CompuServe Thread

#Buying SGI Equipment

38 messages in this thread
#178745From: Guy GalerJul 6, 1995 4:08 PM
I am looking into buying an SGI workstation and wondered if anyone had some advice. Thanks?
#178755From: Dan O'LearyJul 6, 1995 5:05 PM
>> I am looking into buying an SGI workstation and wondered if anyone had some advice. Thanks? << Make sure you _REALLY_ need one before you buy it. What is your application? – Dan / n-Space, Inc.
#178880From: Guy GalerJul 7, 1995 10:59 AM
I am looking at gettting the MediaSuite Pro from Avid and runnning it on a SGI Indigo Extreme. I will demo this before buying it, but I don't think the SGI runs that much more for online editing. I want to have at least Betacam SP quaility output in real time. I like the PAR card but it does not do things with sound that I need now. The perception card looks good, but when can I actually get one and how long will it take to be stable? I need this equipment with two months. I will probably get Power Animator, if I like it when I sit down with it, because the big shops use it and it does seem to do some nice things.
#178900From: CSA/CAJul 7, 1995 12:38 PM
Guy, Have you looked at the cost for acquisition and output of Betacam SP quality images on the SGI? We're an SGI dealer, and the machines are definitely of value to some folks, but your arguments thus far haven't convinced me you need it. Believe me though, it's gonna cost you, if not in the initial machine purchase, in the maintenance agreements for the SGI hardware, SGI software, and your application software. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#179249From: Guy GalerJul 10, 1995 9:14 AM
The cost I have figured for buying a MediaSuite Pro online editing and a SGI Indigo Extreme is around $100,000. To me, that seems better than spending half that on a proprietary system that probably does not look as good. If you have some alternatives for Non Linear Editing I would like to hear them. I would be happy to spend less money and be able to do what I want. PS. Although I like PAR, and think the Perception things sounds nice, I am not sure when it will be running. I have heard of delays and backorders, plus how well will RAZOR work with it.
#179281From: CSA/CAJul 10, 1995 12:31 PM
Guy, OK then, I think I see your perspective on the SGI decision, and it probably isn't a bad one considering the alternatives. Are you sure, however, that an Indigo2 Extreme is really useful for that purpose? I doubt the hardware 3D graphics engines in the Extreme provide any assistance in Non-Linear Editing functions, and, in fact, the XL is quite a bit faster in the 2D functions. I think you may be overbuying, unless you anticipate considerable 3D modeling, and want the interactivity with shaded feedback. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#179305From: Guy GalerJul 10, 1995 1:56 PM
Kevin, Thanks for the feedback. Let me tell you where I am trying to go with this whole thing. First, I am looking at music videos and commercials. I want to be able to incorporate 2d effects, 3d animation and live video with an output that is atleast Betacam SP. Building on this, I want to be able to move more into compositing with 3D and morphing with live video. I have several connections to film people that could use cheap special effects, cheap in terms of ILM. I feel that in order to match computer animation and live video, I will need a lot of speed because I know there is going to be a lot of tinkering to get it to look right. The Extreme might be too much for now, but I want to grow into having several SGI machines. I would love to stay with IBM compatibles, but I find it hard to picture a general computer fullfilling the growing graphic needs for video and film. Let me know what you think.
