Sony's LocationPorter transmits video over 3G at a price you can't afford
By Joseph L. Flatley 
posted February 3rd 2009 10:04AM
posted February 3rd 2009 10:04AM
At an estimated market price of about $17,900 a pop we don't plan on seeing too many of these in the wild, but if you have a pressing need to broadcast high quality video sans-cables, this is definitely worth a peep: Sony's LocationPorter RVT-SD100 is a big box worn on a strap (not unlike the camcorders of old), but instead of rocking unwieldy cassette tape, this guy streams video back to the station via LAN or 3G, where yet another LocationPorter renders it suitable for transmission. This device uses the H.264/MPEG-4 AVC Main Profile codec and supports video resolution up to 352 x 240. A single 3G connection yields the bandwidth needed for up to 15 fps (with up to 160 kbps audio), while those of you shelling out for two 3G cards -- and at these prices, why not? -- can rock up to 64 fps (320 kbps audio). If you go with the LAN option, you can get up to 30 fps (at 1024 kbps). And it's definitely a lot safer than Al Franken's head mounted satellite dish. Video after the break
[Via Akihabara]
[Via Akihabara]
Um, with HSUPA-capable smartphones and networks and apps like Qik, Flixwagon or Kyte, you basically get the same thing, just in your pocket and for about $17,500 less?
with cellphone tethering, a netbook and an optional camcorder(or just use the cam on netbook), one can do this for much less
that is what I was thinking. I saw this guy with a an ultraportable or netbook setup. I doubt it is $18k
http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/534899.html
http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/2313330797/sizes/o/
http://theory.isthereason.com/?p=2370
pretty interesting if you are into that kind of thing. I think I will leave the "lifecasting" to others.
WHY?
So completely pointless. Enough said.
Totally unrelated:
Love the picture..."I kill you!!!" Thank you Ac"phlem"med and Jeff Dunham.
lol has everyone watched that video on utube?
Yes. And every time, the collective IQ of the country dropped by half a point.
Remember that $17900 you are paying for a professional piece of kit intended for broadcast (at least, i hope so!). This thing will be great on the street where journalists are unable to get line of site with a satellite. The audio capability alone sounds interesting for radio broadcasts, where ISDN lines can't be used (in the middle of a field at a music festival). I can imagine having one of these integrated into an outside broadcast truck. Would be a hell of a lot cheaper in the long run than leasing ISDN too!
However, if my 3G reception is anything to go by, it will be a lot less robust than ISDN or SAT.
But to be honest, is 352x240 going to cut it in the professional market? Doesn't sound too great really...
Viewers are totally used to low resolution, low frame rate SAT links from war zones, so I think broadcasters will take the view that live video at street level at a fairly poor quality is better than no video at all. Remember as well that it doesn't have to be full screen. Vision mixers can window the feed so it only takes up its native pixels. Keep in mind analogue tv only really has an effective resolution of 575 lines anyway.. its not actually that bad. Still, I agree the two card option is necessary for a usable bandwidth. \
If they made a cheaper audio only version it would more than likely be very attractive to broadcasters.
"...Viewers are totally used to low resolution..."
You forgot to mention two more reasons why: YouTube and cell phone screen.
Who are you to tell me what i can and cant afford?!?!
Im Rich B!tch!
352x240 at 15fps? I can draw pictures in the snow with my pee with better specs then that.
Wait until you are older and your prostate gets bigger!
Instead of that unweldy crap he could just strap to his side a 3G enabled netbook to which he could plug his camera.
17000$???
HAHAHAHAHA
Why the sucker punch to Al Franken? What did the Senator from the great state of Minnesota ever do to you?
It's a reference to a bit Franken used to do on SNL. Search the tubes for it.
Looks like a wearable port-a-potty.
ummm. take a nokia n95, hack the camera out, replace with RCA in, and you have the exact same thing capable of 640x480 and 30fps via wifi or 320x240 at 15fps via 3g.
i do not understand how you can plug 2 3g cards into the single device either. the only piece of hardware i know of that is capable of evdo bonding is the portabella from mushroom networks.
There are several devices out there that allow EV-DO Rev. A modem cards to be used in a bonded configuration. Check out waav.com.
>worn on a strap
>on a strap
>strap-on?
Couldn't most phones stream 352x240 video at 15 fps with the right software? I don't know what specs regular videocalls have, but they can't be that much different.
The article fails to mention that the weight of the device is completely offset by the reduced weight in the wallet.