#PAR – SLOW MOTION TOO ?
27 messages in this thread
Questions for everyone:
I routinely do real time vehicle motion to show the trajectories of automobiles
during collisions. I presently use a Sony 9650 Hi-8 to record (single frame)
and I always do a couple of slow motion sequences.
These sequences are usually done in six frame copies to tape. I have been
following the PAR info but I am not sure if it has the ability to copy or
duplicate tga images any set number of times through my sequence.
Is anyone aware of that capability? Is PAR THE answer?
James Lock College Station Texas
James,
The Par would work very well for your slo-mo sequences. You mention,
>> I am not sure if it has the ability to copy or duplicate tga images any set
numboer of time through my sequence. <<
You have the ability to specify how many frames per second playback from 15 fps
to .1 fps or about 1 frame every 8 seconds.
-JE
JE Thanks for the reply. I guess I should go ahead and bite the
bullet. I always hate to spend the money but I love the results. JL
James,
Considering the cost of the alternatives, the level of quality
possible and the ability to go out to Beta Sp, there's nothing in its
class. Just make sure you get the Micropolis drive, which is all
that's currently being recommended according to DPS. (Model # 2210A 1
gig and 2217A for 1.5 gig)
The PAR software has the capability to playback normal 30 frames per second to
a recordable slomo selectable at set intervals starting at 15FPS down to, I
recall, 0.2 FPS. I sold some slomo footage of models splashing in the surf
last week. Very sensual stuff. Martin Foster would have drooled! <BG>
Don,
>> Martin Foster would have drooled! <BG> <<
quite probably <g>
>>quite probably <g>
I threw that in there just to see if your reading everything. <BG>
Don,
>> I threw that in there just to see if your reading everything. <BG><<
actually it's really hard to read _all_ the messages anymore with CIM's extreme
slowness. I must've been lucky to catch your quip. Traffic is massive and I'm
going to try OZCIS to better handle it.
Don,
Now that you have been beating on the PAR for a bit, I've got 2 questions.
#1) Can you tell the difference between the PAR output and single frame?
#2) Do you think a customer .. not knowing the PARticulars of how you recorded
the animation, would notice a reduction of image quality
. if delivered on BetaCAM SP?
>> Slow-Mo
Now that's nice. For previews .. one could render 1 image every 15 frames lets
say and use that for customer approval.
Ang
Your 2 questions:
1.) No question. The output is just as smooth playing but the PAR has better,
much better output picture quality than the single frame. Now for the
qualifier: I did all my single frame with a targa+ at tmode 11 512x486x24 and
comparing to the PAR at 752x480x24 bit is just not fair. I think this question
should be addressed to J.K. Jordan who uses an ATVista at 756X486X24.
2.) Can't answer the question yet because I don't have the beta SP deck yet. I
can tell you that my 3/4 SP customers are very happy for the improved quality.
They know what is my FBF and what is PAR on the 3/4 because the PAR quality is
obviously sharper, and the color is tighter. I can tell you that one customer
has switched to me for his slomo work. He was taking it to a local TV station
to do it on their DT beta SP slomo deck. I feed his video in at QF 16 and
output from the PAR at 15 and 10 FPS for his stuff in less than a half hour
time.
>>Now that's nice. For previews .. one could render 1 image every 15 frames
lets say and use that for customer approval.
Actually, I like what Greg does: Render your test animations at 376x240x0.851
for center screen window. It renders 3x faster and gives an exact miniature of
the animation. Only problem with this is when using IXP's. they remain the
same size, res independent and need manual adjustment. I wonder if Greg has a
solution for this problem?
Depends on the IXP. All the ones we wrote factor in the resolution
in their calculations, so the results are the same no matter what
size you render at. This was always one of our priorities. Which
IXPs are you having trouble with? By the way, great going with the
slo-mo business! I love it!
I was refering to the IPAS disk #1 from YOST. These must all be
adjusted when changing resolution such as the hilite. Have you
rewritten these to overcome this limitation?
Don:
>> I was refering to the IPAS disk #1 from YOST. Have you rewritten these to
>> overcome this limitation?
I can only write my own, Yost is responsible for theirs! <g> I know that
theirs are done, we'll just have to see if they changed that aspect of them!
Like I said, though, ours have always done re-scaling correctly to any
resolution. Anything measured in pixels cannot.
Greg Pyros
Our IXP's on Disk#1 are written to work at fixed resolutions, with
the exception of flare.ixp, which is proportional. That's just the
way they work.
Considering that many will want to render at half resolution to do
quicker tests wouldn't it be a good thing to make the future IXP's
like hilite and glow resolution independent?
I wish I had the time to go in and rewrite all of those IPAS routines,
because I've got tons of ideas re how to make them better.
Unfortunately, I'm resource-bound, and all development work is going
into r4 and the new crop of IPAS3 routines.
>> Unfortunately, I'm resource-bound…
With all the ambitious IPAS programmers here, maybe you can "allow" someone to
rework them for you.
>>With all the ambitious IPAS programmers here, maybe you can "allow" someone
to rework them for you.<<
Amazing, I was thinking the same thing when I read that message. I would just
love to see those great .axps with some of those enhanced IPAS3 features that
Gary talked about when he listed his upcoming offerings.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
When I see one of these ambitious IPAS programmers use the IPAS3 tools to the
extent of our new standards, I'll be sure to contact them. Once you see what
we've done with interactive real-time feedback in our new particle systems,
you'll see what I mean.
– G
Did you download the new PAR HEX file with the 5 second GPI trigger
from the DPS BBS? Went up there today, I'm told…
Not yet. I'll go up there in a few minutes to check it out. I've
been racing here this evening due to a JKJ PAR crash. Need to
rebuild my demonstration for a meeting tomorrow at 10. It's almost 4
AM and I have 800 frames to rerender and compress. I should have
known better than to use Join after the warning. Hope they get this
bug fixed soon.
Don:
>> due to a JKJ PAR crash…
We'll have to add that definition to the dictionary. <g> That bug's been fixed
Thursday, BTW. Download the newest set of programs.
Greg Pyros
>> a JKJ PAR crash…
Hey, I thought we agreed to blame everything on Alan?
That's true, pass the message on to Don, he started it! (Coined the
phrase, so to speak!)
>>We'll have to add that definition to the dictionary.
I have two more for you:
These are points in time like A.D and B.C.
AP will from now on be used to denote " After Par"
BP will from now on be used to denote " Before Par"
Of course these terms will only be significant to upscale, cutting
edge animators like us, right Greg? <BG>
BTW I have only used my targa+ twice in two weeks AP <G> Are the days
of my targa+ numbered too?
Don:
Yes, my life changed AP, also. (Not including the fact that those are my
mother's initials!)
>> significant to upscale, cutting edge animators like us, right Greg?
Right! Actually, it will also be significant to those who don't get one,
because they'll start wondering why they started losing jobs to the CEA group
who got the PARs!
Greg Pyros
PS: CEA = Cutting Edge Animators, another Don Landis-ism <g>
Don, well John Ellis also responded with the same information. We
have a consensus <G>. Now I am wondering how I would sequence my
frames, including the titles and fades. I am not too worried about
that now as I just tell the sequence the in point and I can mix and
match. I would like to get a user's manual for the PAR. I think I
will check with Gary or someone on that. Thanks JL