#Truevision vs Matrox
61 messages in this thread
We're about to get 3DS, but what board is preferred? We need to output to
Betacam SP, which we do now with TOPAS through an ATVISTA connected to a
Faroudja transcoder.
Any thoughts out there on a Truevision vs Matrox board to achieve the same (or
better) quality level??
Info appreciated ASAP.
Thank you.,
Don
Don,
you'll get the best quality for the least money from the DPS PAR. For 2-3 times
more money you could get the MAX with slightly inferior quality but which has
the ability to grow into a non-linear editing suite. (my comments partially
based on a recent review in AVVideo mag). I have the PAR and so do many of the
forum regulars and I have heard nothing but rave reviews about its quality.
Nobody I know has actually _bought_ the MAX and made any significant comments
on its usability in a production environment. The quality won't be quite as
good as frame-by-frame through a Vista but many of us are willing to make that
trade-off for the convenience gained.
You shouldn't beleive everything you read, Martin <g>
The review in AV Video magazine was a total joke. The reviewer had completely
failed to set up the system, and when it was shipped back to Matrox to use at a
trade show they were horrified to find out the guy had already written and
published the article (the MAX sytem he shipped back was practically
unuseable).
The MAX gets roughly 25% more throughput with one HD, and the quality is
spectacular. I'll be checking out the 2 HD RAID as soon as the software is
past alpha stage. I think they're getting visually lossless jpeg right now
with it, but I don't know what the setup is.
I don't want to say the MAX is superior to the PAR, because that's a loaded
statement, and the two differ in philosophy, but I can confidently say the
MAX's output is not inferior to the PAR's, rather in most circumstances it
would be noticeably better.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
John,
I had a feeling you'd jump on me for my response <g>. With all due respect, you
are the only person I know who has a MAX and supports it (other than Matrox
dealers, naturally) and that's easy to do when you probably didn't have to pay
for it – which is fine since you are reviewing it (I don't have a problem with
that). However, that leaves no unbiased person spending their own money who
seems to like it – what gives? Why aren't the huddled masses throwing their
money at Matrox for a MAX? Why are they instead flocking to DPS? <G> My point
is the PAR is just great value for money and is going to prove unbeatable
because of that. Just like 3d Studio in a way – breaking the backs of it's
competitors <g>. I will continue to only _ever_ recommend people even consider
the MAX if they already have a Illuminator Pro and even then it may cost them
more for a comparable setup.
>> The MAX gets roughly 25% more throughput with one HD, and the quality is
spectacular. <<
I'd like you to quantify that statement, because it sounds unlikely. The
hardrive is what supplies the throughput so you might be referring to a new
type of high throughput drive. What model?
Martin
The drive that gets that throughput is the Seagate Barracuda SCSI II series. I
can send you the data if you like, it's consistent at 4.5 megs per second on
the whole disk not just the outside. I was probably off with the 25% figure
though – it should probably have read @ 20% – the only numbers I've heard for
PAR throughput are 3.5 megs per second. If you've got different stats,
definitely let me know.
The reason people aren't flocking out to buy it is because its not available
yet, although a final release of the software was announced last week, which I
think means it'll be shipping by now – its much easier to flock to a product
that's available <g>.
I support the MAX not because I got one for free, but because of what I've been
doing with it and how its been working for me – which is why I suspect you
support the PAR <g>. I'll try to keep personal opinion out of my MAX related
posts, other than some market place conjecture.
The only reason I "jumped on you" (maybe "hop" would be more accurate <g>) was
to reference the AV Video article which was tainted due to the authors
inability to configure the device properly, which is not difficult at all (it
requires typing in one word, and letting the software do the rest <g>). It's
quite obvious that if a system is not configured properly, it'll perform poorly
compared to another that is in good shape. I don't have any personal interest
in backing one product over another, or whatever, and I'm not getting paid by
anyone to say anything nice about the product.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
Just a thought, guys…
I work at a VAR that sells/supports both the MAX and PAR. Although quality of
output is a critical issue, keep in mind the other potential system changes or
upgrades the decision may drive. If you buy the MAX you need an EISA system,
something few end users have. If you buy the PAR you can install it in an
ISA/VL or ISA/PCI system- certainly the norm right now. We have found that if
the standing cost difference doesn't tend to lean buyers toward the PAR, the
final "confgure the system so it works" cost does.
