PDA

View Full Version : HD Input Survey



ACross
05-09-2006, 03:29 PM
All,

I wanted to get a brief overview of what you preferred method of aquisition might be for HD input and output for post-production.

Some general notes :


Firewire tends to be cheap, but low-medium quality when compared to SDI, or analog. This is available on most low-medium range cameras. Recompression for output can be slow.
HD-SDI is high quality, but available on medium-high range cameras. No recompression is needed for input or
output. It can still be stored in compressed form on disk to save space.
Analog HD is high quality, and available on low-high range cameras. No recompression is needed for input or output. It can still be stored in compressed form on disk to save space.
P2 drives are very convenient since they do not require the data to be digitized, but tend to be expensive and somewhat lower quality than working with the native feed. Recompression is still required for writing files to them.


Thank you in advance for your response.

Andrew Cross, Ph.D
VP of SW Engineering,
NewTek, www.newtek.com

ps. Don't flame me for my rather simplistic general notes, these are only means as one line guides to the pros and cons of the different formats.

chuckd
05-09-2006, 09:39 PM
Thanks for asking about this Andrew! I just wish you could select more than one answer (like ranking them in order).

I don't see us getting fully into HD in the next six months but what HD we will be doing is most likely to be P2 and HDV.

Having said that, I really think that Newtek's answer to this should be, "we're supporting all of these, plus XDCam HD!"

I would think that HDV, DVCPro HD and XDCam HD would cover most people's aquisition needs but you *have* to have HD SDI, it's the only thing close to a real industry wide standard. Component is in only necessary if you think people will want to output from their cameras directly.

Just my tuppence....

ACross
05-09-2006, 10:12 PM
Thanks for asking about this Andrew! I just wish you could select more than one answer (like ranking them in order).

Unfortunately our forums do not currently allow surveys to be composed like that, or I would have done that. That said, I actually want to fight the temptation for people to simply say "I want everything", which does not give us the ability to balance different items. None of this means that we might or might not do anything ranging from just one, to all of them :D I am just trying to get a good understanding of what people actually plan on using for HD.


I would think that HDV, DVCPro HD and XDCam HD would cover most people's aquisition needs but you *have* to have HD SDI, it's the only thing close to a real industry wide standard. Component is in only necessary if you think people will want to output from their cameras directly.

Well, I'm not sure that the balance is quite as in favor as HD-SDI as you might suggest. While it is a good format most cheaper displays and cameras do not have it, while they almost all have component HD.


Component is in only necessary if you think people will want to output from their cameras directly.

I do not understand this statement; surely the same would be true for HD-SDI or am I missing something obvious.

ted
05-09-2006, 10:31 PM
Wikipedia says..."The dual link HD interface supports 1080p60, 1080p59.94, and 1080p50, as well as 4:4:4 encoding, greater color depth, RGB encoding, alpha channels, and nonstandard resolutions (often encountered in computer graphics or digital cinema). "

I want to do more homework before making a vote, but my first thought is to wait for the higher rated 3.5gps "Dual Link HD" to develop and add the SDI port then.

For now if we can't pick 2 or more, the priority would seem to be Analog since you can run cables over a much longer distance then SDI. Analog also covers a broader level of high AND low end customers that NewTek caters to so well.

What do the rest of you think?

ScorpioProd
05-09-2006, 11:20 PM
Well, I voted for the first choice, firewire-only.

Personally, I really don't see why anyone with HDV, XDCAM HD or P2 would want to go analog HD in and out. Why would they when firewire would keep it pure digital with no losses?

radams
05-10-2006, 12:48 AM
Hi Andrew and All,

I think that most of you know by now where my thoughts on this are...

In looking at for POST production....

I have a hard time with the options being presented...

cause Firewire is a must...along with P2 and other digital medium based (it replaces tape)...Most of the new Decks and most camera's have firewire on them...

That said having the ability to work with analog HD from switchers, decks and camera's would allow for acquistion for onset needs. That and also having HD-SDI i/o...