#179369From: CSA/CAJul 10, 1995 8:12 PM
Guy, The Extreme (and I think SGI just announced another graphics monster coming in the Indigo2 line) would be useful for 3D modeling. Any final rendering or processing of images, or general tinkering, is only going to use the main cpu. In other words, computing power would be processor dependent (faster the better), not really a function of the graphics acceleration (for instance, a XAOS Pandemonium effect won't run any faster). In the case of the 3D Studio Renderer for SGI, a 200 MHz Indigo2 XL would run just as fast as the Extreme, and probably only slightly better than an Indy. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#179507From: David GouldJul 11, 1995 5:05 PM
To all those that are interested… <<The Extreme (and I think SGI just announced another graphics monster coming in the Indigo2 line)>> In a press release received today, 7/10/95, Silicon Graphics, Inc. announced a new line of computers at the SGI intermediate price level. The Indigo2 Impact series is reported to offer three times the 3D performance of the Indigo2 Extreme. SGI states that the Indigo2 Impact integrated imaging subsystem "generates a record 100 million trilinear interpolations [that's triangles in English–Ed.] per second for advanced visualization." The new Impacts also incorporate a new RAM bus technology running at up to 500MHz. The Impact systems are said to run all software made for the Indigo2 line. New applications have been prepared as well, by a number of software companies to take advantage of the new system's capabilities. Pricing is $35,000 for the High Impact and $40,000 for the Maximum Impact, both to be available this quarter. More powerful and higher-priced Impact models are scheduled to appear in the 4th quarter. DaviD "When will the "Do everything automatically" button be installed?" GouID
#179546From: CSA/CAJul 11, 1995 7:48 PM
Daivd, Hey, I knew that! Thanks for the posting. New processors are R4400s running at 250 MHz. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#182620From: Marc D. DalbyJul 28, 1995 12:28 PM
>>We're an SGI dealer, and the machines are definitely of value to some folks>> Kevin, About to purchase an Indigo2 with Galileo Board, and possibly the V-Lan Box "Alex?" for use with Wavefront software. Have you seen or used any combinations of the SGI or aftermarket V-LAN and Betacam or high-end S-VHS decks. If so can you recommend any combinations of these systems that have proven themselves for use. Thanks for the input, Marc Dalby
#182622From: CSA/CAJul 28, 1995 12:38 PM
Marc, Sorry, can't provide any input in that arena in regards to the SGI. Most people seem to go to an Abekas or Accom digital disk via an Ethernet connection (or to Exabyte tape for transfer at a service bureau/post house). A lot of other frame-by-frame stuff is often transferred over to PC or Mac frame buffers and recorded from the local station. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#178946From: Dan O'LearyJul 7, 1995 6:38 PM
I don't know much about NLE stuff, but the SGI is probably an excellent box for it. Just make sure you buy plenty of those hard drive thingys! <BG> >> I will probably get Power Animator… does seem to do some nice things << Kind of a laid-back comment for a $15k+ package. Yes, it does do some nice things, but for the price of the software alone, you can get a nice PC, 3ds, and a good selection of IPAS routines. I would recommend that you determine if Alias is truely necessary for your application before diving in… – Dan / n-Space, Inc. ps – Don't expect to just sit down at Alias and pick up on it in a few hours, either. Damn poor interface.
#179244From: Guy GalerJul 10, 1995 9:03 AM
I would like to comment that I am not stuck on Alias. I just know a lot of people that use it, but it seems to be more for modeling. I like Studio 3d a lot, in fact, I would guess I would still use it for some things. It just does not seem to be that great at making photorealistic things. The speed problems with 3ds will probably be taken care of when the Windows Nt version is out, but when will that be and how buggy.
#178784From: Bradley J. ArtigueJul 6, 1995 8:10 PM
SGI? Get out your wallet! We looked into the SGI machines a while back, but for the money, they just aren't worth it. Use Brad math here: 1 SGI Indy with what I needed to do the same quality work I get from 3DS would cost me over $10,000.00. So let's use $10,000.00 as our number here. For the money, I would get a machine that works about twice as fast as my Pentium 90, which costs me around $4000.00 once I bought all the RAM. So I pay about twice as much for a machine that is twice as fast…makes sense, right? WRONG! After looking into the initial purchase, I started trying out SGI machines and realized that none of my WIndows programs ran well on it (using their little Windows-for-SGI programs)…so my investment started to increase. I couldn't use my Corel Draw! or my Photoshop or any of my expensive design packages on the SGI. Anyway, by the time I had priced everything I needed to run on SGI, I could have bought my existing machine ($4000.00) and four more smaller machines ($2000 each) to farm renderings out to. For the same money as SGI wanted, I could do the same job faster with more PCs and 3D Studio… Wait for the Alphas; unless you have the million or so dollars you need for SGI Onyx machines, don't bother…
#178881From: Guy GalerJul 7, 1995 11:06 AM
I get your argument, but I have always wanted as much power as I could on one machine than spreading it out. Why? For me, developing the objects and laying the scene out takes up most of my time. Having 200 486 would be a big rendering farm, but would take me forever to create anything. The other argument is that comparing CPUs speed is not a great comparision between two seperate machines. For example, the Amiga had a much faster OS that IBM because it handled graphics much better. SGI was built for graphics, so I think that would come into play. Final note, the cost of memory and hard disk space comes into play with render farms. Not wanting to go into the math, but having 32 Meg of memory and a large harddrive on each machine starts tacking onto the cost. I am arguing for SGi right now, but I have not wrote the check yet. Thanks for the response.
