Raw Uncompressed Camcorder Footage
April 26, 2007 5:03 AM Subscribe
A follow-up to this question: I need to get uncompressed digital video recorded to a hard drive for the purpose of developing compression algorithms. I need a portable solution. High-def is not required.
The user has come through with more information. He needs a portable solution and he wants a camcorder. Purchasing the footage is not an option. He has a budget of less than $20K.
I've received conflicting advice from the professionals I've called.
One group recommends using a Canon XHG1 with the AJA Io and a Mac Pro writing to an external hard drive via Firewire 800. This will require power for the external drive and the Io, which is sub-optimal.
Another recommends using the Panasonic HVX-200 (Flash alert) with 8GB P2 cards, but from what I can tell, this records as DVCPRO50/DVCPRO/DV which, I believe, is compressed.
The Blackmagic card mentioned in my earlier question would be perfect if it didn't require a desktop machine.
Are either of these options going to give me what I want? Are there other options I should be considering?
The user has come through with more information. He needs a portable solution and he wants a camcorder. Purchasing the footage is not an option. He has a budget of less than $20K.
I've received conflicting advice from the professionals I've called.
One group recommends using a Canon XHG1 with the AJA Io and a Mac Pro writing to an external hard drive via Firewire 800. This will require power for the external drive and the Io, which is sub-optimal.
Another recommends using the Panasonic HVX-200 (Flash alert) with 8GB P2 cards, but from what I can tell, this records as DVCPRO50/DVCPRO/DV which, I believe, is compressed.
The Blackmagic card mentioned in my earlier question would be perfect if it didn't require a desktop machine.
Are either of these options going to give me what I want? Are there other options I should be considering?
If your budget is less than $20K, you could daisy-chain bus-powered Firewire drives (computer -> FW400 -> FW800-to-FW400 -> etc. etc.) into a striped RAID 0 configuration to get maximal speed benefit (you should be able to get an arrangement fast enough to record uncompressed video with striped FW400 drives). The limitation would be the current draw of the drives on the bus; you'd probably be able to support two or three drives, at most, maybe more.
If you can power the Mac Pro, why not use a power strip to handle the AJA Io and hard drives?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:48 AM on April 26, 2007
If you can power the Mac Pro, why not use a power strip to handle the AJA Io and hard drives?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:48 AM on April 26, 2007
Response by poster: Arrgh. I previewed that post six ways from Sunday and missed this - MacBook Pro, not Mac Pro. He want to capture the footage in the field.
I figured that this is close to professional, but that's what he needs/wants for his research.
posted by donpardo at 6:04 AM on April 26, 2007
I figured that this is close to professional, but that's what he needs/wants for his research.
posted by donpardo at 6:04 AM on April 26, 2007
Response by poster: My ideal setup would be a camera that could output the HD/SDI signal directly to a hard drive, but I haven't been able to find that yet.
I'm not married to anything I've mentioned above.
posted by donpardo at 6:37 AM on April 26, 2007
I'm not married to anything I've mentioned above.
posted by donpardo at 6:37 AM on April 26, 2007
The standard AJA Io only does uncompressed 10-bit SD via SDI, which limits the number of cameras that you can use for this purpose.
Last week at NAB, however, AJA released the IoHD, which basically does everything the original Io box did, but adds HD support via HD-SDI (though this doesnt matter for your purposes, i guess), and more importantly, it has HDMI in/out, so you can grab "uncompressed" 4:2:2 from prosumer level cameras, ala the Blackmagic Intensity card.
the IoHd is also built for portability, and is a steal at only $3495.
But the whole "uncompressed" thing begs the question, what do you really mean by "uncompressed" video? Any 4:2:2 signal is inherently compressed in the color channels, as you probably know. If you want truly uncompressed data, you need to use a camera which will output a 4:4:4 signal, and you'll be hard pressed to find one of those for under $20,000. The defacto standard 4:4:4 camera used in production is the Sony F950, but it costs over $100,000.
The next best solution is the fabled RED One camera, which outputs 2k and 1080p at full 4:4:4 resolution, and costs only $17,500 (this is the cost of the body...price doesnt include lenses or onboard data storage).
The drawback to the RED camera is that they aren't mass producing them, so its not like you can order one from them today and recieve the camera in a week or two. But I saw the camera and the footage from it with my own eyes at NAB, and it's an absolutely breathtaking camera, so if you can afford to be a bit patient, the RED would probably be your best choice overall.
