and I was told) that the thumbnails would show up on the LCT from the firestore (the firestore specifically for the HVX)


We'll have to wait and see for sure...

[Prairieboy]

The firewire attatchment is what scares me as well. How hard would it be to create a dummy P2 card with a cable out to the firestore, or for that matter any other harddrive. This would build my confidence.

[harddrive]

Also remember, as you said, the data is actually a DIF file (in MXF wrapper) where each frame is independent but in the scenrio of DVCProHD when recorded at 720p24 the data rate is 40Mb, not 100Mb.
I'd understood DVCProHD was 100Mb by definition - but I stand to be corrected! Is that true when we're talking about tape as well, or is the 40Mb figure only when P2 is involved?

[Haakon]

I'd understood DVCProHD was 100Mb by definition - but I stand to be corrected! Is that true when we're talking about tape as well, or is the 40Mb figure only when P2 is involved?
That's what hasn't been clarified yet.

[Barry_Green]

I'd understood DVCProHD was 100Mb by definition - but I stand to be corrected! Is that true when we're talking about tape as well, or is the 40Mb figure only when P2 is involved?
On tape, it is 100mb by definition. In 1080 mode, it is 100mb at all times.

In 720p, it gets a little more complex. 720p is capable of variable frame rates, which consists of a series of "active frames" and "duplicate frames". When recorded to tape, the sequence must be rounded out to 60fps/100mb, so duplicate frames are inserted in the data stream to round it out. So if you're shooting 4fps, you'd get each frame repeated fourteen times, so you'd have one original and fourteen duplicates. If you were shooting 30p, each original ("active") frame would be duplicated once.

So far, it's all consistent. If you firewire the image to a tape deck that'll work fine. If you digitize from the tape deck you can use the software frame rate conversion utility to strip out the duplicate frames and leave you with a file that contains only the active frames. So, while the original data stream was 100mb, a 720/30p file on disk would occupy 50mb.

Enter P2 -- with P2, there is no tape involved, it's a direct-to-"disk" storage medium, so why not strip out the duplicate frames before recording? And indeed, that's what they do. So if you record 720/24p onto P2, it will store only the 24 active frames per second, discarding any "duplicate" frames. The result is a file that takes up 40 megabits per second on the card. For 720/30p, it would result in a 50-mbit file.

So now, enter the firestore -- how does it do it? The firewire port will be streaming the full 100-megabit signal at all times, for compatibility with existing decks and editing applications. Will the Firestore just blindly record that full signal? Or will it have electronics and "intelligence" in it that will allow it to strip out the duplicate frames, so it only has to store the active frames? That would be the best, obviously, and that's what we're hoping for. I haven't heard any comment from Focus one way or the other.

[jdv]

[QUOTE=
I've been using a Firestore FS4 Pro with a DVCAM camera (DSR500) for a while now, and have to say it has saved me a huge amount of time not having to digitise.
[/QUOTE]

This part confuses me... Lets say I download my footage from my firestore or p2 card into my editing system (say, final cut pro).

People have been guestimating that it will be around a minute a gig to download the p2 footage to a computer (more or less).

So, would that be it? No digitizing per say? Download and 8 gig card in 8 minutes and start editing?

Would the editing system 'see' the footage and already have access to it? I've read the article on the HVX/p2 on this site, but I guess I'm still confused as to how it would work on a step by step basis... Any knowlege here would go a long way for my, slowly growing, excitement over panasonic's decision to go tapeless... Thanks! John

[Barry_Green]

People have been guestimating that it will be around a minute a gig to download the p2 footage to a computer (more or less).
Depends on the speed of your hard disk -- it will likely be much faster than one minute per gig; could be up to six times faster.


So, would that be it? No digitizing per say? Download and 8 gig card in 8 minutes and start editing?
Well, yes. But it's better than that, actually, because the 8 gig card should download a lot faster than that. And, you don't have to download at all if you don't want to -- you can edit straight from the card.


Would the editing system 'see' the footage and already have access to it?
If you're using a DVCPRO-HD-capable edit station, then yes.

The process could be as simple as:
1) shoot footage to the card
2) plug camera into computer via USB, or plug card into computer (your choice)
3) edit footage.

