Gemini 4:4:4 Recorder
- Thread starter James Bridges
- Start date
mkfotos.com
Well-known member
They did, and it is.
missed that .. thanks.
Depends on the source .. if you feed it a 4:2:2 source .. the 4:4:4 doesn't buy you anything .. sort of like 16bit audio into a 24bit audio source. Unless there's
significant processing in post, the extra bits are wasted.
jeff
Dan Keaton
Well-known member
Dear Friends,
Full Uncompessed has advantages, but of course, it is not for everyone. It is a viable solution for many that want the absolute best from their cameras.
Full Uncompressed is 100% accurate at all times.
There is never any noise or artifacts introduced.
In many workflows, with compressed, there is a "First Encode" (the best there ever will be (in compressed format), that occurs in the camera.
Then, in the Non-Linear Editor, it gets decoded back to full uncompresed for most any function. Then depending on what is being done, it will be compressed again.
Each decode and re-encode cycle has the potential to add noise and reduce accuracy.
With full uncompressed, each generation is the same as the previous, 100% accuracy and no added noise.
There are numerous other advantages also.
If one has one brand of camera (lets assume that it is a high quality camera) and one needs a different camera or delivery format for a specific client, then one can record full uncompressed in the Gemini 4:4:4, then peform the "First Encode" in Apple Compressor or Adobe Media Encoder, or other software.
This first encode can then be delivered to the client in any available media type.
In these days of scarce, or "impossible to obtain" situations, more production companies are rapiding embracing tape-less media.
One major broadcasting network, this past week just switched to nanoFlashes to go tapeless.
If one must have tape, then the full uncompressed footage can be recorded to tape via to a tape deck. The same applies to Sony Professional Disk.
These days, many can easily afford very high performance disk subsystems. A quality 3 terabyte hard disk can be purchased for under $180. 1 TB, 1.5 TB, and 2 TB Hard Disk Drives, all 7200, can be purchased far much less than $100.
Once one has a high performance disk subsystem, editing in uncompressed can be responsive as the computer does not need to decode each compressed frame in order to just display it on your monitor.
Of course, one can use a compressed workflow. And one can use the compressed workflow of your choice. It is just that the "First Encode" from our SSD (Solid State Drive) occurs in your computer. With a fast computer, this "First Encode" is not much slower than just copying the footage to your disk subsystem.
With all of the above said, some may rightfully choose a compressed recorder. The Gemini 4:4:4 does not replace our award-winning nanoFlash, which is a solid choice for many.
For years, many of us have been wanting the best quality available from our cameras. Many have never even considered that one camera could fit the needs of their various clients or potential clients.
Full Uncompessed has advantages, but of course, it is not for everyone. It is a viable solution for many that want the absolute best from their cameras.
Full Uncompressed is 100% accurate at all times.
There is never any noise or artifacts introduced.
In many workflows, with compressed, there is a "First Encode" (the best there ever will be (in compressed format), that occurs in the camera.
Then, in the Non-Linear Editor, it gets decoded back to full uncompresed for most any function. Then depending on what is being done, it will be compressed again.
Each decode and re-encode cycle has the potential to add noise and reduce accuracy.
With full uncompressed, each generation is the same as the previous, 100% accuracy and no added noise.
There are numerous other advantages also.
If one has one brand of camera (lets assume that it is a high quality camera) and one needs a different camera or delivery format for a specific client, then one can record full uncompressed in the Gemini 4:4:4, then peform the "First Encode" in Apple Compressor or Adobe Media Encoder, or other software.
This first encode can then be delivered to the client in any available media type.
In these days of scarce, or "impossible to obtain" situations, more production companies are rapiding embracing tape-less media.
One major broadcasting network, this past week just switched to nanoFlashes to go tapeless.
If one must have tape, then the full uncompressed footage can be recorded to tape via to a tape deck. The same applies to Sony Professional Disk.
These days, many can easily afford very high performance disk subsystems. A quality 3 terabyte hard disk can be purchased for under $180. 1 TB, 1.5 TB, and 2 TB Hard Disk Drives, all 7200, can be purchased far much less than $100.
Once one has a high performance disk subsystem, editing in uncompressed can be responsive as the computer does not need to decode each compressed frame in order to just display it on your monitor.
Of course, one can use a compressed workflow. And one can use the compressed workflow of your choice. It is just that the "First Encode" from our SSD (Solid State Drive) occurs in your computer. With a fast computer, this "First Encode" is not much slower than just copying the footage to your disk subsystem.
With all of the above said, some may rightfully choose a compressed recorder. The Gemini 4:4:4 does not replace our award-winning nanoFlash, which is a solid choice for many.
