CompuServe Messages

>> I do believe, however, that the PAR will not go over well with some of my current clients, The key word here is "my". I'm glad you clarified this, because before your statement appeared that the PAR won't have a beta sp output market, period. What I disagree with is the many who are currently committed to the older more established technology are attempting to put down this new approach to animation recording. Most of these including yourself are making claims of quality and marketability without any basis. >> I don't really remember slagging the PAR, just stating it's not capable of Beta SP quality<< Again without any experience or supportive facts you can't make this claim unless just "slagging" the board. A statement like that is the same as if DPS would say "John Tissavary is not capable of doing quality animation." They probably have never seen your work either. You just stated that if you go with any animation recorder it will be the MAX. What is the basis of this? Why not the Bandit? Haven't the manufacturers have made great claims for it too? And, it is in the budget of equipment that you want to associate yourself with. As far as being defensive, I agree with that. I'm defending the real time recording technology vs. single frame approach as a viable, cost competitive, alternative. I made a prediction that this technology will someday replace the single frame approach. I don't believe I ever said that the DPS- PAR is a replacement for this at this time. I certainly don't plan to get rid of single frame here before testing the waters with the current DPS PAR state of the art. In fact, I have in my budget to buy the soft VTR for single frame control of the betacam. One curiosity I have is whether the PAR output with betacam component is comparable to the targa+ Y/C out single frame to the betacam. This test interests me because it would be the best of each technology here at Scuba Tech. It may not be of interest to anybody else. There is one thing you said that does make me nervous regarding marketing.{>> Most of my clients have, so far, asked for minimum PVW quality,} I adamantly refuse to discuss the model, brand name, software version, software types, number of hours I work, race, religion, political influence, names of subcontractors, brands of monitors, etc etc. with the client or market. I only will discuss the delivered format of the work. How I get to that format with the video information he is buying, I consider none of the client's business and a breach of my confidential trade secrets. I believe it was James Murphy that asked this some time ago and I told him I just say I use all the tools and knowledge I have to give you the best product within your budget and time frame. I have never run into any clients that have tried to dictate the brand name or model number of my editor or the version of my software. But, I have been refused a job because of the color of my skin, but that's life in modern America. It's difficult enough to cope with all these format wars let alone have to cope with the likes of model numbers and brand names. And there are just too many clients that don't try to work you like a puppet to have to deal with those that do. I ran into this in the chemical industry bidding and it always showed up when the bidder was trying to favor a particular customer so he wrote a spec that would attempt to exclude the required competitive bidders. I'm sure Paul has seen this in all his experience in bidding. I agree that Greg is biased because he sells the product but I also respect his judgement. That is precisely why I have to see for myself and why I have a trial period to eval the PAR system for 30 days. Please understand that I am not defending my decision to use the PAR for output to you because I know that you realize it will work for my market if performs as claimed. I am defending DPS in that people should not dictate the potential maket of a product to others when they have no basis or experience to do so. On the other hand, if what you said is just your opinion then I will accept that but please explain that it is just your opinion in the future.