Hawkeye telecine digest?

[Pere Pasqual]

Well, I did some more "detective work"...

I came across this thread from a forum where they did some teardown of one of those electronic microscope. It's interesting because there are clear pictures of the PCB, which can give some hints:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/review...oscope-inside/

For instance, this time the makers bothered including an HDMI output:



There can be seen that, appart from finding the traces themselves, some extra electronics is needed.

Also, look at the 3 spots below the "EAUE" chip. That's a serial connection. We have 3 dots in a near place, so I bet that's a console connection, too. Can it be a different one than the one you found? I remember reading somewhere in the datasheet something like that. On the same thread they say they gained access to the console and the speed was 115 kbps.

The other side:



I have no idea about what that IC on the bottom side of the HDMI connector is.

Winai could have done something similar on our machines, using a connector for the CMOS sensor instead of soldering it directly to the PCB, which maybe could have allowed us to swap the cam with a better, compatible one...

[Stan Jelavic]

Good sleuth job Pere
Yes the three dots could be the console connection.
But even if you get the data out of it you still have to be able to set it to command mode and the FW may not support that or they turn it off before shipping the product.
Winai probably tried to cut the costs down as much as possible.

[Stan Jelavic]

Do you still need the dimensions for the reel arm Pere?

[Pere Pasqual]

Do you still need the dimensions for the reel arm Pere?

Yeah Stan! It would be great if you have it at hand. Haven't done almost anything yet, but...

I've tried playing with the serial. But the supposed-three pin one different to the one you tried. I suspect there's something there; take a look at this... This is another device using the Novatek's which as also a 3-pin debug connector:

https://lleo.me/dnevnik/2015/12/advocam/NovaTek.jpg

The nt96650 datasheet mentions different serial interfaces on the chip (UART, but also there's some "UART2" on the pinout, "programmable 3-wired serial interface"...

The USB-to-TTL has 5 pin, two for different voltages (3.3 and 5), one for ground and two for RX/TX.



My motherboard also has a 6-pin serial port (COM) header, but no idea of what to do with the pinout.

Any ideas??

[Stan Jelavic]

Hi Pere.
Not sure about 3-wire interface. Possibly one-wire that is used for battery status etc.
The test points on Wolverine controller are TTL so you can connect your USB-ttl board directly.
The tx and rx may have to be reversed.

Do not have to use your motherboard connection. It is RS232 but not sure if the levels are RS232 or TTL. It has signal-in, signal-out, Carrier Detect, Request-to-send, Clear-to-send etc (RS232 spec signals).

[Pere Pasqual]

I don't have an oscillo; need to get one now. The guy at that other forum replied and he added pictures showing that he only needs the 3 wires: RX, TX and ground.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/review...64/#msg3145664

Anyway I'll try all 6 possible combinations with Putty, once I'm off from work.

What's becoming more and more clear to me is that any attempts on recycling the Wolverine are coming to a dead end. It took me so much effort to simply solder those 3 wires to their respective little pins that I've lost any hope about wiring an HDMI output somehow. It's simply not possible. So I realize it's much more realistic to devote my (little) efforts to the Hawkeye. Gonna have to read all those 50+ pages about the project. I don't even know if you are using some kind of embedded hardware like Arduino or Raspberry pi.

Collected a bunch of relatively cheap 2K - 4K camera+lens modules (usually Sony based) on my Aliexpress wish list, by the way. They are between 30 and 70 €; I don't know yet what are your dealers/provides but this looks feasible.

EDIT:

Ok, I did my homework. Read (as quickly as I could) the entire thread. Now I have a better perspective of the project. I see you are using some sort of microcontroller that is not an Arduino or a Raspberry pi, either.

I could have saved some of the questions here had I found the manual before, also:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Vc6...IBrETPKZg/view

Some sort of web, blog, wiki or even a github repository for the entire project would be probable useful for lots of people. It's easy to get lost between the huge amount of information that is available now.

Some questions that hasn't been answered yet even after the big reading:

- I suppose it's possible to manually etch the PCB by myself, mainly in order to avoid the long shipping time now that I realize that there's a long queue waiting for it. Do you recommend attempting so?

- I have to search on the thread again in order to find the interface that the camera is using to interact with the rest of the machine. Could you please provide some details on it, Stan? That's in order to see if there are really any cheaper compatible alternatives on AliExpress and so 😅

- I've supposed all the time that the HawkEye mod is compatible with the old Wolverine, but appart from the lack of an extensive arm and the different front plate disposition, I'm not sure if the boards and the rest of the hardware is really compatible. Can anyone confirm that?

- Finally, and some not related at all: during the past weeks I've started seriously to consider getting an oscilloscope. I've went for the cheaper, chinese ones. I've see on the pictures that you are using a Hantek dso5202p, which is one of those I was considering. Do you have any recommendations regarding that?

Thanks again for the patience!