For small shops (and most are) and freelancers this is often the driving force
behind a final decision. Yes… this assumes that no matter which device
they're leaning toward, it meets the "good enough" standard as far as output
quality.
Ken Burke
Designlab
John,
>> Seagate Barracuda SCSI II series … consistent at 4.5 megs <<
That's what I wanted to know. I realise that is a fast drive (7200rpm) but I'm
not sure of it's suitability to task for Video use, especially re. thermal
recalc's etc. I think there may be a limitation in the length of sequence in
that regard. Let the buyer beware.
>> its not available yet <<
Ah hah! That _would_ make it difficult to buy <g>. What constantly amazes me
about Matrox is that there inability to bring stuff to market in a timely
manner. They've been promoting the MAX for almost 2 years (I saw it demo'd at
NAB '93 and it was "coming out soon" then) and it's still not shipping?!!
Amazing.
Personal opinion and biases are bound to come into this, unfortunately. In my
case, I probably want to think I bought the best JPEG device at _any_ price,
not just at that price range. Actually, there aren't any others at that price
range. I'm still convinced I have done so, and I'm convinced DPS is a company
who can and will be responsive to its users and improve the software and
hardware support to stay ahead of the game.
You, on the other hand, were actually an ideal candidate for the MAX since you
already have an Illuminator Pro, an EISA motherboard, and maybe the right EISA
controller. This would make the MAX a less expensive proposition than for
others.
Dealers will probably love the MAX (re: profit margins) and be at _great_ pains
to justify the much greater system cost over the PAR. They are already doing
this. I just don't think most customers will see the benefits.
Martin
The thermal recalculation does not appear to be a problem, but I haven't run a
super long jpeg stream yet. I think the longest I've done is around 10
seconds. I'll find out more as I go along.
Frankly, untill I get an Abekas or Accom (or comparable DDR) I won't believe
I've got the best non-linear playback device around. As much as I love the
MAX, and as good as I think PAR output is, there IS DEFINITELY a difference.
Jpeg is definitely a disadvantage.
I did have all the right parts in my computers, except for the Seagate
Barraccuda, which I don't regret buying. I have been able to use it both for
3DS .tga output storage and jpegging simultaneously, and it doesn't flinch –
unless someone comes out with a better SCSI drive, that'll be the next one I
get, too, maybe the SCSI III flavor. Of course, for best and final output I
erase all unnecessary files, defrag, then stream the targas. This give the
best results, as far as I can tell (but it could just be my "voodoo" <g>).
I don't know what the dealers margins are for the MAX, but they're not THAT
great. Don't forget, the price includes an Illuminator Pro, which isn't cheap
to start with.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
John,
>> The thermal recalculation does not appear to be a problem, but I haven't run
a super long jpeg stream yet. I think the longest I've done is around 10
seconds. <<
I think you need to do a little more research on this since you are not telling
the whole story. I have a Barracuda 1.7gb at work and it is a nice fast drive
but it is _NOT_ suitable for video. According to my research the Seagate
Barracuda ST-12550N will do a ~210ms thermal recalc around the 50 second mark
and then every 8 minutes on a jpeg stream, causing a complete loss of video.
("Whoops! We just lost 6 frames of video! Do you think the client will
mind?"). If you can live with this fine, but I think this is unacceptable. I
often use the PAR to create and compile long sequences of several minutes which
are played back in realtime to betaSP, to avoid further editting. A smart
programmer like Gus Grubba could probably figure out how to reprogram the
Barracuda's bios to force a T-recalc before JPEG playback giving you 8 minutes
before the next one. Otherwise, a good alternative for MAX users needing longer
sequences (which I imagine would be quite a few) would be a Micropolis AV
series (2210AV or 2217AV) which provide the highest uninterruptable access of
all. 'Course that would bring them down to the same data rate as the PAR using
the IDE version of that drive and once again level the playing field re. image
quality.
BTW, how much is the MAX alone?
>> Jpeg is definitely a disadvantage. <<
Only if you have extremely demanding Network TV clients, otherwise it's an
advantage (less data, faster production, faster editing). Like I said, all the
people I know are using the PAR for final output for corporate/industrial/cable
TV clients – they send it direct to BetaSP and everybody's happy. If you have
the clients and budgets for higher quality than JPEG, I'd say jump on an Accom
or Abekas.
Martin
Martin,
You're really big on this PAR unit. 🙂
Are you sure you're not getting paid for this? <BG>
Paul
Paul,
>> Are you sure you're not getting paid for this? <BG> <<
hehe <G>! I almost think I should be, but no I'm not 🙂 I bought my PAR setup
at market price (about $3100 including 1gb hardrive). When I see a product I
really like I do get really (over)excited about it. As you probably know from
following this forum, I've been singing the praises of JPEG devices in general,
and the PAR in particular for well over a year. The Amiga guys started this
trend but with a PAR and an Exabyte a freelancer could definetly become a giant
killer and start doing network graphics.
While Gus is a great programmer, and all around nice guy, he is probably not
the only person out there who knows how to force a thermal recalc. The MAX
forces recalcs at all operations other than jpeg playback, so there's no issue
there.
BTW, there's a SCSI version of the Mic AV. It's definitely slower than the
Barraccuda, and not recommended by Matrox (I think it won't work, as a matter
of fact). Plus, with SCSI's ability to do higher level arrays, throuput is
just a matter of controller and buss capabilities.
The MAX w/o Illuminator Pro lists for @ $3000, I _think_, but I don't know for
sure.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
John,
>> The MAX forces recalcs at all operations other than jpeg playback <<
but that's exactly where I'd want it to force a T-recalc (before jpeg
playback).
Anyway, I think we've argued this to death <g>. So, I'm just going to sum up my
feelings, or what I'd suggest to new users.
1. Buy a PAR, unless you _already_ own all the pieces for the MAX to work (an
illuminator pro 4mb, an EISA m/b, an approved EISA scsi controller), otherwise
avoid the MAX completely.
2. If you get network-level TV projects with a small budget get an Exabyte tape
backup to send your animations to D1/BetaSP via Abekas DDR.
3. If you get network-level TV projects with a BIG budget buy your own Abekas
and a PVW or BVW series BetaSP deck.
That's it for me (maybe) 🙂
Martin,
It sounds like that just about sums it up all the way around. You've got my
vote. Maybe we can zip up just your last message and put it into the file
directories. Because you know it'll be the title of another thread next week.
Paul
Martin,
Sorry man, just got'a disagree. I've seen both and sell both solutions and
thus I feel I'm somewhat unbiased … so here it goes.
Output Quality: I've seen both and it seemed clear to me that the MAX was
definitely better.
Interface: The PAR has a simpler interface .. but its features are lacking.
The capability that the MAX has to create an EDL, set in/out pts for each
segment and play-out without JPEG recalc is awesome! (basically cuts-only,
non-linear editing)
>> decission matrix for purchase
This is the descission tree that I present my customers who are trying to
descide which system to go to.
1) Are you doing animations only (i.e. architect, engineer, contract
animator), then the PAR is a candidtate. The high quality, low price and basic
capabilities of the system are a perfect match for you.
2) Are you a video or broadcast facility who also has and uses video editing
equipment? If so the MAX is the best candidate. Since the MAX has the IllPro,
the benefit of being able to run CG, paint, event controllers, etc. is a
tremendeous value added to the system which offsets the price difference. Also
the IllPro now ships with a flicker reduced Win mode for very nice NTSC windows
screens. So again the basic flexibility of the MAX system, because of the
IllPro, is the main factor here.
Ang
Martin, which Exabyte tape drive is compatible with the Abekas
software?
I have a beta deck, but I'm about to buy a multi-gig backup. I've seen
threads on the Exabyte/Abekas connection before, but I really didn't
pay full attention. We do a lot of corporate animation, and I might
be interested in these capabilities down the line. At the least, it
might be good to know that I could send tape backups to another house
for layoff.
How does it work?
How does it work with 3DS?
How much is the Abekas end of the system?
Will the exabyte drive work on the Macintosh platform as well?
Thanks for the info, and I apologize if I'm making you repeat yourself.
I saw the Barracuda drive being used with a Targa+2000 and Adobe Premier to
output video and it looked pretty good to me. I saw a sequence of video
running non stop for 5 minutes with no problems.
Don,
>> video running non stop for 5 minutes with no problems. <<
it t-recalcs every 8.33 minutes after the initial one at 50 seconds. If you
could force the first one to happen before you started playback, you'd still
get them every 8 minutes, I believe.
John, While I agree with your stance on the MAX, I would like to point out some
fallacy to your reasons.
First, so you understand my position. I place the MAX (in theory) at the
middle of the DDR animation recording technology. The PAR at the low end and
the abekas at the high end. Based on this placement I have no problems with
the MAX and its cost to implement because, in theory, it should achieve 3 times
the peak compression quality as the PAR. (3:1 vs. 10 to 1) What bothers me
with a "middle" technology is that it could quickly get squeezed out as the
price of the Abekas continues to drop and the quality of the PAR continues to
increase as IDE thruput gets better. The second problem I've always had with
the MAX has been its complexity and specificity in the hardware arena.
As with your statement: " I don't have any personal interest in backing one
product over another, or whatever, and I'm not getting paid by anyone to say
anything nice about the product. "
I hardly consider receiving thousands of $$ in Matrox hardware for free not
getting paid. I've done beta testing on hardware too and every time I received
hardware it had to be returned within a couple of weeks or I was billed for it.
So, in my opinion, you are either being paid to say nice things or you did buy
it or you stole it. <G>
Finally, I want you to know that I am a proponent of this whole technology and
wish to see the MAX system finally hit the market. I WANT it to be the
competitor to the PAR because with a worthy competitor the PAR will only get
better.
Don,
>> it should achieve 3 times the peak compression quality as the PAR. <<
could you explain this to me, please. If it's drive array's you are talking
about then I'd love to know how Matrox intend to implement that and when. Do
remember that if Matrox announces some new capability it's usually 2 years from
coming to market.
Sure, The compression ratio of less than approximately 8:1 is
considered by most to be lossless. Others say it must be as little
as 3:1 to be lossless. In December I spoke to the Matrox reps about
what the capabilities of the MAX will be and how they would compare
it to DPS. Matrox claimed they could achieve a 3:1 compression but
with the current system they were only achieving 8:1 which they
claimed to be lossless. They (Matrox) said the DPS system would not
be able to achieve even 10:1 compression. Remember, Martin, all this
is just theory. The reality of all this is that I have not yet seen
the MAX do any animation longer than 15 seconds sustained output at
ratios of 10:1. While it is possible to run the PAR at these low
compression ratios the PAR will also have video breakup.
Consequently, we PAR operators are currently stuck with a BLF/QF of
250/23 yielding compression of approximately 13-14 :1. The way I
figure the ratio on the PAR is to total the file size of targa
series. and then divide by the file size of the ani file on the PAR.
An example of a recent project was 486 MB of targa files and the ani
file was 35.326 Mb. or 13.75:1. The real bottom line to all this
is that a compression ratio of 13-14 to 1 is acceptable to 100% of my
clients. I really don't think that I would gain any more clients if
I had a MAX operating at 8:1 or even at 3:1.
Having said this, last week for the first time I was asked to describe
my equipment I would be using to do the animation I was bidding on.
Since I don't like to divulge my tools I use I was rather vague but
did mention 3DStudio with component output to beta SP, High speed
rendering using a network of PC's. I did not get the job because the
client wanted his animation to be done on the SGI systems or the
toaster because those are the systems being used in recognition,
namely Sea Quest and Jurasic park. It would have been a nice job but
I've got enough to keep me busy right now. Point is the question of
compression did not even come up. The question of recording method
did not even come up.
I agree with everything you say. Plus, I'm very sceptical about this
3:1 figure – I think it's theory or what they have achieved in the
lab with alpha setups. Let's see them deliver, they haven't yet. Very
fishy. I think JPEG is a voodoo art and that makes it very easy to
distort claims.
VooDoo art? Right! Reminds me of that frame grabbing job I did last
year. The voodoo programmer claimed he could get 15 FPS full motion
full screen video in 24 bit in 640X480 res using his proprietary
technique. I did the frame grabbing, he put it to a file structure
and then had a one-off to CD-ROM and, just as I predicted, it was all
a hoax. While I won't be as decisive as you about the MAX and it's
future I will be surprised if it is a money maker for Matrox.
Remember the prediction I made last year? I said that in one year
(this December '94) that frame by frame will be dead! I still say
this is a true prediction. Do you know that since PAR I have not
read one single message on this forum about doing single frame by
frame recording. I did read a few messages about Quick Pass but when
John Ellis bought his a year before I predicted this PAR would change
the way we think about recording animation I felt the prediction was
a done deal. There are still some discussions on other forums about
single framing, softVTR and BCD devices but when I educate those
inquiring minds that the PAR exists the discussion quickly changes to
"where can I get one of these?" I think if I told them about the MAX
with all those special requirements they wouldn't be interested.
>> Do you know that since PAR I have not read one single message on
this forum about doing single frame by frame recording. <<
that is so right! The flavour of the forum has changed a lot since the
PAR was introduced. I think there are few here who need higher
quality than the PAR can deliver, and if they _do_, more of them are
taking the Abekas route (possibly using an Exabyte). I'm considering
buying an Exabyte, not because I have a project to justify it yet,
but mainly because I need a solid backup device.
>> I did not get the job because the client wanted his animation to be
done on the SGI systems or the toaster <<
I see I am not the only one this has happened to. For me it is a big
deal because I need every job I can get. I plan on sending out a
demo tape later this year and asking if they can tell how it was
done. (Not that I want to prove a point or anything. 🙂
With my new equipment acquisitions I need every job I can get too. Yesterday,
I saw the work done on a job I bid and lost to wavefront last winter. A simple
animation but it looked like it was rendered to frames (jerky) and with 8 bit
dithered color depth. Really ticked the customer off when I showed him 3DSr3
64 bit color with field rendering at PAR output. He will be giving me the next
job. 🙂 Wavefront doesn't impress me anymore!
My arrangments with Matrox concerning my keeping MAX do not involve getting it
for free, and definitely do not involve endorsing or promoting the product in
any way, other than that I just like it and have the same motivation to talk
about it as anyone who's got hardware they like.
I completely agree that pressure from the top (Abekas, Accom) will be tough,
but there are a couple of points to consider: they still list @ more than twice
as much as MAX, by virtue of their uncompromized playback and keeping to a
lower cost, they do not play back very much animation at one time, and they do
not have integrated PC support out of the box (unless something has changed
recently).
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
John,
They do have full PC support out of the box. No boards to install, just plug it
up to a serial port and either network it in or hook it to a SCSI chain. Works
great.
FWIW
Paul
That's pretty cool. Every time I talked with Abekas and Accom about this they
told me they have mac and sgi support, but no software drivers for PC stuff.
How's the interface?
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
Well it doesn't really have an interface. It's simple 422 protocol, so you can
access it just like you do any other 422 device. I'm not much for little
proprietary interfaces. I enjoy accessing everything video related the same
way.
Paul
Ah. I know connecting the boxes works fine, but from what you said I thought
they included drivers now. I like using a front end for the recording stuff,
but then you get those nifty little keyboards and jog-shuttle knobs (no knob
with the Accom though, right?) so it doesn't really matter.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
Do you know whether Matrox will be demoing the MAX at Siggraph? I've been
waiting to see this wonder since December. So far, you're the only one I know
that has one that works. I'll say this much, if Matrox can get theirs to work
the software GUI will be superior to the PAR. I liked what I saw at Comdex.
The file handling capability of the PAR constantly annoys me. It has a 1984
DOS look and feel.
I'm quite positive Matrox will show MAX at siggraph. They'll have one in the
Autodesk booth, the Crystal Graphics Booth, and their own (this from their
press release). The release version of MAX software was announced last week.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
I've heard that a PCI-bus Max is in the works. Any info?
don
Haven't heard anything, but it would make a LOT of sense.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
Yo Martin, The PAL version of the PAR will be released in Australia in
September and I'm kinda interested in it's specs. Is it a broadcast device or
not? I'm looking for something to give me at least PAL-SP Quality. Is this the
box for me?
Thanks
Glenn 4Di……(soon to be ANVIL ANIMATION)
Hey Glenn, wha's up?
>> Is it a broadcast device or not? <<
Ah, the $10000 question rears its ugly head again. I think you and your clients
would have to be the judge of that since I understand its a subjective
question. The specs are probably broadcast quality (line resolution and signal
to noise etc) on the direct betacam outputs. You may be able to spot edge
artifacts, but I doubt the average man on the street would. Also, everybody I
know who has one is using it for final output _unless_ they have an Abekas or
easy access to one – instead they use it for a fast, convenient, and high
capacity preview device before committing to Abekas. Consequently, I would say
use it for final output unless the above circumstances are true. If I remember
correctly you are networked to an Abekas, so I'm not sure where the PAR would
help you other than for great previews.
BTW, I'd be interested in hearing your comments on heroes.jpg which I uploaded
some time ago (lib 5, images/animations). It's a compostion of 3 characters I
built (also animated a bit) mainly using skin.axp.
>> 4Di……(soon to be ANVIL ANIMATION) <<
What's going on? Are you branching out on your own? Do tell 🙂
Martin
Hey Glenn,
I've been working with an NTSC PAR up here. For the type of work you do I
think the output would fall just that little bit short of your definition of
"broadcast quality".
However, for folks like you it's GREAT for tests. It goes great with a render
farm — just send your animation out and BANG! a few hours later you're
watching it play back in full glorious realtime color.
I'm hoping DPS will come out with a combo NTSC/PAL machine at some time so I
don't have to buy two. But if I have to I will (one for the US and one for
Oz).
Michele
Michele,
>> I'm hoping DPS will come out with a combo NTSC/PAL machine at some time so I
don't have to buy two. <<
Don't hold your breath <g>. Last I heard, DPS has no intention of having a
combined NTSC/PAL card. The reasons are technical. They would have had to go
with the 720×486 and 720×576 resolution for it to work for both. Instead they
decided to maximize bandwidth by going with the higher 752×480 resolution.
Oh poop. When is the broadcast industry going to start catering to those of us
who can't decide which hemisphere to live in? I know we only make up 0.00001%
of the market, but we're growing in number…
Today I saw off an American friend who is on her way to Australia. She's
moving there, lock stock and barrel. She brought her Pentium and laser printer
and is going to look for AutoCAD work in Sydney, perhaps Brisbane. We're
coooommmmiiiiinnnngggg….. Mwah hah hah.
Michele
Michele,
are you going to Siggraph this year?
Does the PAR co-exist with the ATVISTA so you can choose either method of
rendering?
