Press Release: HMC150, "the new DVX"

BobDiaz said:
It's funny to see how many messages have been generated, but we know so little about what exactly the camera will be... Just think how many messages will be generated once we know exactly about the camera.
Click to expand...

Just think about how many HMC150 vs. XHA1 vs. HVX vs. EX1 thread we'll have. Urgh.
 
BobDiaz said:
. . . It is interesting that Barry, Robert, and myself have a computer programming background. Maybe just a fluke or maybe there's something about programmers that causes us to become interested in video. . . Bob Diaz
Click to expand...

Relative to this whole thing about whether there will be (or was) logic put into the development and planning, manufacturing, and marketing, of this new camera, there is this always and foremost . . NO ONE KNOWS . . not even those who did it all from the ground up. Sometimes in manufacturing we all miss some really important element that when discovered isn't repairable. GM as example forgot to put a bolt in a motor mount and a couple engines jarred loose hurting no one but resulting in a recall. The bolt was 2.14, but since it was under government order also required a safety cable at 5.13 plus the labor discounted for warranty mandate to 17.50 the whole thing cost less than $25. So what's the problem with discovering a mistake or a design flaw or a "if we had only?" There were 413,000+ of these made at the time when the flaw was found. Once this product starts to roll and the quantity is up, regardless of whatever, it will remain what it is.

Unlike Bob, Barry, and Robert, who were programming guru's I was just a industrial scientist who followed his invention all over the world where people were manufacturing and using explosive materials by my design without a single incident as long as the license was under my control. However, when this magnesium processing system license was in the hands of those who "make money" for companies and where the highest quality spec is make the least quality possible (broad window of specs) so the thing or product leaves and goes to a customer . . . well, a plant was built within a block of a poly vinyl chloride plant that if affect by our process could have killed over 100K people and within three years over 20 fatalities occurred (last count I had before I left the industry).

I designed it safe and eventually was used (and is today) in the manufacturing of the solid fuel rockets PLUS I set PnP (process and procedure) that avoided any errors or mistakes. However the cost (and thus margin) was small by comparison to what it could have been were they to broaden the specs and manufacturing techniques and thus while the product replaced ALL of its' competitors, there was a cost. Companies don't care - they make money. If it costs 10 cents more and isn't worth it to gain and equal number of sales by 10 fold (that is; if the dime can't return at least a dollar) FORGET IT.

Question does it cost $3000 to make an HVX? $2500? $3500? The components in volume are low by comparison to the sales price. The development costs were recovered with the first 1000 units or 5000 or whatever. The components are probably less than $1K. The labor and overhead probably less than $500. Just a guess as a later marketing analyist with an industrial science background, a BS in Metalurgy, a BS in Poli Sci, a MS in Scociology, and a PhD in Theology, but the truth was it isn't about whats good at all but what is perceived as good. Sony - HDV - good name - good products - good HDV. That was what worked although it was all wrong.

See the point. AVCHD = Panasonic HDV - a Section is still just two trailers hooked together. It's what???? MPEG derivitive? All MPEG anything we've tried to work with Avid, Premier Pro CS3, and Edius Broadcast says - YUCK - narrow everything because (as we put it) there just isn't enough bandwidth of any meat to work with to get the look and feel we want.

Ringing any bells?
 
It's not difficult to see why the folks here with a background that is in something other than software development (or something else at least somewhat heavily computer/math related) might be fairly confused (and perhaps moved to tears) by our discussion of differences in codecs (stressing them, management issues developing them, etc.). :-Laugh(DBG):
 
To answer the question about how much it costs to produce an HVX (or any of a number of other cameras, like an HDR-FX1, for example):

The machines aren't a whole lot more expensive to make than something along the lines of a laptop computer with a DVD drive in it. Once the R&D and tooling costs are covered (and so long as the mfg technology for the chip fabrication is a little matured and not bleeding edge), pretty dang cheap.

I'm not sure how many HVX200 cameras Panasonic produces, but if the quantities were to approach something like 100s of thousands, the parts/labor cost would pretty easily shrink to likely well under $200/ea to manufacture. I'm sure the profit (mfg cost/retail price), on a per unit being produced today basis, for that particular camera, is pretty fat now.

Edit: I guess I really don't have much idea how much it costs to manufacture the lens, but the rest of the parts are cheap to make (in quantity).
 
Last edited:
Robert M Wright said:
To answer the question about how much it costs to produce an HVX (or any of a number of other cameras, like an HDR-FX1, for example):

The machines aren't a whole lot more expensive to make than something along the lines of a laptop computer with a DVD drive in it. Once the R&D and tooling costs are covered (and so long as the mfg technology for the chip fabrication is a little matured and not bleeding edge), pretty dang cheap.

I'm not sure how many HVX200 cameras Panasonic produces, but if the quantities were to approach something like 100s of thousands, the parts/labor cost would pretty easily shrink to likely well under $200/ea to manufacture. I'm sure the profit (mfg cost/retail price), on a per unit being produced today basis, for that particular camera, is pretty fat now.

Edit: I guess I really don't have much idea how much it costs to manufacture the lens, but the rest of the parts are cheap to make (in quantity).
Click to expand...

