CompuServe Thread – CompuServe test bed

Autodesk Multimedia Forum · Hware/OpSys/video

#PAR FOR BROADCAST?

15 messages in this thread

#107311From: Ed LandryJun 12, 1994 10:06 PM

Is the PAR's output considered good enough for actual tape creation (for each tape format), or just good enough for test runs?

#107339From: John EllisJun 13, 1994 12:56 AM

Ed, >> Is the PAR's output considered good enough for actual tape creation. << That depends on the format and who your client is. For true Broadcast "no". Almost everything else short of that "yes". Does that mean you won't see it on local channels? "no". Does it mean you won't see on major networks? "yes". Does that mean that someone for United Way will use it and it'll get aired on NBC, I wouldn't be suprised, but the networks and large Post houses that feed them won't be using them. If you wonder why this funny response to your question its because the question was and or is one of the most controversial questions that has appeared here. I suspect that even the most vocal will however agree with my synopsis, having properly phrased it. <g>

#107572From: Don LandisJun 14, 1994 12:28 AM

>> For true Broadcast "no" For once we agree, John. The ONLY TRUE BROADCAST is live camera to transmitter link. Everything else is just fake broadcast. <BG>

#107594From: John EllisJun 14, 1994 3:38 AM

>> Everything else is just fake broadcast. << Yeah, I think they call it "Live" on tape. <g> -JE

#107389From: Don LandisJun 13, 1994 10:31 AM

Yes it is good enough, by my standards. It's also good enough by all my customer's standards which is more important. My customers consist of local broadcast clients, local Chamber of Commerce, numerous industrial and commercial clients.

#107516From: Ed LandryJun 13, 1994 7:55 PM

Do you use Beta SP? I love the VHS output, but have heard that the Beta SP may not be good enough. I have also heard that it is good. What's your opinion?

#108043From: Paul ReeceJun 16, 1994 6:10 AM

>> Do you use Beta SP? I love the VHS output, but have heard that the Beta SP may not be good enough. I have also heard that it is good. What's your opinion? << If I understand the quiestion "Is BETA SP better than VHS?", correct me if I'm wrong here? As a broadcaster for 25 years in major markets, BETA SP is currently the broadcast standard for stations, many networks and larger stations have been going to digital or master control and editing but have been using BETA and BETA SP for a generation now. "BETA SP .. not good enough" and "VHS" in the same sentence doesn't compute…. BETA is a broadcast standard… VHS, in any format, is a consumer grade standard. Apples and oranges.

#108147From: Ed LandryJun 16, 1994 3:01 PM

I realize that Beta SP is better than VHS. What I meant was, the PAR output to VHS is very good in my opinion. But I have heard that for broadcast quality Beta SP, the PAR output may not be good enough. I have never worked with Beta SP, and don't know if frame-by-frame rendering is significantly superior to the results one can get with the PAR. There seems to be no scientific standard to determine this, so I must get opinions… Thanks for responding – hope I was clearer this time!

#108418From: John TissavaryJun 18, 1994 5:33 AM

Although the PAR's output is really good, it is not quite the same as frame by frame from a high res framebuffer like the ATVista or Illuminator Pro to Beta SP. The PAR uses a lossy compression scheme (JPEG), and although artifacting is minimized during motion playback, it does degrade the overall video and therefore is not as solid as a well setup up single frame (or non-compression DDR like Abekas A66). Still, I think for all but the high-end broadcast stuff the PAR (and other motion jpeg devices) will do fantastically, especially when recorded to Beta SP wich makes VHS look like the dog-s**t it really is <g>. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)

#108466From: MARTIN G FOSTERJun 18, 1994 3:15 PM

John, all right John! Good message. I think I agree with you on that entire summation. I would like to emphasize that the output of the PAR does look a lot better than single-framing with a targa+, in my experience, although probably not as good as from an AT/Vista. I can live with this slight lessening of quality though since single-framing was a huge pain in the arse for me <g>.

#108491From: John TissavaryJun 18, 1994 7:36 PM

Thanks for pointing out the Targa+/PAR/MAX difference. I agree wholeheartedly. Anyone want to buy an almost new Targa+ ? <g> <no g>. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)

#108502From: MARTIN G FOSTERJun 18, 1994 9:29 PM

John, I still use my targa+ 16/32 for framebuffering purposes, so it hasn't completely outlived it's usefulness for me.

#108585From: John TissavaryJun 19, 1994 5:50 PM

Since the MAX comes with the Illuminator Pro (which is definitely way better than the Targa+) I haven't found a use for it. Oh well… John Tissavary (LUNA cie)

#108599From: MARTIN G FOSTERJun 19, 1994 10:36 PM

John, In your situation, the targa+ is probably gathering dust 🙁 Sell it if you can.

#108725From: Thomas O'DeaJun 20, 1994 2:03 PM

Re: Targa+ Well, if you're giving it away, I can put it to use <g>.