Product request in regards to Proxy Module...

[Jason Beckwith]

I love the idea of the Proxy Module wirelessly feeding an iPad for a director or client. I've read a couple of threads here that describe the need for some sort of expensive wireless router/repeater to allow multiple feeds, if more than 1 feed is needed. Since I can't imagine having a wireless focus puller, director and client huddled around an iPad, I have another solution.

How about a wireless receiver that will provide an HDMI or SDI (or both!) feed out? That way, you could still shoot unencumbered, but provide a feed to multiple monitors in a more standard video village.

I'm sure that I'd use the single feed as often as the receiver, but it would be nice on some of my larger shoots to have the option.

Or does such a product already exist?

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

You don't need any add ons to do what you ask for.

This is not some sort of point to point protocol, but a broadcast over a local network.

Multiple computers (or iPads, iPods and iPhones- any device that can view an h.264 stream really) will connect to the same, probably dedicated, WiFi network and view the same stream.

So, it shouldn't be compared with telephones, but with broadcast TV/radio.

This does have other limitations- for one the proxy module's transmission is controlled entirely through the camera. Second, any clients see only what is streaming now... there is probably no way for them to pause or rewind. Then again... that isn't so different from a monitor.

You are likely to see a degradation of monitoring quality as well- but it should be fine for most on set use.

 

[Pawel Achtel]

You can make your request here and Santa Jannard may take notice...

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=23600&highlight=my+favourite+module

:attention9ha:

 

[Jason Beckwith]

Pawel, thanks, but what I'm asking for isn't specifically a module... It's a receiver for a feed from a module to video village. I'm not sure that this qualifies. I'll be more than happy to point a link in your thread to this thread, once I find out if it's even a good idea. I've read your thread, and the proxy thread, and have not seen anything like this requested. I have been paying attention, and I have (and continue to) learn a lot here.

Alexander, so there is no bandwidth issue from multiple devices trying to get a feed? I was under the impression that if the feed was going to multiple device, it'd be like "hungy, hungry, hippos" and there would only be so many marbles floating around for the devices to grab. It sounded like there was a finite amount of data that could be distributed in the Proxy module thread. This post is an example:

http://reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=598746&postcount=261

If that's not the case, and multiple devices can be used, then awesome! (although it might be nice to view the feed on a larger monitor.)

Are you sure that it works like a radio or TV signal? I would think that the device (iPad, Phone, etc.) would have to hand-shake with the proxy module and each be fed packets of data individually. If not, then how could the feed be secure? Which opens up a whole other can of worms... Can you image some one from ain't it cool news recording the feed off of a camera on a hollywood blockbuster, just by being close enough to catch the WI-FI?

I have to admit that I'm a little out of my element here... My IT skills fall far short of Ninja, they are more like 'crossing guard' status. Getting Airtunes to work with my home network and getting my wireless printer set up are the limits of my Wi-Fi skills.

Anyway, it seemed like around page 27 of the Recon thread, multi-cast solutions were being tossed around, which had me thinking about the receiver to HDMI/SDI.

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43613

It's entirely possible that we'll have to wait to see how it works to find the best on-set solution.

In the mean-time, can anyone clarify this tech, or suggest an alternative?

 

[Jason Beckwith]

This does have other limitations- for one the proxy module's transmission is controlled entirely through the camera. Second, any clients see only what is streaming now... there is probably no way for them to pause or rewind. Then again... that isn't so different from a monitor.

That would be fine. You could leave the camera on the sticks, look over the director's shoulder and control playback through the Redmote, and the client could watch, as well... On another wireless device. Seems like a pretty good way to make sure that you got what you need before striking the set, or moving on.

Have I mentioned that I can't wait to get my hands on this stuff?

 

[Zhibo Lai]

Jason, when a wireless signal is sent out, it spreads out in a sphere in all directions. If the signal is not encrypted anyone can read that signal, much like a TV or radio broadcast. Back in the day, WEP was thought to be a strong encryption for wifi computers, until it was quickly cracked. Anyone who was in the range of the wifi signal could run a simple crack program and read all the data going to someone else's personal computer.

Today's encryption is much stronger. All it takes for Red to broadcast a signal to multiple iPads is to encrypt the signal out of the proxy module and any iPad that wants to view will need a custom Red viewing app that will know how to decrypt their encryption (plus their password or security code of some sort of course). Anyone, or a rival studio, that can break that encryption will be able to view your feed if in range. But encryption, these days has come a long way and the best of algorithms will take something like a quantum computer to crack in a reasonable time.

I recall Jim saying, either on the forms or at Red Day, that it will be able to stream to multiple iPads, encrypted.

 

[Jason Beckwith]

Zhibo... OK, Cool. That makes sense to me. If the encoded stream goes out without having to hand-shake and disperse data to each individual device, then there shouldn't be a bandwidth issue. I guess that I'll have to budget for a couple of iPads then.

