iCam Proof of Concept
I've been a big proponent of a hard drive based, truly hybrid digital camera/camcorder from Apple. It would be the perfect iLife companion. One box that shoots BOTH DV video and full rez still images and then auto syncs with BOTH iPhoto 2 and iMovie 3.
Well Samsung beat us to it. These new models even have MPEG-4 support. They're ugly and Apple could do a MUCH better version, here's hoping they do.
Courtesy MacNN:
Samsung debuts DV/photo, HDD camcorders
Last week at CES,Â*Samsung has introduced its SCD5000, which combines the benefits of a MiniDV digital camcorder with a 4 mega-pixel digital camera using a unique swivel lens mechanism for switching between the two functions; It includes an embedded strobe for still picture taking in low-light conditions, a 3x optical/6x digital zoom and support for Memory Stick media (and USB connectivity). The digital camcorder also features a 680K pixel CCD, MiniDV and MPEG-4 recording as well as the option of a 10X optical or 800x digital zoom, a 2-inch view finder, and FireWire connectivity.
Samsung also unveiled the ITCAM-7 dubbed as the world?s first Hard Disk Drive (HDD) digital camcorder. It uses a 1.5 GB HDD to store still and motion pictures, as well as music, audio and data files, offering storage of more than one hour of footage. The ITCAM-7 saves each new shot as a separate media file, making it possible to locate a specific clip instantly and simple to organize media clips for editing. It also doubles as a portable MP3 and movie player (30 fps playback at 640x480 on its 2-inch LCD or on a TV screen). It features a USB 2.0 port for connectivity.
<a href="http://macnn.com/rd.php?id=3728"; target="_blank">Samsung HDD Hybrid Camera</a> Click on Mobile Entertainment in the flash menu.
Well Samsung beat us to it. These new models even have MPEG-4 support. They're ugly and Apple could do a MUCH better version, here's hoping they do.
Courtesy MacNN:
Samsung debuts DV/photo, HDD camcorders
Last week at CES,Â*Samsung has introduced its SCD5000, which combines the benefits of a MiniDV digital camcorder with a 4 mega-pixel digital camera using a unique swivel lens mechanism for switching between the two functions; It includes an embedded strobe for still picture taking in low-light conditions, a 3x optical/6x digital zoom and support for Memory Stick media (and USB connectivity). The digital camcorder also features a 680K pixel CCD, MiniDV and MPEG-4 recording as well as the option of a 10X optical or 800x digital zoom, a 2-inch view finder, and FireWire connectivity.
Samsung also unveiled the ITCAM-7 dubbed as the world?s first Hard Disk Drive (HDD) digital camcorder. It uses a 1.5 GB HDD to store still and motion pictures, as well as music, audio and data files, offering storage of more than one hour of footage. The ITCAM-7 saves each new shot as a separate media file, making it possible to locate a specific clip instantly and simple to organize media clips for editing. It also doubles as a portable MP3 and movie player (30 fps playback at 640x480 on its 2-inch LCD or on a TV screen). It features a USB 2.0 port for connectivity.
<a href="http://macnn.com/rd.php?id=3728"; target="_blank">Samsung HDD Hybrid Camera</a> Click on Mobile Entertainment in the flash menu.
Comments
<strong>I went to the link and I think that the camera/camcorder is pretty nice looking. Apple doesnt need to make it because this company already did.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple could make an iCam that blows this thing away. It would look 500 times better and would auto-sync over FireWire with iPhoto and iMovie. That's why I'm calling the Samsung device a "proof of concept" even though it's a shipping product.
<strong>It is still a pretty cool device. Very small, but I wonder what the image quality is like. What would be really cool is if you could swap out hard drives when you use one up.</strong><hr></blockquote>
NO NO NO!
The whole point of a hard drive based camera is eliminating the dependence on removeable media. No more flash cards or memory sticks or other little pices of crap to swap out and keep track of. You don't have to swap out drives on your iPod do you? No, the whole point is that it's a small, elegant sealed box. The iCam should be no different.
