FORUMS: list search recent posts

ioHD vs. KiPro

COW Forums : AJA Video Systems

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Roland Blaser
ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 27, 2009 at 10:21:41 am

Hello colleagues!
As a happy AJA ioHD owner I'm looking forward to check-out the KiPro. However, I don't get AJA's policy. I'm sure it would be easy to give the Ki Pro a "view through" capability when using it with FCP. Actually, it looks like I would need the KiPro PLUS the ioHD for editing because the KiPro can't feed the FCP output to an external monitor.
Open said: I'm a little bit confused as the ioHD needs the full Firewire throughput. How should we use the ioHD together with the KiPro, both using full Firewire performance?

To me it looks like AJA doesn't want to canibalize their ioHD business by enabling the view through within the KiPro. Makes sense for the business but not so much for the customer relations. Sorry AJA guys, I know you built extraordinary hardware but I would recommend to reconsider the above. Or maybe you explain the reason behind this question to all of us? I'm sure I'm not the only one being confused...

Best regards,
Roland



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 27, 2009 at 2:51:50 pm

Hello, Roland. I do not work for AJA, but I will try and answer some of your questions.

Simply, the Ki Pro is not a post production device, rather it is an acquisition device. You take the Ki Pro on a shoot to record your footage, you put it in your broadcast truck to record and playback your footage, you stick on a crane for wireless control of recording. What it doesn't do is sit on your desk passing video from FCP (although it can pass through and convert video via the base band ins and outs).

You can simply take the Ki Pro's hard drive, plug it in to a MacBook Pro and bring your footage in for editing (or edit right off of the cartridge if you are in a time crunch). You can also export a ProRes or HQ movie from FCP, put it on the Ki Pro's hard drive and playback your program that way.

As of right now, the Ki Pro will not allow you to monitor your FCP timeline.

[Roland Blaser] "How should we use the ioHD together with the KiPro, both using full Firewire performance? "

What are you trying to do?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Chris Thomsen
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 27, 2009 at 3:28:08 pm

Hello,

i asked to Aja:

"Do you think, that it is possible to use the Ki Pro in future also as an external Video i/o-Card?"

Their answer:

"I've spoken with the Ki Pro product managers and a couple of engineers regarding your video i/o card question. Basically, the Ki-Pro hardware has that capability, but it is not a feature we are implementing at this time. Unfortunately, I cannot give you an estimate on when this feature will be available."

Greetings C. Thomsen


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 27, 2009 at 3:34:55 pm

That is true, Chris. Is not out of the realm of possibility, it's just not something that is directly planned.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Roland Blaser
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 27, 2009 at 11:23:41 pm

Well, I know that AJA calls the KiPro an acquisition device. However, technically it is something like an AJA ioHD with recording and playback capabilities, right?
What I want to do? I just do what most of us or at least many of us do: I use the AJA ioHD as an interface for feeding the FCP timeline output to an external monitor. As we know, AJA is telling us that the ioHD needs the full Firewire throughput and we shouldn't connect any other Firewire units to the Mac at the same time. And now the very same company brings a solution that needs Firewire? In other words: you can't edit in FCP with an external monitor (via ioHD) and having KiPro's Firewire HD connected at the same time? Or you need a second Firewire controller, right? Doesn't make too much sense to me. And as the KiPro is nearly an AJA ioHD (plus recording/playback): is the idea to use it as a view trough unit for connecting an external monitor when editing in FCP so stupid?
My finding: It's not so much of a technical question, they simply want us to buy both units because it's better for the business.
Once more: I like the AJA stuff but here I have a problem. It's not only a question of money, it's a question of carrying two units around when one could do the job. AJA, this couldn't be your last word concerning this question. Just enable view through in your KiPro firmware and everybody is happy...

