BobDiaz
The Professor
Predicting the future is mostly a lot of guess work and many times, the future isn't what we expected it to be. Still, there are several trends that can be logically examined and extrapolated to come within a reasonable guess of what things might become. While I pick a time period of 4 years, many of these things may come before or after this period. As I rub my crystal ball and look ahead, here's what I see...
P2 CARDS:
This is the easy one to predict, with WORST CASE advancements, I expect to hear about the 64GB P2 Cards at NAB 2010. With BEST CASE advancements, that will be 256GB P2 Cards at NAB 2010. The safe bet is to pick a middle of the road number, 128GB P2 Cards by NAB 2010.
With two 64GB P2 Cards, one could record for a bit over 2 hours of material at the maximum data rate and not have to change a card. Why would you want to have two 128GB P2 Cards? That would be over 4 hours of material at the maximum data rate. Increase the memory to 256GB and two cards would record over 8 hours of material at the maximum data rate. With that much memory, the battery will die before you run out of memory.
I'm not suggesting that the larger P2 cards of the future are useless. The larger cards open the door for some exciting possibilities. Currently the existing P2 cards are using about 1/5 the potential bandwidth of the card. (This number counts all the extra overhead, about a total of 130Mb/second, when recording P2 data.) While Panasonic could take advantage of the higher bandwidth today, who would want to record at a mode that only offers 12 to 15 seconds per GB? Once we have the 128GB and 256GB P2 cards, this type of high bandwidth recording becomes possible. What could Panasonic do with the increased bandwidth? There are many interesting possibilities:
LOWER COMPRESSION RATIO: Drop the compression ratio from 6.7:1 to 3.3:1. This would increase the data rate by about 2x.
FULL 1920h RESOLUTION RECORDING: This would increase the data rate by 1.5x.
4:4:4 COLOR: This would increase the data rate by 1.5x.
1080@60P: You shoot and edit in full 1080@60p mode; after that you have the option to reduce it to any other mode. This would increase the data rate by 2x.
12 BIT RECORDING: The more bits in the video, the easier it is to adjust it in post without risking a blocking effect. This would increase the data rate by 1.5x
SOMETHING ELSE: Maybe there's something I didn't think about...
Will newer P2 cards have an even higher data rate (bandwidth)? Yes, BUT... the increases in past memory speed have not be as much as increases in memory size. Future memory will be a little faster, but not by that much.
Panasonic could chose 2 to 3 items from the list above and it would still fit within the 650Mb/second bandwidth limit of the card. It would no longer be DVCPRO-HD, but a new format. Introducing a new format does require changes to editing software, so this is something that Panasonic will not want to do all the time, just when something big can come from it.
INCREASE IN 1/2" CCD CAMERAS FOR 1080 RECORDING:
As far as resolution, at 720v, 1/3" CCDs hold up very well to 2/3" CCDs. In the 1080v resolution, 1/3" CCDs just don't resolve as well as the 2/3" CCDs. In order to come close to resolving the full 1080 resolution, one would need at least a 1/2" CCD.
While I don't expect a major drop in prices over the next 4 years, there will be some drop in prices for 1/2" HD CCD/CMOS video cameras. Expect to see more low cost 1/2" professional HD cameras in the future.
THE RED CONCEPT (LARGE SINGLE CHIP IMAGE SENSORS):
Before I get into this, I need to define a term: In Computer Science, A Pixel = A PEL. The two terms mean the same thing. However, with Color LCDs, we sometimes say that 3 PELs (1 Red, 1 Blue, and 1 Green) make one Pixel. In this context, a PEL is a part of a pixel. While this is the non-standard definition, I will use it here to talk about Large Single Chip Image Sensors.
If we compare a single chip camera to a 3 chip camera, the 3 chip camera always looks better. The reason is simple, each pixel in the 3 chip camera has 3 "PELs" for one pixel, but the single chip camera has only one "PEL" for any given pixel and even then, the PEL is only one color. This means that the neighboring pixels must be read to determine the color information. It works, but does not produce as clean an image as 3 chip cameras.
What if we made the image sensor very large? So large that the surface area for every PEL is greater than the surface area for every PEL in our 3 chip camera. This would result in improved low light performance and lower image noise levels.
