Frankencam

I love it...in. Few generation from now when the bandwidth gets to around 250mbps...there will be great options! Fantastic!

Is there a c mount version planned?

Ok we're at 7% of the way there. 55 days to go.

Does anyone have suggestions of where to talk about this to get it noticed a little more? The current rate of response SHOULD get the funding in place over the next 57 days, but I'd like to improve it's chances!

Thanks Matt! I'm hoping to be 10% there by Monday! So feel free to let other people know about it!

Kabuto it's a good idea, and I had thought about it, but since I am not sure which of the two camera heads would be judged to be the best, it made it impossible to price! Believe me, I tried to figure out a way - it's how the really successful campaigns get so high...by providing shipping units. It's also how campaigns fail after the fact, when they realize their pricing was too low.   This campaign is unconventional...in that it was planned to minimize risk (as Leang concisely pointed out). The numbers of kickstarter campaigns that havent delivered (in all categories, not just electronics) is astounding.   My primary goal was in making people not regret their decision to join. I may retool the perks this weekend. I could add a naysayer category...for people who just dont believe it will work, and would like to go on record as thinking the idea is nonsense. I kid.

I know they will. I'm 10% of the way there. I like looking at things positively. I didn't begin the project to be an adventurer, but to tart a community of like minded individuals. Into complaining about bmcc availability...just stating a simple fact. As far as the keyboard...I'm pretty good at using one...I like the interface mostly because it stays constant over time. The biggest problem with building cameras that you sell to people would be liability, not software writing. That's the true nightmare. Hey, I'm glad you're offering your thoughts...combative responses are the norm when it comes to people having any sort of unconventional vision these days. And yes, it is risky. What isn't? I choose to be positive, I can't control how others decide to look at things! I have seen the footage from these cameras...since indiegogo funds as you go, I'm going to buy the camera as soon as the funds hit$1500, then there will be footage.

You're right in that filmmaking is very different from image quality. The classics of the black and white era were made with tech that looks ancient to us now. That being said, hollywood moved on from that tech as well. This project isn't necessarily aimed at people who are filmmakers for their full time jobs, at least not yet. Investing is definitely a risk, and I wouldn't want anyone to spend 5$ and feel cheated. Some people had to spend $2500 to feel cheated...I'm not a fan of doing anything but what the project states...seeing if a camera constructed from a machine vision camera can deliver quality raw files for use in post.   Trust me, there are a LOT of people who are still laughing at BMCC and DLSR filmmakers as unserious amateurs. Those people were short sighted and elitist. The DIY community (sorry for co-opting the term Bruno) is neither of those things. It's about experimentation, but in a controlled way that risks little to the individual. Shared risk - it's a more sensible approach to the unknown.   Personally I think a good round of Hitchcock would serve most people well when it comes to filmmaking...but then I'm biased. Thanks for getting into the conversation Leang...the more the merrier! Regards, Jarrett

I had overlooked the technicolor profile...thanks for pointing that out!

I wasn't aware that the RAW recording was at a 24 or 30 fps rate...I thought that it was lower. And I thought that it was relegated to the timelapse function. I also thought that the cineform RAW was basically a transcoding that happened in protune, but that did not actually create the same quality of footage as a native raw recording. I'm checking their site to see if that's the case or not. It does say that the camera (the 399 version) tops out at 45 mbps, and that seems a little low for true raw recording. I'd love to be wrong...I think these are great cameras.

These are good questions. There are going to be alternatives to any new project...the MkIII is one...but all of the reports I have seen on it have been that it did not live up to the expectations related to the performance of the MkII. The ximea camera does have a 1" sensor (on the cmosis 4000 version) that is a square sensor. The cmosis 2000 version is basically the same 2048 pixel wide sensor with at roughly half the height. The pixels are the same 5.5um.   Let's be cordial guys. This isn't a project about making a product that can compete with a foreign assembly line...it's just something to give people options. The point about rebuying monitors each time you buy a camera is a good one, though. Over time, there can be a cost savings.

Yeah if go pro did this it would become instant gold. They just need to build a superflat profile into the camera. "Faux Raw"

It's good practice! I've decided to update the video once a week, to let people know what's going on and fine tune the presentation. Contributions have reached $290 now...I definitely think 10% by Monday is doable.