Cheers, Roland



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 27, 2009 at 11:32:16 pm

[Roland Blaser] "However, technically it is something like an AJA ioHD with recording and playback capabilities, right? "

In the sense that it can accept and output video, yes. Otherwise, the Ki Pro is like a VTR. The Ki Pro basically takes the place of an ioHD, a laptop and an external hard drive when out in the field. They are very different. Yes, the have some cross over functionality as all AJA video products basically send video in and out, but they have very different functions. As has been mentioned, maybe someday the Ki Pro can be used an ioHD of sorts, but for now it won't. If you need to connect your IoHD and the Ki Pro/Ki Pro hard drive cartridge, for file transfers (you do know that the hard drive pops out kind of like a tape, right?) then you will need a separate fw bus which is the same for any firewire transfer when using the ioHD. There is nothing different about that.

[Roland Blaser] "is the idea to use it as a view trough unit for connecting an external monitor when editing in FCP so stupid? "

No, not at all, it's a very logical thought, especially for a one man band, but if you have an editor that is editing back at the studio (and needs the Ki Pro to monitor) and a shooter out in the field that needs the Ki Pro to record the shoot with, you are going to need two devices anyway. Also, as I said before, you can export a ProRes Quicktime movie from FCP, load that on the the removable Ki Pro hard drive and playback from the Ki Pro.

[Roland Blaser] "Just enable view through in your Ki Pro firmware and everybody is happy... "

See Chris's post. He said he talked to AJA. Have you tried that yet? Instead of getting mad and accusing AJA of wanting to empty your pocketbook, perhaps you can send them a nice email and ask them nicely to do what you are proposing. Believe me when I tell you, I am sure they want to hear what you have to say as they are constantly looking for ways to make your life easier.

Jeremy


Return to posts index


Roland Blaser
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 28, 2009 at 9:30:30 am

"See Chris's post. He said he talked to AJA. Have you tried that yet? Instead of getting mad and accusing AJA of wanting to empty your pocketbook, perhaps you can send them a nice email and ask them nicely to do what you are proposing. Believe me when I tell you, I am sure they want to hear what you have to say as they are constantly looking for ways to make your life easier."

Jeremy, you got me wrong if you think I'm against AJA. Of course, I emailed them already concerning this question. But aren't forums like this made for people like us who want to discuss such matters open minded? Or do we just have to accept what the industry decides for whatever reasons?

I wanted to post this topic to see whether other FCP users have the same point of view or whether I'm the only one who would like to buy a KiPro as a replacement for the ioHD in case AJA would change their mind concerning the view through. So the idea is: Hey AJA, why not making a nice product even better and more attractive for some of us? What's wrong with that, Jeremy???

I expect AJA to read forums like this. And therefore it's important that discussions like this are possible. It's not about accusing somebody for whatever, of course.

But in case you want me to be more positive concerning AJA, I'm happy to tell this:

Recently my ioHD's composite input/output died. AJA's support helped me to identify the problem and the unit has been replaced within a couple of days. In other words: a great service.



Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 28, 2009 at 2:15:37 pm

[Roland Blaser] "I wanted to post this topic to see whether other FCP users have the same point of view or whether I'm the only one who would like to buy a KiPro as a replacement for the ioHD in case AJA would change their mind concerning the view through."

That would be true, if the KiPro was meant to be a replacement for the IoHD, but it is not, it is a standalone device that is capable of recording internally - without an attached computer.

As far as I know most DDR/ onboard recorders are only used for one thing recording and playing back the content as recorded. I do not know of any that are used for separate I/O functions.

> "So the idea is: Hey AJA, why not making a nice product even better and more attractive for some of us?"

Com'on.. the KiPRo is not even shipping and won't be til late june, not to mention that very few people have actually seen a working unit and you want changes to suit your personal wants and needs.

I plan to actually see what the KiPro will do before I decide what should be changed, since AJA has a history of surprising people with their tools.



gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Check out
http://www.aja.com/kiprotour/

Inside look at the IoHD
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

Roland Blaser
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 28, 2009 at 3:57:33 pm

Gary, you are right! Let's wait and see first.

Take my input as a topic on the wish list. However it looks like others have the same wish (at least found one further down in this forum). I'm pretty sure it's just a question of "playing" with the firmware and AJA will do it earlier or later anyway.