BUT, here is my thought on those other options...
I would prefer to see an IT i/o with clue boxes for the analog and SDI options...let the user decide what they need...but if you supported Giga Ethernet i/o you can then hit all those markets and users...and make this product in line with the latest gear out there...look at the new camera's that have Giga ethernet output...even the high end D-Cinema cameras...

With firewire you hit the main part of the market....
With Giga Ethernet (glue boxes optional) you hit the rest and are future proofing the product.

That's my 2 cents...and since that wasn't an option...

I vote the above....

How many of you plan to work with HD tape systems ? and I don't mean HDV. Even if you need to work with them, If there was a Giga ethernet converter inline...wouldn't that fit perfectly....also this then allows for ANY computer with Giga ethernet and firewire to work....no additional cards needed. Laptops could then even be used.

Cheers,

Jim Capillo
05-10-2006, 05:32 AM
Still doing SD here, but I guess my options will come down to firewire and P2 cards, not necessarily in that order....

JReble
05-10-2006, 07:26 AM
For me, at this point in time, it's a no brainer. The best option for a while will be ability to capture component analog HD video in addition to the obvious firewire capability. If we can use our existing hardware to capture that, it would be a huge plus as well.

Jim Capillo
05-10-2006, 08:08 AM
Change my choices to analog and firewire, in that order !

PIZAZZ
05-10-2006, 08:24 AM
Personally, I really don't see why anyone with HDV, XDCAM HD or P2 would want to go analog HD in and out. Why would they when firewire would keep it pure digital with no losses?

I can think of the perfect reason Eugene. Live switching with Analog HD. Nearly all the HDV cameras have Analog HD out on them so it is very easy to use that in Live Switching applications. Actually that is one of the main reasons I sell those cameras into our current installs.

ScorpioProd
05-10-2006, 10:23 AM
I can think of the perfect reason Eugene. Live switching with Analog HD. Nearly all the HDV cameras have Analog HD out on them so it is very easy to use that in Live Switching applications. Actually that is one of the main reasons I sell those cameras into our current installs.
True for live switching... But Andrew's question specifically said "HD decks", therefore implying to me that the question was specifically for post use...

chuckd
05-10-2006, 10:33 AM
[I said] Component is in only necessary if you think people will want to output from their cameras directly.

I do not understand this statement; surely the same would be true for HD-SDI or am I missing something obvious.

AFAIK, none of the mid-range and below cameras have SDI out. They do have analog component.

I should clear something up. I was thinking primarily in terms of post and clearly you are thinking beyond that.

My insistence on HD-SDI is because of this: you may or may not be able to support every flavor of IT based HD. But by having HD-SDI in and out you don't have to directly support *every* flavor of the month. Again this is from a post perspective.

In terms of live use, a format being IT based or not is irrelevant. All that counts is what kind of outputs does a camera have.

So it seems to me that we have another split between what live users and post users need most. If you're a live guy you'll want analog component and/or HD-SDI depending on what type of camera you have.

If you're a post guy you want IT based support plus firewire for HDV.

BTW, I'm not as personally dogmatic about HD-SDI as I think it may come across in my posts. I think it's just a good way to leave your system open and format agnostic.

Hope that clears up my earlier post somewhat!

chuckd
05-10-2006, 10:39 AM
For now if we can't pick 2 or more, the priority would seem to be Analog since you can run cables over a much longer distance then SDI. Analog also covers a broader level of high AND low end customers that NewTek caters to so well.

What do the rest of you think?

I think you have it backwards Ted. The whole point of SDI is that it works better over long runs than component.

http://tinyurl.com/gl7rj

You can read the whole article if you want (very technical) but the first and third sections ("Getting the Most from SDI" and "Why SDI?") give a quick and general explanation.

chuckd
05-10-2006, 10:43 AM
Wikipedia says..."The dual link HD interface supports 1080p60, 1080p59.94, and 1080p50, as well as 4:4:4 encoding, greater color depth, RGB encoding, alpha channels, and nonstandard resolutions (often encountered in computer graphics or digital cinema). "
What do the rest of you think?


