Pass-Thru Monitoring?

mjmcneese

mjmcneese

Veteran
This question may have been covered here before, but I haven't been able to find an answer...

Does the HVX allow for pass-thru DVCPROHD monitoring via FW, like we can do with DV cameras and VTRs? Can I hook up the HVX to a Mac via FW, then from the camera to a monitor via analog component?

Thanks.
 
No. The firewire stream from the camera is one way only. You will not be able to use the camera to view footage from your timeline when your in the edit.
 
Jan had told me it would NOT be bi-directional (as of Oct in Chicago Rez Fest).
If it indeed is now, then I see no reason why you couldnt view DV100...since it is transfered via firewire as all flavors of DV.
 
At one point, Graeme Nattress said that the HVX-200 would support pass-through monitoring. I'm hoping that the HVX200 does support monitoring so I can avoid paying $1,000 for a video card.
 
I don't know about you, but I don't think I want to use my HVX as a passthrough to view footage while editing. What I would like to see is a DVCPro50/HD bidirectional converter, much like the Canopus ADVC110 for DV.
 
mjmcneese2 said:
Ok, so no HD pass-thru in the camera
Click to expand...

How'd you get that conclusion?
From reading this thread it seems that there hasn't been a clear answer yet on whether or not the HVX will allow for pass-through monitoring.
 
The HVX definitely allows for firewire input. However, the question is whether the analog outputs will function when inputting HD through firewire. They may not. It will definitely allow firewire input even when in HD, and monitoring on the LCD, but the question of whether the component outputs would remain active is still up in the air.
 
Interesting - so it wouldn't be a matter of the NLE being able to output the signal via FW, right? I mean, if we're dealing with DVCPROHD, and FCP already supports that via FW, then there should be no problem...

As long as the camera or deck does the pass-thru.
 
I know you can definitely output from one HVX to another through firewire and see the results on the receiving cam's LCD panel. I am certain you could output from an NLE and see the results on the LCD. What I don't know is if you can see the results live on the analog outputs.
 
Barry_Green said:
I know you can definitely output from one HVX to another through firewire and see the results on the receiving cam's LCD panel. I am certain you could output from an NLE and see the results on the LCD. What I don't know is if you can see the results live on the analog outputs.
Click to expand...

I am not being a smart-a** but if you can see it on the LCD wouldn't it be just plain stupid to not have it output via the analog outs? The only logical reason for not having this is to protect another product... Like a more expensive VCR or something. Again.....if it doesn't output via analog outs then this seems the only real reason.......hmmmmmm. Let's hope it outputs for us....please!!!!
 
I don't know why it might not work, but if it doesn't, I'm certain that there are *reasons* why it wouldn't work. Some engineering thing.

I hope that we never hear about "protecting" the product line again -- I mean, what more can they do? The VariCam is a $70,000 product that does 720p only. With the HVX they gave us 1080p too. People said "they'll never do that, they'll protect their higher-end systems." Panasonic said "surprise surprise" and handed us 1080/24p.

Then they gave us DVCPRO50 too. Why? 'Cause they could. I don't remember there being much clamor for it, but I guess they figured that while they were at it, why not throw it in? And now it's become the feature that several of us are most excited by. So why didn't they "protect" their $27,000 SDX900 by dropping this feature?

Then people said "well, it won't REALLY be DVCPRO-HD, it'll be limited to 50mbps or something." Sorry to disappoint the skeptics, but what they delivered is the full-bore 100mbps version.

So I don't see them "protecting" anything. Instead, Jan said that they target a price point, and then they design in everything they can possibly fit under that pricetag. The way I see it, if the more-expensive product can't compete, well, too bad for it -- that's why they have a VariCam II coming out, after all. Not that the HVX would shoot better 720p than the VariCam would, obviously it won't -- but technology marches on, improvements are made, and the big cams will be updated to take advantage of the P2/multi-format technology too.