No need to transfer anything, you can edit from the camera at perhaps full USB external-drive speeds; if you plug the card into the computer it's even faster (80 megabytes per second, which is RAID speed).

For the FireStore, it's the same workflow:
1) shoot footage to FireStore
2) plug FireStore into your computer (it mounts as an external disk drive)
3) edit footage.

Either way you totally eliminate the logging/digitizing/batch capturing process, you eliminate dropouts, all that stage is just completely gone.

[jdv]

The process could be as simple as:
1) shoot footage to the card
2) plug camera into computer via USB, or plug card into computer (your choice)
3) edit footage.

No need to transfer anything, you can edit from the camera at perhaps full USB external-drive speeds; if you plug the card into the computer it's even faster (80 megabytes per second, which is RAID speed).


Barry - 3 more questions if you will:

First - I thought the HVX transfered its data via a firewire cable, or is that for something else?

Second - So you could, in theory, completely edit a short film (longer as p2 card capacity increases) completely w/in the camera iteself (assuming the p2 card stays in), then download the finished edit to the editing systems' hard drive?

Third - Is this true if you are recording directly to the firestore and not the p2 cards?

Thank you for the answers Barry - man this p2 is looking more amazing by the second. John

[Barry_Green]

First - I thought the HVX transfered its data via a firewire cable, or is that for something else?
It has both USB2 and Firewire ports on it. It can stream data via the firewire port, and it can use the firewire to control an external hard disk drive as well to offload P2 card data. However, for direct-connect to a computer, I don't know if firewire supports that or not -- it may. I do know that the USB2 port supports it, so you can plug in a USB2 cable on the camera, plug the other end into your desktop or laptop computer, and the HVX200 will show up as an "external removable storage disk drive" on the desktop. And the contents of that "disk drive" will be whatever's on the P2 cards in the camera, and you could edit from there, or copy files off of it to your computer, etc.


Second - So you could, in theory, completely edit a short film (longer as p2 card capacity increases) completely w/in the camera iteself (assuming the p2 card stays in), then download the finished edit to the editing systems' hard drive?
Certainly -- as long as you've plugged the camera into a computer running an NLE. There's no editing capability supplied by the camera itself. You'd use your normal computer to do the editing; what I'm saying is you don't have to transfer or offload the data first -- you could edit the data while it's still in the camera.


Third - Is this true if you are recording directly to the firestore and not the p2 cards?
Well, with the FireStore it's probably a little different; I don't know if you can access the firestore through the camera or not; I'd be impressed if you could. I mean, could you plug the firestore into the camera, and then plug the camera into the computer, and be able to access the firestore that way? I don't know if that'd work. It'd be a little convoluted anyway, as there's an easier way to do it, and the exact same workflow applies. Instead of plugging the camera into the computer, you'd just plug the FireStore into the computer, and you can edit from it.


man this p2 is looking more amazing by the second
I think as more people grasp the implications, they'll start to understand why I keep saying "tape is dead." :thumbsup:

[stephenlnoe]

This part confuses me... Lets say I download my footage from my firestore or p2 card into my editing system (say, final cut pro).

My understanding is that FCP does not work directly with MXF. You'll have to debundle the MXF in order to use it's contents. Right now for DVCProHD MXF direct edit I believe there are two NLE's that can handle it right on the card. That is Avid XPressProHD and Canopus EdiusHD.

On the SD side there is Avid XpressPro, Canopus Edius, and Pinnacle Liquid Broadcast that can handle P2 MXF ingest or edit right on the card. There are some others too but I can't remember if they handle MXF directly or require a debundled MXF.

[jdv]

My understanding is that FCP does not work directly with MXF. You'll have to debundle the MXF in order to use it's contents. Right now for DVCProHD MXF direct edit I believe there are two NLE's that can handle it right on the card. That is Avid XPressProHD and Canopus EdiusHD.

Stephen - do you know if that's likely to change w/newer versions of FCP?

Barry - Tape is dead - no kidding. Do you know how tough these little p2 cards will be against the elements, etc? I've never used any other sort of solid state recorder (other than maybe a playstation memory card!). Thanks again you guys... John

[harddrive]

Originally posted by me: I've been using a Firestore FS4 Pro with a DVCAM camera (DSR500) for a while now, and have to say it has saved me a huge amount of time not having to digitise.

