Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder"to record HD and 4K video?
 

On 27/05/2014 11:38 a.m., RichA wrote:
I don't get it, how can the camera not record the images it is taking??

http://web.forret.com/tools/video_fp...gb444&depth=12

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder"to record HD and 4K video?
 

On 27/05/2014 14:44, Whisky-dave wrote:
(...)
I wonder if that's why they are recording the new star wars movie on film.
well I doubt they'd be using a SD card but perhaps the data rate is just too high to be practical.

No. They shoot on film to achieve a certain look. Digital cinema has a
range ways to deal with high data rates. SSD, RAID, etc. It's not really
an issue other than cost. And Star Wars have enough budget to shoot
whatever format they want.

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder"to record HD and 4K video?
 

On 2014.05.26, 20:13 , Me wrote:
On 27/05/2014 11:38 a.m., RichA wrote:
I don't get it, how can the camera not record the images it is taking??

http://web.forret.com/tools/video_fp...gb444&depth=12

Bring it down a notch to 4:2:2 (per the dpreview article).

"The camera can read out its entire sensor fast enough to output 8-bit
4:2:2 4K video over HDMI at up to 30p, without the need for line
skipping or pixel binning."

Still - a lot of bandwidth - about 800 MB/s.

--
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder"to record HD and 4K video?
 

On 2014.05.27, 09:44 , Whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 May 2014 04:26:27 UTC+1, RichA wrote:
On Monday, May 26, 2014 8:13:50 PM UTC-4, Me wrote:

On 27/05/2014 11:38 a.m., RichA wrote:



I don't get it, how can the camera not record the images it is taking??







http://web.forret.com/tools/video_fp...gb444&depth=12



Wow! So much for the SD card.

I wonder if that's why they are recording the new star wars movie on film.
well I doubt they'd be using a SD card but perhaps the data rate is just too high to be practical.

Like many movies, the D and DP (who often work together) have chosen
film - per statements I've posted here before - they are determined to
get a 'look' similar to the original movie series (eps. 4-6). The same
pair shot the most recent Star Trek on film as well.

A lot of movies and television series are still shot on film.

The choice of film over digital (or v.v.) has nothing to do with
economics. There are systems to record digital data streams at very
high rates (and redundantly too). It makes managing the whole a lot
easier and one would assume cheaper in the long run.

Yet - nobody objects to what the D and DP choose to film in. And the
second step after filming is to digitize the entire thing (or at least
the chosen rushes).

--
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder" to record HD and 4K video?
 

In article , Alan Browne
says...
Bring it down a notch to 4:2:2 (per the dpreview article).

"The camera can read out its entire sensor fast enough to output 8-bit
4:2:2 4K video over HDMI at up to 30p, without the need for line
skipping or pixel binning."

Still - a lot of bandwidth - about 800 MB/s.

Doesn't the camera use at least a bit of compression to bring down the
data volume?
--
Alfred Molon

Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder"to record HD and 4K video?
 

On 2014.05.28, 18:26 , Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
says...
Bring it down a notch to 4:2:2 (per the dpreview article).

"The camera can read out its entire sensor fast enough to output 8-bit
4:2:2 4K video over HDMI at up to 30p, without the need for line
skipping or pixel binning."

Still - a lot of bandwidth - about 800 MB/s.

Doesn't the camera use at least a bit of compression to bring down the
data volume?

I don't know. The above is a rough (from the linked calculator) about
how much information is produced. Compression could probably cut that
by about 20%, perhaps more.

Another issue is how fast a disk drive can take a sustained write. RAID
arrays are used to split the bandwidth (striping). Compression would
help reduce that load as well.

Redundancy would drive the disk number up (double or triple). RAID
striping increases complexity (and processing at the storage end too, I
guess).


--
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder"to record HD and 4K video?
 

On 29/05/2014 16:44, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:44:02 UTC+1, Joe Kotroczo wrote:
On 27/05/2014 14:44, Whisky-dave wrote:

(...)

I wonder if that's why they are recording the new star wars movie on film.

well I doubt they'd be using a SD card but perhaps the data rate is just too high to be practical.



No. They shoot on film to achieve a certain look.

A certain look is that it, a look that they can't use an effect or filter for is that it ? I just hope it's not the special grain/canvas look they used on the last 4-5 seasons of Battlestar Galatica, it looked really crap on upscalled DVD players.

Most of that was shot on Sony F900 and F950 camera in HDCAM.

So: no.