What if we doubled the number of image elements in the horizontal direction and doubled the number of image elements in the vertical direction? (1920h x 2 = 3840h, 1080v x 2 = 2160v; this is an 8MP Image Sensor) We'll assume that the surface area of every PEL is still more than the area for each PEL in our 3 chip camera. For any given pixel in a 1920h x 1080v image, there would be 4 PELs. (2 Green, 1 Red, and 1 Blue) A pixel would be 2 PELs horizontal and 2 PELs vertical.
Clearly, a single large image sensor costs more than a single smaller image sensor, but it does avoid the cost of a beam splitting prisms and 3 smaller image sensors that we find in the 3 chip camera. Consider the Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT SLR; it's 8 MP and sells for under $1,000. It's NOT a video camera, but it does have a CMOS image sensor that measures 22.2mm x 14.8mm. The 12 MP Canon EOS 5D sells for under $3,300 and has a CMOS image sensor that measures 35.8mm x 23.9mm.
My point is that if large image sensors can be put into digital still cameras for under $1,000 (or under $3,300) why not put them into a video camera? This is the logic behind the RED Camera, but there's no reason that other companies couldn't do the same thing.
The tough part is getting 8MP worth of image data from the chip in 1/24 of a second and it's even harder to pull it in 1/60 of a second. That's a lot of data to pull continually from the chip.
In theory the large image sensor should make for a great camera, BUT remember, in theory, the Titanic was unsinkable... Still, I can't help but believe that in a few years, RED will NOT be the only large image sensor video camera out there.
THE END OF VIDEO TAPE RECORDING:
In the next 4 years, tape will do a slow fade to black and more and more people switch over to other formats. The three main contenders are: Optical, Hard Drive, and Solid State Memory.
For now, hard drives and optical media seem to have the edge with longer recording times, BUT that is going to change over the next few years. Before this year ends, many of us will be recording with 16GB P2 Cards. Two 16GB cards gives us 32 minutes at the maximum data rate and 64 minutes at 720@30p or DVCPRO-50. (I believe that when the 16GB P2 Cards come out this summer (or fall), it won't be until late winter that they'll arrive in any real quantity.)
After that point, the 32GB P2 cards are another 1 to 2 years away. With the 32GB cards, we are looking at 1 hour (maximum rate) or 2 hours (720@30p or DVCPRO-50). What is really mind boggling is this news:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/03/21/32gb_ssd_samsung/
While Samsung has not announced a price, the writer of the article guessed that the price would range between $750 and $1,000.
Solid state recording offers reliability, roughness, and low power consumption; these are key features that make it desirable. Today, one can make a case against solid state video recording on the grounds of recording time and/or media cost. In less than 4 years, this argument is going to fall apart and it looks like it may be sooner than later.
Even if Samsung's NAND Flash memory module can't fit into a P2 card, it could be used in a future P2 store drive. Try to picture 2 or even 4 of the Samsung drives arranged in a RAID 0 Array in a P2 Store Drive. Whether this is practical or not depends on the price for Samsung's 32GB memory module.
FEBRUARY 17, 2009 (THE LAST DAYS OF USA ANALOG TV):
There's nothing in the analog shutoff date that requires stations to broadcast in HDTV, but as the date approaches, more and more people will dump their older SD TVs and purchase a new HDTV. So, I believe that indirectly, the date will help push us from SD TV to HDTV.
Currently less than 1 out of 4 people even have a clue that analog TV service is going to be turned off. Unless a major consumer education campaign starts real soon, there will be a massive backlash when around 30 million people see their TVs fail.
After that, I predict that a team of trial lawyers will generate a class action lawsuit against the TV manufactures and retailers. In the end, the lawyers will get millions in legal fees and the rest of us will get a coupon for $5 or $10 off your next purchase of a digital TV set.
:kali: Trial Lawyers
THE CALIFORNIA MONKEY WRENCH:
SEE:
http://www.nab.org/newsroom/pressrel/Releases/041106_NAB_CEA_Converters.htm
Just when you think that the transition to an all digital broadcast couldn't be any more screwed up, the California Energy Commission finds a way. The Consumer Electronics Industry is doing their best to keep the cost for a digital to analog TV converter within the $50 range. Not an easy task considering that the cheaper HDTV Tuners currently sell for around $200.
The California Energy Commission just recently mandated new low power energy standards for these converters. I'm all for saving energy, but a "low energy" converter is going to cost more to build than a "regular energy" converter. It also seems unlikely that the cost savings from lower energy bills will ever offset the increased price.
The bad part about all of this is that the low income families are the ones most likely to need the converters. The California Energy Commission just placed the increased burden on those who can least afford it.