[Stan Jelavic]

Sorry about the documentation Pere. I've been so busy doing the project that there is very little time for documentation. I am slowly moving it over to github.
Yes you can definitely get your own PCB directly from http://jlcpcb.com/
Can send you additional details. BTW I shipped out all of the board and there is no queue. Can build one for you if you want to go that way. The board is compatible with old Wolverines.

The interface is USB 3.1 if you go with:
https://www.theimagingsource.com/pro.../dfm37ux226ml/

and USB 2 for
https://www.theimagingsource.com/pro.../dfm72buc02ml/


The only additional interface to the camera from the Hawkeye is the trigger cable.
I am very happy with the Hantek dso5020p. The only issue I had with it was with one of the probes.
Sometimes the connection is flaky and you have to push extra hard on the probe attachment to make good connection.

Hope this answers some of your questions.

[Pere Pasqual]

Yes you can definitely get your own PCB directly from http://jlcpcb.com/

I was going even further... Talking about etching the board myself, using my own cupper virgin board, from the pcb design, like in the old times, as I still have some spare at home... Although seeing the prices it's probably not worth it.

BTW I shipped out all of the board and there is no queue. Can build one for you if you want to go that way. The board is compatible with old Wolverines.

Thanks a lot for clarifying! I would be interested in getting a quote. Maybe in the near future I'd consider getting one (other issues to solve on the meantime, like getting an oscilloscope...). You are providing them with the components, right? I think I could solder them myself. Also I could print my own 3D pieces, too.

The interface is USB 3.1 if you go with:
https://www.theimagingsource.com/pro.../dfm37ux226ml/

and USB 2 for
https://www.theimagingsource.com/pro.../dfm72buc02ml/

The only additional interface to the camera from the Hawkeye is the trigger cable.

Nice! I need to compare them with other offers to see if they would work.

I am very happy with the Hantek dso5020p. The only issue I had with it was with one of the probes.
Sometimes the connection is flaky and you have to push extra hard on the probe attachment to make good connection.

Thanks for the recommendation! My mistake, the model was dso5202p. I think I'll keep an eye for a "hacked" DSO5102P, as I'm on budget, and people aim to get 200Mhz bandwith after changing the firmware...

By the way... I'm almost sure you already discussed this, but... Is there any good reason why you didn't choose one of those "more popular" platforms like Arduino or Raspberry?

Is the source code for the PIC programming available or is it closed?

Thanks again for your replies and recommendations

[Stan Jelavic]

I sell the kit for $135 US + shipping (around $15 internationally).

The design is fully open including the firmware MSP firmware.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...V1?usp=sharing

I use MSP430G2231IN14 due to space constraints. This one is a 14 pin dip and very suitable to application like this one.
You can get the flasher from amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

And the IDE programmer is free from TI:
https://www.ti.com/tool/download/CCSTUDIO


If you are planning to build the kit by yourself there is a fine pitch connector (0.5mm pitch) that connects to the wolverine power supply. That one is very tricky to solder. Need a microscope, fine soldering iron tip and plenty of patience.

I always struggle with that one. Maybe if enough people are interested I can get that one pre-assembled. The rest of it is not hard.

[Pere Pasqual]

Stan, I think ordering a kit will have to wait a bit. I just ordered a dos5102p (hackable to 200Mhz), which I found on a good offer. And I already have a lot of other stuff on my hands I need to solve before embracing on a new project...

[Stan Jelavic]

Cool. No problem Pere. Fully understand and I am in the same boat.

[Jason Quinn]

Hi everyone! I used to visit this forum time ago, when I became an owner of the original Wolverine MovieMaker (not the pro version). In the end, I became more interested on the technical aspects than digitizing films. I ended up releasing my own "remixed" version of the firmware (still available on http://retromania.pandelground.com/w...tal-moviemaker), which enabled FullHD (1920x1080) capture mode and higher bitrates, albeit it's only a cheap hack.

It's been a couple years from last time I entered here and was amazed to discover how the venerable, original topic about the Wolverine (http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bi...1;t=011395;p=2) has evolved into a full, professional project on his own (http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/vbb/fo...wkeye-telecine). I've been trying to read ALL the messages in both threads, but there's about 50 pages worth of discussion in each topic, so I haven't had any other chance than digest it a bit.

What I'm asking for is: could you please summarize a bit about the state of the project and why any attempt on hacking/modified the original firmware was abandoned? Yep, I'm aware of the bad quality of the camera/lens, but... couldn't it be possible to get a compromise between the original project and yours without too much hardware hassle? In particular, there is one comment from Stan Jelavic that puzzles me out:

http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bi...;t=011395;p=42

"1. The Wolverine camera is not the same resolution. It is 720 x 480 because of the 6mm lens used. Then they double up the frame digitally.
It cannot be reused because the sensor is a part of their controller board. The new 12mm lens that we use with the new cam is far superior.. see some of the test results earlier in the thread."

