Official: HDMI 1080 IS INTERLACED ONLY

[bufo55]

All versions of ProRes except 4444 are 10 bit, even Proxy. Of course if the recorder is being sent only 8-bit from the camera, it's a "fake" 10 bit.

You're right. Thanks for the correction. In any case, I'm hoping one of the higher bit rate versions will prove to be worth using.

And it should be obvious I have no connection to Sound Devices. I joined their forum recently because pairing a Pix 240 with a D800 might work for me. I asked them about compatibility and well, it looks like Nikon may have provided a can of worms for third parties to figure out. Or maybe it's simpler than it looks right now.

 

[Zephyrnoid]

So many 'Bob' contributions to respond to, forgive me if I err in Copy/paste here.
1) normalcy. well, the shrinks have their ideas on this topic but we all get the gist of the poster's gripe. Bob. I respectfully suggest that you condense your conclusions at the outset of your missives, followed by "This is why...." seque into the tech details (which become optional reading). I taught my BioTech engineer bro to do this years ago- with fabulous results. YMMV
2) "Nikon made themselves to be the villain a few years back..." Canon & Sony have also done the same for as long as I can remember in the digital paradigm. As an IP specialist I can proffer that the principle reason for this deliberate obstructionism and hobbling, is Intellectual Property Protection of Proprietary innovations. The secondary reason is to manipulate the available product mix so as to align profitability with a specific market segmentation. It is rarely as a result of unenlightened self interest.
3)"Here's the bottom line: Most -- if not all -- of the questions listed above would be brushed away if the recorder (and we're not just talking about Ninja, agreed?) supported and accepted the 'native' 1080p24/25/30 HDMI output from the D4/D800." All you need for this to happen is for the manufacturer of the Camera to have a vested interest in the external acquisition of the data stream into a third party device. That's what we call a partnership. I know because I've brokered a couple. Again, I cite item 2) , where the take-away is that if there's no profitability in 'giving' part of the game away, it will not happen.

Finally. would it not make sense for the camera makers to simply own the fabrication of an external recorder for capturing a higher quality stream of data? Sure! and when that happens, they simply merge it into a new body design and call it... RED or something like that

 

[eteam]

2) "Nikon made themselves to be the villain a few years back..." Canon & Sony have also done the same for as long as I can remember in the digital paradigm. As an IP specialist I can proffer that the principle reason for this deliberate obstructionism and hobbling, is Intellectual Property Protection of Proprietary innovations. The secondary reason is to manipulate the available product mix so as to align profitability with a specific market segmentation. It is rarely as a result of unenlightened self interest.

Sometimes the IP specialists in the company must recognise that keeping customers happy is the straightest path to (continued) corporate prosperity. In a competitive marketplace, appearing to be at cross purposes with the customer base is unwise.

3) ... All you need for this to happen is for the manufacturer of the Camera to have a vested interest in the external acquisition of the data stream into a third party device.

In other words, making the product's unique competitive features easy for customers to use.

That's what we call a partnership.

Thank you for not using "partner" as a verb.

... Finally. would it not make sense for the camera makers to simply own the fabrication of an external recorder for capturing a higher quality stream of data? Sure! and when that happens, they simply merge it into a new body design and call it... RED or something like that

I think that with an alternate approach -- leveraging (those buzzwords are contagious!) all the small, hungry, and nimble video gear companies out there -- Nikon and Canon could give digital video companies like Red a run for their money. I realise that some see Red as the upstart innovator against the entrenched Sony + Kodak + Panavision establishment. And some see Canon and Nikon (both of which are much larger than Red) as the upstart innovators against the (recently) entrenched Red (and Arri?).

My sympathies are with the innovating entrepreneurs who provide the ecosystem peripherals which surround the cameras. There are many business and market opportunities in the rapidly changing industry.

That's about as far off-topic as I'd like to go, for the moment.

-- Bob Elkind

 

[hsz]

I've been reading this thread for a while and is very interesting .... well first of all hi all ... new to the forums ...
my question is simple would guys recommend the D800 for video production?
and just to make it clear in my head so the D800 can shoot HDMI out 1080P at 30/24 right?

Also could the Nikon D800 be hacked like the GH2?

 

[eteam]

... and just to make it clear in my head so the D800 can shoot HDMI out 1080P at 30/24 right?

There are numerous posts in this thread which touch on this question in very plain terms. I'm tempted to simply answer YES, but the related information might be of great interest to you, and I do not want to keep you from reading it for yourself. You should re-read this thread, and this time don't skip over the good parts.

Also could the Nikon D800 be hacked like the GH2?

You mean, like the Canon 5D Mark II?
I do not know if the Nikon D800 could be hacked.

