Blackmagic Mini Ursa 4.6K New Footage looks darn good.

[Wayne Morellini]

We'll see. I want to do my other stuff definitely, but this is a group thing and marketing, to keep it simple.

A high quality sensor, s16, hybrid large multi focal liquid lens, and patent pool, may not be possible. But otherwise we are talking about getting manufacturers to sell us a product we like at its simplest. Something a team can do and crowd funding and sourcing can set up and get the numbers together.

Patents are tricky and expensive, and it is not obvious you have violated one. That is why you get a manufacture because they already have licensing arrangements, any open source past that can be added by the user. The user can press to download a configuration feature options file, from which they choose the options and select command to down load them (all their doing) from the open-source host. So the company never uses any code that theoretically just might, might, some day be caught up in some unknown licensing issue in the distant future. The user is the one that chooses to do that, and the developer. The user can choose whatever option they want and whatever option file from who ever they choose. The camera becomes a blank canvas like a PC computer.

Good night. Let me know what you guys think.

 

[M.Halsell]

Open source projects tend be nebulous in nature. Which makes crowd funding not a good dance partner.

Crowd funding seems to prosper when there is a mature idea with a working product in tow and a solid timeline fore delivery.

Aspiring ideas require more lead time and greater quality of investment.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Yes, that is my thinking. An adaption of a present product by a manufacturer is easiest, requiring minimum investment. Crowd sourcing may not even involve a manufacture, just management to get there.

Doing a Linux based on a reference design requires more, but if on an adapted product then additional functionality can be added afterwards, under independent initiatives. So crowd sourcing may or may not cover such coding, but in either case it still covers a mature product from a mature manufacturer.

Doing an adaption of a reference platform requires more again. It maybe something a manufacturer or chip set manufacture might like to take on themselves or in partnership.

Using a modular phone platform requires minimal work and the possibility of self manufacture, which is not so desirable. But I mention this because designing sensor, recording and audio modules are desirable for such a platform. This may require substantial coding. But here, you are designing at least one component for a mature system rather than the whole system.

Doing a whole new reference platform ourselves is not on the cards at the moment. In a future product maybe.

Doing the case, physical controls, other unique features etc, if I decide to use them, needs possibly substantial funding for patents.

I have done a lot of substantial thinking on strategy and shape of things on this in the last ten years. I don't want to be too overly committed because of other things in life, but its here in easier form to do this. Two guys saying it is a great idea is also not a market. The market is to sell this as a camera for content makers (including news and web), as well as the best consumer camera for the price, with sales of over one hundred thousand or more. I'd just like to be here to make sure its not a more expensive mediocre product which is pretty much what happens 100% of the time without me. I've had people take my ideas before, without consulting me, and make a hatchet job. You need the originator of an idea, who is competent, to shape and form the idea and to work out how to implement it. I've got several forms of cameras on my books, but this is not about most of them, it is about simpler to implement models. The control system though is patentable and a feather in the cap of a manufacturer that uses it.


Re-edit:

I should have said, any internal coding, open source or not, should hopefully be funded. Open source is often nebulous, because they are often unfunded, unfocused. We really need crowd funded standards groups to produce desirable targeted open source.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Hopefully 13-16 stops. But those stops are not likely to be high quality stops. Just look at the HDR on Sony consumer 1/2.3 inch sensors for example. but it's pro video not pro cinema.

I should also say: If you know what you are doing, you can shape those poorer stops for more quality.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

A new home, and a new hope?

A new home, and a new hope?

Anyway, I'm desiring to move this topic out of here to a more desirable location. Does anybody have any suggestions as to where to host a discussion of this?

For the moment some off topic thread might do, but a location that has a lot of interested implementers would be best, as well as an area with a lot of interested users.