For years, many of us have been wanting the best quality available from our cameras. Many have never even considered that one camera could fit the needs of their various clients or potential clients.
Dan Keaton
Well-known member
Dear Jeff,
Many camera owners and operators have wanted higher quality.
Full Uncompressed provides the ultimate in image quality.
And full uncompressed allows you to maintain the ultimate in image quality thoughout the edit process as the images do not degrade from one generation to the next, there are no decode and re-encode cycles.
And one can use the Gemini 4:4:4 as a playback device.
Of course, not everyone will want to add a $6,000 recorder to the AF100. The nanoFlash is still a very viable solution for many.
And one may appreciate the 5" diagonal LCD Monitor (with LED Backlight). This is a sunlight viewable monitor (800 Cd/m2) versus many monitors which are 300 to 350 Cd/m2.
The Gemini 4:4:4 can record 8-Bit or 10-Bit and 4:2:2 or 4:4:4. The AF100 is 8-Bit 4:2:2 (via the HD-SDI output).
But, just like the nanoFlash, the Gemini 4:4:4 may be moved from camera to camera. An investment in the Gemini 4:4:4, initially used for the AF100, will work fabuluously for the Sony F3, or the Sony F35, or the Arri Alexa or many other high-end cameras.
Most other full uncompressed recorder are far more expensive. The leading one is over $30,000 and the transfer station is $15,000 extra. Our transfer station is included in the $5,995 price.
Thus, for the first time, a moderate cost, low power, full uncompressed recorder is now available.
No, this is not two nanoFlashes in one box.
This is a complete new design. We started designing this last summer.
Many camera owners and operators have wanted higher quality.
Full Uncompressed provides the ultimate in image quality.
And full uncompressed allows you to maintain the ultimate in image quality thoughout the edit process as the images do not degrade from one generation to the next, there are no decode and re-encode cycles.
And one can use the Gemini 4:4:4 as a playback device.
Of course, not everyone will want to add a $6,000 recorder to the AF100. The nanoFlash is still a very viable solution for many.
And one may appreciate the 5" diagonal LCD Monitor (with LED Backlight). This is a sunlight viewable monitor (800 Cd/m2) versus many monitors which are 300 to 350 Cd/m2.
The Gemini 4:4:4 can record 8-Bit or 10-Bit and 4:2:2 or 4:4:4. The AF100 is 8-Bit 4:2:2 (via the HD-SDI output).
But, just like the nanoFlash, the Gemini 4:4:4 may be moved from camera to camera. An investment in the Gemini 4:4:4, initially used for the AF100, will work fabuluously for the Sony F3, or the Sony F35, or the Arri Alexa or many other high-end cameras.
Most other full uncompressed recorder are far more expensive. The leading one is over $30,000 and the transfer station is $15,000 extra. Our transfer station is included in the $5,995 price.
Thus, for the first time, a moderate cost, low power, full uncompressed recorder is now available.
No, this is not two nanoFlashes in one box.
This is a complete new design. We started designing this last summer.
monkeyking
Well-known member
Can any SSD drives be used or just proprietary, CD approved ones?
Mwjace
Active member
So it sounds like there will be no on board compression option at all, it would seem to me it would be great if we could have the option of uncompressed and then for quicker projects be able to use a onboard compressor such as apple pro res or XDcam.
but maybe i'm the only one
but maybe i'm the only one
I can't even locate pricing for a 512GB 1.8-inch SSD drive.
2.5-inch SSD drives at that size run about $2K USD.
jdesignhi
Well-known member
From Nano 3D to Gemini
Hi Dan,
Do you remember my comments on your forum back when you guys announced Nano 3D? I wondered aloud whether or not, now that you had achieved synchronization with two Nanos, the next step might be 4:4:4 recording. What a firestorm of tech talk that set off! And now, you've done it. Congratulations.
On another note, I've successfully triggered my Nano with my AF100. I think that my triggering problems with my Canon XLH1 must lie in the camera. Maybe someday, when I'm not using my Canon, I should send it up to you guys for a look-see?
All the best,
Jeff
Hi Dan,
Do you remember my comments on your forum back when you guys announced Nano 3D? I wondered aloud whether or not, now that you had achieved synchronization with two Nanos, the next step might be 4:4:4 recording. What a firestorm of tech talk that set off! And now, you've done it. Congratulations.
On another note, I've successfully triggered my Nano with my AF100. I think that my triggering problems with my Canon XLH1 must lie in the camera. Maybe someday, when I'm not using my Canon, I should send it up to you guys for a look-see?
All the best,
Jeff
Dan Keaton
Well-known member
Dear Jeff,
Thanks for posting.
Yes, I remember your comments.