#179192From: Bradley J. ArtigueJul 9, 1995 9:21 PM
Guy, You have a good point; and I agree with a lot of it, but I'd personally wait to see what the Alphas can offer in 1996. So far, I have been impressed by everything about them. Now…you might be saying "but the Alphas cost as much or more than SGI machines." And you'd be right, but running NT on an Alpha with 3D Studio, a VTR, a good frame buffer, etc… is much, much more economical in the long run. SGI simply wants too much of my money up front…and the only pieces of equipment that I have are my VTRs that work with them. Even my very expensive Nanao monitors would have to go. If you are considering a first purchase, don't let me deter you from SGI…they are very nice to work with (and very powerful), but if you have an existing investment, watch out because it will all be lost (and resale value on VTRs and frame buffers is very, very low!) Brad
#179209From: Peter RichardsJul 9, 1995 11:13 PM
Don't forget the maintenance charges on the SGI hardware/software every year either… *ouch* -Peter
#179245From: Guy GalerJul 10, 1995 9:06 AM
What are the maintenance charges on the SGI hardware and software?
#179282From: CSA/CAJul 10, 1995 12:31 PM
Guy, Full Extended Warranty for the SGI Extreme is $2590 per year. Of course, there are lower cost/lower service plans. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#179217From: John EllisJul 10, 1995 12:16 AM
Brad, What setup do you have were you're running VTR's and a framebuffer… and specifically what kind of framebuffer… and even more important still, which applications… ? TIA John
#180007From: Bradley J. ArtigueJul 13, 1995 9:40 PM
John, I use VTRs anytime I put animation down. I hate using so-called "high-end" VCRs because I can't have control of everything that goes on. Anyway, maybe my terminology threw you. I still refer to the old Targa+ cards as framebuffers….
#180049From: John EllisJul 14, 1995 3:26 AM
Bradley, >> I still refer to the old Targa+ cards as framebuffers… << Well you're absolutely correct, they are. My query was under what OS mostly as I thought maybe you were using NT, and I didn't know which framebuffer you were using… and with what VTR's… I agree with you statement I just thought maybe there was some more I could glean from asking the question, in case it was with regard to NT… So that was why I asked… Thanks for your reply, John
#180644From: Bradley J. ArtigueJul 18, 1995 1:19 AM
Sorry about the confusion: I use Targa+ framebuffers (actually the Targa + 16 for the low-end machines and the ATVistas 4mb for the high-end). I still can't see the economic advantage of the Targa 2000; and I find the PAR card too inflexible (i like to do lots of old-fashioned things with cards, like poke into what they may be doing). Anyway, to describe my systems, I use an "economically advantageous" system, in other words, I know that most people can't tell the difference between Betacam and VHS, so I master lots of jobs on SVHS tape with Hi-Fi audio using a Sanyo GVR-S950 (about $2300.00). I have some Betacam equipment but it costs a lot to operate and most of my clients are low-dollar-high-quality (and everyone should be familiar with this). As for as Operating Systems (OS) I use a variety. Never NT. I don't use NT for anything but a server; I like to use my memory, not waste it. My NT Servers are both Compaq Proliant 2000 P60 machines with 64mb RAM, 16gb HD, etc… but you probably want the specs on the animation stuff, so my animation stuff is as follows: Main System: ( I do 90% of the work here) is a Dell Dimension XPSP120 with 64mb RAM, two 4gb