CompuServe Thread

#What software is next?

30 messages in this thread
#40422From: David McElroyApr 6, 1994 10:47 PM
I'm finally supposed to be able to pick up my new Toaster system Thursday afternoon and I'll be spending the next who-knows-how-long figuring out what I'm doing and where I'm going with it. But I'm already wondering what software I'm going to soon discover that I MUST have. Beyond the Toaster software and all the other basic stuff that comes with an intitial setup, what should I be looking to buy? I know that I'm buying some sort of "utilities pack" with my system, but I'm more interested in the software that I'll need to amaze my friends and clients. What are the things you would recommend as the first purchases beyond the basics? What are the things you've found are absolutely essential that you wish you'd found earlier? In case it matters, I will have a Toaster 4000 with Amiga 4000, AmiLink machine control, 3/4 SP decks, TBC IV (that name doesn't sound exactly right, but I can't remember for sure) and a Cooper audio mixer. Also, I should probably tell you that the equipment will be used for TV commercials and short political pieces rather than for heavy animation. I'll appreciate any input you have. Thanks. David
#40424From: glen millerApr 6, 1994 11:19 PM
YOU MUST BUY: 1) Art Department Professional (ADPro) 2) D-Paint 4, and or Brillance* 3) Maybe Morph+ 4) A real time paint board (24 bit) with paint software, such as the Impluse Firecracker, the Retina, the Picasso II. If you have the latter two of the above boards, you might also want a larger monitor… a 17", 19", or 21"!!! Any Questions? GLEN
#40426From: Black Belt SystemsApr 7, 1994 12:29 AM
Actually, he'd be far better off with Imagemaster R/t, plus he'd spend less money. :^) –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40431From: Wayne ColeApr 7, 1994 1:32 AM
Depends on whether you measure in productivity or just price. With ImagemasterRT you require a computer to use as a document reader, and it is not as quick or easy to use as a document with a good TOC and index. Also the OL doc has lots of language that is not directly devoted to operational reference that is usually not desireable in OL reference material which increases the wading factor. With ADPro, I can take the document home, to lunch, to the beach etc and figure out the how I'm gonna set up that next killer sequence/image. Can't do that with IM since th chord on the reader is not long enough :^}. NOTE to Glen: these are my OPINIONS, (there is no absolute answer on this issue) and you should actually try them both out. The facility of one versus the other is mainly a function of work style. Some like trial and error (aka creative play) and others like to get directly to what they have already seen in their mind's eye. The latter group will usually have the process planned out before starting, while the former play until they get something they like. The latter will use a document in off-line mode more, while the former usually aschew documents altogether. That, in my mind is the real issue on these two packages as they both can get you from A to B with quality results and both products are well supported in terms of tech support. ADPro is better supported by third party products and does have the ability to render direct to the Toaster. (IM doesn't does it? Haven't checked recently.) wmc – via Autopilot!
#40470From: Black Belt SystemsApr 8, 1994 2:51 AM
"Depends on whether you measure productivity or just price" No it doesn't. I fyou measure price, we win. Period. If you measure by capabilities, we win. period. Now, if _all_ you do is use the features in AdPro, and you already know how, then yep, you'd suffer a productivity hit if you tried to change to IM. But if you have use for the _tons_ of other capabilties in IM that simply _aren't there in ANY form_ inside AdPro, regardless of version, then your productivity gets hit no matter if you know AdPro, or not, just because you chose it. further, if you do NOT already know AdPro, and are just choosing one or the other to begin with, then You'd be much better of with IM R/t, most especially the current 1.50 version as it's considerably easier to use than earlier versions. It's not at all the way you made it sound in your message. "not as easy to use as a document with a good TOC and INDEX" Are you kidding me? Have you _looked_ at the IM R/t docs??? The Imagemaster R/t docs have large, detailed TOC's _and_ indexes _and_ are context sensitive – and are a darned sight easier to use than paper versions of the same as it "gets you where you're going" in the docs faster than you can do it on paper more often than not. Then there's the find… which has no parallel in paper docs, and comprises a user definable, persistant index for some situations. As for wading factor, could be, but I disagree, personally – it depends on how you read it, I believe. Re paper to home, lunch etc, easy: print it out – right ther ein the menu – you DO have a printer, don't you? :^) No, IM doesn't directly render to the Toaster at this time. It may, shortly, if certain issues work out well. Despite the current lack of direct writes to the Toaster's buffer, you can still "get there from here" simply by using an intermediate file – it's less convenient, but not in any way impractical. OTOH, it does much more on many, many fronts than AdPro does. Some things, like rendering into Amiga modes such as 16 color palette mapped, it does _so_ much better than AdPro that you're pretty well shooting yourself in the foot if you use AdPro instead of Imagemaster: Unless you _prefer_ a poorer quality image, that is. IM's always had more power than AdPro, and if the past development rates of both companies are any indication, it probably