$200................. oh come on, why be so generous. I'm sure Pani could make an HVX for something close to $20 or so. :nads:

JohnG
 
Is AVCHD an acceptable acquisition format for broadcast applications? Seems like the HMC could be used for run and gun ENG scenarios. Or am I wrong? Thanks.
 
I called our two local TV stations who we do work for almost every week and asked them and they said "NOPE!" Another free lancer I know in the next nearest market said that the three stations near him all said NO also.
 
Most television stations might currently be unable to open the MTS file one of these cameras generates, and convert it for broadcast. It's not like there is a lot of software out there yet to get at these files. I did manage to get the video stream from a small clip re-wrapped in an AVI container, but it sure wasn't easy.
 
There hasn't been a professional AVC-HD camcorder yet. So anyone you've asked has only had experience with something like a Canon HF10, so of course they'd say "no".

Let's ask the question again 8 months from now when the HMC150 is out.
 
Hopefully, a HVX200b will exhibit the codec much earlier. (Would be the perfect complementation for those who need long shooting time on P2)
 
Even if they can handle the format that footage is shot in, television stations can be awfully finicky about what they will accept. A couple years ago, I was on a major highway just outside St. Paul, and happened upon the scene of an accident where a semi had crossed the median and rolled just a few minutes earlier (fortunately nobody was hurt - somewhat miraculous, given it was rush hour). It was pretty obvious that this accident was going to close a major artery for quite awhile (turned out to be over a day) and was newsworthy. I had a TRV70 in the car with me, and realized the conditions were pretty close to perfect to capture great footage with that camera, so I got it out and shot the scene. I headed back to my girlfriend's (much closer than home) and called a couple television stations. When I told them I shot the footage with a TRV70, they had absolutely no interest whatsoever. Apparently, they were thinking the footage would look like it was shot with a cell phone camera or something, not realizing that a TRV70, in ideal conditions, can shoot an excellent image (which it did). When I watched the news later, they sure didn't have anything better than what I had shot (or nearly as fresh from the scene at the time it occurred either).
 
Well, remember that the "DV" format was originally a "non-starter" for them too. It ended up that about 75% of the news market went with DVCPRO, and the rest of the market went DVCAM -- and all of that is pixel-for-pixel identical with DV.

Turns out that what they didn't want was a bunch of shooters with little handycams, but once the manufacturers gave them professional products like the DSR500, then it wasn't a problem anymore.

So that's why I say, let's get some professional AVC-HD product out there and see what it can do, before we start worrying about whether the format will be accepted or not. Nobody can know that until we see the results of the footage, and until THEY see the results of the footage.
 
Barry_Green said:
So that's why I say, let's get some professional AVC-HD product out there and see what it can do, before we start worrying about whether the format will be accepted or not. Nobody can know that until we see the results of the footage, and until THEY see the results of the footage.
Click to expand...


And you can always use Panasonic's AVCHD->DVCPRO converter software, and give them a DVCPRO copy. - Of course you don't want to give away your expensive [insiuating P2?] memory cards, so you [converted it] and put it on an external drive or DVD-R for them.

Hopefully the camera & codec will perform well enough that there won't be any notable difference.

- Mikko
 
Many years back, I happened to catch a Helicopter Crash on video. The problem was, I used an 8mm video camera. However, the show Real TV was more than happy with the footage and it aired on national TV. So, depending on how important the footage is, defines whether it's "Broadcast Quality" or not...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qq3GRFOKK2g

By the way, the guy lived and had only minor scratches.


I'll bet that by next year, there will be articles in the video publications about, is AVCHD "Broadcast Quality" or not.. as if there's some sort of binding standard to define "Broadcast Quality". My guess is that it will take time for stations to accept AVCHD and in the end, many of the smaller stations with limited money, will use AVCHD and larger stations will prefer the higher formats, but if its' important, they'll use it.


Bob Diaz
 
"..an enhanced mode with a higher bit rate is planned to be incorporated".

Sounds very interesting. I suspect that it requires using the faster Class 6 SDHC cards, that meet the speed demand. Panasonic are a little picky which cards can be used in their AVCHD cams. But they're cheaper than P2 cards, that's what's important.

I really hope this camera is a winner, in all areas, that optics are at least decent, that there are enough picture tweaking parameters (like the DVX).

However I'm wondering about the audio. The fact is, that it' s compressed if you're shooting in HD format, so does this mean one has to start record better audio with a portable audio recorder? Especially if planning to shoot an indie movie and using some authentic on location 100% sound... Dolby is good for reference sound of course.
 
Well, not necessarily. It's compressed if you're shooting to HDV, yes, but other formats provide for uncompressed audio (DVCPRO-HD is uncompressed, and XDCAM EX is uncompressed).

AVC-HD has two audio options: either compressed AC-3 in 5.1 channels, or uncompressed in up to 7.1 channels. I certainly hope Panasonic had the foresight to include the uncompressed option on the HMC150.
 
I think I read somewhere (but I'm not sure where) that the HMC150 will be able to record uncompressed audio from the XLR inputs. If it's 16 bit audio, I don't much care if it's compressed AC3. What I would really like to see is 24 bit audio. Of course, I wish the majors made cameras that record 10 bit video too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top