By the way: There is no need to defend AJA's product philosophy beacuse there is nothing to fight. I really got the message that it is a record/playback unit. However, as a TV journalist I'm used to ask questions like this. I apologize if somebody got the idea it is my intention to fight against AJA. I use my ioHD daily and I'm happy so far. I'm waiting for the KiPro as you do because Apple's ProRes is just great and it makes totally sense to offer a recorder/player like the KiPro. I plan to use it for taking reports and footage out of my TV station's video archive, ingesting the stuff into my FCP editing suite. And I plan to use it vice versa, bringing the final product back to my TV station.

Up to know I used either tape or XDCAM for this. But after changing the video stuff so many times in the past, I'm tired of proprietary solutions. By using ProRes and offering any kind of formats (SD/HD in different standards) the KiPro will be a unit that will do the job for many years...

Roland




Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 28, 2009 at 3:22:34 pm

[Roland Blaser] "But aren't forums like this made for people like us who want to discuss such matters open minded?"

Of course.

[Roland Blaser] "Or do we just have to accept what the industry decides for whatever reasons? "

Sometimes.


[Roland Blaser] "What's wrong with that, Jeremy??? "

Absolutely nothing, as I mentioned before, it is a logical thought. Your comment does not fall on deaf ears.

[Roland Blaser] " It's not about accusing somebody for whatever, of course. "

Well, then it's all my fault as I took your comments to mean that AJA was out to get you to buy another device just because they can, not taking in to account how different the ioHD and Ki Pro's functions are despite some hardware similarities. Perhaps this is not what you meant.

My point is to not to get you to speak well of AJA. They have their own reputation to uphold, and I think they do it well. When you start understand what exactly it they are doing with the Ki Pro, you will realize that the Ki Pro is not an FCP monitoring tool at this time. It is not the way it was designed, tested or the way they are planning to roll it out as far as I know. At NAB, the word was that the fw800 port is going to be used for a host mode so that you can transfer all of your data from the hard drive/ExpressCards all at once. Are all the ports there for future capability? Why yes they are. There's AES bnc audio on my ioHD that I never use, but I am glad it's there. As a v1 application, the Ki Pro has to prove itself in the field first before proving itself on the edit desk. I am not right, you are not wrong. AJA is on record saying the Ki Pro will not be used for monitoring from FCP right now, but ss Gary mentioned, things can change at any moment. The lanc/lens tap/rs-422/VFR features are also not slated to be enabled on V1 but are planned to go active in a not so distant future software update.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Roland Blaser
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on May 28, 2009 at 4:00:35 pm

Jeremy, I couldn't agree more with you!



Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 1, 2009 at 2:18:06 am

Roland
your posts make me want to vomit. This is the workflow. The workflow, that is - if you are a professional, and have the typical busy day shooting.

You bring your camera and your KiPro to the job. You plug your camera into your KiPro. You shoot - you shoot ALL DAY LONG, just like in any production. You can't take your KiPro off to edit BECAUSE YOU ARE ON A PRODUCTION SHOOT and you are using your KiPro with the camera ALL DAY LONG.

SO, AJA, who is LOOKING OUT FOR YOUR POCKET BOOK, makes the drive in the KiPro REMOVABLE, and at a retail cost of only $260, this is REALLY REALLY CHEAP. You pop out the drive, and start to edit RIGHT NOW, just using your firewire 800 cable and your MAC Book Pro. Pop in a replacement $260 drive in the KiPro, and go back to work on the production, while someone is editing.

NOW, because AJA is looking out for YOUR pocketbook (to protect it), they released the I/O Express, which is LESS THAN $1000, and uses the Slot 34 adaptor on the MAc Book Pro (they even give you the slot 34 adaptor), so you can not only edit from the FW800 drive (that cost you $260), but do a real edit, output to VTR's, or to a large monitor for the client - ALL FROM YOUR LAPTOP, all for less money than ever before. And they took into consideration that you need your FW800 port for the drive, and that is why the I/O Express uses the SLOT 34 adaptor. So they are looking out your your behind.

