CompuServe Messages

#QuickPass Rave

    10-Oct-94 20:29:38
Sb: #128125-#QuickPass Rave
Fm: John Ellis 72440,3046
To: Don Landis 71673,3612
First let me say thanks for taking the time to give me a basis of comparison. Granted our rendering scenarios are different; having the PAR on your rendering platform makes sense in your situation. I am re-evaluating my setup but as I heavily rely on network rendering I'm not sure what advantage I might have reconfiguring my system in the same way. My new AT Vista is 720×486, my old Vista was 756×482 but it died a few months ago and I decided to replace it with the CCIR version. FWIW. >> Since my experiment showed no difference in recording the frame to the PAR vs. recording the frame to the dos drive we can figure that the recording process is a relation of par recording to tape vs. quickpass recording to tape or 1 min for PAR vs. 48 minutes for QP. << This sounds like a fair assessment. You could do better or worse with QP depending on what kind of framebuffer, platform and output deck you have. >> First, you compared the PAR speed using a rendering resolution of 752×480 vs. a quick pass or FxF rendering of 512×486. You used the rendering speed difference as part of the equation. In several tests here I found all the people asked could pick out the PAR resolution quality as superior in sharpness and video noise to the targa+ output. << That is true. In that time frame we were both outputting to SVHS and it didn't seem to me that the quality difference between the PAR and a Targa was significant when going to that format. You seemed to concur with this view a few days ago. I do think that going to Beta SP does show a significant difference in quality due to the increased resolution of Beta. I've compared SVHS from the Targa and SVHS from the PAR into the EVO. I can't really say one looks better than the other though I will agree they look different. I think the Targa does look softer but then so does the AT Vista. Kinda like Tube and CCD. Better in this case I think is in the eye of the beholder at 400 line res. I'm not sure where to go from here. It appears that short of rendering directly to the PAR, there doesn't seem to be a solution to increasing the speed of transfer.