Don
Don,
>> Does the PAR co-exist with the ATVISTA so you can choose either method of
rendering? <<
It should. You just need to be sure the base addresses and IRQ's are unique.
>>PAR co-exist with the ATVISTA?…
Hey Don C. I don't know if you got your question answered yet, but just in
case you haven't, I'll jump in. The PAR works very nicely with the ATVISTA. (I
have both) For me, it is the ultimate setup, since I use the ATVISTA for all
rendering tests, switch to the PAR for animations, or single-frame thru the
VISTA for better quality. (or when I feel like punishing myself) With the PAR,
you can work without a framebuffer such as the VISTA or Targa, but I think it
is much more efficient, less stressful, and a lot more fun to use a
framebuffer. For example, with the PAR alone you can't overlay an image with a
small rendered region to compare materials or lighting.
JKJ
>>With the PAR alone you can't overlay an image with a small rendered region to
compare materials or lighting<<
That's true, John, but you *can* render to successive frames on the PAR and
just do a quick frame-jump with the PAR software!
-Alan (may not be pretty but it can work in a pinch!<g>)
PS -I thought you were gonna call…
>>PAR frame-jumpin'…
Yeah, buddy. I think it would work OK as a "poor-man's" (relative, of course
<g>) frame buffer. It seems to me from when I played with it that another
small advantage to sending rendering tests dircectly to the PAR was the
"history" animation file you build.
I was going to call sometime soon when I had enough free minutes to make it
worthwhile! So far, ack!
Hey, a proposition, Mr Alan "Social Director" Iglesias. I tremendously enjoyed
the Siggraph ASOFT get-together you guys put on last year (with Iglesias
originals' nametags!). If it turns out that no one local to mid-Fla is
volunteers to set up an ASOFT thing this year, maybe we could set one up for
later in the week after we get there and scope out the area. You know, people
could give the secret password at the Adesk booth on Monday and be shown the
private notice for the party on Tuesday or Thursday, or something like that.
I'll be driving down with Bruce M. so maybe we could bring an SVHS deck. Just
need to find/rent a spot with a TV, etc. Think it would work?
JKJ
John,
<< Think it would work?.. >>
I'd go.. good luck making it happen..
jonas[adesk]
>>PAR frame bufferin'
And, here's another tidbit for those (poor souls) wishing to paint on their PAR
frames, but the PAR's non-square pixel is "distorting" the issue<g>.
I got around this by setting my Windows driver to 800x600x24 (it should be
mentioned, this is a resolution I NEVER use for anything else. I LOVE UI's in
1024×768 and it re-draws just about as fast as 800×600!) and render a sphere in
3DS using the PAR's native 752x480x.851. Bring the pic into your favorite
Windows (or whatever) paint program an re-adjust your monitor 'till the sphere
is "spherical"<g>. Now let your monitor "remember" this configuration for the
800×600 scan-rate (obviously, you need a monitor and/or card that lets ya do
this) and every time you "do" the scan-rate, your monitor/card will use these
settings. Voila, a non-square pixel display to paint on your PAR frames with!
Wanna see 'em on NTSC? just a quick "save" to the PAR drive away.
If I know you, you've probably got an easier way to do this<g>. Oh, that's
right — you just use the Vista, right?
Having a Siggraph '94 ASOFT get-together is a great idea. I was really hoping
one of our Florida-based bretheren would pick up the ball here, but no-one has
stepped forth as of yet. Lessee… Monday night is the Adesk press conference,
Tuesday I think many folks may go to the Electronic Theater, and Wednesday is
the Adesk/3DS party itself. Thursday, Martin and I are West-bound. That kinda
leaves Sunday night, like last year. The downside to Sunday night is we miss
the opportunity to have information left at the booth (assuming they'd help us
out), as well as the fact that it is hard to say just how many ASOFT folks will
be in town Sunday night, so perhaps we could get a little creative here and
make a couple of phone calls. I'd be glad to call a few places and see if
anyone would mind us "dropping in". If someone/place was agreeable, we could
post it here and make sure everyone gets the message. Kind of a long-shot, but
I'd give it a whirl…
So how 'bout it? How many of y'all are gonna be around Sunday night? Can anyone
out there reccomend a couple of local bars that might have us? I guess I could
always go cold from the local yellow pages (if I can find 'em)…I've been
known to do nuttier things…
Anything for a party!
