Apple Contracting For Multimedia Chips?

[ibilly]

good points

The DIGIC 2 processor is not for multimedia it was developed purely for image capture. The high frame rates available on Canon's top models are due to the huge memory buffers the pro units ship with not just the efficiency of the processing units. This is one of the main reasons for the huge price jump between the prosumer and pro models.

I'm pretty sure it's not too expensive because either the vers one or two is in all of the new Powershot models (just consumer digicams). Not sure of actual cost of course...

While as a photographer myself it would be great to see improved photo capabilities on the iPod a tie in with Canon is very unlikely to happen.
Linking with Canon for a prosumer+ model tie in would alienate many photographic pros (those who use Nikon, Sigma, Pentax, Hassleblad etc) and would have little benefit for the mass iPod market.

I know that it's a proposal with great tech hurdles and big problems, but I would still LOVE to see any HD based device that could live-capture images. It's an interactive cable release and a great way to keep the cards empty w/o lots of waiting. I'm personally biased towards Canon, and I know taht they have remote capt. software for OSX currently.

...While it says the chip can interface with an 8MP camera it has no inate photographic capabilities...

Actually, I think that this was intended for power 'benchmarks'. I think they said it could serve as the prosc for a digital camera–interfacing capabilities–and can handle up to 8MP worth or image (incl. prosc for size, format, etc) Comparitively, the digic 2 handles a 16 MP camera...

As a digital camera user who also uses film I also have to disagree with anyone who thinks that any digital camera (bar possible the digital backs available for medium format cameras depending on the intended market) produce better results than an equivalent film camera. Digital technology still has many hurdles to overcome (in pure image quality terms)...

WRONG! lol not to bee standoff-ish, but the EOS 1d(s?) Mark 2 (16 MP Pro body) has significantly more detail than ISO 200 color negative film. I might try to dig up the article, but in a review, a photography mag compared it directly to film for image quality (both Canon Bodies, same exposure, ISO, and same lens) and it had significantly MORE detail of a very small area than the film. It was a pic of a bridge or something, and ther was a lady standing at the far end (taken from shore). In the film, you could tell it was a human like form. with the digital, you could make out that it was a lady, and since there was practically 0 noise (a lot of grain visible at same subject size) you couls see things like what type of shoes, etc...

But all this is for another forum

other forums? they make those? LOL sorry everybody.

 

[840quadra]

I would love to connect an Ipod like device to my Powershot Pro1. I could take more pictures and videos at the verious Motocross, and Automobile races I go to, without having to connect to my laptop to upload the images and pictures.

It would also be nice to watch the videos on a slightly larger screen, and with a better pair of headphones.

I know this is a LONG way out, but having a Pocket version of Final Cut that could edit videos taken with portable video devices, would be HIGH on my list of cool, need to have, devices!!

 

[psycho bob]

I'm pretty sure it's not too expensive because either the vers one or two is in all of the new Powershot models (just consumer digicams). Not sure of actual cost of course...

Zip..

WRONG! lol not to bee standoff-ish, but the EOS 1d(s?) Mark 2 (16 MP Pro body) has significantly more detail than ISO 200 color negative film. I might try to dig up the article, but in a review, a photography mag compared it directly to film for image quality (both Canon Bodies, same exposure, ISO, and same lens) and it had significantly MORE detail of a very small area than the film. It was a pic of a bridge or something, and ther was a lady standing at the far end (taken from shore). In the film, you could tell it was a human like form. with the digital, you could make out that it was a lady, and since there was practically 0 noise (a lot of grain visible at same subject size) you couls see things like what type of shoes, etc...

The Digic processor used in the Powershot models is not the same as that used in the pro SLR's. I never said the processor was too expensive I said that the extra memory buffers employed in the higher end models are what accounted for the faster capture and burst rates and in part the extra cost.
The technology to capture images directly to hard drives is employed by Hasselblad on their medium format 20MP+ digi backs, you attach a very small Sony laptop. I think one of the reasons it hasn't actively been employed outside of medium format (35mm or equivalent) is simply that having to attach cables reduces the freedom available to the photographer out in the field. In a studio it isn't such an issue. Currently outside of the top pro SLR's file sizes are well within a comfortable Compact Flash capabilities, the medium format Hasselblad can easily create files over 70MB a piece.
What I implied with the lack of inate photographic capabilities is the chip in question is purely a processor which can process CCD captured data. There is no CCD or memory buffer attached to it. A lot of people have jumped upon the fact tha this means an iPod camera when in truth all it means it the option is open to apple they don't have to use it.
The film vs digital debate will rage for a long time yet. I'm 20 so have been brought up in the digital world. Digtal will over take film in all areas eventually. For now cost is an issue, a medium format Hasselblad will produce better images than an EOS 1d yet will set you back around £30,000 all in. An EOS 1D is 10x more expensive then a Canon film SLR yet the results are definitely not 10x better. The EOS 1D is in many ways the pinacle of digi 35mm equivalents at the moment (at least in the Canon stable) once that technology has filtered down to all and the current digital issues have been ironed out then I will concede that film has had its day completely. We just need to banish fringing, increase long exposures (to the hours that can be set up with film), increase image size (not easy as the sensor needs to remain the same size) and most importantly reduce cost.

 

[GilGrissom]

Anyhoo...all this talk about the technical side of a video ipod...its gonna have to have a total redesign isnt it??...bye bye click wheel (or at least soley using the click wheel). You can't get all those fancy ichat PDA mini OS X functions on a click wheel. I think it would look horrible to be honest!..but then again im too biassed and used to the current iPod design. (With each generation its hard to see how they can improve them...but they do!!)