This part confuses me... Lets say I download my footage from my firestore or p2 card into my editing system ............
So, would that be it? No digitizing per say? Download and 8 gig card in 8 minutes and start editing?

Any knowlege here would go a long way for my, slowly growing, excitement over panasonic's decision to go tapeless... Thanks! John
Right. In theory, yes, you can indeed do exactly as Barry says:

1) shoot footage to FireStore
2) plug FireStore into your computer (it mounts as an external disk drive)
3) edit footage.

In practice, we found practical disadvantages to doing that for our workflow, which typically involves filming and editing four 7-8 minute mini features over the course of a week, away from base. Typically about 60 minutes of rushes might be shot per film, and the first problem is that the whole weeks rushes won't fit on the Firestore. It is necessary to make allowance that the first film may still be being edited whilst the last is being filmed.

Downloading to the local computer happens (for DV) at about 4x real time over Firewire, so for the sake of an extra (typically) 10-15 minutes when we first get back to the hotel we consider that well worth the time. It also saves wear and tear on the Firestore, and cabling and having to power it all the time editing is happening. We trialled P2, and found a similar process even more necessary due to having even less recording time available. Download times were similar to Firestore.

Either way, the big advantage over conventional capture from tape apart from speed is that the material is imported into the NLE as separate clips, one per shot. That applies to FS4 or P2, and is the same whether you edit off the drive/card or download as we do.

We need to keep copies of our rushes for a while, typically two months, and this was the main problem we found with P2. We couldn't keep the data on the cards for that time, had to wipe them daily, so ended up laying all the material back off the computer to tape. Frequently it was done unattended over dinner, but was a pain and did negate a big advantage to using P2 in the first place.

Firestore was MUCH more satisfactory. Apart from being able to use our existing camera, it had all the benefits of P2, and the archival tape copy happened automatically. That tape is also useful for the reporter to log from on a small viewer, the Avid being used for editing at the same time - that facility probably saves as much time as the use of tapeless for acquisition. It may be unpopular to say it here, but we've realised that tape is actually very useful - tapeless has advantages, but problems as well. Our experience is that recording to both at the same time really does give the best of both worlds.

P2 (or something like it) really does look like the way of the future - but unfortunately that future looks like a way off yet, practically. And using 100Mb for HD, rather than a 25Mb system probably puts it back by 2 more years. For the next 5 or more years the ideal would be a hybrid solution P2 and tape - why oh why does the tape deck in the HVX200 not record HD!?!

Barry - thanks for the explanation about data rates. Most informative.

(Edit - Have just reread the thread and notice the comments about "tape is dead". For all the reasons above, I'll go along with "will be dead", but definately not "is"! ;)

[Barry_Green]

why oh why does the tape deck in the HVX200 not record HD!?!
Because a DVCPRO-HD tape deck costs $20,000.



(Edit - Have just reread the thread and notice the comments about "tape is dead". For all the reasons above, I'll go along with "will be dead", but definately not "is"! ;)
Okay, let me rephrase it: Tape is dead, it just doesn't know it yet. :thumbsup:

[stephenlnoe]

Stephen - do you know if that's likely to change w/newer versions of FCP?

It's likely to change if enough people ask for it...

[harddrive]

In answer to : "Originally Posted by harddrive
why oh why does the tape deck in the HVX200 not record HD!?!"

Because a DVCPRO-HD tape deck costs $20,000.
Which to me then is the same as saying that Panasonic made a mistake by not going for HDV and recording 25 Mb MPEG onto the P2.

[USLatin]

Waaaaaaaait!!!!

Please tell me it is true! Will the Firestore feed the foootage back to the camera just as the P2 cards will? Thumbnails and all, metadata too?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?


I can't belive it! PLEASEEE!!!! BE TRUE!!!!!!!!! :engel017:

[braw]

Which to me then is the same as saying that Panasonic made a mistake by not going for HDV and recording 25 Mb MPEG onto the P2.

What the...do you...I can't... :shocked:

*gouges eye out with a stick and smashes computer*

[Barry_Green]

Which to me then is the same as saying that Panasonic made a mistake by not going for HDV and recording 25 Mb MPEG onto the P2.
This makes no sense to me. If all you want is HDV, there are plenty of HDV cameras available, you can get one of those today.

