Record uncompressed 14-bit (4:4:4) on your HVX200

[Barry_Green]

How would it do variable frame rates in 1080p? I assume you would have the camera set for 720p but the Hydra would pull the footage before it got to the part of the camera that compresses the image back down to 720?

Yep. The camera menus would most likely still be used to control the system, but the Hydra would pull the image information off before the camera processes it (and compresses it and everything else). Internally the camcorder scans its image into a 1920x1080 matrix and processes that; the Hydra appears to use the rest of the raw pixels and actually pulls out about 2k worth of resolution. You wouldn't have cinelike-D or cinelike-V gamma, as those are created in-camera; instead you'd use the Reel-Stream software to create those type of looks. You'd have the raw 14-bit image data to work with, rather than the pre-processed and compressed 8-bit image.

 

[IanK]

Looks great! Does anyone know how much hard drive space that would take up? How many gigs per minute? What does the Andromeda get?

 

[Barry_Green]

I've always been a little confused with a system like this. I understand the benefits of acquiring an image that is uncompressed (no compression artifacts, clean, no banding, great keying, etc...), but how does this system improve image resolution?

The proof is in the pudding. For sample pudding, look on the reel-stream site and see how they pulled a 1540x960-ish image out of a standard-def DVX. Now imagine that same technology applied to a high-def HVX.

If I plug my HVX200 into a TV (before it goes to P2), that's the best image the camera can create, right?

Not necessarily! It's the best image that the combination of the lens, the chips, Panasonic's DSP, Panasonic's gamma curves, Panasonic's color matrix, and Panasonic's digital-to-analog conversion hardware can create. Juan's replacing everything downstream of the CCDs. It is, basically, a new camera (and the old camera, simultaneously).

Hydra takes the raw information right off the CCDs, at full 14-bit quality. Then Juan supplies software that does color transformation, quantizing to 14-bit or 12-bit or 10-bit or 8-bit, as well as any other image processing that you need to do. It's the raw signal, not camera-processed. However, the camera-processed image is still available (assuming Hydra works like Andromeda!) All the HVX processing will still apply to anything recorded to the P2 cards or to the firewire port. So you get both -- you have a normal HVX for normal HVX use, but when you want a mini-RED you plug in the gigabit-ethernet cable and capture raw variable-frame-rate 2k-resolution 14-bit images right to your computer, for processing through reel-stream's Sculptor HD software.

How will the HVX be able to give us 2K image quality?

Internally the chips are delivering a 1920x1080 matrix already, through the Panasonic software. Juan's tapping into all the available pixels to get a full 2k image.

Isn't this similar to the fact that the HVX shoots in both 720p and 1080p, but resolution wise, the image is about the same (only slightly better in 1080p)?

The resolution difference is largely due to the recording format used; DVCPRO-HD 720p prefilters the image from 1280x720 down to 960x720; it expands that back up to 1280x720 on playback. A tad of resolution loss occurs in this process. In 1080 mode the HVX delivers more res than 720p can record; it's at least in the ballpark of 1400 x 800 or so. But that's using Panasonic's algorithms. Juan's algorithms are different, and may be able to deliver even more resolution. Again, the proof is in the pudding, and Juan's showing higher-res images from a DVX than Panasonic gets from an HVX. So is it unreasonable to think that Juan can pull even more res out of an HVX? We'll see. But it sounds promising.

IF THE HYDRA CAN DO WHAT IT PROMISES, WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER BUY A $100,000 VARICAM HD CAMERA PACKAGE???

Same question, different price bracket: if the HV20 can do what it promises, why would anyone ever buy a $9,000 XLH1? Some people can't fathom the answer to that question. And others can't fathom why anyone would even ask the question, since the answer is so obvious.

 

[soarprod]

Good thing I already own this:
http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts/generic/8f52/

 

[235 Studios]

Good thing I already own this:

LOL!!! Great shirt.

This looks like a great mod to the HVX. Variable frame rates in 1080p - nice! I can't wait to see this mod in action.

 

[arrestthisman@comcast.net]

The BIG question

The BIG question

Will it record sync sound???? Or is it Andromeda bound with no sound?

I would not do hydra unless it had sync.

 

[GaryinCalifornia]

So then you'd just void your warranty on a new camera... and it sounds like no need for p2... might not be a bad idea... if it costs the price of 2 8gig p2 cards...

 

[Zack Birlew]

*Looks over at RED titanium R and back at computer screen*

grumble...grumble....grumble.......

 

[Tzedekh]

Digital Betacam is 10-bit.

Even the grandson of Digital Betacam, HDCAM SR, is 10-bit. And although the H.264/AVC High 4:4:4 Predictive Profile supports 14-bit sampling, I am unaware of any product that uses this level of the profile. Maybe RED is capable of it.

 

[Christopher Barry]

arrestthisman, indeed, no sync audio recording would be a major drawback, imo. My understanding of the DVX Andromeda, you have to record to DV tape for audio, then post sync the DV A/V footage to the DVX Andromeda files in your NLE during online, then remove the DV video and re-link/group the remaining A/V from there as a clip. Now, if the HVX is in HD mode, this means record HD A/V to P2 cards. Ouch, lots more data to wrangle, etc. Anyway, please may the Hydra A/V be recorded together to the hard drive, or this would make things quite difficult, especially long form/narrative projects.

 

[hawaj]

2K is great, color dynamic is amazing ...... but HVX is just pixelshift

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

*Looks over at RED titanium R and back at computer screen*

grumble...grumble....grumble.......