always will. As for Adpro being "better supported by third party products", yeah, it is, and it needs it a lot more than we do since IM has much of that power built right in from the start – we don't _need_ third party products to be viable the way AdPro does. In fact, more AdPro "support" from ASDG themselves like the extra formats you have to buy, the morphing that's NOT included, are in many cases included in the basic Imagemaster price. In some cases, like comparing "Fred" with IM's built in filmstrip, catalog, and graphic buffer (postage stamp or "tile") selection powerhouse of UI capability, both packages offer functionality that _appears_ similar but in fact is integrated in IM and external and mcu, much more limited inthe AdPro package. ASDG's strength has never been general capability: AdPro has been supremely reliable in past releases, and ASDG is a marketing powerhouse: they've done what needed to be done to convince magazines, dealers and endusers that they're #1- just like WIndows, #1 isn't "best", it's just #1 in sales. In some cases, what ASDG has done to stay on top been good stuff. Like MorphPlus. Like the tech support they provide. Like the basic very high quality of the product. But some of what they've done has been otherwise, as you probably well know. Examples? You're a dealer: Remember the fax ASDG sent to it's dealers with that outragous statement about IM's NTSC conversions, how AdPro's was better because it "used units recognized by broadcast engineers"? It's a fact that it does indeed use those units. However, it's _also_ a fact that IM's NTSC conversions are head and shoulders more effective, result in better looking NTSC output, handle far more sophisticated color changes and in fact do far more than just limit the final output levels of the image, as compared to the AdPro tool being compared at that time (and for all I know, still). So, you get your choice: use ApPro, and get that warm and fuzzy feeling of "knowing your units", or use IM and simply get a better NTSC image as a result. That's a very good example of some of ASDG's "other" techniques for staying on top. So's the time they poked Cinemorph in the eye using a bogus comparison they dreamed up against a half-blind beta tester of the GVP product. And you say? –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40482From: Terry L. TaborApr 8, 1994 9:21 PM
Ben, Just to add to your comments, two features which IM R/t has which I can't understand why ASDG refuses to put in their product, and I find are absolutely indispensible are: 1) Definable operation areas, and 2 UNDO!!!! I own and use both products, and the only advantage I have ever found to AdPro is it's quicker at most of its processes than IM R/t (as I understand it, that's because they have some algorithm tricks they can make use of due to the fact that they don't allow processing on less than the whole image). I end up using AdPro when I'm doing straight forward processing on whole images (scaling, compositing, color adjustments). If I have to do anything more "artistic", or if I have to process only parts of the image, or if I have to morph, its IM R/t no question. Terry Tabor
#40490From: Black Belt SystemsApr 9, 1994 12:22 AM
Thanks for your comments, Terry. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40488From: glen millerApr 8, 1994 11:50 PM
Wayne, Good point! You must make up your own mind! I often say," Bring me a COKE," when I am thinking, "Bring me a softdrink." I only wish all companies supplied users with a simple copy or a "work once or twice" test disk. I have shot a bundle of $$$ on testing software I can't take back! A good program, besides an installer, would be a deinstaller… one that a computer store clerk could tell if you actually have deleted a program off a hard disk that you will never use again! GLEN
#40487From: glen millerApr 8, 1994 11:45 PM
Ben, Explain! Just curious! GM
#40501From: Black Belt SystemsApr 9, 1994 12:04 PM
Glen, Explain, what? I'm unsure to what you're referring… –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40510From: glen millerApr 9, 1994 11:10 PM
Explain why I should use ImageMaster and not AdPro or MOrph+, or any other product from ASDG.. a company porting to Mac, SGI, etc. WHY? GM
#40514From: Black Belt SystemsApr 10, 1994 12:11 AM
So, ASDG's porting to the Mac, SGI… So? We ported to Windows 3.1, a much more viable environment. <shrug> What's that got to do with Amiga software, I ask you? Perhaps new features from the new platforms? YES! The latest Imagemaster has multiple backports of the new Windows features we've created… so, where's ER for the Amiga? Hmmm? Black Belt Systems has released two new products – whole products, not upgrades – for the Amiga in the past three months, and massively upgraded Imagmaster both in features and interface – _twice_… ASDG's upgraded AdPro's look and feel, added a few features. Whee. :^) On to more important questions… "Why use Imagemaster R/t instead of AdPro or MorphPlus?" Adpro, the short version: Want to increase the sharpness of JUST a facial feature, such as eyelashes? Adpro can't – it can sharpen the entire image, but not areas. IM has _extrordinary_ area selection tools that work with everything, from sharpening to swirling to gaussian blur to motion efects to… you get the idea. :^) Need to undo a change? Adpro's got this little limitation in that area, y'see… we don't. Want to perform any one of a hundred or so operations that AdPro doesn't even _have_, much less have for the entire image, such as complex camer flares or annular rings? Imagemaster's the answer. Want to render to Amiga display modes and get the best possible image? Imagemaster. Tests (not just ours, either) have -repeatedly_ shown that ApRo's palette picking runs a poor