-- Bob Elkind

 

[bufo55]

The thing that excites me, and what I think is the D800's wild card, is that the uncompressed HDMI out IS a built in hack. Minimally, it gets around the limitations of the AVC/H.264 codec that is recorded to the internal cards and allows recording directly to ProRes. Whether the optimum bitrate will be provided by ProRes LT at about 100Mb/s, ProRes at about 150Mb/s, or ProResHD at 200+Mb/s remains to be seen.

In any case, I think all test comparisons with Canon, etc. will not be completely valid until we see what is really coming out of that HDMI pipeline, and how much latitude there is for correction in post. Who knows, maybe Nikon actually has a plan to release Capture NX-Motion with moire and noise reduction tools.

 

[eteam]

... what I think is the D800's wild card, is that the uncompressed HDMI out IS a built in hack.

If it was a hack by some eastern european programmers, it would probably be better documented and specified than it is now in the Nikon user manual.

-- Bob Elkind

 

[Zephyrnoid]

The thing that excites me, and what I think is the D800's wild card, is that the uncompressed HDMI out IS a built in hack. Minimally, it gets around the limitations of the AVC/H.264 codec that is recorded to the internal cards and allows recording directly to ProRes. Whether the optimum bitrate will be provided by ProRes LT at about 100Mb/s, ProRes at about 150Mb/s, or ProResHD at 200+Mb/s remains to be seen.

In any case, I think all test comparisons with Canon, etc. will not be completely valid until we see what is really coming out of that HDMI pipeline, and how much latitude there is for correction in post. Who knows, maybe Nikon actually has a plan to release Capture NX-Motion with moire and noise reduction tools.

Well this is a bit pf a non-sequitur something that's built in is just that and not... a hack at all. In fact, that's what we need in this world solution built in or at least extensible via API's but a hack implies a repair. GH2 is really an open source camera so the development of 'hacks' is really just a series of enhanced builds where the plain vanilla code left off. Now I bet that Nikon could offer some keys to unlock the hobbled potential, for a small fee
We busted our chops (well three years of the hacker's time trying to get under the hood of the HV20 three years ago. No go. Canon and prolly Nikon, want control of the camera upgrade path. I have to commend Panasonic for tossing us such a virulent plaything in the GH2. Twill be interesting to see if Nikon launches a video division like Canon.

 

[Zephyrnoid]

I hear Dath Vadar's voice weighing in on the HDMI out controversy.
"Uncompressed, no holds barred video out of that pesky D800 HDMI connection? Why would I allow THAT? No! That would give you the power, and in this universe, I am the POWER!" ....fade to black

 

[eleison]

I hear Dath Vadar's voice weighing in on the HDMI out controversy.
"Uncompressed, no holds barred video out of that pesky D800 HDMI connection? Why would I allow THAT? No! That would give you the power, and in this universe, I am the POWER!" ....fade to black

How about for "sales"? Nikon doesn't have a Cinema division to protect. This is Nikon's chance to shine if they take it. Its a small window since there will be a lot of competitors. Either Nikon take the bulls by the horns (remember the past 3-4 years that the Canon 5d2 kicked Nikon in the nads?) Or else someone else will.

Canon is "out" w/ respect to Vdslr. Hopefully, they aren't relying on their camera division for profits because I have a sinking feeling they wouldn't be smiling when they see their quarterly reports. Their prosumer 5d3 camera doesn't seem to be flying off the selves. I don't think their cinema division will be big enough to carry the rest of the burden.. oh well.. whatever..

 

[bufo55]

I think Nikon is actually being pretty cagey here. They have provided a data tap (pre-empting the need for an actual "hack") for third parties like Atomos, AJA, Sound Devices to use with their recording devices. Sales to the video crowd will increase overall sales without Nikon having to put a lot into opening a whole new branch of hardware development and manufacturing from scratch. They cut into Canon's HDSLR sales and maybe even some AF100 and C300 sales if the quality is as good as I hope. If the market gets big enough to jump in, they lock the tap and require purchase of their recording module which is the only one that can (or is licensed to) read their proprietary data stream. Or maybe they just license the decoding software.

 

[prune]

Hi all,

as far as I remember, the HD-SDI format only support PsF format in 1080p, except when going dual-link (or now 3G) 4:4:4 RGB.
There you have to make a difference in the frame rate (1080p24,25,30) and the transport rate (1080p frames are duplicated in 1080i @ double rate). Most (all) of the tools I used in HD-SDI were aware of this and the final recording war really 1080p.

I'm not supprised the D800 only offer PsF in 1080p also.

As PsF is part of the HD-SDI workflow, I have no clue for the HDMI one.

I just ordered a D800 few weeks ago (which I'm still waiting for, even as a NPS) and a BlackMagic Hyperdeck Shuttle 2 which I'll receive today. Once the full kit is in I'll post a review here. But seeing the Hyperdeck specs, it support both 1080p and 1080i formats so it shouldn't be a problem.

