#CD Writes
18 messages in this thread
Besides eliminating the need for SF decks, there is a MAJOR savings in time!
David Hopkins
Oh yeah, there is that too.
It's usually my clients that have to suffer through the final process of
laying the images to tape, but it does take awhile.
So, is the HAM8 mode making you happy, or do you still feel an SFC is
necessary for high-end work?
Keep On Toastin' (& I'm STILL jealous!)
Erik Flom
Well, HAM8 is nice, but it still doesn't look like 24-bit no matter
what anybody says. Plus, you can only record ANIMs for playback from
Lightwave in Super Low Preview, Low Res Preview, Medium Res Preview
and Medium Res Overlay. No high res. (I've been asking them about
it…) BTW, the image quality that goes with the realtime playback
isn't nearly as good as you might hope. It also doesn't play
realtime (full 30/frame) when I record Medium Res…oh well, I feel
more in control with the PSFC anyway. (At least until I get my hands
on the DPS product…) David Hopkins
The thing you have to remember is that video does not use full 24 bit
colour. If it did try to display it, you'd be getting alot of illegal
colour hits. HAM8 may use a 24 bit palette, but the colour displayed is
roughly equivalent to 18 bit colour. The same can be said of the VT
display. When you are looking at a render, even with the higher
resolutions, you are looking at an 18 bit colour display (NTSC legal).
I have played around with HAM8. It is far better than DCTV, and if you use
Imagemaster features, you can push the envelope of quality in HAM8. The
resolutions may not match up with all of the Video Toaster's, but HAM8 is
still broadcast quality when dumped to tape through a decent encoder or
genlock.
I, personally, like the PSFC use better than realtime animation recording,
as I might need to use the SMPTE time code to lay down an accurate audio
track to go with the accurate frames recorded.
-= Vance =- Image Master
using Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster!
I think "illegal NTSC color" has to do with the color values, not whether the
RGB value is built up with 24-bit, 18-bit, HAM or whatever color. You can make
the same bad colors in any system. Making legal NTSC colors is a matter of
understanding the limits of how fast the color signal can change across a scan
line, and limiting the total color saturation of some colors. Color TV can
only handle a relatively small number of complete color swings across a single
scan line. To put it another way, there are some sequences of colors that
aren't "legal" in NTSC.
Oh, I was taking the standpoint that peripherals such as DCTV and the
Video Toaster both are estimated to have 4 to 6 million colour palettes
instead of true 24 bit. Although the VT uses 24 bit pics, it limits the
actual amount of available colour when it makes the pics NTSC legal.
In any case, the HAM8 colour, in my opinion, is perfectly acceptable for
broadcast quality video, since the VT pic colour range is closer to that
than 16.8 million colours.
-= Vance =- Image Master
using Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster!
You miss my point entirely. Even with CGA-quality video, even with one
bitplane, I can make illegal colors and images for NTSC. White is still white,
garish red is still red, and you can only swing so far so many times across one
scanline. You might find a device that turns that screen into something
resembling composite video, but it's not "broadcast". Just because your 1084
eats it, it might not be legal or pleasant to look at.
Arghh! I think we've both been communicating without our rabbit ears. *8)
I give. Let's see what other trouble we can get into, now…
-= Vance =- Image Master
using Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster!
So, have you tried a utility like Rend24/ImageMaster/ADPro to create the
HAM8 anims? (Maybe it's a weakness of LWs HAM8 mode?)
How about the Anim7 format? Maybe that would give decent results?
My major need for HAM8 is to get 24bit graphic editing in programs like
ImageMaster and PhotoShop.
Keep On Toastin'
Erik Flom
P.S. What amazes me is that LW still DOES NOT support Anims as Image
(sequences)?!? It seems like it'd be relatively easy to implement, and
it'd save oodles of storage space for any image sequence you were mapping
in a scene! (Sorry, just had to vent my spleen. :^)
oh no, I can see it now. Forget the PD Brain shctick and attack the Spleen
msgs
I don't mind joking about the various organs, but I'll drop out when the
joking about bodily fluids/secretions/excretions begins! :^)
Sure just when it was getting interesting. Anywho, Methink my next
Triceratop anim will have Tim Wilson's Cycleman Sitting Astride it.
I alreadt did a test rendering which is going to be sent to John Gager
along with a few disks of other JPEG's
I hope there's some of this Triceratops stuff in your new demo reel.
Sounds like you've been a renderin' fool these last few weeks?
(I've been kinda stumped for the last week or so. No work, and I can't
decide what I want to do as an experiment. Just kind of floundering
around. I think I'll come out of my funk after I order my new 4000 and
Toaster. [I just can't stand the thought of going even _deeper_ into debt,
but hey! It's only five grand, right?])
Keep On Imaginin'
Erik Flom
Yup, the Triceratops is on the Reel I sent Jerry. I think it is the last
segment I put on my submission to Jerry. It SOUNDS more impressive than it
really s IMHO. All it really does is have a Vistapro Backdrop and the
Tirceratops walks "ON CAMERA" from the right, gets about midway across
the screen, Stops looks left and right(some tearing of the polygons is
noticeable) and then continue's on off the right side of the screen.
Nothing very Spectacular. But Visually pleasing I reckon.
Finally sent John Gager a package of JPEG's today and recieved Nate Wahl's
reel.
Look forward to checking it out. So, is this Dino object available for
public consumption? :^)
As an aside:
I've been playing 'the 7th Guest' (an AWESOME CD-ROM game for the IBM –
runs in 640x400x256 color [ltrbox], with LOTS of digitized action
sequences. The game itself is just a vehicle for the animated sequences
that move you from room to room, but the entire mansion is rendered in 3-D
[I think they used SGI systems] and the lighting and mood is of the
animations is REALLY good.) Anyway, I've been playing this game, and it
got me to try the new Shadow Mapping options for shadows in LW3.0.
Shadow Mapping is AWESOME! It's faster than ray-tracing, and you can
control the fuzzines of the shadows cast by objects. No More Sharp-edged
shadows! (I've got this gold Nefertiti face jumping around in the center
of that StoneHenge object you UL'd – the only light is a spotlight at
about flashlight position relative to the viewer's eyes. Looks cool as the
fuzzy shadow plays across the granite surfaces of the stones!)
(I may send that off on the next tape.)
Keep On Toastin'
Erik Flom
Could you do 2 pics showing shadow mapping and raytrace shadows? Or can't
we tell the difference? If you've already tried it (same scene), which
produces better quality?
-= Vance =- Image Master
using Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster!
ooooo that Nefrititi anim sounds nice. The Triceratops is a Viewpoint
Model Impulse liscenced for release with Imagine 2.0, it is not
freely distributeable as far as I know. Perhaps John Foust can
further illuminate you. Perhaps it will be on his 3D ROM
>Shadow Mapping is AWESOME!
I have been working on a project in Imagine and I wanted to add shadows
but with about 70,000 polygons I decided to do it another way, I made my
own shadow maps. Of course, I don't have the control you do in LW and it
does have limitations but I did get it to work for what I needed. It will
be in my submition to the SCI-FI contest.
<<< Tony D. Tracer >>>