Digital cinema has a
range ways to deal with high data rates. SSD, RAID, etc. It's not really
an issue other than cost. And Star Wars have enough budget to shoot
whatever format they want.

If it's not cost there must be another reason and I'm not convinced by the 'look' idea.

http://www.indiewire.com/article/10-reasons-why-filmmakers-should-shoot-film-according-to-kodak

http://www.motion.kodak.com/motion/Customers/Productions/index.htm

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder" to record HD and 4K video?
 

In article , says...

On 29/05/2014 16:44, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:44:02 UTC+1, Joe Kotroczo wrote:
On 27/05/2014 14:44, Whisky-dave wrote:

(...)

I wonder if that's why they are recording the new star wars movie on film.

well I doubt they'd be using a SD card but perhaps the data rate is just too high to be practical.



No. They shoot on film to achieve a certain look.

A certain look is that it, a look that they can't use an effect or filter for is that it ? I just hope it's not the special grain/canvas look they used on the last 4-5 seasons of Battlestar Galatica, it looked really crap on upscalled DVD players.

Most of that was shot on Sony F900 and F950 camera in HDCAM.

So: no.

Digital cinema has a
range ways to deal with high data rates. SSD, RAID, etc. It's not really
an issue other than cost. And Star Wars have enough budget to shoot
whatever format they want.

If it's not cost there must be another reason and I'm not convinced by the 'look' idea.

http://www.indiewire.com/article/10-reasons-why-filmmakers-should-shoot-film-according-to-kodak

http://www.motion.kodak.com/motion/Customers/Productions/index.htm

The top grossing movie of all time was shot on digital and won a "Best
Cinematography" Oscar. Here's a list of movies shot using Red digital
cinema cameras: http://www.red.com/shot-on-red?genre=All. And anybody
who thinks that digital is only for high end movies needs to see
"Monsters", which had a $500,000 budget. Anybody who thinks that there's
a technological obstacle to making feature movies using digital just
hasn't been paying attention.

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder"to record HD and 4K video?
 

On 2014.06.02, 08:12 , J. Clarke wrote:

The top grossing movie of all time was shot on digital and won a "Best
Cinematography" Oscar. Here's a list of movies shot using Red digital
cinema cameras: http://www.red.com/shot-on-red?genre=All. And anybody
who thinks that digital is only for high end movies needs to see
"Monsters", which had a $500,000 budget. Anybody who thinks that there's
a technological obstacle to making feature movies using digital just
hasn't been paying attention.

A lot of feature movies and television shows are made digitally. But
many DP's prefer film generally (whether for technical, aesthetic, both
or other reasons) or based on the needs of the project.

As to budget, it may be cheaper in the end for lower budget movies to go
to digital. The larger the overall budget the less important is the
film v. digital decision and the producer and director defer to the DP.

--
I was born a 1%er - I'm just more equal than the rest.

Sony's new A7s (12mp FF) why do you need a separate "recorder" to record HD and 4K video?
 

On Mon, 02 Jun 2014 08:03:46 +0200, Joe Kotroczo wrote:
: On 29/05/2014 16:44, Whisky-dave wrote:
: On Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:44:02 UTC+1, Joe Kotroczo wrote:
: On 27/05/2014 14:44, Whisky-dave wrote:
:
: (...)
:
: I wonder if that's why they are recording the new star wars movie on film.
:
: well I doubt they'd be using a SD card but perhaps the data rate is just too high to be practical.
:
:
:
: No. They shoot on film to achieve a certain look.
:
: A certain look is that it, a look that they can't use an effect or filter for is that it ? I just hope it's not the special grain/canvas look they used on the last 4-5 seasons of Battlestar Galatica, it looked really crap on upscalled DVD players.
:
: Most of that was shot on Sony F900 and F950 camera in HDCAM.
:
: So: no.
:
: Digital cinema has a
: range ways to deal with high data rates. SSD, RAID, etc. It's not really
: an issue other than cost. And Star Wars have enough budget to shoot
: whatever format they want.
:
: If it's not cost there must be another reason and I'm not convinced by the 'look' idea.
:
: http://www.indiewire.com/article/10-reasons-why-filmmakers-should-shoot-film-according-to-kodak

The comical thing about that list is that half of the ten are more compelling
as reasons *not* to use film. The "trust" argument, as they state it, is
particularly absurd.

Another comic touch is that the accompanying picture of the panel participants
is out of focus and needs a major white-balance correction. Perhaps the point
is that it wasn't shot on film.

Bob