If you have any experience since D800 started shipping, please let us know.

 

[eteam]

as far as I remember, the HD-SDI format only support PsF format in 1080p, except when going dual-link (or now 3G) 4:4:4 RGB.

If you are comparing 4:2:2 to 4:2:2, there is no bit rate or data rate difference between true progressive, true interlaced, and PsF. In any case, the HDMI specification includes 1080p24/25/30 as well as 1080i50/60 -- and these HDMI interface signal formats are all in use, today.

There you have to make a difference in the frame rate (1080p24,25,30) and the transport rate (1080p frames are duplicated in 1080i @ double rate).

I don't understand what you are saying. Please re-phrase.

Most (all) of the tools I used in HD-SDI were aware of this and the final recording war really 1080p. I'm not supprised the D800 only offer PsF in 1080p also.

The D800/D4 camera outputs 1080p24/25/30 8-bit 4:2:2 YCbCr signal format -- if the receiving device supports this format in its EDID table. You may be working with mistaken or incomplete information.

I just ordered a D800 few weeks ago (which I'm still waiting for, even as a NPS) and a BlackMagic Hyperdeck Shuttle 2 which I'll receive today. Once the full kit is in I'll post a review here. But seeing the Hyperdeck specs, it support both 1080p and 1080i formats so it shouldn't be a problem.

You should check with the BlackMagic folks on this question. They may have a firmware update for supporting the D4/D800 in true (non-PsF) signal format. PsF is not without risk.

If you have any experience since D800 started shipping, please let us know.

You should read through this thread. There are a number of reports describing support for the D4/D800 HDMI output formats.

-- Bob Elkind

 

[prune]

Bob,

what I was trying to say is :
- the shooting format (1080p@24, 1080p@25...) will change the look of the image.
- then the image is (compressed and) transported into a container. In case of PsF, the image remain the same as in 1080P but doubled. The resulting image is exactly the same.
If you same the PsF stream, you will have to convert it back to 1080P for editing.

I see no reason why Hyperdeck or other recorders (Ki-pro...) which can record 1080p PsF stream can't record that. At least, I hope there are none
I will contact BlackMagic and check what they think.
I've already been through the whole thread and checked for D800 output format, and it seem totaly compatible with Hyperdeck supported formats :

720p50, 720p59.94, 720p60, 1080i50, 1080i59.94, 1080i60, 1080PsF23.98, 1080PsF24, 1080PsF25, 1080PsF29.97, 1080PsF30, 1080p23.98, 1080p24, 1080p25, 1080p29.97, 1080p30.

My only concern would be the 8bit signal of the D800 but it is part of the HDMI specification. The Hyperdeck, which is recording 10 bits, will "fill the blancs with 0 " as does the Sony EX1 with the 8bits imager to 10 bits HD-SDI signal...

Am I clear enough ?

 

[eteam]

- then the image is (compressed and) transported into a container. In case of PsF, the image remain the same as in 1080P but doubled. The resulting image is exactly the same.

• The image is not necessarily compressed into a 1080i container.

• From 1080p30 to 1080i60 (for example), "the image remain the same as in 1080P but doubled" is not accurate. "Doubling" is the wrong term to use in this context.

• The resulting image may be exactly the same, if the PsF conversion is properly reversed. There are several ways in which the signal can be processed or mis-handled so that reverse conversion cannot be guaranteed to be perfect or reliable. This is why I have said (and continue to say) that PsF conversion (and pulldown) are not without risk.

If you same [save?] the PsF stream, you will have to convert it back to 1080P for editing.
I see no reason why Hyperdeck or other recorders (Ki-pro...) which can record 1080p PsF stream can't record that. At least, I hope there are none.

Possible reasons why you might prefer that PsF not be used:

• Lossy compression and storage in PsF format (which is indistinguishable from non-PsF interlaced format), resulting in loss of "clues" for faultless reverse pulldown and I => P conversion.
• Auxiliary data or markers which provide reverse pulldown information are stripped and lost, not recorded. (reference: Sony FS100)
• There is more than one scheme for pulldown, and the different schemes are indistinguishable without hints.

I will contact BlackMagic and check what they think.
I've already been through the whole thread and checked for D800 output format, and it seem totally compatible with Hyperdeck supported formats :

720p50, 720p59.94, 720p60, 1080i50, 1080i59.94, 1080i60, 1080PsF23.98, 1080PsF24, 1080PsF25, 1080PsF29.97, 1080PsF30, 1080p23.98, 1080p24, 1080p25, 1080p29.97, 1080p30.

If all of these HDMI input signal formats are supported (in 12-bit 4:2:2 YCbCr HDMI form), there should be absolutely no need whatsoever for accepting the risk involved with PsF conversion.