I posted about the RED on the blue last October.
posted by melorama at 7:35 AM on April 26, 2007
Last week at NAB, however, AJA released the IoHD, which basically does everything the original Io box did, but adds HD support via HD-SDI (though this doesnt matter for your purposes, i guess), and more importantly, it has HDMI in/out, so you can grab "uncompressed" 4:2:2 from prosumer level cameras, ala the Blackmagic Intensity card.
the IoHd is also built for portability, and is a steal at only $3495.
But the whole "uncompressed" thing begs the question, what do you really mean by "uncompressed" video? Any 4:2:2 signal is inherently compressed in the color channels, as you probably know. If you want truly uncompressed data, you need to use a camera which will output a 4:4:4 signal, and you'll be hard pressed to find one of those for under $20,000. The defacto standard 4:4:4 camera used in production is the Sony F950, but it costs over $100,000.
The next best solution is the fabled RED One camera, which outputs 2k and 1080p at full 4:4:4 resolution, and costs only $17,500 (this is the cost of the body...price doesnt include lenses or onboard data storage).
The drawback to the RED camera is that they aren't mass producing them, so its not like you can order one from them today and recieve the camera in a week or two. But I saw the camera and the footage from it with my own eyes at NAB, and it's an absolutely breathtaking camera, so if you can afford to be a bit patient, the RED would probably be your best choice overall.
I posted about the RED on the blue last October.
posted by melorama at 7:35 AM on April 26, 2007
Response by poster: Any 4:2:2 signal is inherently compressed in the color channels, as you probably know.
Well, no. I've been thrown into the deep end of the pool here, so I know very litte. It sounds as if 4:2:2 wil have to be sufficient. Unfortunately the RED blows the budget.
Based on what you've said, is the Canon XHG1 with the AJA Io and a Mac Pro and bus powered drives going to preserve as much of the original capture as I can expect to get for my price? HD isn't necessary. If he has to deal with a power inverter, that's just the way it will have to be.
Thanks for your help.
posted by donpardo at 8:57 AM on April 26, 2007
Well, no. I've been thrown into the deep end of the pool here, so I know very litte. It sounds as if 4:2:2 wil have to be sufficient. Unfortunately the RED blows the budget.
Based on what you've said, is the Canon XHG1 with the AJA Io and a Mac Pro and bus powered drives going to preserve as much of the original capture as I can expect to get for my price? HD isn't necessary. If he has to deal with a power inverter, that's just the way it will have to be.
Thanks for your help.
posted by donpardo at 8:57 AM on April 26, 2007
I'd suggest you identify a few candidates, and then spend a little effort hustling to see if you can get loaner equipment. You might have a chance since this is for research use.
posted by Good Brain at 9:08 AM on April 26, 2007
posted by Good Brain at 9:08 AM on April 26, 2007
donpardo-
A macbook does not have a professional video card, and may not be able to display uncompressed video in real time. FCP is not usable on a macbook. you need a macbook pro. To get true uncompressed video you need to shoot on an uncompressed format, such as beta or HDCAM. these are not cheap solutions. Digitizing these video streams uncompressed requires a peripheral such as the AJA Io. The trouble is there are few cameras that shoot uncompressed to begin with, and those that do are very expensive. Your standard DigiBeta shoots a very low compression, but it is compressed nonetheless. Your best option may be to rent a BetaSP Camera for a day, get some footage and digitize it via the AJA Io uncompressed using a beta deck, all you need is a standard firewire 400 because the bit stream of uncompressed Standard Def footage is much lower than firewire 400's 400Mb bitstream. Your color space will be 4:2:2, but you will be able to effectively study the compression algorithm with that level of quality.
posted by winterhat at 9:53 AM on April 26, 2007
A macbook does not have a professional video card, and may not be able to display uncompressed video in real time. FCP is not usable on a macbook. you need a macbook pro. To get true uncompressed video you need to shoot on an uncompressed format, such as beta or HDCAM. these are not cheap solutions. Digitizing these video streams uncompressed requires a peripheral such as the AJA Io. The trouble is there are few cameras that shoot uncompressed to begin with, and those that do are very expensive. Your standard DigiBeta shoots a very low compression, but it is compressed nonetheless. Your best option may be to rent a BetaSP Camera for a day, get some footage and digitize it via the AJA Io uncompressed using a beta deck, all you need is a standard firewire 400 because the bit stream of uncompressed Standard Def footage is much lower than firewire 400's 400Mb bitstream. Your color space will be 4:2:2, but you will be able to effectively study the compression algorithm with that level of quality.
posted by winterhat at 9:53 AM on April 26, 2007
It all depends on how many days of shooting there are. I'd say rent a Digibeta camera and run the SDI out into the SDI in on the AJA Io. The problem with the new Io HD is that it doesn't record uncompressed HD, only the new Apple ProRes codec, which *isn't* uncompressed.