I'll gladly pay you for your RED reservation.

This mod is nice and all, but its not really great for field production.

Anytime I have to be tied to a computer for optimal image quality from a camera, well, that's just a non-starter.

 

[Kholi]

Sounds like you're saying it's not optimal for YOU. Which is cool. Most of the time, there's a wire of some sort tethered to the camera anyway, and those wires are much more constricting than the Ethernet possibility here.

I don't really see the extra hassle, outside of adding one more technician that knows the system and can monitor, etc.

 

[Tzedekh]

2K is great, color dynamic is amazing ...... but HVX is just pixelshift

True, but how do you think Reel-Stream accomplishes HD with the DVX mod? The process sounds like the ultimate in spatial offset.

 

[sick boy]

arrestthisman, indeed, no sync audio recording would be a major drawback, imo. My understanding of the DVX Andromeda, you have to record to DV tape for audio, then post sync the DV A/V footage to the DVX Andromeda files in your NLE during online, then remove the DV video and re-link/group the remaining A/V from there as a clip. Now, if the HVX is in HD mode, this means record HD A/V to P2 cards. Ouch, lots more data to wrangle, etc. Anyway, please may the Hydra A/V be recorded together to the hard drive, or this would make things quite difficult, especially long form/narrative projects.

This could be an advantage though. You can be recording to your p2/fs-100 and to the mac at the same time, making a back up either way. Also, this is agreat option for someone that is making a film that dont expect much for it but in the long run if it does go big, you have the option of going main stream quality. Also, choosing ethernet over many of the cables out there is a good choice a)anyone can make their own cables b)ethernet can be strung long distances, more so than firewire (meaning you dont have to carry your laptop everywhere, just be mindful of the cable) c)ethernet is much more durable, thats why they use it in networking buildings, can withstand heat, cold and be bent lots of ways.

 

[sick boy]

What I dont understand is why does panasonic sell cameras stripped down to 720p when it could be selling 2k cameras? I never new there was this option for the dvx, which is sort of an eye opener, almost like a governor on your engine, stopping you at a certain rpm/mph, the man is always holding us back.

 

[siniarch]

For Starters, Panasonic probably did not have the technology figured out to pump out 2k from their hardware. that's the genius behind Reel-Stream. (Panasonic not thinking outside the box)

Second, its a money thing. If they can produce a 2k camera for $7500. then why sell some of the higher end ones that do less resolution at a higher price.
They'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

Third, in order to keep costs down, they have used less expensive glass and I assume internal components also on the HVX than on their Professional Cameras. So why give 2k images with 1k optics.

I'm assuming there might be other reasons, but these are just my guesses.

 

[Tzedekh]

For Starters, Panasonic probably did not have the technology figured out to pump out 2k from their hardware. that's the genius behind Reel-Stream. (Panasonic not thinking outside the box).

Didn't have the technology figured out? You mean that you think Reel-Steam knows more about Panasonic's technology than Panasonic does? Doubtful. Besides, Panasonic has been monitoring Reel-Stream's developments and could easily buy the company.

Second, its a money thing. If they can produce a 2k camera for $7500. then why sell some of the higher end ones that do less resolution at a higher price. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot.

Hardly. Until the HPX2000's AVC Intra board is released, the HVX-200 supports the highest-definition format that Panasonic offers; it also supports 1080p24/p30, whereas the Varicam, at $45,000, doesn't. So in some ways Panasonic already sells high-end cameras that do less at a higher price.

Third, in order to keep costs down, they have used less expensive glass and I assume internal components also on the HVX than on their Professional Cameras. So why give 2k images with 1k optics.

This is a good reason. High-quality glass is expensive.

 

[pertierr]

Anytime I have to be tied to a computer for optimal image quality from a camera, well, that's just a non-starter

I guess those running back and forth to a computer swapping P2 cards wouldn't find it any different, unless you have enough cards to run the entire length of your shoot.

I think the main point to consider is that this is just an extra tool, more like a scalpel than a hammer. That is, if you decide that you need uncompressed 14-bit quality in your production then you can now do so at a low cost. This doesn't mean the system will be ideal for every single shooting situation, it's not intended to. Those of you shooting run-and-gun documentaries probably already know that the core value of such work is being there and getting a shot, not necessarily the aesthetic video quality.

In our experience, a big chunk of the people interested in wide-latitude uncompressed footage are those shooting features and special effects. In either of those situations, i have yet to see a single professional setup in which there are no cables connected to whatever camera is being used. In professional handheld shots, there are video taps, power and probably audio coming off the film camera.

About the resolution issue, remember that most manufacturers make video cameras which have to comply with standards, such as DVCPROHD, or HDCAM, etc. As such, it goes against the concept of a standard to have non-standard frame-sizes. This is why you get 1920x1080, 1280x720, 720x480 out of some camera, even though the imaging block may be capable of other frame sizes.

On the DVX, for example, the imaging block is capable of 1.5K at a 1.4:1 aspect ratio. The tape format available at the time(miniDV) accepted a 4:3 aspect ratio, and up to 720x480 resolution. Thus, that is what the data is processed into.

Cheers!
Juan@reel-stream.com

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

Sounds like you're saying it's not optimal for YOU. Which is cool. Most of the time, there's a wire of some sort tethered to the camera anyway, and those wires are much more constricting than the Ethernet possibility here.

I don't really see the extra hassle, outside of adding one more technician that knows the system and can monitor, etc.

Indeed, I was talking about MY needs. I'm sure this will be a great mod for others.