BUT ALL YOU WANT TO DO is whine that you spent $3000 for an I/O HD, and now, something else came out, and you don't like when your investment isn't the coolest thing in the world a year later. Well TOUGH NOOGIES ROLAND, because the industry continues to evolve, and soon, EVERYTHING THAT YOU OWN (and everything that I own) will be obsolete, and all that money that we both spent will be down the toilet. Get used to it.

With that said, AJA has made sure that the "old trusty I/O box" from yesteryear (released when the AVID Adrenaline was released) STILL has current free updates for ALL modern operating systems, and STILL works on the latest MAC, and no one has ever paid ONE PENNY for any of these FREE updates. How has AVID treated their customers in the same period of time ?

So the problem is YOU Roland - you are a whining baby. AJA is doing nothing other than trying to save you money, and cover your behind. Now get back to work before I come over there.

Bob Zelin




Return to posts index


Roland Blaser
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 1, 2009 at 8:24:28 am

Bob, definitely I like your kind of humor. To make it short: Below the line it was a simple feature request. I'm sure both of us will LOL whenever AJA decides to add the "view through" for FCP in future. In the meantime we will be happy with the KiPro as it is.
And hopefully the creative cow forum will continue to be an open minded discussion forum for PROs like you and me, even if the requests and points of view seem to be strange or stupid sometimes.

Kind regards, Roland



Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 1, 2009 at 1:42:22 pm

Hi Roland,
thank you for not being offended by my statements. This is my typical "reaction" on Creative Cow, and other forums. It is not meant to do anything but be "amusing" with my hysteria. I fully understand that you realize what is going on here. I can only assume that AJA will at some point enable these features for us (but first they have to make the development money back !).

Bob Zelin




Return to posts index

Joseph Robinson
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Dec 11, 2009 at 6:18:39 am

Bob your post is hilarious. Sure appreciate all the input on these. We are brand new to video and are simply learning and hoping to land a "real" video guy to guide us. We shoot 80% of our video in an auditorium setting with two cameras.

Two - Sony PMW-EX1 XD Cams
MacBook Pro - 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2TB - CalDigit VR - FASTA-1ex SATA Express Card
Final Cut Pro 6.0.6

Our work flow has been to shoot while hot-swapping SxS cards. During shoots we insert full cards into the Mack and dump them via Firewire 800 to the external HD

Once the shoot is done we plug the External HD into the express slot and do all post production in FCP. Post production was a killer at our last conference.

This is the solution I'm thinking in my uneducated skull of mush

1. Shoot both cameras and output HDSDI (also record SxS as a backup)
2. Video switcher to
3a. AJA KiPro (or ioHD)
3b. AJA ioHD thru FW800 thru MBP thru FCP to External HD

Three Questions
1. Are either of these intelligent work flows?
2. Based on what we're shooting, ioHD or KiPro?
3. Could sure use a recommendation on a simple, inexpensive ($4k) HD video switch. Simply need to switch between two video signals. An adjustable fade during the switch would be nice. The ability to expand to 4 video inputs would be great as well.

Any input would be greatly appreciated.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Dec 11, 2009 at 5:58:47 pm

WHy not just get two KiPros and save yourself the hassle of the switch? You can ISO the two cameras and edit later.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Joseph Robinson
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Dec 11, 2009 at 7:32:16 pm

Correct me if I'm wrong but I want to switch between cameras live. The resulting stream from the switcher mixed with the audio will give me a single file I can clean up in FCP and drag into DVD Studio Pro. This saves me manually cutting from cam1 to cam2 in post production.

Post production is cool when we're filming dramatic presentations, but when it's simply a conference speaker, I'd like to switch live and be ready to quickly slap it on a DVD.

Does that make sense or am I missing something?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Dec 11, 2009 at 8:03:48 pm

[Joseph Robinson] "Does that make sense or am I missing something?"

Makes tons of sense. If that's the best workflow, then that's the best workflow. I guess you could always use the SxS as ISOs if you need it.

I didn't realize it was such a quick turnaround.

Jeremy


Return to posts index


Joseph Robinson
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Dec 12, 2009 at 12:49:51 am

So (back to my original post) I'm wondering, based on my workflow, would you recommend the ioHD or the KiPro?