The HVX is compressed, so also not what you're looking for.
posted by MythMaker at 12:04 PM on April 26, 2007
The HVX is compressed, so also not what you're looking for.
posted by MythMaker at 12:04 PM on April 26, 2007
donpardo:
Since he doesn't need HD ingest, the IoHD's lack of uncompressed HD doesn't really matter. It still does fully uncompressed, 10-bit 4:2:2 SD via SDI and the Firewire port.
If he could get access to a camera that spits out via SDI, I would recommend the original Io, since its $1500 cheaper than the IoHD, albeit a bit bulkier (the original Io is intended as a rackmounted unit, but is still very light, so you could use it in the field provided you have AC available.
The IoHD is preferable, however, since it also allows for uncompressed 4:2:2 via the HDMI connector. You could plug in a prosumer camera such as the Sony V1U (aprox $2000 USD), and capture the video at a much higher quality than you would recording to the internal (HDV) tape in the same camera. Video geeks like Alex Lindsay from the Pixelcorps/Macbreak have reported that there is a "night and day" difference between the HDV-on-tape vs. HDMI ingest from the V1U, at least for greenscreen work, which is particularly sensitive to compression and colorsampling.
Macbreak just posted a good video on the IoHD, direct from the show floor at NAB that you might want to take a look at.
posted by melorama at 1:26 PM on April 26, 2007
Since he doesn't need HD ingest, the IoHD's lack of uncompressed HD doesn't really matter. It still does fully uncompressed, 10-bit 4:2:2 SD via SDI and the Firewire port.
If he could get access to a camera that spits out via SDI, I would recommend the original Io, since its $1500 cheaper than the IoHD, albeit a bit bulkier (the original Io is intended as a rackmounted unit, but is still very light, so you could use it in the field provided you have AC available.
The IoHD is preferable, however, since it also allows for uncompressed 4:2:2 via the HDMI connector. You could plug in a prosumer camera such as the Sony V1U (aprox $2000 USD), and capture the video at a much higher quality than you would recording to the internal (HDV) tape in the same camera. Video geeks like Alex Lindsay from the Pixelcorps/Macbreak have reported that there is a "night and day" difference between the HDV-on-tape vs. HDMI ingest from the V1U, at least for greenscreen work, which is particularly sensitive to compression and colorsampling.
Macbreak just posted a good video on the IoHD, direct from the show floor at NAB that you might want to take a look at.
posted by melorama at 1:26 PM on April 26, 2007
Another interesting option I forgot to mention is the Reel-Stream Andromeda. Reel-Stream is a company which basically hacks off the shelf DV cameras (specifically, the Panasonic DVX-100) to spit out "raw" uncompressed 4:4:4 RGB, for about $2500 (in addition to the cost of the camera itself, of course).
This, however, begs yet another question regarding the quality of the camera's CCD itself, as well as if any 4:4:4 camera solution you decide on actually allows you to output the raw Bayer pattern from said CCD(s). I would think if you're interested in doing research in video compression that you'd want to work with the raw Bayer data from the camera, and use your own, known demosaicing algorithm (instead of the camera manufacturer's on board demosaicing), so you have maximum control over how the pixels are getting pushed around.
posted by melorama at 1:39 PM on April 26, 2007
This, however, begs yet another question regarding the quality of the camera's CCD itself, as well as if any 4:4:4 camera solution you decide on actually allows you to output the raw Bayer pattern from said CCD(s). I would think if you're interested in doing research in video compression that you'd want to work with the raw Bayer data from the camera, and use your own, known demosaicing algorithm (instead of the camera manufacturer's on board demosaicing), so you have maximum control over how the pixels are getting pushed around.
posted by melorama at 1:39 PM on April 26, 2007
Oooo...it looks like Reel-Stream now has an option for the HVX-200 called "Hydra".
This, in a word, effin' rocks.
posted by melorama at 1:43 PM on April 26, 2007
This, in a word, effin' rocks.
posted by melorama at 1:43 PM on April 26, 2007
Nope. Not on a laptop.
