Jump to content


Photo

F900R Tape vs Flash card


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 Miguel Bunster

Miguel Bunster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 28 October 2009 - 12:29 PM

Hi,
I am shooting a movie pretty soon in the F900R and originally we were going to tape but Ideally I wanted to go to P2 cards though the panasonic deck to get 1920x1080 at 4:2:2

The production company has a Nanoflash recorder (or something like that) that takes 32GB cards and what we will be recording from the F900r is 1920x1080 at 4:2:2 at 160mb/s not 220mb/s because of the cards limitation.

So my questions is what is better. I understand and know 4:2:2 is better over 3:1:1 but I am curious how compressed is the higher color space of 4:2:2 at 160mb/s vs 3:1:1 at 140mb/s and as well I think the tape records 1440x1080 and the card 1920x1080 out of the HDSI.

So is better to go with the higher color space and pixel count at a similar data rate or go to tape?

best and thanks!
m
  • 0

#2 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11938 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 October 2009 - 03:24 PM

It's very difficult to get a solid idea of how good P2 is on paper, because Panasonic don't seem very clear on how it works themselves!

I think tests would be required to figure out what's best here. AVC Intra is a subset of h.264, but which overlooks quite a lot of that codec's compression techniques to make it easier to handle. While this is valid, you've then really just got a per-frame DCT codec, which is exactly what HDCAM is, and you're asking that DCT codec to fit a chunk more data into it than HDCAM does. While the data rate is somewhat higher than HDCAM, I think you'll find benefits marginal in this case, and the added equipment burden of using P2 might not be worthwhile.

There may of course be extenuating circumstances, such as a lack of access to HDCAM decks, that makes P2 more attractive.

P
  • 0

#3 Miguel Bunster

Miguel Bunster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 301 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 28 October 2009 - 03:45 PM

phil,
thanks for your response.

Yes I agree with what you said.
But this mini deck is so small is ridiculous. It hooks to the back of the camera and thats it. I think money wise for the small production it makes more sense vs the tapes need plus the HDCAM deck. The expenses are pretty much the same.

Originally i we were going to tape but I emntioned I would like to use the P2 deck and get 4:2:2 for better color correction range and the rental house got this other deck called something I cant remember but s like a Nanomicro deck and goes to flash cards. It can record up to 220mb but the cards they have can go only to 160mb/s.

I think everything is set to go this way its just that I found alter it went 160mb/s and as you said is a lot of info to put in a smaller data rate.

From a practical point of view is not more complicated to go with the cards.

I will play with ti tomorrow but we start next week.

any other ideas would be great!
thank you
m
  • 0


Technodolly

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Opal