second to Imagemasters. Need a lossless, high compression format? many people (such as doctors, scientists) need image data compression but can't take the hit that JPEG puts on the data integrity… Imagemaster comes with TRIM, which has an _average_ efficiency on scanned 24-bit data of over twice that if 24bit IFF (IE, convert 10 megs of 24bit IFF and you get 5 megs of files, and lose _nothing_ from the images. IM has built in sequencing, filmstrips, etc, etc, etc. There's more… lots and lots and lots more. Imagemaster is a more powerful product. But if your needs are simplistic, then AdPro may be entirely sufficient for you. MorphPlus: Imagemaster has a much better user interface than Morphplus. We invented the onion skin interface, use it, and also have dual window interface. We also have organic morphing paths – Morphplus does not. Morphplus has masking that we do not. Depending on just what you're trying to accomplish, one or the other could make the difference. Both products produce similar output, although if you're rendering down to Amiga displays, Imagemaster's IFF creation is far superior so that the morph you made will look better simply because it's rendered better in many cases. Nothing stopping you from morphing with MorphPlus and using IM to render images, of course. :^) Those are some of the reasons why. There are many more. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40526From: Adib NasleApr 10, 1994 8:35 PM
Just jumping in here. Ben, I am not one to argue with you about the complete host of creative tools Image Master has to offer, but in order to let everyone else know what a powerful tool you have, when will you guys put out a demo video which covers all of the wild things R/T can do? You guys are in the video/image business and no matter how great a product is, you still have to let the public know about it. ASDG contiously sends out video demos of their programs (I personally have received three within one year) and they obviously have an impact. I think that the Apprentice videos are a good start, but they are targeted more towards people who already have Image Master. I have no doubt that your market share will significantly increase if you put together a 5-10 minute demo showing all the image manipulation, morphing and other Unique features that only Image Master has. With the power of your program, a simple video will make believers out of everyone, and make you guys a couple of dollars richer. So what do you say?
#40530From: Black Belt SystemsApr 11, 1994 12:54 AM
Yep, it's a very good notion. It's a matter of having enough time to get such a thing done, not to mention someone with the skills. No one at the company is a video type – we're all programmers, engineers and such. Further, everyone has more than enought to do, which I suppose is no surprise, eh? –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40532From: Steve Bennett/SYSOPApr 11, 1994 8:40 AM
>>No one at the company is a video type – we're all programmers, engineers and such.<< So why not ask your CUSTOMERS to provide samples of THEIR work?
#40564From: Black Belt SystemsApr 11, 1994 11:59 PM
Oh, we do – and a large number of them say yes; very few come through. Still, we have some examples of customer work, some even from major motion pictures and so on. But there's more to a good demo than just a few clips, don't you think? Good voice over, a consistant, directed story and punch line, high quality video (unfortunately, much of what we have from customers is 2nd – or worse – generation video). There are examples on things like the Amiga gang video, in the libs, and so on. It would be quite an effort to pull all that together into one whole. We'd like to – but I don't see it happening in the short term. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40556From: glen millerApr 11, 1994 10:56 PM
If IMAGE MASTER can do the following, you have sold me. I want to be able to do that "SPY Movie thing" where I take an image, crop in a a part of the image, bring up the detail of the crop to full screen resolution, do all the steps again, and continue to pull detail out of this digital zoom. GM
#40565From: Black Belt SystemsApr 11, 1994 11:59 PM
Well, we can certainly take the image, arbitrarily crop, zoom (with scaling or subsampling, your choice), and repeat that process as many times or as "deep" as you like. However, this process is bound by the laws of physics… there's only so much image data in there, and at some point, you're going to be looking at a blur. The better the image, the more you can do this, of course. But you CAN do it. :^) –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40566From: john bennettApr 12, 1994 12:08 AM
PMFJI, I think IM can do this very easily. You just start with a hi-res image (2kx3k +) load it into IM then render a 24-bit or what ever image to another buffer. Zoom render, Zoom render etc. etc. Not sure if this is the SPY thing, but I'm sure Ben will tell you. :^) ….John
#40574From: Peter GreciApr 12, 1994 3:56 PM
Sounds like you're looking to do something like Harrison Ford did in "Bladerunner" I'm not with Black belt but I do know it is possible to do just what you asked. The initial image needs to be fairly high rez tho to get good results. First Load it into IM of course, then use the Grid Overlay, or not, I'd use the grid as it looks a bit more impressive in my mind. Then simply use one of IM's rectangular or other shaped area selectors and simply "Zoom in", then to pull out the detail use the Sharpen operations. Of course this won't work so well with a 736*482 rez image blowing up a portion of it to that size. But if you use a 736*482 rez image and Display it in IM as a Low Rez Ham image you may get decent results. Hope this is coherent for you.