A 40BG Toshiba micro drive combined with MPEG-4 video capture would provide hours and hours of footage AND thousands of photos. One box, two sets of functionality with no compromise.
Anyway I have been waiting for something like this and was hoping apple would do it...Sony didnt upgrade its DCR-101 or 120bt line..which are the smaller cams...they did mention that when they release their memory stick pro they will have some more product announcements and they mentioned the memory stick pro was because of the video medium so I would think that they would have something like the samsung coming out (the MS pro will start topping out at 1 gig and eventually go up to 36 gigs) unfortunately it' looking like the future so consumer cams might be USB2 only too...
<strong>You guys are missing something...that samsung is USB 2 only! no Firewire!! </strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm not missing anything. That's my whole point. The Samsung device is a typical wintel "almost, but not quite" hack job. What's important about it is its use of a single fixed HD for media capture and transfer. All Apple has to do is put the same concept into a gorgeous iPod like case, give it FireWire and a level of iApp integration that can only be dreamed of on the PC side. That product, my friends, is a winner.
<strong>I went to the link and I think that the camera/camcorder is pretty nice looking. Apple doesnt need to make it because this company already did.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea, I'm sure everyone can't wait to download an hour of video over USB2. HAHAHA
<strong>Ensign Pulver, removing the ability to swap out storage is a giant leap backward. When I shoot video on my camera, I don't always transfer the video to iMovie and iDVD right away because that is a long process. In addition, MPEG-4 video would then have to be recompressed as MPEG-2 for use in DVDs. You're going to lose a lot of video quality by compressing already compressed footage. And I keep MiniDV copies of most of my videos anyway.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The iCam is not instead of traditional camcorders, it's in addition to. All of your above points are valid and there's nothing stopping you from using a existing third party camcorder to capture, transfer and store your DV in the traditional ways.
What the iCam will do for the huge majority of consumers is provide a totally integrated solution for shooting home movies AND digital stills in one box, with seemless transfer to iPhoto and iMovie. The loss of a little quality and MiniDV archiving is a very small price to pay for these customers. To my mind complaining about the loss of removeable media is like complaining about the loss of the floppy drive.
[ 01-14-2003: Message edited by: Ensign Pulver ]</p>
First of all define 'these customers". Are they...
- Those who are incredibly flummoxed by the way <a href="http://www.apple.com/iphoto/compatibility/camera.htm"; target="_blank">over 160 cameras</a> "unseamlessly" work with iPhoto?
- Those who don't mind that video from their neighbors' 3-year old Canon ZR-10 has higher quality since it's DV?
- Those who don't mind that the 3-year old ZR-10 can be played on a TV and their iCam can't?
- That don't mind toting a SuperDrive laptop and a stack of DVD-Rs on a three-week vacation to store the camera video?
- Those that generate electricity because the iCam battery is not swapable or replaceable?
- Those who don't mind spending $600, $700, $1000 or $1300 for an additional video/still camera when the $600 they already own accomplishes more?
Your iCam concepts sounds neat in a three-cocktails-in-an-hour way, but, when sobering, how does it make using iMovie or iPhoto any easier (not faster, and I would still find that debatable) to use? What's more seamless than now? What's "less integrated" now?You've written good ad copy, now sell it.
[ 01-15-2003: Message edited by: scottiB ]</p>
<strong>
Yea, I'm sure everyone can't wait to download an hour of video over USB2. HAHAHA</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's obvious that if Apple will release such a device, they will only do so once Firewire 800 is standard across all product lines.
<strong>I went to the link and I think that the camera/camcorder is pretty nice looking. Apple doesnt need to make it because this company already did.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Like Apple doesn't need to make an MP3 player because so many other companies do? Or like Apple doesn't need to make computers because so many other companies do?