Again 80% of what we do will be in a controlled environment. We will do some shots occasionally in the field. We have Anton Bauer adapters for all our equipment. I assume we can get something for the ioHD or KiPro. I'm just wondering which unit would probably be best for us.

Any suggestions are appreciated.


Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Dec 12, 2009 at 3:39:50 pm

[Joseph Robinson] "So (back to my original post) I'm wondering, based on my workflow, would you recommend the ioHD or the KiPro? "

That's your decision, IoHD offers more options but requires being tethered to a laptop.

"We have Anton Bauer adapters for all our equipment. I assume we can get something for the ioHD or KiPro"

For the KiPro YES,
With the IoHD, a power inverter would be needed as it only runs on AC power.



gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows for the Digitally Inclined
Chicago, IL


http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

Mark Beazley
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 2, 2009 at 4:29:11 pm

I actually thrilled by the announcement of this product. Not only will it save a shit load of time by not having to digitize video, it will make the entire workflow from camera to edit much easier.

I can honestly tell you that we've spent well over 10 grand in DVCAM tapes per year, so this box is kind of a no brainer the way I look at it; not to mention it supports NTSC to 1080 recording; and it costs less than the lowest end DVCAM deck I would even consider for purchase, which is a 1500a.

And the firewire thing is no big deal, just buy a $100 PCIe or Express34 Firewire card and then you'll be all set running the IoHD and multiple Ki Pro drive modules.

I'm looking forward to this; this is going to save us money, time and headaches. The only question I have is whether or not one of these can act as a timecode master to slave other multiple units to.

AJA once again is releasing a kick ass product!

-mark






Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 2, 2009 at 5:09:46 pm

[Mark Beazley] "The only question I have is whether or not one of these can act as a timecode master to slave other multiple units to. "

The Ki can generate timecode and will be available on the LTC out port. Yes.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 2, 2009 at 5:32:26 pm

[Mark Beazley] " looking forward to this; this is going to save us money, time and headaches. The only question I have is whether or not one of these can act as a timecode master to slave other multiple units to. "

While yes it does allow for external LTC timecode- it will require that all of the cameras be in constant physical connection to each other- meaning that long runs of SDI cabling will be required and that it stay attached to the KiPro during the entire shoot.

The traditional way this is handled onset is by using Clockit Boxes that continuously generate sync be attached to each recording device ( camera, audio or recorder) - these boxes are currently used in all manner of settings and are the most reliable way to handle timecode synchronization on a live set and are available for rent in most markets.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

Check out
http://www.aja.com/kiprotour/

Inside look at the IoHD
http://library.creativecow.net/articles/adcock_gary/AJAIOHD.php




Return to posts index

Mark Beazley
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 2, 2009 at 7:16:46 pm

My workflow is per say a actual "shoot", but rather a corporate meeting type scenario with full blown studio kit style cams; so everything would be off the CCUs or routed.

Both have answered my questions though; it sounds like you will be able to sync them just like VTRs, so all is good.

-mark



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 2, 2009 at 7:35:31 pm

[Mark Beazley] "it sounds like you will be able to sync them just like VTRs, so all is good. "

Yes sir. It should be relatvely easy. The Lockit boxes Gary referred to are usually for syncing entire shoots from double system audio to cameras, sending accurate tc to all. Of course, they recommend one per device.

http://www.ambientaudio.com/products/timecode.html


Return to posts index

Bruce Greene
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 9, 2009 at 4:04:46 am

Just for the record...I would find the ability to display pro-res from the mac to a broadcast monitor a valuable, and perhaps, persuasive reason to purchase the product.

Don't know if it's possible, but it makes the product more useful to me. Significantly so.

Thanks for listening!

Varicam/Steadicam Owner
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.brucealangreene.com


Return to posts index

Simon Blackledge
Re: ioHD vs. KiPro
on Jun 13, 2009 at 9:43:45 am

So what we supposed to monitor with now apple have dropped the express port on the 15"? We all have to get the unportable 17?? Hmm
If I were aja I wouldn't be chuffed !!



Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]