Actually this brings to mind a question I have about SpeedEDIT (and any version of VT HD presumably). What colorspace and color depth does SpeedEDIT work in?

A lot of HD formats are 10-bit and a few are 4:4:4. Then there are the dual link 4:4:4 formats (is there more than one of these?).

HD has so many freakin' variations I'd like to know how Newtek will handle all of them.....

bbeanan
05-10-2006, 10:50 AM
but most of us I would ASSUME have a mid range camera and or deck that does not have SDI-HD out.
As for Firewire while I have not tried firewire with HD yet I know the quaility is far far better from the analog outs vs. the firewire (think green screen firewire sd is just a pain in the... to do green screen but from the same camera going into my VT4 via analog it is no problem)

So my vote is 100% analog in with firewire #2. But then again I really do not need the firewire in as with non-green screen shots I use my Firestore FS-4 drives (with the HD upgrade) and I would just drag the files over... again assuming that speed edit can use the *.m2t files

MBeck
05-10-2006, 10:56 AM
AFAIK, none of the mid-range and below cameras have SDI out. They do have analog component.


What do you mean by mid range? the Cannon HL-1 and the JVC GY-HD250U both do and are at or around 10K.

bbeanan
05-10-2006, 11:28 AM
... my sony z1 does not :(

chuckd
05-10-2006, 11:33 AM
What do you mean by mid range? the Cannon HL-1 and the JVC GY-HD250U both do and are at or around 10K.

I guess it's a matter of semantics, but to my way of thinking the $10k cameras price puts them in a category above the cameras that come in around $5-6k. Those cameras are above the category of cameras that come in at $3-4k.

That's the distinction I was making and the low-middle-high distinctions are based on prices for guys who typically come from a DV camera background.

For people who come from, say, a Beta background *all* of these cameras fall into the low category in terms of cost (and features as well for the most part).

ScorpioProd
05-10-2006, 12:51 PM
That's the thing, if we're again trying to say that SpeedEDIT is perfect for every range of user needs, from hobby through broadcast, I don't think that's true. There are significantly different needs in that range.

And Newtek seems to be into the old paradigm of one product for all... So I'm not sure how that's gonna work out... :stumped:

robewil
05-10-2006, 01:09 PM
And Newtek seems to be into the old paradigm of one product for all... So I'm not sure how that's gonna work out... :stumped:This poll seems to indicate that this is not the case. Between this, and the HD-related poll a few months ago, Dr. Cross seems to be researching how the current user-base is planning on using HD.

chuckd
05-10-2006, 01:22 PM
Well, there's broadcast and then there's broadcast....

I would dearly love to see SpeedEDIT break into some of those higher, more visible market areas. I realize that there are a number of areas Newtek would need to address for that to happen in any real large sense.

I admit that I want an Inferno at Vegas prices-- ain't no shame in my game!

And obviously, there's no real chance that SpeedEDIT would be able to get into the highest of the high end right now. But, just as you keep pushing for a more open plugin interface, I'll keep pushing for th ability to work with higher end formats.

The premise that Newtek has always had is that they make tools that give you the ability do the same work that the big guys do at a fraction of the cost. Well, the big boys aren't using a $4k HDV camera.

chuckd
05-10-2006, 01:26 PM
This poll seems to indicate that this is not the case. Between this, and the HD-related poll a few months ago, Dr. Cross seems to be researching how the current user-base is planning on using HD.

Which I am all for! But I would like to see Newtek expand their user base and to do that you have to have features that potential customers will look for.

ACross
05-10-2006, 01:31 PM
Which I am all for! But I would like to see Newtek expand their user base and to do that you have to have features that potential customers will look for.

Well, we posted the survey on our forums to find out what our existing users wanted. This is by no means the only information we are getting ...

chuckd
05-10-2006, 01:37 PM
Oh, I know that Andrew! I think it's great that Newtek will just come out and ask their users what they want to see and what they intend to use.