My only concern would be the 8bit signal of the D800 but it is part of the HDMI specification. The Hyperdeck, which is recording 10 bits, will "fill the blancs with 0 " as does the Sony EX1 with the 8bits imager to 10 bits HD-SDI signal...

There are two possible HDMI signal formats for 1080p24 from the D4/D800 (which have already been described in this thread), per the HDMI specification:

• 1080p24 8-bit 4:4:4 YCbCr -- The D4/D800 would be replicating the colour difference data to fill 4:4:4 from 4:2:2
• 1080p24 12-bit 4:2:2 YCbCr -- The D4/D800 would be filling the 12-bit data values from 8-bit data

I do not know with certainty which of these two signal formats is output by the D4/D800 -- I strongly believe it is the second of these two. In the second case (but not the first), the Hyperdeck will be rounding or truncating 12-bit data to 8-bit data.

Just so that I've made this entirely plain -- there is no HDMI-specified or -defined 8-bit 4:2:2 YCbCr video format, as of the 1.3a version of the HDMI specification. This is a minor logistical 'nit', but one which must be respected by HDMI devices connected to the D4/D800.

Am I clear enough ?

Better. Am I also clear enough?

-- Bob Elkind

 

[Zephyrnoid]

And that's the way the big boys play. They ought to be careful or they end up like SGI, eating Apple's dust.

I think Nikon is actually being pretty cagey here. They have provided a data tap (pre-empting the need for an actual "hack") for third parties like Atomos, AJA, Sound Devices to use with their recording devices. Sales to the video crowd will increase overall sales without Nikon having to put a lot into opening a whole new branch of hardware development and manufacturing from scratch. They cut into Canon's HDSLR sales and maybe even some AF100 and C300 sales if the quality is as good as I hope. If the market gets big enough to jump in, they lock the tap and require purchase of their recording module which is the only one that can (or is licensed to) read their proprietary data stream. Or maybe they just license the decoding software.

 

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Bob and Prune,

All I can add to this conversation is that 1080P over single link HD-SDI is a known quantity. It's 23.976 fps recorded as PsF into a 59.94i 4:2:2 YCbCr 10-bit stream. That's it.

So, in the HD-SDI world, 23.976 PsF is a well known, useful, compatible format. And the process of extracting 23.976P frames is well understood and standardized.

Now HDMI is another story. It's a wild west consumer format governed by much broader standards that are subject to revision. Interestingly, HDMI can actually carry more bandwidth than single like HD-SDI. The main benefits of HD-SDI are its robust signal, standardization and that professional equipment knows exactly how to deal with it. To use a Star Wars analogy, single link HD-SDI is a Stormtrooper; HDMI is more like a bounty hunter.

 

[BobbyMurcerFan]

Bob,

HDMI can be RGB, and it can have color depth up to 16-bits per chanel.

 

[grecner]

I don't think it is that sophisticated

I don't think it is that sophisticated

I think Nikon is actually being pretty cagey here. They have provided a data tap (pre-empting the need for an actual "hack") for third parties like Atomos, AJA, Sound Devices to use with their recording devices. Sales to the video crowd will increase overall sales without Nikon having to put a lot into opening a whole new branch of hardware development and manufacturing from scratch. They cut into Canon's HDSLR sales and maybe even some AF100 and C300 sales if the quality is as good as I hope. If the market gets big enough to jump in, they lock the tap and require purchase of their recording module which is the only one that can (or is licensed to) read their proprietary data stream. Or maybe they just license the decoding software.

I believe Nikon has just let someone who had no solid pro video background design the 1080p24 to 1080i60 conversion, and this is what resulted - he did his best and invented a new format. ;-)


Martin

 

[grecner]

3)"Here's the bottom line: Most -- if not all -- of the questions listed above would be brushed away if the recorder (and we're not just talking about Ninja, agreed?) supported and accepted the 'native' 1080p24/25/30 HDMI output from the D4/D800." All you need for this to happen is for the manufacturer of the Camera to have a vested interest in the external acquisition of the data stream into a third party device. That's what we call a partnership.

I do not think you need a partnership to make devices using open standards communicate with each other.
What you need is a specification of the standard being used released by the manufacturer.
On the D800 side, Nikon has not released this info, we just believe they use 8-bit YCbCr color format. This is what Nikon is due to.
I believe a simple question to technical support could do it. I will give it a try.
On the recorder side, guy from AJA has unofficially reported they can record it, so they already know what it is, and unofficially they say it is 8-bit YCbCr is I am not mistaken.
Every recording device manufacturer should make it clean, besides of resolution (like 1080p24 or 1080p23,98), what color formats and bit clocks and whatever alse there is they are capable of recording.

I have also asked ATOMOS technical support what is the exact reason why they can not record native 1080p24 from the D800 as they state in firmware release notes, but have not received any answer in two days now.

If we had this information, it would be easy to just buy equipment based on those specs, and no partnership would be required.

Martin