<strong>You guys are missing something...that samsung is USB 2 only! no Firewire!! and the new dvcams sony just released also have no firewire...all usb 2!!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And the point would be? Because some other companies are switching to USB2, Apple must as well? Instead, ask why Apple didn't include USB2 on the new Powerbooks. Apple is still a heavyweight in the video department. If Apple puts USB2 on their machines, Firewire is dead (for consumer cameras at least).
On the other hand, if Apple were to come out with a kick-arse iCam that was Firewire2 only (with a Firewire1 bridge for old machines), it would not only be a cool product, it would help shore-up Firewire as well. They'd shame the USB2 crowd by the raw transfer numbers.
<strong>Ensign Pulver, removing the ability to swap out storage is a giant leap backward. When I shoot video on my camera, I don't always transfer the video to iMovie and iDVD right away because that is a long process. In addition, MPEG-4 video would then have to be recompressed as MPEG-2 for use in DVDs. You're going to lose a lot of video quality by compressing already compressed footage. And I keep MiniDV copies of most of my videos anyway.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I must disagree with the Ensign on this one. Your points are not all valid.
There would be NO loss of quality going from MPEG-4 to MPEG-2. Why would there be? Okay, maybe just a little tiny bit, but none that you would notice. You would not compress already compressed footage. You would UNCOMPRESS the MPEG-4 and RECOMPRESS it into MPEG-2. Look at it this way, if you were to take a compressed JPEG picture, UNCOMPRESS it so that it's sitting pretty on your screen in Photoshop, and then save it as an uncompressed TIFF image, would it take the same amount of space as the original compressed JPEG? If you were to go back and forth between MPEG-4 and MPEG-2 over and over and over again, you would notice the loss. But you wouldn't do that and I don't think most people will be able to notice it once.
Being able to swap drives would certainly add value to the camera. But who would buy this camera in the first place? Professionals? No. Semi-Professionals? No. The mass market? Yes. While professionals and semi-pros need swapping capabilities (be it HDDs or tape), does the mass market really need this? And would the additional cost of providing it result in more buyers or less? How much MPEG-4 video would 40GB hold anyway? Over 20 hours. And that's over 20 hours of the highest quality MPEG-4 can spit out (near DVD quality). Since MPEG-4 allows for variable quality, this can technically go WAY higher. If you want swappable HDs, you'll have to wait for the iCam Pro.
Another thing you're missing is that the iCam will do for video the same thing digital cameras did for photos. Picture didn't turn out well? Delete it and reclaim the space. Don't like that 5 minutes of video you just shot? Delete it and reclaim the space.
[ 01-15-2003: Message edited by: Faeylyn ]</p>
<strong>It's obvious that if Apple will release such a device, they will only do so once Firewire 800 is standard across all product lines.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Absolutely incorrect. Why ignore the MILLIONS of potential cutomers with current Macs that happen to have Firewire 400? How about a bridge betwen the Firewire 800 port on the iCam and the Firewire 400 port on the Mac? Yes, it will be slower than Firewire 800, but so what? The iCam should sell big to the older Mac users in any case.
Really, all they need is a single Mac model with Firewire 800. And look! They just came out with one! All the pieces falling into place....
Exactly.
Apple WILL produce an iCam, using the same concepts of style and usability that made the iPod a success.
20GB should hold hours of video, enough for most normal people to film what they want on holiday, then dump it to their superdrive equiped Mac when they get home.
Ther's no need to have removeable drives. 20Gb is enough for now, with maybe 40GB or 60GB in the pipeline.
<strong>
First of all define 'these customers". Are they...
- Those who are incredibly flummoxed by the way <a href="http://www.apple.com/iphoto/compatibility/camera.htm"; target="_blank">over 160 cameras</a> "unseamlessly" work with iPhoto?
- Those who don't mind that video from their neighbors' 3-year old Canon ZR-10 has higher quality since it's DV?
- Those who don't mind that the 3-year old ZR-10 can be played on a TV and their iCam can't?
- That don't mind toting a SuperDrive laptop and a stack of DVD-Rs on a three-week vacation to store the camera video?