And *please* don't think I'm trying to be a pain in the hindquarters. I think you guys are doing a great job and I'm very excited about what's happening over at Newtek HQ.

But these are the things that I've been ruminating on since NAB. And, well, iron sharpens iron....

chribba
05-10-2006, 01:56 PM
Speededit so cheap that everyone should be able to buy better cameras and i think that digital is the future .. Support for MXF format usb,firewire,HD-SDI,gigabit and other digital inputs that i missed... Lets not take one step forward and two step back please...

Chribba

Tomorrow i am going to watch Thomson/Grassvalley Infinity camera and i really want to see support for Rev-Pro,memorycard and Jpeg2000 (MXF) in VT(speededit).

Geomagnetica
05-10-2006, 05:29 PM
SpeedEDIT may have potential to do well in the fast world of broadcast news, but it needs to support the likes of Grass Valley's Infinity and Sony's XDCam HD to be a serious contender.


Gary :)

ted
05-10-2006, 11:04 PM
The input here is great. It also shows the level of dissaray the HD "solution" is in.

:hijack: Thanks NewTek for the opportunity to voice our concerns, and obviously you are taking other input. Loved the TriCaster Pro, Speed Edit name AND product etc.
Thanks also to the great input from this group. I know it's helped me.

Back on trac... :stumped: I'll have to vote Analog. For personal reasons I'd choose the P2 Drive! But I could live with Analog for the time being as it seems most people can.

kleima
05-11-2006, 12:11 AM
Well, I would have assumed that I wanted firewire, but if it has quality and speed issues as you say, Andrew, then I vote for analog! But, does this mean both capture and output would be analog? What about Firestore hard disk recorders? We would be able to copy the files over an existing firewire port regardless of the method of capture/output in VT, right?

BTW, I already have my HD camera, and it has component analog, and firewire - no SDI, so it would be a real problem for me if there was only SDI.

radams
05-11-2006, 03:14 AM
Actually this brings to mind a question I have about SpeedEDIT (and any version of VT HD presumably). What colorspace and color depth does SpeedEDIT work in?

I also have this questions...since before VT was 8 bit only.
FYI, thou Adobe and Apple talke about 10 bit...but their render engine's in Ppro and FC..are 8 bit...they still have NOT released their 10 bit/16 bit version...FWIK. Thou being able to work with 10-16 bit material is needed and one of the stumbling blocks to work with Video for film uses which include commercial, documentary and feature production. We need the larger color depth ranges to be able to CC and DI properly. along with giving use more apparent depth and detail..with less banding and artifacts.



A lot of HD formats are 10-bit and a few are 4:4:4. Then there are the dual link 4:4:4 formats (is there more than one of these?).

Most of the entery level HD products are 8 bit only...it is only in the mid range and higher that you get 10 bit and 12 bit (Viper). Also most do NOT work in 4:4:4...most HD for Video production use 4:2:2...and most D-cinema camera's have both 4:2:2 and 4:4:4...but none record this level on the camera yet...this has to be recorded to SR tape or a hard drive raid system. I do not know of any single link camera output at 4:4:4...they are all dual link in that range. FWIK. The highest level is Bayer dumps...direct raw from the chips...this give you the resolution and color depth of the chips used.




HD has so many freakin' variations I'd like to know how Newtek will handle all of them.....

With class and completeness I hope ;)
With no follow the bouncing ball or don't look at the man behind the curtain...hehehe

Cheers,

radams
05-11-2006, 03:44 AM
Well, there's broadcast and then there's broadcast....

I admit that I want an Inferno at Vegas prices-- ain't no shame in my game!

Actually I would not compare an Inferno to Vegas or SpeedEdit.

a) it is NOT an NLE...and even thou is realtime is meant for short clips or shots..

b) Until recently could only be used on SGI gear...thou now it works in Linux....but with limitations to its power.

I would prefer you compare Smoke or Fire...now those are NLE production systems...and guess what...even with VT's editor now...and Bob Tasa's LWconnect product...gives you the power of a Smoke system's 3d planes and FX...In fact outside of a Smoke...VT is the ONLY other editor that can do this. AFAIK.