The most of the fallout from this will be at NAB 2006 --> NAB 2009, but we may still find some fallout come NAB 2010.
Bob Diaz
P2 CARDS:
This is the easy one to predict, with WORST CASE advancements, I expect to hear about the 64GB P2 Cards at NAB 2010. With BEST CASE advancements, that will be 256GB P2 Cards at NAB 2010. The safe bet is to pick a middle of the road number, 128GB P2 Cards by NAB 2010.
With two 64GB P2 Cards, one could record for a bit over 2 hours of material at the maximum data rate and not have to change a card. Why would you want to have two 128GB P2 Cards? That would be over 4 hours of material at the maximum data rate. Increase the memory to 256GB and two cards would record over 8 hours of material at the maximum data rate. With that much memory, the battery will die before you run out of memory.
I'm not suggesting that the larger P2 cards of the future are useless. The larger cards open the door for some exciting possibilities. Currently the existing P2 cards are using about 1/5 the potential bandwidth of the card. (This number counts all the extra overhead, about a total of 130Mb/second, when recording P2 data.) While Panasonic could take advantage of the higher bandwidth today, who would want to record at a mode that only offers 12 to 15 seconds per GB? Once we have the 128GB and 256GB P2 cards, this type of high bandwidth recording becomes possible. What could Panasonic do with the increased bandwidth? There are many interesting possibilities:
LOWER COMPRESSION RATIO: Drop the compression ratio from 6.7:1 to 3.3:1. This would increase the data rate by about 2x.
FULL 1920h RESOLUTION RECORDING: This would increase the data rate by 1.5x.
4:4:4 COLOR: This would increase the data rate by 1.5x.
1080@60P: You shoot and edit in full 1080@60p mode; after that you have the option to reduce it to any other mode. This would increase the data rate by 2x.
12 BIT RECORDING: The more bits in the video, the easier it is to adjust it in post without risking a blocking effect. This would increase the data rate by 1.5x
SOMETHING ELSE: Maybe there's something I didn't think about...
Will newer P2 cards have an even higher data rate (bandwidth)? Yes, BUT... the increases in past memory speed have not be as much as increases in memory size. Future memory will be a little faster, but not by that much.
Panasonic could chose 2 to 3 items from the list above and it would still fit within the 650Mb/second bandwidth limit of the card. It would no longer be DVCPRO-HD, but a new format. Introducing a new format does require changes to editing software, so this is something that Panasonic will not want to do all the time, just when something big can come from it.
INCREASE IN 1/2" CCD CAMERAS FOR 1080 RECORDING:
As far as resolution, at 720v, 1/3" CCDs hold up very well to 2/3" CCDs. In the 1080v resolution, 1/3" CCDs just don't resolve as well as the 2/3" CCDs. In order to come close to resolving the full 1080 resolution, one would need at least a 1/2" CCD.
While I don't expect a major drop in prices over the next 4 years, there will be some drop in prices for 1/2" HD CCD/CMOS video cameras. Expect to see more low cost 1/2" professional HD cameras in the future.
THE RED CONCEPT (LARGE SINGLE CHIP IMAGE SENSORS):
Before I get into this, I need to define a term: In Computer Science, A Pixel = A PEL. The two terms mean the same thing. However, with Color LCDs, we sometimes say that 3 PELs (1 Red, 1 Blue, and 1 Green) make one Pixel. In this context, a PEL is a part of a pixel. While this is the non-standard definition, I will use it here to talk about Large Single Chip Image Sensors.
If we compare a single chip camera to a 3 chip camera, the 3 chip camera always looks better. The reason is simple, each pixel in the 3 chip camera has 3 "PELs" for one pixel, but the single chip camera has only one "PEL" for any given pixel and even then, the PEL is only one color. This means that the neighboring pixels must be read to determine the color information. It works, but does not produce as clean an image as 3 chip cameras.
What if we made the image sensor very large? So large that the surface area for every PEL is greater than the surface area for every PEL in our 3 chip camera. This would result in improved low light performance and lower image noise levels.
What if we doubled the number of image elements in the horizontal direction and doubled the number of image elements in the vertical direction? (1920h x 2 = 3840h, 1080v x 2 = 2160v; this is an 8MP Image Sensor) We'll assume that the surface area of every PEL is still more than the area for each PEL in our 3 chip camera. For any given pixel in a 1920h x 1080v image, there would be 4 PELs. (2 Green, 1 Red, and 1 Blue) A pixel would be 2 PELs horizontal and 2 PELs vertical.