If you want what makes the HVX so much better, you have to recognize that you'd never get that on tape. It's P2 or FireStore.

[stephenlnoe]

In answer to : "Originally Posted by harddrive
why oh why does the tape deck in the HVX200 not record HD!?!"

Which to me then is the same as saying that Panasonic made a mistake by not going for HDV and recording 25 Mb MPEG onto the P2.
Panasonic has it's agenda and JVC has it's agenda. Both are Matshushita.

Two paths from two divisions under one banner. I'd say there were some choices already in place at the price range. The HD-100 seems (to me) to be cresting over the hump of the initial release issues. For HDV there are some really nice options to choose from under 10K. For DVCProHD there will be one option at the price range.

I recommend getting hands on, understanding the workflow and how it suits your business/artistic objectives. That being said, for HD(V), you can check out an HD-100 and talk about workflow and shooting online with other owner/users of the camera. Or wait and check out the Canon XL-H1 when it arrives and then on to the HVX200 when it debuts and make some decisions.

In my opinion, all of the splitting hairs over small stuff stands in the way of just grabbing a camera and shooting some video. It seems (to me) to be over analysis.

best of luck...

[dvpixl]

ive been out of it lately.. but i didn't want to start a new thread for couple of simple questions...
I'd appreciate any quick thoughts.

can you record SD to P2 on the HVX? just curious- and if so, would it be a complete waste of time to develop a p2 mini-dv cam? which then, come to think of it, would no longer be mini-dv and mini-dv would then be dead....
and there would be no point in making anymore SD cameras. fantabulous.

[Barry_Green]

Yes SD can be recorded on the P2 card -- DV, DVCPRO25, and DVCPRO50 are all SD formats and all can be recorded to the card.

[Neil Rowe]

Waaaaaaaait!!!!

Please tell me it is true! Will the Firestore feed the foootage back to the camera just as the P2 cards will? Thumbnails and all, metadata too?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?


I can't belive it! PLEASEEE!!!! BE TRUE!!!!!!!!! :engel017:

the following is my current (with available information right now)understanding of the camera operation with the firestore drive:

it can only record the video stream.. since the HVX200 doesnt stream out metadata and all that jazz through the FW port its not even there for the firestore to record. the metadata and thumbnails and all are P2 only features. if it had the ability to write those IT files to external HDD of any kind while shooting, you wouldnt need a firestore.. you could just plug in a dumb external drive and use it for data storage instead of P2 or firestore.. the reason the firestore is needed is because all the camera sends out is a one way video audio stream when shooting.. its not an IT connection at that time. just a video send. the HVX can do data transfers through the FW port, but your either in one mode or the other. and when shooting.. its only outputting the full video/audio stream of the record mode your in. the camera has no way of knowing whats on the firestore dirve to playback unless its in data transfer mode.. and in that case it can only transfer IT data I/O connected drives.. It likely wont recognize the filetyp of the files on the firestore which i assume would be AVI or quicktime. but could move them around non ethe less. so no.. there is no data stored to recall a thumbnail or indexing on the camera. the camera does not even know that the firestore is hooked up to it and recording the stream whatsoever. when the camera outputs in streaming mode.. its a one way stream. theres no 2 way communication between camera and device.. the camrea just sends out the stream and doesnt care what happens from there on out. nothing could be there, or you could plug the other end of the Fw cable into a laptop , firestore, DVCPRO HD deck.. or a potato.. the camera doesnt know or care.. although i dont suggest a potato. just the same as you can run your speaker cable from your stereo into a bowl of rice krispies, and your stereo doesnt know or care. so the firestore or whatever you have attached is responsible for not dropping any frames or missing any of the stream. and again, the camera doent care or know if it does or doesnt. so when shooting with the firestore the only way to view your footage is back in the edit bay , or off a laptop in the field or whatever.. you need some device that can read the files off the drive in the field with you if you want to review anything. which of course I would hope you could play back the stream sent back from the firestore through the 1394 port to view in the camera LCD or any device hooked up to the cameras outputs using the camera as a signal converter. that way you can review things by using the firestores built in clip indexing and playback features, and review them off the camera in the field by streaming from firestore to the camera.. just like you can with the current firestore and the DVX100.