So now we're having people say that "the only reason" it doesn't have 25p is this or that -- well, no, there's good solid engineering reasons why it doesn't have 25p. It would require two different oscillators and a rebootable operating system, and that feature didn't fit under the price point they had in mind. Or someone else is now saying that "if it doesn't have pass-thru, the only possible reason is that it's being crippled" or something. How do you know this? How do you know that there's not some valid reason for it? Maybe there's only so much processing power to go around, and importing a 100mbps stream, while simultaneously recording it, while simultaneously uncompressing it, while simultaneously playing it out to the LCD panel, might be about the limit. Maybe there's not enough "juice" left to go that extra mile and put it out on the analog ports.

I sincerely hope it's in there. I sincerely hope it can do it. I won't know until I have an edit system that can output DV100 over firewire. But if it can't do it, I'm not going to say that it's the end of the world! I know it can input and display on the LCD, because I've seen two HVX's hooked up via firewire, in 1080 mode, and it worked. I just don't know if it goes that final stretch into analog output of high-def as well. It may, or it may not. It may just be too much to ask.

But crippled? 1080/24p, 1080/30p, 720/60p, 720/variable framerates, DVCPRO50, DV, four channels of uncompressed audio, native 16:9 in DV mode, DV tape as well as P2, firewire input, firewire output... does it really seem like they were trying to LIMIT its capabilities?
 
Barry,
I never said it was "crippled". But my logic is that if a 100mbs stream of HD can come in through the firewire and be decoded and displayed on the LCD then it should work on the analog outputs too. Maybe there is some technical reason....but at this point it would seem logical that if there is a circuit or logic board in the camera that converts the binary data for display on the LCD then it should be relatively easy to get out the analog ports too.

To be honest I don't even know if the workflow of streaming HD from a NLE is legit! Maybe they aren't designed to do this and were never meant to be. And that is ok. But if they do have this feature and we can stream back to the camera and preview on a 3.5" LCD but not the analog outs.....well....that's just a crime against humanity!

:)

Seriously though....Barry.....Your response seemed kinda jumpy....I was just theorizing...I am not going off on a Pana is "crippling" stuff tangent. If it proves that it does HD conversion to LCD via firewire and not out to analog that would be just weird!
 
Dude, it wasn't you. It was about the six hundred thousandth time I've heard someone say (or speculate) that they're specifically hampering the product in order to "protect" the higher product line. That kind of thinking may work on Sony, but not with the "new" Panasonic. So yes, I did jump a little, but it was from exasperation with it being the millionth time it's been brought up. Just like with how people kept saying "it's only 1080i, there's not REALLY 1080p in there" up until the moment we posted 1080/24p footage shot in native 1080/24p mode. That was what it took to get that rumor/speculation to die.

And yes I'm sure that I attributed some of that pent-up frustration towards what you said, and added things in there that you didn't really say. I apologize for that -- I was answering to things that weren't asked, and I shouldn't do that, at least not without proper clarification.

The other thing is that I've noticed a huge percentage of posts where people are dictating what is or is not possible. What the engineers could or couldn't do, and why they did or didn't do it. Saying things like "the ONLY reason they don't do this (or that) is because they're intentionally crippling the product!" Sigh. I've been trying to explain for months why there will not be 25p in the US HVX, nor will there be 24p in the European one, and I can't tell you how many people have said "well, they're just deliberately crippling it". As if that's all there is to it. I'm not even a camera engineer, but I was a software engineer at the top level of the ultra-competitive videogame industry for about 15 years, and I have a little bit of an idea of what it takes when someone says "well, just make it do *this*... and it's never, ever, ever as easy as people think it should be.

So, hey, I totally agree with your points -- it's eminently logical that it should be able to do that, the question is if it's actually technically possible. Not everything that should be, is. I wish it were. And I really, really hope the feature is in there.
 
Holy Crap! Barry, you programmed on Crescent Hawk's Inception, California Games, and the first C&C??

You're my hero! :engel017:

(sorry, off topic)
 
... among dozens of others... :) Lead programmer on Disney's The Lion King, and co-lead programmer on C&C: Red Alert were probably the two biggest-selling titles...
 
Cool. There's a special place in my heart for those old Westwood games. Ahh...memory lane. :cry:

(p.s. I worked with red alert II people during my time at EA after the move out from NV)
 
C&C.. SWEET! I love that game! (it and Worms are the only ones installed on my system!) Man it's a small world!

Respect. :beer:

- Mikko
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top