Clearly, a single large image sensor costs more than a single smaller image sensor, but it does avoid the cost of a beam splitting prisms and 3 smaller image sensors that we find in the 3 chip camera. Consider the Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT SLR; it's 8 MP and sells for under $1,000. It's NOT a video camera, but it does have a CMOS image sensor that measures 22.2mm x 14.8mm. The 12 MP Canon EOS 5D sells for under $3,300 and has a CMOS image sensor that measures 35.8mm x 23.9mm.
My point is that if large image sensors can be put into digital still cameras for under $1,000 (or under $3,300) why not put them into a video camera? This is the logic behind the RED Camera, but there's no reason that other companies couldn't do the same thing.
The tough part is getting 8MP worth of image data from the chip in 1/24 of a second and it's even harder to pull it in 1/60 of a second. That's a lot of data to pull continually from the chip.
In theory the large image sensor should make for a great camera, BUT remember, in theory, the Titanic was unsinkable... Still, I can't help but believe that in a few years, RED will NOT be the only large image sensor video camera out there.
THE END OF VIDEO TAPE RECORDING:
In the next 4 years, tape will do a slow fade to black and more and more people switch over to other formats. The three main contenders are: Optical, Hard Drive, and Solid State Memory.
For now, hard drives and optical media seem to have the edge with longer recording times, BUT that is going to change over the next few years. Before this year ends, many of us will be recording with 16GB P2 Cards. Two 16GB cards gives us 32 minutes at the maximum data rate and 64 minutes at 720@30p or DVCPRO-50. (I believe that when the 16GB P2 Cards come out this summer (or fall), it won't be until late winter that they'll arrive in any real quantity.)
After that point, the 32GB P2 cards are another 1 to 2 years away. With the 32GB cards, we are looking at 1 hour (maximum rate) or 2 hours (720@30p or DVCPRO-50). What is really mind boggling is this news:
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/03/21/32gb_ssd_samsung/
While Samsung has not announced a price, the writer of the article guessed that the price would range between $750 and $1,000.
Solid state recording offers reliability, roughness, and low power consumption; these are key features that make it desirable. Today, one can make a case against solid state video recording on the grounds of recording time and/or media cost. In less than 4 years, this argument is going to fall apart and it looks like it may be sooner than later.
Even if Samsung's NAND Flash memory module can't fit into a P2 card, it could be used in a future P2 store drive. Try to picture 2 or even 4 of the Samsung drives arranged in a RAID 0 Array in a P2 Store Drive. Whether this is practical or not depends on the price for Samsung's 32GB memory module.
FEBRUARY 17, 2009 (THE LAST DAYS OF USA ANALOG TV):
There's nothing in the analog shutoff date that requires stations to broadcast in HDTV, but as the date approaches, more and more people will dump their older SD TVs and purchase a new HDTV. So, I believe that indirectly, the date will help push us from SD TV to HDTV.
Currently less than 1 out of 4 people even have a clue that analog TV service is going to be turned off. Unless a major consumer education campaign starts real soon, there will be a massive backlash when around 30 million people see their TVs fail.
After that, I predict that a team of trial lawyers will generate a class action lawsuit against the TV manufactures and retailers. In the end, the lawyers will get millions in legal fees and the rest of us will get a coupon for $5 or $10 off your next purchase of a digital TV set.
:kali: Trial Lawyers
THE CALIFORNIA MONKEY WRENCH:
SEE:
http://www.nab.org/newsroom/pressrel/Releases/041106_NAB_CEA_Converters.htm
Just when you think that the transition to an all digital broadcast couldn't be any more screwed up, the California Energy Commission finds a way. The Consumer Electronics Industry is doing their best to keep the cost for a digital to analog TV converter within the $50 range. Not an easy task considering that the cheaper HDTV Tuners currently sell for around $200.
The California Energy Commission just recently mandated new low power energy standards for these converters. I'm all for saving energy, but a "low energy" converter is going to cost more to build than a "regular energy" converter. It also seems unlikely that the cost savings from lower energy bills will ever offset the increased price.
The bad part about all of this is that the low income families are the ones most likely to need the converters. The California Energy Commission just placed the increased burden on those who can least afford it.
The most of the fallout from this will be at NAB 2006 --> NAB 2009, but we may still find some fallout come NAB 2010.
Bob Diaz
