A note to anyone using the NanoFlash with the popular Panasonic HDX900. A fellow Atlanta DP, Allen Facemier, found that the Nano when set to TC trigger thru HD-SDI was recording slightly different TC than what was on the tape. Tests with an HD XDCAM and P2 Panny HPX200 showed it dead on. Working with CD, and quoting Allen, here's what they think is going on:
It seems the 900 uses a back space edit function in order to maintain
continuity between cuts, much the way Betacams do to prevent TC/Control
track breaks. However, when the Nano sees the first number from the trigger
start, it's starts laying down TC. Not copying TC from the tape, but laying
down it's own TC based on the logic of the next progressive digit. So while
the 900's tape transport goes back a few frames to see where the TC cut off
and find the next number up, the Nano sees that first number and begins
laying down TC. By the time the tape has settled down, the Nano is 28 frames
ahead.
Convergent concurs and they are coming up with a firmware update to cure the
bug. It'll mean that we will need to pre-roll a few seconds because they
are going to create an option where the Nano won't begin laying down the TC
until the tape has settle in, thus the pre-roll. Probably about 3-4 seconds
worth. Not a problem really.
Anyways, the short fix for us until the firmware upgrade is available, which
could be within a month, is to disable the TC trigger and manually record
the Nano. Kind of a pain but that's what has to be done.
Allen was using the Nano as a logging/proxy deck and TC had to match. Hats off to him for passing along this info. He mentioned that CD was very helpful in finding a solution. So if TC accuracy with the tape is critical for you or your clients needs, watch out. Of course, the longer the record times the further off the TC will be. If you're only doing a short interview, it's not that far off. And of course, your mileage may vary!
It seems the 900 uses a back space edit function in order to maintain
continuity between cuts, much the way Betacams do to prevent TC/Control
track breaks. However, when the Nano sees the first number from the trigger
start, it's starts laying down TC. Not copying TC from the tape, but laying
down it's own TC based on the logic of the next progressive digit. So while
the 900's tape transport goes back a few frames to see where the TC cut off
and find the next number up, the Nano sees that first number and begins
laying down TC. By the time the tape has settled down, the Nano is 28 frames
ahead.
Convergent concurs and they are coming up with a firmware update to cure the
bug. It'll mean that we will need to pre-roll a few seconds because they
are going to create an option where the Nano won't begin laying down the TC
until the tape has settle in, thus the pre-roll. Probably about 3-4 seconds
worth. Not a problem really.
Anyways, the short fix for us until the firmware upgrade is available, which
could be within a month, is to disable the TC trigger and manually record
the Nano. Kind of a pain but that's what has to be done.
Allen was using the Nano as a logging/proxy deck and TC had to match. Hats off to him for passing along this info. He mentioned that CD was very helpful in finding a solution. So if TC accuracy with the tape is critical for you or your clients needs, watch out. Of course, the longer the record times the further off the TC will be. If you're only doing a short interview, it's not that far off. And of course, your mileage may vary!
