Re: Delivering our work to Producers wo Tape a work flow?.

This is a very interesting discussion and I'm glad to see it addressed here.

At Silicon Imaging, we've partnered with CineForm not only because we feel they provide superior technology that would cost a significant amount of money to reproduce in quality using a tape workflow (basically one would need something like HDCAM-SR to equal or exceed the quality of CineForm's wavelet 10-bit codec, and that's not cheap), but they also provide a codec that has been developed primarily for multi-generation post-production use, and as a result has not been restricted to the limitations that tape-based codecs were created to operate in . . . basically low-fixed bit-rates and one-time aquisition-to-compression cycles (not created for multi-generational use in a post environment).

DV started a revolution where we had the first "native" editing systems come to market that could digitzie the stream from the camera, and without recompression, edit that footage in a cuts-only-fashion and dump back to tape a clean digital copy. Of course adding an effect or transition, etc. would create a recompression cycle. Same situation with exporting and doing an effect in RGB space using a program like After Effects, etc. You have to go back through a recompression cycle.

Now we're in a time where there are a myriad of formaats and a myrad of ways to get those formats into a system. At Silicon Imaging, our main goal was to provide a cinema-class codec and camera system that could deliver the utmost quality that the camera head could deliver in a cost-concious system. While a great aquisition format, asking small indie production houses to edit in 4:4:4 uncompressed RGB at 2K resolutions is no small feat and requires lots of storage and disk-bandwidth. We could have created our own codec system, but that would have simply added to the confusion in the marketplace between compeiting codec systems.

CineForm and their RAW codec, provide a directly editable codec system that works on both platforms in both QT and AVI formats (QT betas will be available in the coming months), and on both Mac and PC. It's not a custom codec that doesn't have support from the editing community . . . instead you can shoot with the camera, capture to a relatively low-data-rate codec that is running at 12MB/s (remember that RAW is 1/3 the data of RGB, so it is only 5:1 compression in a very efficient wavelet, not DCT codec), and *directly* ingest into a Final Cut Pro or Premiere Pro editing system. The decoder for general playback is a free download (not available yet since we haven't released the cameras, but will be shortly), and the Prospect 2K editing plug-in has a 15-day free trial. Those who purchase a camera and Prospect 2K get three licenses to install P2K on up to three different machines for editing, etc, and licenses are transferable from machine-to-machine.

The CineForm RAW and it's tapless approach is very forward-looking . . . and we at Silicon Imaging are doing our best to accomidate the end-user with off-the-shelf tools, not proprietary hard-drives, etc. You can use any USB capable device or 2.5" HDD or flash-based recording medium with the camera to record the CineForm RAW data. The basic math is 40GB/hr, so a 200GB hard-drive that you can purchase now will get you around 5 hours of record time. The price of hard-drives pales in comparsion to the cost of a HDCAM-SR tape-deck rental (that I'm sure you're charging the client for), and so it is feasable that you can hand a hard-drive to a client at the end of the day.

Of course a lot has to be said for tape-based workflows, especially since they are still the standard mode of operation. While "tapeless" is the buzzword right now, one has to look at the realty of the situation and see if tapeless works for your clientel. As said before, at Silicon Imaging, we're seeing comodity-based computer hardware as the future for aquisition, and because we don't have any legacy hardware to maintain, we feel this is the best approach forward. As working professionals though, you can't put your clients at risk, and must gage the facts to see what is the appropriate approach you should take with them. Can they accept a hard-drive at the end of the day and work within a tapeless environment? If not, then tapeless isn't for them. There is nothing wrong with this. One thing to keep in mind though is that at SI we feel you should, just like a tape, be capapble of passing off the hard-drive magazine to the client at the end of the day, not be required to pass off a copy of the hard-drive. Copying 200GB can take some time . . . just like you hand off the tape, is there a reason (if the hard-drive is non-proprietary to the system) why you couldn't give the producer the hard-drive (or flash disk) at the end of the day? A 200GB 2.5" HDD right now is around $300, and as mentioned, that will hold 5 hours of media. The same amount of tape in HDCAM (at less quality) will cost you $200, and in HDCAM-SR will cost you $450. There are of course back-up costs to the hard-drive method that must be considered, but one could use BlueRay disks to store over an hour of media per 50GB disk. There are other options as well, but of course those will take investment on the client's part as the cost of working in a tapeless environment.

So, in the end, the new tapeless cameras on the market (Silicon Imaging-CineForm RAW, RED (Redcode), Thomson/GV (Jpeg-2K), and Panasonic (AVC-Intra)) are capable of delivering better quality than their tape-based predacessors at reduced operational costs, but they are doing so at the expense of breaking away from the norms of tape-based workflows, and using the editing systems as the basis for compatibility, not supporting former tape-based workflows. As a result, if one's clients are not ready to make the leap to tapeless, then you need to support them were they are at, and help encourage them to move into the future *at the right time for them*.

Personally I'd rather see lost sales on our part rather than watch people getting screwed because they ventured out into un-charted waters before they were ready. But I do believe with education and support, people can make the connecting links from where they are now to where they need to be in the future with tapeless-based workflows.

Jason Rodriguez
Virginia Beach, VA