Cheap Video output
12 messages in this thread
Buck,
You sure have courage to publicly admit that you use something less than
"broadcast quality" gear! From the talk around here, I thought anyone who
didn't output frame by frame at the highest resolution to Betacam or D2 was
a sissy <g>
In my experience in (non animation) video production, I've found that there
are really two levels of quality: unacceptable and acceptable. If you're
stuff is steady, clear, and well lit it will usually fall into the
"acceptable" level and users don't know or care about the difference
between VHS and anything better. I recognize that the acceptable standard
for commericials and hollywood stuff has to be much higher but I fully
agree with your observation that most people are delighted with "low
quality" stuff.
One question: how do you make use of the time lapse function on your
camcorder or deck?
Alec Jason
Betacam? D2? Sheesh, those are very low-end formats. Component digital
is the only way to go, dude. Jamie and I just got back from the online
edit of the r2 launch tape, and we did it on Sony's latest D1 4:2:2
machines. Not only that, we used the first all-digital video switching
system in California — at Pacific Video Resources. Even the signal going
to the MONITOR was digital serial 4:2:2, and the danged TV had an
Analog-toDigital converter in it for the picture tube.
What's more, the audio guys have an all-digital audio board, so this is
turning into a very "bleeding edge" production. Should look pretty decent.
– G
How about using the really, really, really high-end format – 70mm film at
16k resolution… Now were talking! <g>
Isn't funny how the best format (ok, it's not video) is actually old
technology….
My dream has always been to do a piece on film. 35mm would be good enough
for me. Maybe one day…
– G
Gary,
Last I spoke to him, Paul Carey was offering 2-K targa file layoff
to 35mm motion picture film for around $1500 per ten second clip !
Bruce
I agree, video sucks, thank you FCC! If Buck thinks the price of good video
equipment is expensive then you should look at a MGI 16 w/ an Oxberry Cine'
Filmback. And the rendering time! The colors under coposite video will
never be true. That is what all the stink about D1, Beta, and S-VHS is all
about. If you are going for photo-realistic video quality then frame by
frame component video rendered to fields is the only realistic alternative.
If you are selling images that are to look computer generated than use a
VideoVGA and a $200 VHS deck. And don't get VCR and VTR confused!
Most of my clients are happy with frame-by-frame output to 3/4" SP,
although I'm not. I don't think I got VCR and VTR mixed up? Was your
message for Buck Crowley?
Wow, Gary, That type of gear sounds wild!!!
On the down side, did the people you were working with tell you what it
COSTS?!? I'd be interested in finding out, just for a good reason to kick
my heels over in a faint…
I get the feeling that most of the guys around here are a little distant
from that sort of expenditure… I sure know I am (I still bitch about my
CServe bill…!)
NATURALLY, you're not implying (wink,wink) that that kind of dribbling edge
gear is NECESSARY (wink, wink) to get acceptable results from 3DSr2, are
you? I sure hope not, 'cuz I'm currently scrounging to get enough valuta
together for a copy, and if I have to spend half a mil on video gear to use
it, UNH UH!
(Tongue in cheek) Glen
Alec: I've been reading your thread and agree with you. The thing that I
find to me most interesting is the "sliding scale" that people use to judge
video quality. I've had to include some video that was shot on S-VHS with
an X-ray system onboard an aircraft in flight, or a handheld 8mm camcorder
on the same flight while they flew through a low gravity parabola. The
pictures can be pretty poor (particularly the grainy B&W X-rays!) but
nobody ever complains. If any of my animations looked that bad, I would
certainly hear about it!
The people that I work for (and the people that see the animation that I
do) expect the titles and the animated stuff to look good, but they forgive
a lot in the experiment video.
I guess that people appreciate the uniqueness of the "live" video. I've
recently seen some TV programs that included some of the video from the
Apollo program. It looks pretty bad, but you do get a sense of it being
history in the making, and I'm grateful that there was any video coverage
available at all. I guess most people aren't so jaded by TV and motion
pictures that they care more about the picture than the event!
Chris
Chris,
Thanks for your reply. Interesting stuff you're into. What were you
x-raying in flight?
Alec Jason
Alec: I'm not the Principal Investigator on this experiment, but I've done
the image processing and animation for it. What they do is melt an aluminum
slug (about 1" X 1" X 1/2") on the aircraft in flight. When they get to
their restricted airspace ( you'll see why the restricted space in a
minute!) at the proper altitude they fly the aircraft through a parabolic
trajectory that gives them low gravity (about 0.001 g if I remember right)
for about 20 seconds. At the beginning of the low g period, they pump cold
water onto the bottom of the sample chamber and solidify the aluminum. They
are interested in watching what happends to the void areas during
solidification in low g.
The solidification front and voids are monitored with an X-ray system and
videotaped. The video is grainy and moderately noisy, since the X-ray
system uses a combination wavelength converter/image enhancer to get
something that the camera can see. You can even see some motion in the
image as the system bends, since the parabola starts and ends with a 2g
maneuver! The 8mm video was handheld during some of these flights so there
is a lot of camera motion.
I had to put a disclaimer on the animation of the solidification experiment
to tell the audience that it was much easier to see the interface in the
animation than in the real video!
Chris
To use the time lapse function of my Hi8 video recorder, I put out aframe
at a time and push the "Next" on the camcorder. It helps if you have a good
book to read, but it's cheap!