Seagate drives, four NEC 3x CD-Roms, an IOmega ZIP drive, a Dell Multimedia keyboard (fun, but well, worthless), a microphone (yes, worthless), and modems, etc… Subsystens: (I do all rendering jobs and some wireframe here) 4 Digital Venturis 560 machines with 16mb RAM, 270mb HDD, Intel (whatever)Express 100 cards. I route everything with Novell's Personal Netware and a nice 3COM Multiconnect Repeater with the fiber-optic cards from Codenell…old like Andy Griffith but fast like a GTO. Anyway, I use OS/2 for my 3D Studio work, Windows 95 (beta) for my AutoCAD 13 stuff, and NT for some AutoCAD stuff. 99.999999% of the time, OS/2 Warp. Because I am writing to you as I render, I love OS/2. Now, don't get me mistaken. I don't like OS/2 enough to endorse it, but I don't see a better way to run 3DSr4 right now. Call me, i'll speak volumes. 🙂 Bradley Artigue —- bjartig0@wcc.com
#180647From: John EllisJul 18, 1995 1:57 AM
Bradley, >> Sorry about the confusion… << Hey no sweat… got plenty here, the bulk of which answered my original question, which came down to NT… you talked about high end systems and graphics boards. OS/2 is definitely a step up from Win 3.1 and DOS but not NT. Interestingly I just read a thread which claims that IBM will support NT API's… that'll be very interesting if true… though I suspect there has to be a catch somewhere… your system seems quite adequate, the render platforms look weak compartively… but I suspect you must do alot of keyed logos… still, how you get away with 16 mb of ram per system is a mystery to me… I haven't seen that little since R2 days. If you want to debate the merits of NT vs OS/2, I'll pass… been there, done that… there's enough hard data out there and enough people using NT that trying to explain it to someone with 4 machines with 16mb of ram is out of the question. <G> But don't take this as a slight on your arrangement because it looks like you've spent considerable time and thought configuring it for your needs, and the bottom line is, if that's what works for you, I'm the last person to try to convince you that maybe you need something else… seriously. That's not my game and never has been. I still maintain that old addage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". <g>
#180737From: Bradley J. ArtigueJul 18, 1995 5:40 PM
The whole configuration can change at any moment. For many jobs, I don't even render to all the workstations, it all depends on what I am working on. I have a small but reliable client base that keeps me going — I charge a lot less than some of the big shops around here, but my clients have to wait a little longer. They usually don't mind. How do I get away with 16mb RAM? Like I said, I'll rearrange as needed. I might have 64mb in two machines at one time, or 16 in each, or 32 in one and 48 in another…it all changes. Luckily the cases come off real easy (I can make changes almost on the fly). In January, I am upgrading to machines that can optionally run NT (I say "optionally" because I still have to run OS/2 or DOS for 3DSr4). I'm going to purchase four of the Dell Optiplex machines with twin P100s in them and 32mb each. Should speed up operations a bit and I can rack mount the whole thing…no monitor, no keyboards (unless I need to switch them on)…just a slave setup. I'm debating switching over to a total fiber link between them, the server, and the "master" machine, but that's expensive (and the benefits are really not that great in my case). And you weren't wrong – my render platforms are waaaaay behind my "master" system, but I had to make some money before I spent it!!!