We have been working hard on this since last summer.
Thanks for posting.
Yes, I remember your comments.
We have been working hard on this since last summer.
monkeyking
Well-known member
Cinedeck uses standard SSD drives; I think Gemini uses proprietary SSD drives sold by CD, but I'll wait to hear officially from Dan Keaton.
LuckyStudio 13
The Tapeless One
I thought the AF100 can only output 8 bit 4:2:2 maximum via HD-SDI ? What advantage can u get by using the Gemini vs a cheaper 4:2:2 8 bit recorder ?
Fohdeesha
Well-known member
Nothing, quality wise. I suppose it could be helpful if you're shooting 3d using two af100's though.
Dan Keaton
Well-known member
Dear Friends,
The Gemini 4:4:4 uses industry standard 1.8" SSD's.
It is just that not every 1.8" SSD will have enough performance to do the job adequately.
While some SSD's claim a certain level of performance, which would seem acceptable, and may even pass some benchmark tests with good results, there can be problems.
The 1.8" SSD's that we are using are not available through retail channels at this time. These are literally "State of the Art" drives.
Our pricing is intended to cover our costs in purchasing, shipping, testing, burning-in, testing again, and then stocking the drives.
We have not publicly released SSD pricing at this time, but are prices are never meant to gouge.
When compared to custom memory magazines that are avaiable today, they will be an absolute bargain.
Compared to enough 90 MBps CompactFlash cards, to make up 256 GB or 512 GB, they are an absolute bargain.
About the fastest CompactFlash cards support (theoritical) 90 MBps read and write.
Our SSD's support 260 MBps read and write.
Our current code is achieving, in actual sustained throughput, close to that number. We have some more tweaks to do to the code to obtain the full 260 MBps.
It takes a lot of expertise to write, on a sustained basis, at these speeds. You can count on us to do it right.
Last edited:
PappasArts
Veteran
Dan, That's just one of the reasons I have respect for CD- You offer a phenomenal product at a fantastic price. The positive reputation that your gaining in such a short time in the industry is priceless...
Pappas
http://pappasarts.wordpress.com
http://www.facebook.com/PappasArts
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms
http://www.PappasArts.com
Last edited:
Barry_Green
Moderator
Sounds exactly like what Red went through with CF cards. Jarred tested every CF card he could get his hands on, and very few offered actual performance that matched the claims, especially in a sustained data writing application (which is, frankly, all that matters -- the minimum sustained write performance). Memory manufacturers like to talk about "speeds up to 266x" or "speeds up to 200mB/sec" but "up to" is meaningless -- what matters is minimum sustained write. Your recorder is sending data at a specific rate, and the burst mode of the drive is meaningless, it needs to be able to capture all the data all the time every time.
That's why the SD cards are rated with the "Class" designation -- Class 10 means minimum sustained data writing of 10 megabytes per second.
In the end, Red went to Lexar (IIRC) and had them custom-make CF cards that would guaranteed meet their minimum write speeds, so that you always knew that the card would always be up to the task. Looks like CD is doing similar, working with manufacturers on drives that aren't even available to the public, probably specifically engineered to make sure that they meet the minimum throughput requirements.
I'm sure we'll get people who will complain and say that such-and-such drive is just as good, and to those folks I would say -- then go right ahead. But please don't begrudge those of us who value reliability above all else, the opportunity and freedom to choose drives and memory that are absolutely guaranteed to perform reliably at the proper minimum performance spec each and every time.
I think CD has taken the right approach here, they've made it open to all drives, you can plug in anything you want, but they've also said that some are just not going to be able to handle the task, and if you want the safety and assuredness of guaranteed performance, CD is sticking their name on a set of drives that will always work.
That's why the SD cards are rated with the "Class" designation -- Class 10 means minimum sustained data writing of 10 megabytes per second.
In the end, Red went to Lexar (IIRC) and had them custom-make CF cards that would guaranteed meet their minimum write speeds, so that you always knew that the card would always be up to the task. Looks like CD is doing similar, working with manufacturers on drives that aren't even available to the public, probably specifically engineered to make sure that they meet the minimum throughput requirements.
I'm sure we'll get people who will complain and say that such-and-such drive is just as good, and to those folks I would say -- then go right ahead. But please don't begrudge those of us who value reliability above all else, the opportunity and freedom to choose drives and memory that are absolutely guaranteed to perform reliably at the proper minimum performance spec each and every time.
I think CD has taken the right approach here, they've made it open to all drives, you can plug in anything you want, but they've also said that some are just not going to be able to handle the task, and if you want the safety and assuredness of guaranteed performance, CD is sticking their name on a set of drives that will always work.