#40670From: Charles BlaquiereApr 17, 1994 12:37 AM
Glen, yes, ImageMaster will do this Blade Runner-type image enhancement very well, if you start with a high-resolution scan, so that the last zoom still shows some detail instead of a blurry mess. (this enhancement gadget is _science-fiction_, remember. You can't expect your computer to come up with missing information on its own.) So you take a sharp 35mm snapshot, have the negative scanned at a service bureau, save it as a TIFF (I guess — ImageMaster will handle several IBM and Mac formats) and bring the image to your Amiga. By the way, the Black Belt BBS has a macro called "Zoomulator" which will automate this zoom-in effect for you. Blaq!
#41044From: Vance SchowalterMay 7, 1994 3:46 AM
Ben, you're a rock! I come back after a 97 day hiatus and find you here, writing lengthy, informative replies and never seeming to run out of steam. I saw a great write-up for Imagemaster R/t in a recent issue of VTU magazine. Looked great! I hope to get the change together to upgrade to the latest IM R/t as soon as possible. I've been pretty sick for awhile, and am just getting treatment now. I hope to get back to normal soon. I blew my upgrade $$$ on Imagine 3.0. It's the next best thing to Lightwave, even though I'm only at 2.9. Waiting for the mail man to hurry up and get me my disks. *B^/ I have spent many a month dragging my jaw on the rug because I'm blown away by the things I've been able to do with IM R/t and my Imagine renderings. My boss has started a video series project that I'm doing the effects for. So far, it's been a hoot! Anyhow, will ttyl. *B^) -= Vance =- Image Master Flying high on Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster R/t!
#41053From: Black Belt SystemsMay 7, 1994 5:24 PM
Welcome back, Vance! –Ben …via AutoPilot
#41056From: Vance SchowalterMay 7, 1994 9:14 PM
Thanks, Ben! Is BBS hanging tight with the Amiga until official word comes out about CBM? I wonder if CEI would be able to handle the task of running the show? -= Vance =- Image Master Flying high on Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster R/t!
#41059From: Black Belt SystemsMay 8, 1994 1:07 AM
Vance, Our position is simple: CBM hasn't done anything worthwhile in over a year. In the past year, they've sold very few computers (as a percentage of the installed base) and as a result, haven't affected our operations particularly. Now that they have screeched to a halt either temporarily or permanently, the _only_ reason we see for things to change will be the reaction of the userbase. So for the time being, there are no plans here to slow or discontinue Amiga product development. Should the Amiga _market_ dry up and blow away, which is far different from the supply of Amigas going away, then as a matter of business we would be forced to back off. My hope is that this will not happen. –Ben …via AutoPilot
#40429From: GREG TEEGARDENApr 7, 1994 1:10 AM
Glen, Can you tell if the 24 bit boards you mentioned here are accelerated? Also, can they drive a large MultiSync type monitor, such as an NEC 5fg, without the need for a flicker fixer or whatever…. How much are they? Thanks, GT
#40485From: glen millerApr 8, 1994 11:31 PM
Greg, From what I know, all the boards like the Picasso II are based on VGA chips, I believe. (Picasso II, the GVP Spectrum,etc) The only one that isn't is the Retina. So far, from what I have been able to find out, the Retina offers the biggest screen rez with the most color(24bit). All of the cards come with (very close to) real time paint packages. I don't know if they are accelerated or not, but most have fast displays. To answer your specific monitor question… well, I don't know. I have been told that most come with a bag full of pre written code to make specific monitors work with out any problem. I know they should all work with IDEK 19" and 21" monitors, but my question is, are those monitors any good? I guess we could start sending messages to the DKB folks for an 040 based 3000 X 3000 line 24 bit super realtime card for under a thousand dollars! That would work for me just fine! GLEN
#40489From: glen millerApr 9, 1994 12:00 AM
Greg, Also, the price question… EGS SPECTRUM (GVP) under $540.00 PICASSO II w/1 meg under $450.00 Retina 2meg under $490.00 Retina 4meg under $560.00 Firecracker 2meg @ $500.00 By the way, these are street prices from Amiga World… the Amiga Super Ad Shopping Showcase in a handy magazine format! GLEN
#40430From: GREG TEEGARDENApr 7, 1994 1:10 AM
If you get AdPro, make sure you get the latest version. I hear it has a much better interface than 2.0. GT
#40449From: Peter GreciApr 7, 1994 4:30 PM
You might want to pickup Imagemaster R/T for it's image manipulation and it's morph abilities.