None of them are going to give you what you want. As far as I can tell (If you had just asked this before NAB....) the AJA IO will only do the Apple ProCodec 422, not totally uncompressed.
In fact, you can't do uncompressed HD on a laptop. You could conceivably capture one stream - but there's no input method for fully uncompressed HD. SD? sure. HD? No. You could use a regular AJA box which does SD uncompressed - that plus fast drives could do so.
There are two camera workflows that can capture the direct signal (cheaply). There are other methods (real HD) that aren't this sorta half assed hybrid.
First is the Canon method you had above - be aware you're only going to get 8 bit uncompressed, and also, you're going to need FAST, FAST, FAST connection for uncompressed HD (think 600 mb/s).
The second, some of the sony HDV cameras have an HDMI connection and can be used with a blackmagic HDMI card; but you still have the problem - you want to use a laptop. The AJA IO can do uncompressed SD, but it's still the Apple 422 ProRes codec (not totally uncompressed.
posted by filmgeek at 3:17 PM on April 26, 2007
None of them are going to give you what you want. As far as I can tell (If you had just asked this before NAB....) the AJA IO will only do the Apple ProCodec 422, not totally uncompressed.
In fact, you can't do uncompressed HD on a laptop. You could conceivably capture one stream - but there's no input method for fully uncompressed HD. SD? sure. HD? No. You could use a regular AJA box which does SD uncompressed - that plus fast drives could do so.
There are two camera workflows that can capture the direct signal (cheaply). There are other methods (real HD) that aren't this sorta half assed hybrid.
First is the Canon method you had above - be aware you're only going to get 8 bit uncompressed, and also, you're going to need FAST, FAST, FAST connection for uncompressed HD (think 600 mb/s).
The second, some of the sony HDV cameras have an HDMI connection and can be used with a blackmagic HDMI card; but you still have the problem - you want to use a laptop. The AJA IO can do uncompressed SD, but it's still the Apple 422 ProRes codec (not totally uncompressed.
posted by filmgeek at 3:17 PM on April 26, 2007
filmgeek:
The AJA IO can do uncompressed SD, but it's still the Apple 422 ProRes codec (not totally uncompressed.
This is incorrect. The ProRes 422 codec is only a requirement for doing HD on the IoHD. Standard-def formats, on the other hand, can still go in and out of the unit as Uncompressed 10-bit, just like the original Io box.
Since donpardo stated that HD is not a requirement, the ProRes 422 thing is not going to be an issue for him.
posted by melorama at 5:38 PM on April 26, 2007
The AJA IO can do uncompressed SD, but it's still the Apple 422 ProRes codec (not totally uncompressed.
This is incorrect. The ProRes 422 codec is only a requirement for doing HD on the IoHD. Standard-def formats, on the other hand, can still go in and out of the unit as Uncompressed 10-bit, just like the original Io box.
Since donpardo stated that HD is not a requirement, the ProRes 422 thing is not going to be an issue for him.
posted by melorama at 5:38 PM on April 26, 2007
Response by poster: Since SD is acceptable, I'm going to recommend the Canon/AJA Io/MacBook Pro solution.
Thanks for the help, everyone. I'll still be checking this thread, so feel free to weigh in with additional info if you have it.
posted by donpardo at 3:16 AM on April 27, 2007
Thanks for the help, everyone. I'll still be checking this thread, so feel free to weigh in with additional info if you have it.
posted by donpardo at 3:16 AM on April 27, 2007
It doesn't say here if it will support uncompressed. It will certainly support Pro422, which is compressed (even in SD.)
I'm going to email the product manager over at AJA.
posted by filmgeek at 7:19 PM on April 27, 2007
I'm going to email the product manager over at AJA.
posted by filmgeek at 7:19 PM on April 27, 2007
"Yes, it will handle uncompressed SD (with or without prores).
We'll begin shipments in July." So yeah, you're good to go for SD uncompressed.
Be aware - a MBP can get between 1-2 streams of RT SD
posted by filmgeek at 6:22 AM on May 1, 2007
We'll begin shipments in July." So yeah, you're good to go for SD uncompressed.
Be aware - a MBP can get between 1-2 streams of RT SD
posted by filmgeek at 6:22 AM on May 1, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.
Honestly, it sounds like you guys are wanting to do some serious close-to-pro-level research.
What would your ideal setup look like?
posted by Thorzdad at 5:48 AM on April 26, 2007