"The 6mm lens has wide FOV and thus low optical resolution,sooo they digitally double the frame and that gives lots of artifacts. Additionally the MP4 encoding has high compression. The frames are not stored anywhere but pushed into the mpeg stream by the Novatek chip.
You cannot put a higher FOV lens in there because there is not enough room to back off the controller."

How do you know that? I mean... Have you inspected, reversed ingeneered the firmware? I've read previous messages when the low quality of the lens is clearly displayed, but... Couldn't that be tweaked in any way? Maybe attaching a new lens and reusing the camera at higher resolution? Having been able to find a picture of the cam+lens either

Sorry dudes; I don't mean to be rude or anything. Just asking and very quick when writing this. I'm always short on spare time. Will return later and check and add more info. And dozens of thanks to those involved in that great, amazing project as the Hawkeye is. I cannot believe you have reached such an amount of success.

Pere, just stumbled upon your links with the new thread. Would you advise in still using your firmware updates on the original Wolverine unit if I also have the Wolverine Pro? How does the before and after quality compare?

[Jason Quinn]

Hi everyone! I used to visit this forum time ago, when I became an owner of the original Wolverine MovieMaker (not the pro version). In the end, I became more interested on the technical aspects than digitizing films. I ended up releasing my own "remixed" version of the firmware (still available on http://retromania.pandelground.com/w...tal-moviemaker), which enabled FullHD (1920x1080) capture mode and higher bitrates, albeit it's only a cheap hack.

It's been a couple years from last time I entered here and was amazed to discover how the venerable, original topic about the Wolverine (http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bi...1;t=011395;p=2) has evolved into a full, professional project on his own (http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/vbb/fo...wkeye-telecine). I've been trying to read ALL the messages in both threads, but there's about 50 pages worth of discussion in each topic, so I haven't had any other chance than digest it a bit.

What I'm asking for is: could you please summarize a bit about the state of the project and why any attempt on hacking/modified the original firmware was abandoned? Yep, I'm aware of the bad quality of the camera/lens, but... couldn't it be possible to get a compromise between the original project and yours without too much hardware hassle? In particular, there is one comment from Stan Jelavic that puzzles me out:

http://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bi...;t=011395;p=42

"1. The Wolverine camera is not the same resolution. It is 720 x 480 because of the 6mm lens used. Then they double up the frame digitally.
It cannot be reused because the sensor is a part of their controller board. The new 12mm lens that we use with the new cam is far superior.. see some of the test results earlier in the thread."

"The 6mm lens has wide FOV and thus low optical resolution,sooo they digitally double the frame and that gives lots of artifacts. Additionally the MP4 encoding has high compression. The frames are not stored anywhere but pushed into the mpeg stream by the Novatek chip.
You cannot put a higher FOV lens in there because there is not enough room to back off the controller."

How do you know that? I mean... Have you inspected, reversed ingeneered the firmware? I've read previous messages when the low quality of the lens is clearly displayed, but... Couldn't that be tweaked in any way? Maybe attaching a new lens and reusing the camera at higher resolution? Having been able to find a picture of the cam+lens either

Sorry dudes; I don't mean to be rude or anything. Just asking and very quick when writing this. I'm always short on spare time. Will return later and check and add more info. And dozens of thanks to those involved in that great, amazing project as the Hawkeye is. I cannot believe you have reached such an amount of success.

Pere, just stumbled upon your links with the new thread. Would you advise in still using your firmware updates on the original Wolverine unit if I also have the Wolverine Pro? How does the post firmware update compare between the quality of the Pro and Standard Wolverine unit?

[Pere Pasqual]

Pere, just stumbled upon your links with the new thread. Would you advise in still using your firmware updates on the original Wolverine unit if I also have the Wolverine Pro? How does the post firmware update compare between the quality of the Pro and Standard Wolverine unit?

Hi Jason,

I don't know if the original firmware is compatible with the Pro model (my bet is it is), so be careful. In my case, I could recover my machine after a bad flash, but it's not guaranteed to work for everyone, so as always... do at your own risk. Before any attemp, you should keep a copy of your original firmware (or the last official update). In case you had that, you could share it and I could attempt to modify it for the higher bitrates in case you are interested on that.

Didn't do any extensive tests or comparisons, either. I don't have any material to compare side-by-side of both machines, neither access to a Pro model. But the impression I got was that the improvements where rather modest, not being on par with the huge bitrate increase.

[Pere Pasqual]

By the way, Stan Jelavic , I've cancelled my oscillo order as I head very good reviews on this one; any advice?

https://www.amazon.es/Siglent-Techno.../dp/B06XZML6RD

To my understanding, it's far superior to the Hantek's. Huge sampling memory (14 MB vs 40k), "phosphor-like" TFT, various mathematical functions and 200 Mhz out-of-the-box at a very affordable price. I'm going to wait a bit until I get a deal under 300 € based on advice that it drops to that price regularly...