So does a wireless receiver to HDMI/SDI for Video Village appeal to anyone else? Or will iPhones and iPads be good enough for you?

Wireless broadcast, Proxy h.264 files, HDRx™™, Wireless follow focus for AF lenses, Pan-Tilt Metadata from on-board inclinometers, Touch Screen interface, High frame rates... It's hard to pick a favorite!

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Zhibo mostly cleared it up, but to just to state it (more clearly I think...)

All the security is handled on the network with WiFi encryption, just like on your home or corporate wireless.

There is no encryption at all on the data coming out of the proxy module.

Anyone who can connect to to the wireless, will be able to see the feed. So, its up to the production to ensure that only devices that should be able to view the feed can access the network.

If the standard wireless network security is not sufficient, you still have options.

You can set up the Proxy module to connect to a wireless network using your own wireless router- and it can use more serious security.

You could pipe SDI or HDMI to a workstation, and create your own streaming video over the LAN. You could then apply whatever security you like to both the stream itself as well as the network.

COTS software/hardware can handle it, although it wouldn't be as neat as a RED module.

As far as wireless HD-SDI... that's a huge issue. If you look at a product called "CamWave" I think you can see the pricing is astronomical. (Seriously it costs more than an Epic ready to run with all the currently available Red lenses) I think that is technologically on the edge right now.

Another solution... if you are willing to gather your HD-SDI on set monitoring into a centralized location near video village... you can view the Proxy modules stream with a computer, and pipe that input to a HD-SDI output. Then you just use standard SDI routing.

So, using that last notion, you can view wirelessly on any device. You can also have SDI devices monitoring the wireless feed over a wired SDI network. The camera can be untethered for video.

Just remember that the SDI devices won't be looking at full quality SDI... far from it. It should be enough though for script, and the other departments.

If you have to make critical judgments from the monitors, then you either have to tether the camera via HDMI/HD-SDI or wait for "dailies" from DIT to be distributed.

In five years doing all this will be fairly easy and secure... but for now it requires IT support to be done securely.

I've neglected to mention that physical security is a huge component. If you can keep would be snoopers out of range of the Proxy modules WiFi then they can't snoop effectively. Of course with special antennas what is in range can be a flexible issue. So, in practice, this won't stop a determined attacker, but it will stop casual snoops.

Wireless security will never be easy.

 

[Brian Wells]

You could do this now -- today -- with a Cube and MBP, BM DVI extender to SDI output.

But, with the picture delay of 5 frames, which by necessity the Proxy Module will also have similar latency, why would you want to ? Similar contraptions exist, for same price point, in the form of wireless HD-SDI transmitters, that give you HD-SDI receivers... for 5k.

Yes, that sounds like a lot. But, how much is a Proxy module + MBP + BM DVI-SDI = $5k.

The only benefit I see of the Cube or Proxy module, is perhaps a longer distance since the stream is compressed vs uncompressed. But, then there's the latency issue to deal with.

I just don't think any of these compressed wireless do-hicky's will be hot items...

But, I'm probably wrong about all this.


PS- to get a sense of a 5 frame delay, just offset the audio on a clip in FCP. Make the video happen 5 frames after the audio. Does this bother you?

 

[Chad Clemans]

You can make your request here and Santa Jannard may take notice...

"Santa Jannard" indeed; that cracks me up Pawel. I think that will have to be my permanent replacement for "Mr." from now on.

But encryption, these days has come a long way and the best of algorithms will take something like a quantum computer to crack in a reasonable time.

Meh. (you've oversimplified, but given the audience...)

In five years doing all this will be fairly easy and secure... but for now it requires IT support to be done securely.

Assuming in five years encryption algorithms get better and decryption algorithms don't. You said "fairly" though so that's fair.

Wireless security will never be easy.

And that's the truth. Right now nearly all encryption algorithms are based on one open (unsolved) math problem in computational complexity theory. If solved [in the affirmative], subtext communication is all you've got. There currently isn't a general purpose TCB (Trusted Computing Base) that is mathematically verifiable beyond preliminary testing, and that's with respect to embedded devices with much smaller kernels and operating systems, meaning physical security isn't even a reality yet. Supposing those projects reach fruition, then physical security is all you could hope for beyond subtext communication, meaning cables would be passable but wireless would be a no-go. Luckily for those who love wireless encryption, there's only about a handful of researchers in the world who haven't given up researching that one particular open problem, and maybe only two of them are trying to solve it optimally rather than metaheuristically. Unluckily for those who like efficiency, saving, and abolishing all but aesthetic waste, the same scenario applies.

As it applies to Red, it's nice they provide the options they do -to be used at each users discretion based on each production; however, if the stakes are higher than Hollywood blockbuster, then you'd better stick with cabled solutions and keep an armed perimeter...and then just film that, because that's more interesting than your script anyway.