Basically this is the way I see it:   There are people who would build their own camera if someone could show them that it is going to give them the result that they want. But those people aren't willing to take that risk on their own. Those same people would probably would not mind settling that argument in their mind by putting out a minimal investment ($5 in this case) to see if these small cameras can in fact produce or not. There are a lot of people who bought a $2500 camera , sight unseen, that still has not shipped. when I saw the footage coming from the BMCC, I loved it. I went to their website to buy one. They weren't available. I looked on ebay...they were $4500.   DIY maybe a term you and I don't agree on. When I think of putting a 1" cube camera together with a capture system and a lens and an audio capture solution - that says DIY to me. You make great points, of course, but as I said, this isn't probably going to be aimed at the BMCC target...those guys have likely pre-ordered already. This is for people who think that in the long run, we may be able to out these things together on our own, and do it in a short time. Most DIY projects I have seen involve combining known pieces of equipment into a design that the parts were not originally intended for. I think this fits that bill.   People would have choices in camera heads. There are hundreds available. finding one that hits all of the important specs is difficult, though. I think the ximea fits the bill. The software is not proprietary...it can use most name brands, including the 950$ pt. grey usb 3 flea!   Most of these cameras come with a rudimentary sdk that will allow raw image capture. Theoretically, you could get in the game with only the $950 investment from Pt. grey. Their tech person told me verbatim that the free sdk software would captuer dng that are editable in Premiere. I am not totally sure they are correct on this, as I have heard reports to the contrary. But the fundraiser was designed to source two to three sensors, and find out the answer to that question. Maybe we DONT need the $1000 capture software after all...but there is a fallback, and that software is very robust and can handle 3d/multi camera capture, which will be beyond the scope of most sdk/homebrew products.   The bit about the holiday was a joke. Sometimes I forget that text carries no body language or tone with it. I will strive to be more clear in this regard.   The manual is a perk...a reward for backing a project that someone thinks is worthwhile. If people are willing to help out...I think it's nice to give them something back!   I do appreciate your feedback...it helps me fine tune my message. With luck we should be at 10% funding by Monday.

I am hoping people will build new front ends for cameras like this, but rather than trying to add development of a touchscreen interface (to a monitor that would definitely NOT have focus peaking) I opted to solve it with a 20$ mini keyboard with a track point. Sometimes you can lose track of your final goal (fantastic imagery) and get sidelined by something like this...I chose not to. There would be ample room for people to homebrew front ends for a system like this as well.

No, the computer is controlled by a mini keyboard. A touch interface could be used, but it would push the price out of the range for an entry product. Once people see that the camera is capable of the quality they desire, they will find all sorts of ways to control it. The capture software is fully able to use macros though, so the mini keyboard can map the function keys for all sorts of purposes.   There is some confusion when I say "sensor" and "camera". That is my fault for not being clear. The ximea cameras use the cmosis sensors. When you upgrade the "unit" for lack of a better term, you would swap the camera, not the sensor. These cameras are 1.25" cubes! Remember this is the ideal camera sensor, and it costs $1500. There is a fallback camera sensor that costs $1000, if the project does not gain full funding. I would prefer the ximea because the pixels are 2x-3x the size (need to dig out the calculator to get an exact measurement) of the cheaper camera sensor, and the ximea is global shutter as opposed to the rolling shutter of the cheaper version. Also, the workanship on the ximea is amazing!   And, thank you for the questions! The smallhd serves two purposes beyond the obvious one of monitoring: A) the mounts on the sides let you mount the camera head on a magic arm so you can aim it however you want. B) the focus peaking will let you check focus ;)   Of course you could use a cheaper lilliput or whatever you already have on hand, but SmallHD has kindly lent me a monitor for the build phase of the project! Great guys, and just north of me across the NC border!

Ok, I've been told my perks (rewards) need refinement. Anybody got any suggestions?