Cheers,

blueisland
05-11-2006, 04:13 AM
I think your survey shows how difficult the market is at the moment, with leading camera suppliers having so many competing products on the market -even I'm confused!! As with many then, I will sit on the fence and wait to see which format(s) captures the broadcasters needs.

Don't think that Newtek's VT5 is a low to mid range edit machine. It is a top edit suite which should aim high. As such watch what Sony (especially) and Panasonic (particularly) are doing. Their solutions will certainty shape the market over the next few years. Anything else is just gossip. Make sure the system is compatible with Sony HDCAM/XDCAM and panasonic's P2 (and the cineporter hard disk attachment) and you will have a very sexy product that will be craved for. HDV will have limited time on the market as tape formats disappear. Maybe Newtek don't have to make these boards/connections, perhaps third party HD-SDI and firewire stuff could be bought off the shelf and just be compatable with the software - (compatible support for audio cards would also be welcome). Just a thought. Good luck!!

chuckd
05-11-2006, 09:12 AM
I would prefer you compare Smoke or Fire...now those are NLE production systems...

Cheers,

Thanks for the correction, I forgot which is which!

blueisland
05-11-2006, 09:53 AM
I saw a product called Decklink HD Extreme card (it was posted on another thread) and it looks very good. Could VT5/Speededit work with this?

Would it be of use.

cholo
05-11-2006, 03:46 PM
Considering the price tag it carries, I don't think VT has ever been a low to midrange application. I think it would be a mistake to neglect high end users with a lack of SDI support. How are you supposed to ingest material originated in HDcam if the need should arise?

radams
05-11-2006, 08:19 PM
I saw a product called Decklink HD Extreme card (it was posted on another thread) and it looks very good. Could VT5/Speededit work with this?

Would it be of use.


Personally I would suggest staying clear of BMD....due to other issues... Raymond what are you needing that it has ?
If you already have VT then you have all (except the SDI) for analog SD...as for HD that is what Andrew is asking about... If you want to look at hardware I would suggest looking at AJA instead of BMD.

But that still isn't the point of this thread.

Andrew is looking to see what we need to allow us to i/o HD and what flavors of HD are we looking to deal with.

So let him have it ;)

I've made my points known earlier in this thread.

Cheers,

radams
05-11-2006, 08:24 PM
Considering the price tag it carries, I don't think VT has ever been a low to midrange application. I think it would be a mistake to neglect high end users with a lack of SDI support. How are you supposed to ingest material originated in HDcam if the need should arise?


I'm not going to push one way or another...but SDI/HD-SDI could be done thru a little external converter box...to Giga ethernet...If IT based i/o could be supported.

As far as dual link 4:4:4 thou I do agree that we would need a dual link i/o HD-SDI. (with audio support :).

But I think for the vast majority...firewire with IT and storage based (disk and memory) are the main i/o's that should be done with Giga ethernet being used with converter boxes if needed...at least until NT comes out with their own HD based card, or next generation product to support such throughputs...

Cheers,

cholo
05-12-2006, 01:01 AM
What converter boxes are available out there to get sdi in through giga ethernet? It sounds very promising to tap the hd-sdi out of our new xl-h1 using a laptop. Most newer laptps have giga ethernet built in. In addition, I would also need capture software of some kind, preferably able to ranscode the uncompressed signal into a codec that a laptop harddrive can handle. (NT25 anyone?)

rbartlett
05-12-2006, 01:36 AM
I'm a big proponent for using gigabit-ethernet or SATA hookups for direct-to-edit acquisition if not for output. They are readily available, low latency and have less baggage than the traditional connectors that don't cover all bases anyway. HD-SDI-uncompressed, HD-SDI-ASI, FW-transport-streams, component HD, P2, esoteric video with proprietary wrappers on hard-disks, HDMI (and subsequent reformulations),.... So the gigabit ethernet approach is probably going to have to wait. Even that interface isn't ideal even when connected point-to-point. 250MBytes/sec is achievable but that is only about one input or output in baseband/unfettered HD video.

