CompuServe Messages

#PAR purchase?

    01-Aug-94 11:59:27
Sb: #115470-#PAR purchase?
Fm: Don Landis 71673,3612
To: John Ellis 72440,3046
>>everytime I read "full broadcast quality" I cringe. >>But obviously I'm out of sync with the majority view. Well, we do agree on these points you made! To tell you the truth, I added the word "full" after hearing it on the DPS-PAR demo tape and knew it would get a rise out of you. We also could match stories on this topic. For every job you have seen go down the toilet due to something like "only having 54 db S/N and the producer requires 56 db S/N to qualify for minimum broadcast quality (not measured, just speced)" I could tell a story on the otherhand where a nationally recognized popular network TV show has purchased VHS Video for inclusion in their show, and, I'm not talking about America's Home Videos either. As a matter of fact, I did compete with two bidders for a job last April who submitted work using the Abekas DDR and Alias on an SGI. I used the PAR. The spec was beta SP recorded component. While the "experts" here on the forum were saying the PAR/UVW1800 would never make it in the real world. I quietly won the bid and, I found out the $ was not an issue as the bidding was quite close. Point is we're here to make recommendations as you stated but it would be totally wrong to mislead someone into thinking that the industry is as cut and dried as you seem to think. The low end technology is very low end and doesn't stand much of a chance ( VGA converter cards) in making it to broadcast due primarily technical reasons but the PAR system is indeed capable of passing the technical requirements for broadcast and in my opinion the only remaining rules are those imposed by snobs. A suggestion for DPS: Why not come out with a new Broadcast snob version of the PAR called the BAR? Of course it would have to be repackaged in a plain box of basic black, tan, or battleship blue/gray. There would be no supplied connecting cables, you have to purchase them extra for big bucks because they are all using non standard connectors. It would have an interface that only runs on an SGI. It would only be capable of 60 seconds of recording time. The cost would have to be $16000 or more. It would not have composite or Y/C output but only YIQ with CCIR601 option for $5000. The resolution would have to be less, ie 720 lines horizontal. All the rest of the specs would be the same as the original PAR. For another $10000 it could hook up to a remote control panel that has the appearance of an ADO panel. <BG> <Hi Dave!> <BG> John, here's one for you: While two of the 6 local TV stations were upgrading their beta SP decks with UVW's a third was all set to make the move too when they scraped their decision and went again with the PVW's Guess what the reason was? The UVW is not capable of RECORDING with betacam oxide. It plays fine but won't record. The station only uses oxide and has scrapped SP tape due to cost differences. I guess the FCC will be taking their broadcast license now, right? <G>