The iCam, iMacs and Consumer Widescreen Video
Reply 21 of 56
October 8, 2002 10:51AM
If my annoying persistence isn't clear enough, then let me say clearly 'No, I for one do not think that an Apple digital camcorder is a given.' Maybe in a year...maybe not even then.
There are plenty of good digital camcorders out there to be had for well under $1000 that could replace your hi8. If you need a camera this year, I'd suggest you consider one of them. But before you consider a digital still/video hybrid, you might want to check out <a href="
; target="_blank">this thread</a> on the MacNN boards.
Reply 22 of 56
October 8, 2002 11:24AM
A mock up I did a few months ago.
Reply 23 of 56
October 8, 2002 11:26AM
Over at macrumors.com
[quote] Furthermore, the 17/19 inch LCD wide screen iMac which carried 1Ghz PowerPC G4 is a thing that an announcement and shipment are planned by Macworld SF 2003 as a higher rank model.
Reply 24 of 56
October 8, 2002 11:51AM
[quote]This all sounds great...... but, it's gonna cost a bundle. Any new technology does and I t hink we're talking about a camera in the $2000 range.<hr></blockquote>
Why would it have to cost a lot? Think of a replacement for the $500-$1000 digital still cameras that just happens to be able to take videos as well. And think mass market. No, it would not be up to DVD standards, but the people using it would not be making studio-quality DVDs. Still, it would be able to produce pretty darn good quality video. Certainly more than adequate for the market it's targeted at.
[quote]Uh...correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't edit from MPEG directly, can you?<hr></blockquote>
Not with the current version of iMovie, no. However, there is no technical reason (that I know of) why a future version could not do so. If nothing else, you'd be able to stream data out from the camera into an intermediate format that could be edited. That's kind of ugly though, so I'd vote for editing MPEG4 directly.
[quote]There are plenty of good digital camcorders out there to be had for well under $1000 that could replace your hi8.<hr></blockquote>
There are NO decent $1000 cameras that can also take decent still pictures. Take a look at the foveon link to see why that limitation would not be the case for this camera.
As far as the HD goes, yes that would be a concern. I don't think a big concern, however. And I'd be willing to bet that they'd last until well after the warranty ran out.
The HD is a big piece of the puzzle though. Tape is dead, dead, DEAD. It just doesn't know it yet.
Reply 25 of 56
October 8, 2002 12:18PM
[quote]Originally posted by Faeylyn:
There are NO decent $1000 cameras that can also take decent still pictures.</strong><hr></blockquote>
(Sigh)...take a look at the last sentence in my post, please. Including the link.
Reply 26 of 56
October 8, 2002 12:49PM
[quote]Originally posted by Michael Grey:
(Sigh)...take a look at the last sentence in my post, please. Including the link.
I checkk the link and only read about a $1400 canon and that most DV cameras will only give so so pictures. So I'm not sure what the rolleyes were for as the poster was correct.
Reply 27 of 56
October 8, 2002 2:50PM
I'm sorry but I still believe this is total fantasy.
From a business point of view I cannot imagine why Apple would enter a market that they cannot possibly compete in.
From a technical point of view THE FOVEON CHIP IS NOT FAST ENOUGH FOR VIDEO USE.The video encode format has to be editable (ie: DV25) since that's the point of iMovie. The Toshiba discs are not yet hardy enough for contiuous use.
Reply 28 of 56
October 8, 2002 3:54PM
[quote]Originally posted by KidRed:
I checkk the link and only read about a $1400 canon and that most DV cameras will only give so so pictures. So I'm not sure what the rolleyes were for as the poster was correct.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The roll eyes means that Faeylyn didn't read my entire post...and didn't see the big ol' "BUT" there at the beginning of that last sentence.
before you consider a digital still/video hybrid.."
I was actually supporting Faeylyn's here, but he's so intent on selling that dang Foveon chip he didn't even realize it.
Reply 29 of 56
October 8, 2002 4:25PM
[quote]Originally posted by Ensign Pulver:
<strong>The recording capacity of a hard drive based DV camcorder is an issue, but you still get 90 minutes of footage which is more than enough for most people.
The "loss" of removable media is also a matter of perspective. For every pro user who thinks "I don't get to swap out mini DV tapes? Darn!" there are 10 consumers who think "I don't have to swap out mini DV tapes? Yippee!"</strong><hr></blockquote>
Absolutely I'm not tied to having to swap media out, but I'm not in a position whereby either carrying a laptop and Firewire drive around is as economical as having a big bag of Mini-DV tapes, which gives me the freedom on a three-week holiday, shoot just about everything and then make something decent from it afterwards. Which usually ends up being exported back to Mini-DV when I've finished...
Reply 30 of 56
October 8, 2002 5:22PM
I like the idea of Apple kicking ass with a MP3/MP4 Player/Recorder/digital camera/PDA/GPS
16x9 recording....doesnt mean that all the LCD's on their computers have to be widescreen, just so that iMovie3 can work with it.