NewTek will surely be releasing a hardware based HD solution, probably with switching functions. This poll helps them determine which are the first wins to make.

I guess this is as much of a market share question (which is what NewTek will look at outside this poll) as it is a customer feedback poll. This is where dealing with HDV MPEG-2 transport streams, without needing digital intermediate recompression/proxies and having a decent deck control and print-to-tape approach might suit a great many in the audience. If P2 catches on, you can bet there will be $200-$800 tools to make working with that easy in any AVI/MOV/MPG savvy editor. If Red or Thomson catch on as the new betaSP (ie popularity) format then something else will be driving the NLE and switching market.

Polsters just need to make their choice, either selfishly or to direct NewTek to what they feel will aid the company sooner rather than later.

Eric Pratt
05-13-2006, 11:37 AM
I think the answer is pretty straightforward. Support for all current HD codecs is a must, HDV, P2, XDCam, whatever. Let the customer decide how to ingest their footage based on their format (firewire, P2 reader, etc). So, number 1, Firewire, (and number 5 as well) for ingest and export.
Doing Analog/SDI preview of edits sounds nice, but that would require an output only board to be made (or 3rd party support for), which is a waste of time considering it could be I and O as well, so strike number 2 from the list.
3 and 4, SDI or analog. That's easy, SDI. You can convert analog to SDI, but you're not going to make anyone happy converting SDI to analog. Better solution, do both. Make an SDI VT board (2 in, 1 out), and a switchable SDI/analog BOB, 24 SDI in or 8 component. If this is unreasonable, make an 8 input SDI BOB and a low cost component to SDI converter. So, number 3 next with consideration for number 4.
So 1 (and 5), then 3 (with 4) :)

Eric Pratt
www.virtualsetworks.com

PS, and be quick about it.

radams
05-13-2006, 12:08 PM
I'm a big proponent for using gigabit-ethernet or SATA hookups for direct-to-edit acquisition if not for output. They are readily available, low latency and have less baggage than the traditional connectors that don't cover all bases anyway. HD-SDI-uncompressed, HD-SDI-ASI, FW-transport-streams, component HD, P2, esoteric video with proprietary wrappers on hard-disks, HDMI (and subsequent reformulations),.... So the gigabit ethernet approach is probably going to have to wait. Even that interface isn't ideal even when connected point-to-point. 250MBytes/sec is achievable but that is only about one input or output in baseband/unfettered HD video.

NewTek will surely be releasing a hardware based HD solution, probably with switching functions. This poll helps them determine which are the first wins to make.

I guess this is as much of a market share question (which is what NewTek will look at outside this poll) as it is a customer feedback poll. This is where dealing with HDV MPEG-2 transport streams, without needing digital intermediate recompression/proxies and having a decent deck control and print-to-tape approach might suit a great many in the audience. If P2 catches on, you can bet there will be $200-$800 tools to make working with that easy in any AVI/MOV/MPG savvy editor. If Red or Thomson catch on as the new betaSP (ie popularity) format then something else will be driving the NLE and switching market.

Polsters just need to make their choice, either selfishly or to direct NewTek to what they feel will aid the company sooner rather than later.

Hi Richard,

I agree and disagree...from my point of view why develope around legacy technology when the path is very clear that we are going down the IT pathway. Now I'm not saying not to support HD-SDI...but to do it in a way that will leverage now and the future. I agree that NT must be working on HD-SDI hardware for switching etc...but read Andrew's post again...it is about POST production...not LIVE. So we are not looking to be switching this i/o...but as only single stream input and output...and for that let's break the chain of being limited to the desktop and allow laptops, etc... into the mix. Think of this not only as in the edit suite but also for location shoots and edits. For me there is NO question that we need to support firewire i/o...to support P2, XDcamHD, and Hard drives....but I would add to this Giga ethernet support which IS being used by the latest gen of cameras...and "WILL" become more common in the near future. To be able to then hook up HD-SDI or analog HD, etc.. with a converter into the Giga ethernet port make SO much more sense...than to be forced to buy some additional video hardware card that only works with desktop machines...this helps to free production to use and scale depending on their needs. I do feel that NT will come out with their own hardware...but I'm thinking of NOW as well as the future.

