CompuServe Thread

#Hi-8 audio tracks? HELP!

5 messages in this thread
#178094From: Thomas FlanneryJul 1, 1995 1:41 AM
Don, Your question sent me to the manuals to check for the specification in writing, but alas, no such description about the pixel size of the frame buffers. But here is what I do know… The system specifications are CCIR 601, which I though was 720×486.(you're the expert here.. ) Further proof for the frame size is also confirmed by the bundled "paint" program that has a default size of 720×486 with no facilities to change it's size. In addition I loaded up some of the special effects files that are used for Geni wipes etc., and PShop also confirms the 720×486 size. If I fire up the Inscriber program an tell it to load a 512×486 targa file, it sizes the image to fit the 720×486 size. This is also confirmed by "exporting" the file and checking it's size with PShop. With the Alladin application itself, if I load the same image, it is not sized and has black borders at the sides of the image. I did note that PShop cannot load the JPEG files that Alladin Paint creates 🙁 Sooo… Everything seems to confirm the 720×486 size even if it is not stated anywhere in the documentation. This is probably due to the fact the bundled programs must see the Alladin to work, and operate as an integrated package. If the system was 640×480 when you saw it, it has certainly changed. I can see no way to get any of the applications to produce an image file of that size. As far as working with the Fast Video Machine, don't know…From what I know, I'm not sure what value the Alladin would add to the Fast VM. Seems to be very redundant capabilities in the switcher/frame buffer area. It is clear that they make modifications to other application that work with the Alladin, ie. the Crystal Topas software that must see a lit up Alladin in order to start. As I said, a very expensive harware lock. (I haven't, nor do I intend to load Topas, but thats what the Doc's say) From the pixel depths, Tom
#178118From: Don LandisJul 1, 1995 10:30 AM
On the CCIR issue: I would say it is favorable for 720×486 but not to guarantee it. I will try to get some answers here. Could be they have a special configuration for different machines. As for Topas, Crystal sells many versions of the Topas Professional. Yours requires Aladdin, mine requires the 3DStudio dongle, would you believe. As for the FAST VM: Aladdin brings additional video channels of compositing and 3D DVE. Fast only has two channels and only does 2D DVE. And from what I've seen a better chroma keyer than the FAST. IT is a definite plus for a FAST VM owner. I place it higher prioriety than any NLE system for FAST VM.
#178357From: Thomas FlanneryJul 3, 1995 9:44 PM
Don, Thanks for the clarification on the FAST stuff, I didn't remember the 2D vs 3D effects issue. Given that with the Alladin does all the switcher handling, I guess the FAST is relegated to machine control and the FAST GUI editor, correct… Cheers, Tom
#178390From: Don LandisJul 4, 1995 10:32 AM
>> guess the FAST is relegated to machine control and the FAST GUI editor, correct… I have never gotten a straight answer from either FAST or Pinnacle on this question, but if a recent article in VMUM is any indication one would only use the Alladin for 3D effects, subtractive chroma key effects and any use that the VM by itself is not capable. This is why purchase of a 3D effects box is a tough call money wise. Considering that the average video is 90% cuts, 8% dissolves and fades to black, and 2% special wipes and effects. We would only use the Alladin for, maybe, half of that 2% or 1 effect out of a hundred. Of course if we did music videos there might be a greater proportionate application. If I decide to get the Alladin it would be based on the assumption that TV commercials would be taking on the this layered, high end, Alladin look for the commercial market I currently tap. I think it is unrealistic to believe that I would start to get those deep pocket commercials that tipically use these effects. I have done one commercial like this all year and it was achieved using the VM's alpha wipe capability in manual T-bar mode. In other words the Alladin would be a long payback for me in my current business. I could only justify the expense if I felt that the competition was passing me by in this regard.
#178464From: Thomas FlanneryJul 4, 1995 11:00 PM
Don, You're assumptions are quite valid. Early on when I was assembling my edit suite the Fast was a consideration, but I was concerned about the proprietary architechure. It seems that some of my early concerns were valid. For my particular case, I had a somewhat dated Echo Labs PC-3 SMPTE switcher. In order to do basic CG, I used a Magni VGA Pro with a DOS based CG program. This required more signal paths for the video than I wanted, and the quality was only passable for low budget productions. For Higher end sy=tuff I used the Targa. I very much wanted to replace the the current setup, so the Alladin seemed like a natural choice. So far I'm still learning all of the things it can do, but the quality of the signal and the effects are awsome… Thanks for your side of the equation. Some day I'll try and make some money off all of this investment. Right now I do only a few commercials, and some industrial trade show video work. Onward to better video quality, Tom