I know that the Mpeg4 DV camera is possible because I bulk import and compress on-the-fly video from 6 hour long VHS tapes with my extremely fast (read: overclocked) Athlon system. Editing them is a breeze and at 1500kbps DivX5/128kbps MP3 i will never run out of hard drive space again. (www.virtualdub.com).
So all you need is a dedicated MP3/4 encoder/decoder chip onboard the iPod
I only wish that Macintosh could do all the things my PC could, but then again, they would need a processor that could handle all the video work.
Enough Mac bashing, its not your fault they are slow. heheh... im on a PowerBook now, i love macs.
Now back on topic: All with color LCD's and a new, slightly larger case...mmmmm
There was a friend of mine who "accidentally" went into a lab, white sheets were instantly thrown over the tables and the screens on the computers went blank, shortly thereafter he was escourted out.....makes you wonder what they were working on, it was small.
<img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Reply 31 of 56
October 10, 2002 11:35AM
[quote] well, the foveon chip is coming out in a dslr format from sigma. the model is the sigma sd-9 and is due in stores within a week or two. i have one on order. but if apple came out with a point and shoot foveon chip camera, that would be mucho cool. <hr></blockquote>
Talking with a profesional photographer last week, he was comenting that the current issue with this (ie the reason he's not going to get one) is that to keep the cost down, they actually cut the chip down in size- just as a 1/3" CCD results in a better image than a 1/4"CCD, the foveon chip in this camera, and any foveon cemeras fot the near future will have somthing like a 1/8" equivilant chip- trading quality through size for quality from design.
Do you know about this? is this correct? does the size cut bring the image quality down to the range of standard digital cameras?
I'm thinking we would have to wait for Foveon2 to get the iCam people are hoping for.
Reply 32 of 56
October 10, 2002 7:13PM
I would imagine that they have multiple products for multiple price-points. At any size, however, a Foevon should be better than a similar image sensor. Take a look at the technical descriptions on their website to see why.
Reply 33 of 56
October 11, 2002 8:35AM
Say Faey...just how much do you get everytime someone hits that Foveon site, anyway?
Reply 34 of 56
October 11, 2002 12:54PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michaelm8000:
[QB]A mock up I did a few months ago.
Mike, those mock ups are amazingly good. I didn't catch that the text saying they were mock ups at first and I was totally fooled for a good minute while I read more recent posts and wondered "Why hasn't someone commented on these pictures? They look like they were pulled off of Apple.com for cryin out loud." Then I noticed a few things that made me think fake,
I noticed the text at the beginning. moral 1: Read posts carefully and don't believe everything you see.
moral 2: Mike is damn good with Photoshop, or whatever he used.
Reply 35 of 56
October 13, 2002 4:08PM
At CEATEC 2002 in Japan, one of the major consumer electronics companies showed a 720p HD widescreen camcorder that records MPEG-2 on MiniDV tape. So a lot of the things in this thread are possible.
Reply 36 of 56
October 13, 2002 10:01PM
[quote]Originally posted by wmf:
<strong>At CEATEC 2002 in Japan, one of the major consumer electronics companies showed a 720p HD widescreen camcorder that records MPEG-2 on MiniDV tape. So a lot of the things in this thread are possible.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Cost? Only five grand.
Wake up. Apple is never going to be able to make something affordable enough to be competitive with products in the same price range, especially not with a totally new product, in a totally new market that is already saturated! Not to mention Apple would never try to cut out and possibly alienate third party camera/camcorder manufacturers, and take away choice from consumers.
The only other iDevice we're going to be seeing is a cell phone audio player that has "personal digital assistant" qualities. The rest is for third parties.
Reply 37 of 56
October 13, 2002 10:20PM
bradbower, I completely agree that it makes no sense for Apple to make camcorders. I was just pointing out that widescreen camcorders will come to market sooner or later.
Reply 38 of 56
October 13, 2002 11:07PM
While Apple couldn't compete with just any product, they could enter and compete with the right product. Putting together a camera is not so different from putting together a computer froma stock of generic parts. Digital imaging is big (still and video) and products from a multitude of players continue to sell well. Saturation really isn't an issue, though Apple may want to avoid the market for other reasons. Peripherals aren't their main focus (even really cool ones like the iPod), they need to focus on hardware and software solutions to stay competitive.
Still, there may be room for a digital imaging device from Apple. Something you'll just want to own, when first you see it; something pricey, but like the iPod, worth it, if that's your bag. hmmm...
Reply 39 of 56
October 14, 2002 7:38AM
[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:
<strong>Putting together a camera is not so different from putting together a computer froma stock of generic parts...</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't agree with this at all, but even if it were true, what would differentiate this camera from the 600 others that are out there? Apple can't just cobble together a camera and expect it to sell because it has an Apple logo on it.
It has to do something better than all the other cameras and it's very hard for me to believe that Apple can come up with something better than all the companies out there who have been making cameras for decades.
Reply 40 of 56
October 14, 2002 2:40PM
You are absolutely correct Mr. Grey.