[PLUG-AV] Cameras : getting urgent now.

[Nick Bannon]

On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 02:55:07PM +0800, James Bromberger wrote:
[...]
> > I think that's precisely what we need to quote for, because I can't find
> > good value alternatives. So we need experimental alternatives.
> Saying "experimental" may not be reassuring for a grant. Hence staying
> to the proven track... if possible...

If possible is the key - we've proven that it isn't possible, that the
best value we can get for a IEEE 1394 camcorder is $888 (including GST)
each for three end-of-life'd Canon HV40's. If we want reproducible
non-EOL'ed gear, it's going to cost more; in the range $1500-$5700 each.

On the bright side - Canon HV40's do SD-DV, HDV _and_ HDMI out. Do
they have a battery eliminator included, or do we need that too?

We do need a line item for assorted cables, otherwise we will be forced
to pay for them as required, without being funded by the grant. (More
likely after they're required, which is typical, but irritating)

[...]
> Why get a Fury (to capture HDMI to Twinpact to PC), when you have HDMI
> capture with the Blackmagic Shuttle above (HDMI direct to PC, no
> Twinpact required?)?

Exactly. The Fury gives us a low CPU known working capture option for
HDMI from cameras and HDCP-producing consumer electronics, with a few
manual switch overides that could come in handy.

Direct HDMI capture doesn't give us any of that, but it's hopefully a
workable preferred option for future new equipment.

Nick.

-- 
   Nick Bannon   | "I made this letter longer than usual because
nick-sig at rcpt.to | I lack the time to make it shorter." - Pascal