[harddrive]

In my opinion, all of the splitting hairs over small stuff stands in the way of just grabbing a camera and shooting some video. It seems (to me) to be over analysis.
"Just grabbing a camera and shooting some video" may be fine for a hobbyist, but for us shooting and editing for broadcast is the way we make our living. With the tight constraints of broadcasters, it's important to do that as efficiently as possible.

What may seem like "splitting hairs over small stuff" to you, are matters to us which impact on productivity, even the difference between making a profit or loss.

Not having to digitise in real time (as with tape only) has been a real boon. Having a tape AND tapeless copy generated at the same time we have found saves up to perhaps a further 5% of the total time of production. Not having to actively archive our rushes (as was the case with the P2 trial) also saves time.

That is why I regret the deck in the HVX not being able to record HD - if we adopted the camera on a move to HD, it would adversely affect our efficiency. That is why I still recommend a tape camera and hard drive over the P2 solutions AT THE MOMENT - the technology may perhaps "be less cool", but it is more efficient in real life professional usage. For the next few years at least. And that's what counts.

Since HDV has the same data rate and structure as broadcast HD, I don't see how it can be that bad, and for us, the benefits of any tape deck would be worth sacrifices elsewhere. Without any real evidence, I can't but suspect that the difference between DVCPRO HD and HDV is less important in real terms than the difference in usability terms between front heavy prosumer cameras like the Z1 and HVX200 and true pro cameras?

Speaking to others in the industry, mine seems to be a common finding, and I can only ask how many companies you know who have adopted P2? I understand it to be not many, and of all the other crews I have encountered on the road in the last year, I've seen a few XDCAM units, but no P2.

In five years time, all the arguments will be different as costs come down, and solid state will make more and more sense. But how many sales can Panasonic afford to lose in that time?

[Ralph Oshiro]

[The Firestore] does connect to the camera via firewire (1394) on the rear right side of the camera.I wonder if this has changed? Jan said at RESfest Los Angeles, that they were still deciding on its exact method of connectivity to the camera and even suggested (correct me if I misunderstood you, Jan) that it might attach via the P2 slot off the back of the camera.

[Ralph Oshiro]

Speaking to others in the industry, mine seems to be a common finding, and I can only ask how many companies you know who have adopted P2? I understand it to be not many, and of all the other crews I have encountered on the road in the last year, I've seen a few XDCAM units, but no P2.As far as I know, no L.A.-based broadcast show, O&O or affiliate has adopted, or has announced plans to adopt P2. For example, CNN switched to BetacamSX a few years ago. Inside Edition recently switched to XDCAM. Most other daily shows (Extra, ET, etc.) are still shooting with BVW400s and 600s. A few locals and affiliates are still hanging on to their DVCPRO acquisition systems. CBS and NBC O&Os and network news operations are switching to XDCAM, and I think, ABC is too.

[Ralph Oshiro]

As far as the thumbnails to view, it is stored in the MXF which would be their on the P2 or the firestore so it is likely (and I was told) that the thumbnails would show up on the LCT from the firestore (the firestore specifically for the HVX)Just thought I'd add even more to the confusion . . . I was told by Jan that the MXF wrapper does NOT contain the metadata.

[leofish]

I wonder if the iPod Video version2 coming out in the spring 2006 could be an alternative to Firestore (and it most likely have over 100GB). That is an interesting thought, isn't it.

[harddrive]

I wonder if the iPod Video version2 coming out in the spring 2006 could be an alternative to Firestore (and it most likely have over 100GB).
The capacity of the Firestore isn't really an issue. I would expect the iPod to be geared up to handle quite highly compressed files to display on it's own relatively low resolution screen. What counts in the Firestore - what makes it different to a simple hard drive - is the way it handles the incoming stream, how it is controlled by the camera, how it formats the files made (differently for different editing platforms) etc etc. Why should any of this be built into the iPod, which is built for a different purpose?

[stephenlnoe]

Just thought I'd add even more to the confusion . . . I was told by Jan that the MXF wrapper does NOT contain the metadata.
MXF does contain metadata (without a doubt). Some NLE's (like Liquid or Xpress) will create an MXF which contains all metadata including picon views.

Click here and take a look (http://www.snellwilcox.com/knowledgecenter/mxf_aaf.html) for a web explaination of MXF. :thumbsup: