Tapeless video camera?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
It seems to me that the next logical digital hub device for Apple would be a tapless video camera. More about tapeless video cameras



But it would be a lot better if instead of capturing the video to flash memory, the camera would instead used one of the new small toshiba hard drives. A 4GB drive could hold up to 20 minutes of uncompressed DV footage or 4 hours of MPEG-4 video. No need to capture you footage anymore, just drag and drop it on to your desktop - better yet, iMovie integration.



Apple already makes all the parts for a tapeless camera. All the have to do is integrate them into one package.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 51
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pjn23

    It seems to me that the next logical digital hub device for Apple would be a tapless video camera. More about tapeless video cameras



    But it would be a lot better if instead of capturing the video to flash memory, the camera would instead used one of the new small toshiba hard drives. A 4GB drive could hold up to 20 minutes of uncompressed DV footage or 4 hours of MPEG-4 video. No need to capture you footage anymore, just drag and drop it on to your desktop - better yet, iMovie integration.



    Apple already makes all the parts for a tapeless camera. All the have to do is integrate them into one package.




    From that article:



    Quote:

    MPEG-4 and even "DVD-quality" MPEG-2 will not look as good as most MiniDV footage. You can also get a decent MiniDV camcorder for half the price of most tapeless camcorders. The cost of videotape is also relatively low.



    To me it is stupid. A 4GB version for DV, not even close (maybe 40GBs). You could shoot, what, maybe a quarter of a short on a 4GB drive? And what do you do if you are on the road and need to film more? You are screwed. No popping in a new tape. What is the facination here?



    Maybe if they could make the drives removable, but even still DV tapes hold an hour of footage, and are cheaper than any removable HD could be. Maybe for only the lowest of consumer camcorders...
  • Reply 2 of 51
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
  • Reply 3 of 51
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kupan787

    From that article:







    To me it is stupid. A 4GB version for DV, not even close (maybe 40GBs). You could shoot, what, maybe a quarter of a short on a 4GB drive?




    A consumer wouldn't shoot in DV, that would just be a feature for prosumers. Most consumers would shoot in MPEG-4 -that's 4 hours of video. And if you watched all the fresh gear videos the video profession said that MPEG-4 video looked pretty good when displayed on a TV (he actually opens and edits it in Final Cut).



    The advantage of this camera is that it's tiny. It fits in your pocket.
  • Reply 4 of 51
    Every few months an Apple camera thread pops up and I make the following argument. Here I go again:



    Home photography is a universal market. EVERYBODY loves pictures and movies. Yes, digital cameras are mainstream, even commoditized, but they still aren't mandatory possesions like cell phones because they are still usually more trouble than they are worth. Most people need a really good reason to take pictures (let alone video). There's still a phsycological barrier to digital photography because the hardware is still a pain. iPhoto makes it a lot better, but the cameras themselves suck, the exact same way all the MP3 players sucked before the iPod. The market is crying out for a solution and this is just what Apple does best: spend some time surveying the market, take all the good, throw out the bad, and put it all in one little drool-worthy box that makes you smack your forehead in that wonderful, somebody-finally-figured-it-out way.



    Apple's next DLD will be a camera, called iCam. (The name iSight was used for the webcam since it is for viewing not archiving.) It will be a huge hit in the exact same way as the iPod, and for the exact same reasons. The iPod took three seperate devices (MP3player, portable FireWire hard drive and PDA) and combined them into one little box without compromising any functionality. (I know the PDA functions are limited, but 90% of people only use their PDAs for contact and schedule management). Now instead of spending $500-$600 on three seperate boxes you have to juggle and keep track of, you spend $300-$500 on one little box with better functionality than the multiple dedicated devices it replaces.



    Consumer digital cameras currently suffer from the same fragmention. You have to spend $200-$500 on a still camera and then $400-$1000 on a DV camcorder. Yes, many still cameras shoot video and many camcorders shoot stills, but they all suck at it . They take one kind of image well and the other kind terribly.



    This leads to the current problem for consumers. Dad wants to chronicle little Timmy's soccer games, but he has to choose between good stills and crappy video or good video and crappy stills. Even if he drops $1K+ on both kinds of cameras, he still has to decide which one to use at any given time. Is this week's game "video worthy" or are stills good enough? Of course what ends up happening is Dad takes both cameras to the game and ends up taking a header into the Gatorade as he juggles a still camera in one hand and a camcorder in the other.



    Then when he gets home he gets to manage two transfer sessions with two different kinds of cables and charge two kinds of external or removeable batteries.



    Apple can do for consumer photography and videography what no one else can. The combination of Foveon tech, a 40-60GB Toshiba drive and MPEG-4 will create a HD based hybrid camera/camcorder that does everything in one box with no compromise. The stills and the video both look great.



    So, Dad archives the soccer game, comes home, plugs his iCam into his Mac via FireWire and all the stills go to iPhoto and all the video to iMovie. No tapes to swap out, label and store, and no external batteries to recharge. It's costs less than buying two dedicated cameras and is 100 times easier to use.





    OK, let me anticipate the objections.



    1. HD based DV capture will be substandard. If you want good DV you have to use a traditional tape based camcorder.



    This may or may not end up being true. Even if it does, so what? The MPEG-4 stuff will be more than adequate for 99% of consumers. It's just like the MP3 format. You give up a little quality in return for massive convenience.



    2. I like my DV tapes. I can bring extras with me for more storage and they double as a backup of my video. A HD based camera won't offer enough recoding time for video.



    This is true. Those little $8 DV tapes are a marvel and I'm a fan of them. 99% of consumers however, won't care. All they want is ease of use. Give them 60-90 minutes of raw video footage along with a couple hundred high rez stills, all in one sealed box and they'll be thrilled. Most people don't shoot more than that on one outing anyway.



    3. A HD based consumer hybrid camera is a toy. I want a "real" camera.



    You are a geek. The iCam is not for you. Don't buy one.
  • Reply 5 of 51
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ensign Pulver

    ... The combination of Foveon tech, a 40-60GB Toshiba drive and MPEG-4 will create a HD based hybrid camera/camcorder that does everything in one box with no compromise. The stills and the video both look great ... You are a geek. The iCam is not for you. Don't buy one.



    Foveon X3 technology



    Apple needs to seize this technology and take the high ground in this market, much like they did with the iPod.



    I agree with everything you posted Ensign Pulver (except the last bit quoted, Geeks will love it), this has got to be the next consumer gadget, and runaway best seller for Apple. I'm into digital photography, owning a Nikon D100 and Sony 530 DV Cam. If Apple comes out with an iCam based on Foveon X3 I'll be whipping out my credit card to buy one as soon as they hit the Apple Store.



    This device (the iCam) should be able to download it's images to the DV tape in my Sony, just as iMovie can send it's DV stream back to the camera and tape. An iPod should be able to store the video and photos as well.



    The tie-in for this device with current and projected Apple products will be quite compelling and sell a lot of Apple current and future products. An uber iPod (videoPod?) won't be long in coming, as well as other cool devices that will tie into the "Digital Hub".
  • Reply 6 of 51
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Listing others' objections doesn't negate them. You merely insist that your view would offer a solution and that it would be more appealing, but you can'y point to anything concrete to substantiate that.



    Removable storage is a MUST in said CONSUMER device precisely because the consumer does NOT want to have to interact with the computer to have a veiwable product. This is why DVD-RAM/R camcorders will take off. A sealed system is extremely vulnerable to failure (especially HDDs).



    AS for Foveon. It's a good idea, but for the application described in thsi thread, mosaics still do a better job. The only sensor that could be used would be the small 1.5MP X3. This does not have a 4.5-5MP equivalent res, rather it equals a 3MP mosaic, at best. Easily outclassed by 4 and 5 MP mosaic sensors. SCCD would be the best bet, it too can summ the results from alternate lines into a video signal (either in pairs or triples) Foveon is strictly niche ATM, and does not offer the performance needed for consumer stills in a small sensor.



    I agree about a hybrid video/stills device, but the best solution would replace CDR with DVD-r/RAM in a sony mavica type body.
  • Reply 7 of 51
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    Listing others' objections doesn't negate them...



    OK, I'll address your objections:

    Quote:

    Removable storage is a MUST in said CONSUMER device precisely because the consumer does NOT want to have to interact with the computer to have a veiwable product. This is why DVD-RAM/R camcorders will take off. A sealed system is extremely vulnerable to failure (especially HDDs).



    How about a video-out plug? Sigma SD10 has one for viewing it's (still) images. A sealed system like the iPod? Consumers want convenience, viewing on any nearby TV or downloading to your iPod (or other FireWire HD seems convenient enough.

    Quote:

    AS for Foveon. It's a good idea, but for the application described in thsi thread, mosaics still do a better job. ... Foveon is strictly niche ATM, and does not offer the performance needed for consumer stills in a small sensor.



    Do tell how mosaics do a better job. Why Foveon images are sharper. Image quality is somewhat subjective, but a side by side image comparison is still the best way to decide for yourself.

    Quote:

    I agree about a hybrid video/stills device, but the best solution would replace CDR with DVD-r/RAM in a sony mavica type body.



    Sony Mavica? Have you handled one? The Mavica is just not Apple cool, and you can't put it in your pocket. Now THIS is Apple cool:





    The Apple iCam is not going to replace my Nikon D100 or my Sony DV camcorder, but it will go with me in my pocket. it will be a video iPod for the cool gadget consumer, not a replacement media for professional videographers.
  • Reply 8 of 51
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Foveon is better pixel for pixel, that much is given. It's better out to about 1.7-1.8X, even 2X, such that a 3.5MP Foveon compares nicely with 6MP Mosaic. However, it does not compare out to 3X the number of pixels. A 5MP Mosaic will always return a sharper image than a 1.5MP X3. If you want the apparent sharpness of an X3, you can downsize the mosaic image and you'll get it, along with a noticable decrease in noise to boot. Don't use promotional images. I would expect an X3 to dust any mosaic on a pixel per pixel basis, but Foveon doesn't have any small sensor that can provide an equal number of pixels, they don't even have one that can provide half (which is about what they need).



    If the argument for a hybrid device is that it can be crap so long as it's convenient, then it better be damn cheap, so that when the HDD fails, I can replace it, and that it's not the case that I can buy a leagues better device for still or video or one of each for the same price. Paying more for on thing that does two things badly is not convenient just because it sounds cool on paper.



    If the argument is that said device can replace a consumer miniDV and P&S hybrid at a reasonable size, then I'm sorry, but for right now a small DVD-R/RAM system is the best comprimise. Not cheap, but convenient and competent, and reliable.



    If the argument is that internal HDD capture is more convenient, then prove it. It's not more convenient if you just want to drop a disc into your DVD and watch. What's lighter, a disc or the whole damn camera? If you say that direct camera to TV connection is simpler, I disagree, cause playing a disc format you understand will always be simpler than hooking up components. But for the sake of argument, if I accept that flawed premise, what happens when I want to show something else? I have to erase my previous footage to store it? If I don't want to loose it, I have to interact with the computer. If I have to interact witht he computer that isn't convenient or simple any more.



    If I'm a budding director/iMovie type, I'm already comfortable with the computer. I don't need the convenience of a DVD recording system and am more likely to choose a quality capture system, probably not hybrid still/video, probably not limited bit rate MPEG2-DVD. I choose MiniDV, better quality, lower price, default archival footage.



    What you describe doesn't make sense for HDD capture, unless it's a toy. But then it would cost. If it costs you mnay aswell make it good enough at a coupls of things and convenient too. DVD recording provides that, HDD-technogeekphantasyrecorder does not.



    Again, take a Mavica, which takes decent pictures. Now add decent DVD recording, simplify the menu and control system, tweak the ergos and... bingo, that's the device you want! You may love iPods, they're neat, but be rational about what works and what doesn't.
  • Reply 9 of 51
    Matsu you are not the target audience for this product, and nor am I for that matter, ~ of course I'll get one anyways, but that's beside the point.



    This is precisely a toy from both our perspectives. It's just a cool gadget for upscale gadget freaks. That's the target audience. Something like this, with a "way cool" execution would be another hit on the scale of the iPod if produced cheaply enough.



    The tie in (or even lock-in) to Apple products and digital hub strategy is enormous. As iPod is to iTunes, the iCam is to iMovie. (and as the Cannon XL is to FCP). There is linkage here and this would be wise for Apple to make the connection.
  • Reply 10 of 51
    Ignoring the gateway tapless cam, the fisher and the panasonic both come close to what I would think would be the killer consumer product.



    The next big fusion device MUSTt be the following-



    1. Small, iPod small, shirt pocket small, with you always small.

    2. 3+ megapixel still camera

    3. at least DVD quality cam

    4. tapeless, and preferably solid state.



    Tape DV and the soon to come HD-DV will still rule for some time as most people will want "the best" for recording those important life moments.



    What is pushing the tapless cam is really just the realization that there is no good reason why your still cam shouldn't be able to capture good quality video to the limits of your chosen flash card capacity.



    Edit in- One other thing, if it is made by apple it damn well better function as an iSight camera also.
  • Reply 11 of 51
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Nordstrodamus

    ... Tape DV and the soon to come HD-DV will still rule for some time ...

    What is pushing the tapless cam is really just the realization that there is no good reason why your still cam shouldn't be able to capture good quality video to the limits of your chosen flash card capacity.



    Edit in- One other thing, if it is made by apple it damn well better function as an iSight camera also.




    And that lack of capacity is precisely the "good reason" you speak of. My Sony CyberCam can only store a limited quality and length of video due to this limitation. Even the 1 GB IBM microdrive for my Nikon would be crippling in a video camera.



    Yes, built in iSight functionality would presume to be a given in any Apple camera product. Part of the tie-in -lock-in I mentioned earlier.
  • Reply 12 of 51
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Nordstrodamus



    What is pushing the tapless cam is really just the realization that there is no good reason why your still cam shouldn't be able to capture good quality video to the limits of your chosen flash card capacity.







    Why is that pushing the tapeless cam? That might be pushing the hybrid cam, but that's a far cry from the tapeless cam. It seems people are conflating "tapeless" with "hybrid."



    Removable solid state memory would rock, but have you seen the prices? It ain't happening. Camera orthodoxy should change substantially when blue laser systems become feasible. Then you'd have a small durable (and cheap) medium that can hold a reasonable amount of high bit rate footage.



    That's where consumer cams are going. The HDD advocates continue to ignore the way cameras are actually used by most consumers: WITHOUT EDITING!!! If you can give them a medium that they can play right off the bat, in any machine, they'll buy it.



    HDD could work for a still cam, because you have to process to get a print, even if that means simply downloading the pic to a computer and printing the JPEGs. It is not very convenient for a video device.
  • Reply 13 of 51
    As long as it's all digital, who gives a hoot if there's a HD or DV tape in there. Of course that's what you think, until you fill the HD and have to stop recording
  • Reply 14 of 51
    If it has a 6x or better optical zoom, I'll buy one. Soccer games and weddings need good zoom. (And with MPEG-4 don't even think about 'digital zoom'.)
  • Reply 15 of 51
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    If it has a 6x or better optical zoom, I'll buy one. Soccer games and weddings need good zoom. (And with MPEG-4 don't even think about 'digital zoom'.)



    I hate digital zoom, but I don't think MPEG-4 would have any effect on it. The digital is used after the caputure (pure video feed) and before compression (into DV, or in this case, MPEG-4).
  • Reply 16 of 51
    Tape = cheap, reliable, convenient.



    HD = expensive, reliable, time consuming.
  • Reply 17 of 51
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    A 5MP Mosaic will always return a sharper image than a 1.5MP X3.



    Please tell me how to get rid of moire with bicubic interpolation, scaling down a 5 mp image down to about 3 mp. Also, please tell me how to insert color accuracy that was never captured by the mosaic.



    And well all know that megapixels isn't the only thing to care about. What happens when full-frame mosaic sensors surpass the upper limits of a lens' optical resolution? The lower pixel count X3 type sensor will trounce it.
  • Reply 18 of 51
    Panasonic has a professional DV-codec camcorder in prototype form. We're talking 25 Mb data rate DV; just fine for ENG. I'm told production's still about two years away for it. My take is that if Panasonic figured they could make it right now, it would be on the market.



    One wonders what else the Apple-Panasonic partnership (of sorts) in professional video is producing?



    In the meantime, you can buy Sony's professional disk optical storage professional camcorder if you like, and choose from a variety of codecs (BetaCam IMX at 50 Mb, or DVCam at 25Mb).
  • Reply 19 of 51
    Actually, you're referring to the Panasonic AJ-SPX800 professional camcorder for news gathering that is to be released at NAB in April '04:







    It takes five PCMCIA-sized solid-state memory cards that (so far will only) hold up to 18 minutes of video per card if recorded in the DV codec (or just 9 minutes per card in the DV 50 codec).







    Looks yummy. Coming out in the spring. Probably a gazillion dollars.



    Read the article on it:

    http://www.abcdv.com/article/articleview/126/1/12/



    As is generally the rule when you see prototype technology like this, it will take a little time before it can be brought down to the consumer level. Right now, it's not economically practical for consumers.
  • Reply 20 of 51
    That info jives with what I've been told. Thanx for the pix!



    FWIW, Sony introduced their camera at NAB this past April, and it's only now shipping. Go figure.



    Panasonic's been taking that camera around the USA, showing it off to a select crowd of broadcast engineers. The day in town they were there with it, I had a work conflict I couldn't get out of. D##n.
Sign In or Register to comment.