Maybe video...just video...but anything else would need to make it unrecognisable from a curent ipod (I know ipods have been slowly changing, but their basic concept has remained the same)

Anyone else think that if this did happen it wouldn't be an iPod anymore??...I think the iPod must never lose its original intent purpose. (i.e.: iPod photo keeps it...nicely)....video playback would keep it...not sure what else would...maybe other people see it more clearly than I do!!

 

[JFreak]

Steve probably had all of this worked out back in 1998, and has just been waiting for technology to catch up to him.

are you talking about the man that didn't see that mp3 downloads were a huge success? steve has himself said that they dropped the ball with mp3's and were kind of lucky to get ipod to market at the right time. it was bought from outside and rushed out to the market. steve wasn't planning for it in the 90's.

(at least if mr. jobs himself, as presented in magazine articles, is trustworthy...)

 

[locomacg6]

iPods needs an Update

Sony has his new Walkman
http://www.sony.co.uk/PageView.do?s...86889283&section=en_GB_Magazine_Entertainment

iT can hold 13,000 Songs on 20GB and 40 Hours Battery!
So....iTs time for an Update for the iPods...

Maybe This Multimedia Chips will be the Solution....

 

[GilGrissom]

Sony has his new Walkman
http://www.sony.co.uk/PageView.do?s...86889283&section=en_GB_Magazine_Entertainment

iT can hold 13,000 Songs on 20GB and 40 Hours Battery!
So....iTs time for an Update for the iPods...

Maybe This Multimedia Chips will be the Solution....

Correct me if Im wrong I "think" the amount of songs it can hold are using its own ATRAC format (and maybe a different quality encoding, but I think it may still be the same as Apple or close.
by this its perhaps not the best comparison (mind you, everone uses different formats, but hey!)

Personally I dont think the Sony walkmans have squat on the iPods (apart from the surprising battery life...summits suspicious there (in the Apple camp or Sony camp...not sure!) Sure they may be better on paper etc...but they miss one vital thing...they're not iPods!!!!

But yes I agree bout the multimedia chips, would be interesting to see what things Apple can come up with in the iPods with it..even if it is just under the covers paper specs that are improved.

 

[Rod Rod]

Perhaps this as simple as iSight HD. After all we now have all these HD editing tools but no way get HD footage.

You don't need footage to create HD video content. You can create some fantastic photo montages in HD using digital still pictures. Try it in iMovie HD with some pictures from your iPhoto library and a song or two from your iTunes library. You'll like it.

 

[AtHomeBoy_2000]

I assume they are implicating that the chip is to be used with a vPod, which with a 802.11n w/ vid-out airport express and iHome, pretty much makes up the grand 'Media Center' idea for Apple.

I was thinking something along the same lines. I don’t think Apple will role out a “vPod” without someway of putting content on it. I am not talking about an “iFlix” store either. I am talking about someway of taking content you recorded and putting it onto the “vPod”. The nice thing about VHS and DVDs are their portability. Once you record something, you can play it anywhere. With DVRs, you are stuck unless you want to dub it onto tap. While a “vPod” wouldn’t be for everyone, it would allow you to download content off your DVR and take it anywhere.

Also along those lines is that Apple would need to strike a deal with Tivo or one of the other DVR companies to make it possible to download content from a DVR. Apple has two options here. A) Buy out Tivo as has been rumored before. B) Develop their own DVR which has also been rumored.

I don’t see Apple rolling out an vPod until both an online store and DVR deal have been worked out. I know I wouldn’t want one until then.

 

[GilGrissom]

MacOSRumors:
Given Apple's deep commitment to H.264 on several fronts, and the rumors of a HD Media Hub device there are serious implications behind the deal. Based on the timing and capabilities of the VC02, we might have to wait longer than previously rumored for this device to hit the market -- but it will be even more impressive than we had imagined.... "

I assume they are implicating that the chip is to be used with a vPod, which with a 802.11n w/ vid-out airport express and iHome, pretty much makes up the grand 'Media Center' idea for Apple.

I think all those technologies (wireless, video, capture, out etc etc etc) maybe a while away yet (if they do happen) I think it is more likely that one or two of them make it into the iPods soon, im thinking H.264, maybe an iPod HD?! with video capture from other devices (not its own camera) and playback (like iPod photo, via AV cable or other such connection to any playback device (screen/monitor/projector etc etc). I think this may be the solution some of you are looking for (maybe not!!) It would be as easy as pluging your ipod into your TV etc set and push record, recording anything on the current channel etc, and playing back just as easy. There are MP4 players out there (some powered by Windows Media Portable OS thingy!) that do this already, so it can be done.
The idea of a wireless iPod is growing on me but Im still not sure about its implementation just yet, think its full works will take it too far away from the usual iPod interface at this time.
Maybe wireless playback on Airport Express speakers would be the first easy stage, with no or little alteration to the current iPod interface.
Intergration with iTMS i think is too far at this stage for the iPod, why would people do it? Isn't it quicker and easier to do it on a bigger screen on ya portable ibook or powerbook? (or any other portable device with iTunes for that matter!...ie: Windows PCs) I think this is a Japanese thing as opposed to a US/UK/Europe thing, given the past experience with the Japanese mobile phones etc. Plus I dont think Apple would go to all this trouble to get this iTunes phone out with Motorolla if they intended to make it obselete with their future wireless iPods with iTMS intergration. Its hard enough on a phone, let alone an iPod.

 

[Ja Di ksw]

NEVER underestimate the power of porn. A handheld device with a 3-inch screen that plays porn? Show me where to put these giant bags of money.

ummmm, what???? Not sure why this was in reply to what I said earlier, which didn't talk about porn or 3-inch screens.