-Alan
I'll be around, but I'm not sure I can commit to anything that night. If
something happens, and I've got the time, I might spontaneously show up.
– G
I'm in for sunday nite.
I'm getting in bout 3PM, Sun. An ASOFT jam… well, party, would be great!
Alan,
Looking back through some old notes here I found the name Dan O'Leary
[73140,1211], a representative of Siggraph's Orlando Chapter, I believe. Months
ago he mentioned hosting a group get-together at Siggraph, but there was no
real interest since it was way to early. I'll drop him a brief e-mail message
to see if he has anything going.
BTW, Count me in for Sunday, wherever we end up. There is a Siggraph reception
on Sunday (for conference attendees?), but this will certainly be more fun!
– Dave
I will be there Sunday. In fact, I will be there Saturday night! In
fact, I am staying the whole week!! I need someone to water my
plants . . .
Great to hear it James!
Things are shaping up nicely — see my anouncement…
See ya there!
-Alan
Alan
I've been using the PAR as sort of a framebuffer, rendering to
stills, and after about 15 renders of the same image with the same
name(overwriting) it scrambles the PAR drive and forces me to format
the drive. Of course I lost 900 frames "both" times<G>!! Any ideas on
how to avoid trashing the drive?
I'm not arriving in Orlando until Monday, so I'll leave it up to you to watch
JKJ at the shindig<g>
TedB
!^NavFont01F0007MGHHH509EA1
Dang it, Ted! I was hoping you'd be around on Sunday. Oh well, we'll catch ya
at the show and party.
I'll keep a close eye on JKJ for ya; maybe I'll grow a ZZ-Top beard so he'll
feel more comfortable<g>.
Not too suprised at the "scrambling" of the PAR disk after repeated
.STL renders. The DOS functionality only really goes so far, I guess.
Try turning your ANIM/STILL switch to ANIM and just render to
subseqent frames in a single .ANI file. The latest one will show up
on your monitor after the save, and the quality is pretty dang good,
if you have a nice, high BlLimit set. Don't know about any limit
problems with this method, yet, as I don't usually go for too many at
once. You also get a nice way of comparing renders, by just perusing
thru the .ANI file with the PAR software.
See ya in Orlando!
-Alan
Thanks, Alan
Single frame ANI files seem to make the most sense anyway! See you on the
floor<g>.
TedB
!^NavFont01F0007MGHHG54F214
The ATVista is a great board, still one of the best out there. I use an
Illuminator Pro, which has on-board CCIR-601 and D1 output with optional
Toccata board, but if you've already got an ATVista and don't need digital
output, then you're all set.
Martin's comments re the PAR and MAX are almost right on. They do have
excellent output (not quite up to single framing w/ BetaSP, but close). The
MAX, however, is definitely not inferior in output to the PAR, I rather think
it's superior. It has greater throughput (@ 25% faster HD througput),
upgradeable to 2 HD array for visually lossless jpeg, and as Martin said, it
fits nicely into a non-linear editing situation. The article Martin referred
to was written by a fellow who was completely unable to configure the MAX
properly, for what reason I don't know.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
Thnaks for the input. i saw the demo reel for the PAR, and it would have some
limited application for us. I've yet to see a demo for MAX (on Beta SP), so
I'm not convinced that it would be worth purchasing now. But, maybe…
Don
I'm pretty sure dealers have MAXs to show off at this point, also it'll be at
Siggraph.
John Tissavary (LUNA cie)