Markm, the software in question is already capable (and built specifically) to handle multi-camera setups! And, like I said, I would never try to be a competitor to Black Magic...they are a fine company with a good product. But getting one is very difficult, and will be for quite a time, I think. Plus this camera can delete clips in camera, as well as format a drive. As far as I know, the BMCC cannot surf vimeo, or post to twitter, either :P

Hi markm! Like you said, cables are a problem. The initial goal here is to prove to people that the camera that you can buy for $1000-$1500 can provide fantastic image quality, even in comparison to the other commercial offerings. Once that matter is settled, there are a number of ways to deal with the recording.   1) Laptop - this is good in controlled settings, like studios, greenscreen setups, high speed recording 2) Mini PC - these are as small as 4"x4" and in that case, your hdmi cable only needs to be 2"-3" long, as the pc would be reverse mounted to the monitor (I suggest smallhd monitors as they have the accessory arms for articulated arms (magic arms, friction arms) on the sides, bottom, and top. From there I would mount the camera to the top of the monitor via a friction arm, for the ultimate in camera aiming possibilities...straight up, straight down, and anywhere in between.   The laptop provides it's own power. The mini pc would need a battery pack like a tekkeon that would fit in a carrier bag or in a backpack. Still the whole package would be smaller than many dlsr setups. i am going to experiment with a steadicam that mounts the battery pack as well. The smallhd monitor receives it's power from a canon style battery, so the tekkeon battery pack would only be tasked with powering the i3 mini pc, which, having only an mSata hard drive, and integrated hd 4000 (dont laugh, it's the same graphics in a macbook pro retina!) is very low power draw. The camera itself only draws 1.8w off the battery!   So, since this is the beginning of a new concept in cameras, we start with image quality first, then move towards portability. Thanks for reading about the project! I just had an email of someone promising $200, so that puts the project at 5% funded in a little over 2 days!

I think the idea is great. But something about the extended timeline makes me wonder. We can build cameras now. The ximea are up to the task. I'm sure the delay has to do with writing capture software, at least in part. I just don't think I would rely on open source software...what if your main programmer suddenly can't continue because of their day job? The reason I'm ok paying half the price of the camera software is because I know these guys livelihoods are depending on it being very good and very robust. I hope they succeed but I believe you can build a great cam for $2500 that you can upgrade to state of the art every three or four years for an additional $1500. It would make sense or them to delay to reduce their overhead per camera...they'll need the margin to build infrastructure. I just don't really think we absolutely have to have that infrastructure. I wish them well, though. There needs to be competition even in open standards!

So should I retool the perks, remove the giveaways, and simply label it as a fact finding experiment?

Thanks Zaz. I was hoping other people could see the potential. Now it's up to us to convert others!

I will think a lot about what you have said. You make excellent points.   I looked into the flea. It would work, but the pixels are very small compared to the cmosis. It is actually a cmosis sensor in a ximea camera. Another problem with the flea is that you cant get the 4K to 24 fps. You CAN get 3K appx at 24-40. So remember that 4K is merely a preview of where we are headed with these sensors. It's very close.   I wanted to do this project to prove to people they could make their own camera. As you probably know, the 3000$ cameras are hard to get, or have not appeared at all. I was hoping to show a prototype that would encourage people to make the initial high investments in the software and camera sensors. I believe that in the long run, these are much cheaper to operate.   Yes, it is a different approach to other crowdfunded cameras. I had hoped that would be a benefit. They kick in 5$, read the book, watch the footage, and realize they can get into RAW shooting without having to wait on pre-ordered cameras that may never arrive or back ordered cameras.   Like I said, if no one is interested in the next few days, I will pull the plug. If you want to know the camera that is going into it, go to Ximea.com and look at their USB 3 cameras. It is quality workmanship.   Thanks for your comments! Jarrett

In response to another question in another forum...How fast can the camera shoot? 600fps at VGA and 90fps at 4Mpix resolutions, though these are not raw, of course.

Thanks for reading Bruno! I have seen that camera when I was researching this project. Something tells me the rental price would be more than the price to build your own! But, yes, it was one thing that led me to believe that this was possible. I have no interest in selling cameras. I am hugely interested in building a community of people that use modular cameras. I think it's the most cost effective way to stay in the game. Machine vision sensors are often higher tech than consumer sensors, or at least the high end sensors seem to find their way into industrial cameras before they hit the consumer arena. Moving to 4K with this camera would simply mean swapping a head (figure 2k$ in 18 months) and adding a boatload of external hard drives :)