#180757From: John EllisJul 18, 1995 7:30 PM
I wouldn't generally recommend the approach you've taken, because you certainly have to know what your doing… but obviously you've got the situation wired and can maximize all your resources at a moments notice… Unlike some people you're primed for success… for alot of people when it comes they're not ready and it overwhelms them… I can see in your case you have a clear goal of where you want to go and how you want to approach it… I like it, its risky to an extent and staying on the edge can take its toll but I'd be right out there with you under similiar circumstances… One other point I'd like to mention as its indicative of your whole arrangement and which I find most admirable… you've thought the whole thing through, and have come up with your own individual approach, which would seem quite sound for the time being (albiet you realise the potential risk and are willing to take it..) you seem quite adept at switching gears as the situation warrants… I think that should your situation change, and should your needs require moving to NT you've got the drive and oranization to make that tranformation rapidly… alot of organizations couldn't handle it, which is where I think the motivated independent has a definite advantage… the ability to adapt rapidly to a changing environment… so while I've encouraged alot of people to get on NT early on as that really is a sound approach overall, your operational mode of flexibility could allow you to adapt very quickly should the need arise. I hope so, because it would be nice to see more people like you taking this journey into the world 3DS is entering… you unique approach to solutions would be a real asset. >> Have a good one << You too Amigo… John
#181371From: Marc D. DalbyJul 21, 1995 1:41 PM
>>SVHS tape with Hi-Fi audio using a Sanyo GVR-S950 (about $2300.00).<< What do you think about the Sanyo, Reliability etc. I am considering it for purchase and can use all the feedback I can get. Thanks, Marc
#181378From: Paul Sanford [LVL5]Jul 21, 1995 2:03 PM
PMJI, my experiences with the Sanyo GVR-S950 were pretty miserable for frame-by-frame recording. Lots of dropouts. Tech/repair support sucked, the unit spent a total of 2 months in different shops with no actual repair of the problem. It seemed to work fine as a regular record/playbeack deck. Paul S.
#181539From: James M. MurphyJul 22, 1995 1:50 PM
Marc, Well, I was a dealer for Sanyo and can tell you that I can sympathize with Pauls problems regarding the Sanyo GVR-S950…our Dealerships unit worked Great when we first got it in but after a while it developed a "Tearing" Problem laying down single frame animations. I was lucky enough to have contacted Sanyo Directly in California and therefore I got Excellent Tech Support, so I'd have to disagree with Paul on the Tech Support Sucked part of it. I think what he may have run in to was a subcontracted technical repair center similiar to the one one of my clients used for the same problem that was located in the Chicago Area…that particular tech support subcontractor simply did not know what he or she was doing. My client had a Scratched "Audio" head which was identifiable by the fact that the scratch was showing up prior to any single frame animations beign layed down. They could not or would not recognize this. After many many phone calls he finally called me and I told him to contact Sanyo directly in California….they knew what we were talking about and replaced the unit at no charge. Since the introduction of the DPS PAR and now the PVR by Digital Processing Systems I can't see any reason why anyone would want to use a Single Frame Setup..therefore I'm assuming that you want to use this deck as a S-VHS Hi-Fi Recording Deck Straight from A Par or similiar device…If that is the Case then this would be an excellent deck for it because it was really designed for single frame and is very accurate…however a bit pricey for just laying down to S-VHS..I would look at getting the DPS PVR System or if money is tight maybe the original DPS PAR if your only doing "Industrial" Video. If you require Higher Grade Video…."Above S-VHS"..output, then you must consider the PVR or similiar Digital Video Systems going out to BetaSP Quality. You can always Purchase a Panasonic AG-1970 or the Newer Sony SVO-2000 which are both S-VHS Hi-Fi record decks that are considered "Pro-sumer" Quality. In other words Better than Consumer Deck Quality and certainly good enough for Industrial Video Presentations. Then if you needed to go out to BetaSP…just rent the BetaSP Deck and Run out at Component Quality from your PVR. Be sure and figure the cost of the rental and your extra time and expenses when quoting your higher end clients and all should be happy. I hope this helps. Murph'
#181543From: Paul Sanford [LVL5]Jul 22, 1995 2:02 PM
My deck went to Chicago first, then later to LA.. The head guy in LA (who I think you may have referred me to) *was* very helpful and attentive…, they just failed to repair the deck! So the tech support was fine, the repair support was lacking! <g> Paul S.
#181866From: Bradley J. ArtigueJul 24, 1995 8:45 PM
Marc: I really like the deck; for $2300 it's the best deck for the money. It's inexpensive enough not be be a burden to entry-level animators and powerful enough that it can crank out broadcast-quality work cheaply. The editing features an expandibility of the unit is lacking; but for computer-to-video tape editing it's a bargain and a fairly powerful solution.