The IT path would allow them to hit most of the markets now and build the future at the same time.

Going only with HD-SDI will be a costly mistake IMHO.
Understand that I want to work with dual link 4:4:4 material..which can not be supported thru giga ethernet at this time...but the majority of the market is not dual link. and if you need that power then use another system (until NT can get their next Gen gear out). to Digitize most of the AJA's and BMD's come with i/o software to get material into the system....then Speed Edit can work with it. You can then view it from the Graphic's card output.

I guess that most are not understanding that the OLD way of requiring a seperate hardware card for i/o, along with software to run it...and that the hardware was required to even process the video etc...

Those days are GONE ! The processing now is in SOFTWARE...those card are now literally just i/o. Which now can be done without them even...why do you need a seperate video card to view the output (especially of HD material)...??

The answer is you don't. and you can use analog HD or DVI outputs to monitors and even to decks, or other gear.
So why do you need to buy another video card?

I think we've all been brain washed from the past and the hype like those of BMD keep feeding us...even as low of prices as BMD...the fact is you don't need them any more just to POST something.

This is HUGE to get wrapped around on...but soon our off the shelf systems will BE our HD systems...for home and professionally...What do you think the industry is using to do HD with? Dedicated small computers with displays.

Look at the new Silicon Imaging camera...the chip block fits into your hand...has a giga ethernet output and then goes into a computer (in the camera body). That is the next Gen type cameras....that is also what Panasonic is doing with the P2 line of camera's as well.

So as strange as IT is and there some quirks to get worked out... that "IS" the way this industry is going whether you like it or not. IT isn't just the future...but IT is here now !

Cheers,

rbartlett
05-13-2006, 12:34 PM
I wouldn't say you were disagreeing with me there Ray! I'm anticipating NewTek to have almost chosen their next gen kit. Talk of multiple input HD-SDI on a PCIexpress card running on a red Tricaster HD dual-type Opteron makes me think that this is the next plan for HD device support where it isn't firewire or "IT storage" based. This has in my mind only be countered by the gossip that NewTek have been trying out some other homegrown technology too.

I see exactly where Eric is coming from, practical and getting down to the immediate viable options. Pick them off like targets.

However I also see your suggestion as both strategic and tactical. Using Gigabit ethernet for drilling down to reach the formats otherwise restricted to tape or "hose" based mediums is ideal. Quite whether NewTek need to match the same transport protocol as Silicon Imaging would be another matter. Whether they used an ethernet-LLC or an IP-transport (possibly WAN routable) is again purely down to their preference. One might assume that this would only be a point-to-point connection to enforce an isochronous approach to dishing out bandwidth reliably per node. There is also the question as to whether such an GigE conversion pack would compress to NT25 or leave it uncompressed but take in 4:4:4 and subsamble it to 4:2:2 with a true lossless compression and either an AVI envelope, an MXF or a MOV envelope depending on whichever is the most native for SpeedEDIT (!)?

The interesting notion on the post approach to using gigabit ethernet modules, is that when NewTek want to do switching for live or flexible acquisition NLE work, they could simply develop a 4 port gigabit ethernet NIC. Or a ten-gigethernet NIC with a non-blocking 1Gb presenting slave switch (a la SX84). Connectivity is more than about adopting broadcast standards throughout all parameters and interfacing, isn't it!

R&D costs, and a system has to be stable throughout when you use a cross-bar video switch and digitising card like a VT. So the risk might be better with PCIexpress (which can work isochronously, like PCI-X but unlike PCI32-66MHz). Especially with a GigEth approach, if it isn't too late for our favorite supplier? Not that this is the first mention or an industry-first like you point out, so/but they may have ruled this out very much earlier.....