- Those that generate electricity because the iCam battery is not swapable or replaceable?
- Those who don't mind spending $600, $700, $1000 or $1300 for an additional video/still camera when the $600 they already own accomplishes more?
Your iCam concepts sounds neat in a three-cocktails-in-an-hour way, but, when sobering, how does it make using iMovie or iPhoto any easier (not faster, and I would still find that debatable) to use? What's more seamless than now? What's "less integrated" now?You've written good ad copy, now sell it.
[ 01-15-2003: Message edited by: scottiB ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Tape is dead. Tape is DEAD. DEAD, DEAD, D E A D. The 8-track died for a reason. The cassette died for a reason. VHS is about to die for a reason.
If you do a lot of video editing, you really shouldn't be using your camera as the playback deck. And in fact, simple edits on your camera will eat away at the tape mechanism. Heck, even rewinding tapes is bad for the camera and significantly shortens the camera lifespan.
Tapes get lost. Tapes are slow. Which is faster - transfering a 2-hour video from tape to your computer or transfering a 2-hour video from an HDD to another HDD over Firewire 800? The HDD to HDD over Firewire 800 will take SIGNFICANTLY less time. OODLES less time.
To jump from scene to scene using your tape camera for playback, especially when the scenes you want are not contiguous on the tape takes a LONG time and causes wear and tear on the camera. To do the same thing on an HDD camera would be nearly instant. At the very least, it would be OODLES faster than tape.
After a certain point, the average human eye just can't tell the difference between REALLY good quality and REALLY REALLY REALLY good quality. MPEG-4, while not as good as MPEG-2, is still pretty darn good. I don't think most consumers would be able to tell the difference. Of those who could, I don't think most would care. Of those who did care, they're not the target market anyway, so who cares what they think?
A 40GB HDD would hold over 20 hours of high-quality video. I would think that would cover most people's 3-week vacations.
Who says the battery won't be swappable? That would be silly. I vote for a swappable battery.
The iCam wouldn't replace higher-end ($1000+) still cameras. However, it would do a very decent job at replacing all non-pro video cameras for most users. Throwing in decent still pictures is just icing.
[ 01-15-2003: Message edited by: Faeylyn ]</p>
Consider the latest trump to DVDs is D-VHS.
And all DV formats (DV, HD-DV, etc.) are shot on tape.
Yes there are physical limitations to the resistance of tape...a DV tape, if you're going to reuse it - is only good for about 3 uses without compromising quality.
And you are correct about editing off of a tape...although that's how they did it in the *old days* (4-6 years ago) with Beta.
So yes, ultimately I see tape based medias phased out - but I still think we have a ways to go.
BUT...the issue here is latency and storage space. And when I say latency, I mean how quickly does it take for information to get from the lense, to the CCD(s) to the media? This makes optical media unusable and hard-drive based media...well currently unreliable.
Although I'm sure that's going to change soon...but not as quickly as you think.
Solid state media could possibly work, but then again - have you used a digital camera before...it takes a while for the camera to process the image onto the memory card.
There's a reason why server farms still make *tape* backups - it's reliable and can hold a lot of freakin' data.
I'm all for up'ing the ante for DVcam storage solutions...I just don't think we're ready to phase out tape yet...
maybe I'm wrong...but that's what I think.
kb.
<strong>You guys are missing something...that samsung is USB 2 only! no Firewire!! and the new dvcams sony just released also have no firewire...all usb 2!!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, the Samsung SCD5000 (the DVcam/digital camera appliance) does list IEEE1394 in it's spec in addition to USB.
And by the looks at the spec of the Samsung IT-CAM7 (HDD camera), it appears to be a more consumer/recreational focused camera. So it would make sense to focus on the PC/USB 2.0 markets.
But...
who says Apple will never adopt USB 2.0?
who says Samsung has to announce a FW800 device only days after the first computer to have a FW800 port was announced?
who says Apple doesn't have one of these things up their sleeve WITH FW800?
kb.