#182143From: Marc D. DalbyJul 26, 1995 7:20 AM
Thanks for the input. I'll probably make the purchase and more than likely go with the 955. (I've heard this one tends too be a touch more predictably and is priced at only $100-300 more.) I will probably only use the deck for preview purposes only, as the final output will be on rercordable laserdisk. (will be MCI controlled for presentations) Again, thanks for the info. Marc
#179417From: Gus GrubbaJul 11, 1995 4:11 AM
After so many replies, let me give another 2 cents… The cost difference isn't too great. A comparable PC (CPU+Memory) isn't that far off. The cost of the software, however, is typically 10x due to the reduced market share. The support contract is a bargain if you consider your time being worth anything. If you have a bad _anything_, you have immediate replacement. How much does it cost you to wait a week for a PC to be repaired? The decision has to be made based on other not so obvious "costs". Do you, or does anyone in your company knows "a lot" about Unix? Have you ever seen some of these "high end" programs working? They are, by definition, all very buggy and intricate. If you like DOS, you shouldn't have much problems. If you are like those who hate DOS and like Windows, you will throw your SGI out of the Window in the first 30 minutes for just trying to install a software license. As I see it, the kind of problems you complain about the current state of PC hardware/software are just like those you will find under Unix, if not worse. These are high-end, "niche" type products with limited audience and thus limited "demand" for an easier product. Of course I am comparing these to broad market share products such as spreadsheet and word processors. Spend some time with someone running these things to have a feeling for it. Try leasing some equipment and getting "evaluation" licenses for the software you will be using (Kevin can set you up with all these and more). The biggest cost of all is the time it will take you to realise you've made a bad decision (either SGI, PC, or whatever). As far as NLE on PC's, take a look at FAST Video Machine with the NLE options. On the SGI, a combination of Wavefront Composer and Accom WSD should do you miracles for about 1.5 times the cost but no image loss. But then again, that's the easy part… try using either…
#179483From: CSA/CAJul 11, 1995 1:15 PM
Gus, After your comments, I take it you're very pleased with your SGI <g>? Very nice machines, once you raise your wallet, and lower your expectations. Kevin Krell – Computer Support Associates
#179759From: John N. JordanJul 12, 1995 8:29 PM
Guy, I would seriously recommend the ImMix Turbo Cube for a high quality nonlinear system. We have had one for a few months now, and it is incredible. Top notch video quality, alot of realtime effects- including 3D page turns, and DVE. Flying audio faders, realtime keying (luma,alpha, chroma) and lots more. Expensive, ($90k) but it totally replaced our online (linear) suite costing much more. Very productive, and easy to use. (I picked up the basics in a few hours..) It runs on a PowerMac (interface), with it's own RAID array and dedicated modular hardware for the video and audio. Very upgradable. (the computer doesn't process the actual video) Backup time is 10% longer than realtime. Component input/output. Uncompressed Quicktime input/output also allows you to input 3DS animation (with Debabelizer), as well as After Effects, and other stuff. It's a Killer nonlinear box. JNJ
#179855From: Guy GalerJul 13, 1995 10:15 AM
What quality output does it have? Like SVHS or Betacam SP. Does it use SMPTE? I saw a demo of it once and liked it, but I'm not a big fan of Macs. One more question, for 90K how much video can you store?
#179990From: John N. JordanJul 13, 1995 7:14 PM
The quality is the best I've seen for nonlinear (except for uncompressed) (It stomps on our Avid Media Suite Pro) It's definately BetaSP. It will record SMPTE marked areas (automated batch digitizing) and lay off SMPTE I believe. (I'm just the graphics guy.. not an editor.) It will record 1 hour of video, and 2 hours of stereo audio. Additional time/storage can be bought at 1Vid2Aud increments. It uses a custom wavelet compression (it doesn't get blocky like JPEG, only "soft" after multiple compressions.) The compression is in a continual state of improvement- it's CD-ROM upgradable. Very plug and play. (And I'm not a Mac zealot) I like it. Depending on what you need, there may be other options for shorter projects, and more effects laden stuff- like something called the CUB "Dance" It looks really hot, but is intended for smaller stuff (like spots, etc.) It's uncompressed, and has many layers of realtime DVE tracks, etc. It also looks cool, but never seen it in person. Not sure on the cost, I think around $40k, with probably much less storage. A Mac runs the box. JNJ