CompuServe Thread

Lyon Lamb \ PC-VAS?

15 messages in this thread
#53255From: VERNON P. SHURTZAug 12, 1993 7:11 PM
Is the PC-Vas a good choice compared to the Diaquest equivalent boards? Vern Shurtz
#53572From: joseph roseberryAug 16, 1993 9:43 AM
vern: I bought a Lyon Lamb Pcvas several months ago. Complaint list: 1.The back has a bunch of jumpers going to the dipswitch that selects which com port it emulates. This was sold at sale price as "Beta" (Translation: Dump defective production run ) 2. No documentation. Even though I called every one or two weeks, they were not able to print a manual until after my 3 month warrenty expired. I had to pay shipping. 3. Com ports. It was promised to configure as Com 1-4. With no manual, I called for help. The same person gave me two different descriptions of the settings, both of which were wrong. They got it right on the third try, when they sent me a xerox of the engineer's hand written notes. When the manual was finally printed, it was incorrect. Anyone who buys this should insist on hand written notes! The customer support person has given several different answers on different occasions as to why it won't work as Com 3 and 4. Once he told me that it that it was never intended to work as 3 and4. Another time he told me that as hardware it answers as 3 and 4, but is not supported by software. I believe that it does not work. Not only will it not operate as 3 and 4 but it will not allow me to use Com 3+4 for anything else. I checked it under msd and several other diagnostics. It appears intermitantly as one or two ports. 4. Software. The board requires use of a driver. The installation of this driver is incorrectly described. The Vasmagic program is graphical shell that looks like a VCR console. It was extremely buggy. 5. Support BBS. Same version of VASmagic was posted that shipped with the board. I called them. They told me that the version I had was 2 revs old. Why isn't it on the BBS? What kinda Beta test is this? They didn't know. The new revision didn't work either. The good news: It did insert frames correctly, when I sent manual commands through the terminal emulator. I have not been able to capture with it, due to sync problems. Lyon Lamb says it is because an external black burst generator is needed. Why didn't they mention this before? It seems that they have finally found a way to reduce the amount of complaints. Their 24 hour service BBS has been ofline for about a month. Can anyone tell us about the Diaquest ?
#53602From: VERNON P. SHURTZAug 16, 1993 5:27 PM
joseph It looks like were booth shopping for a diaquest. thanks for the input. I have some pretty good cumputer dealers who are trying to get me good deals on this equipment, if you want I will let you know what they come up with. Vern
#53590From: John EllisAug 16, 1993 12:44 PM
Vernon – Not knowing the current pricing on the Lyon Lamb but having had experience with the PRO-VAS and Lyon Lamb in general as well as experience with the Diaquest, my vote is resoundingly for the Diaquest. Soft VTR is another excellent alternative. Many reasons why, support is a big one, Diaquest has one of the best support teams around and has worked closely with Autodesk as you may know. My experiences with Lyon – Lamb go back many years with first the Mini VAS and then the PRO VAS, in those days they were really the only game in town and EXPENSIVE. Diaquest came along and quickly established an outstanding reputation and also the ability to put the controller in the PC. If your interested in the hardware solution I would recommend them. If your interested in a software solution SoftVTR is the answer. Is there any particular reason you wanted to go the hardware route? -JE
#53601From: VERNON P. SHURTZAug 16, 1993 5:19 PM
John I'm still trying to find out what route to take. I'm an extreme novice at computer graphics and have only had my computer and 3d studio for 10 months and I want to do frame accurate renderings. I have approx. $5000 to work with and I dont want to end up with junk. If you have any input it would be extremely helpful. I'm planning on renting or leasing the vtr for the time being so I'm more interested in the frame buffer\ntsc converter ie:targa+, and the controller board ie:diaquest or lyon lamb. I also put in the question about the sanyo gvr-s950 and got huge response on that that is why I'm asking about controller cards. Vern P.S. do you know what the targa+ 64 can do for me vice the 16\32 model?
#53653From: John TissavaryAug 17, 1993 3:33 AM
The targa+ 64 has no 3D Studio advantages. Other than that I don't know what the exact difference is between that and the 32 other than lots of bucks. As far as the Sanyo goes, wait untill some people get their hands on them. I will be checking the unit out personally, and have recieved some good reviews from people who played with it and currently own or deal with the Panasonic AG7750. While no one outside of Sanyo really believes this deck will replace, or even be in the same category as the 7750 rugged endurance wise, it promises to offer great (equal?) output at less than half the price. Even if it only lasts half as long as the 7750, for someone with $5000 bucks to spend, it seems like a good solution. As far as controllers are concerned, there is another product out there called the Animation Commander, that is manufactured in Canada. It was supposedly designed as part of a larger system (I'm not sure of the details), then the company decided to market it as a VTR controller for the PC. It comes with software, and supports many packages (animation and VTR's), and will do Quickpass for PC when that comes out. The reviews on that are thumbs way up so far, though I only know of three people who use it. I don't know the name of the manufacturer off hand, but I'm sure someone will jump in and post it. John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
#53714From: VERNON P. SHURTZAug 17, 1993 5:23 PM
john thank you for the support.I would be real interested in what you find out about the sanyo deck. so far I've been given alot more avenues to go then I have dreamed of. thanks again will be in touch. vern
#53688From: John EllisAug 17, 1993 11:51 AM
Vernon – I appreciate you situation, there is alot going on in this area and things are changing fast. You have some other options available to you which we can explore but first lets answer your questions directly. If your going to go the video frame accurate route, I would recommend the software approach ie: SoftVTR and by-pass the hardware approach. SoftVTR is about $1000. When you buy the software is supports a wide variety of machines. Good especially if you're going to be renting a VTR or plugging your system into a production house for frame accurate transfer. Another approach is to go with an image compression for real-time playback off the hard disk. DPS has an engine called the Personal Animation Recorder which allows you to put your animation to hard disk and then play it back in real-time with S Video, NTSC and Component output. This runs around $2500 and the cost of a compatible 500 MB hard disk (add approx $1000). The advantage here is no tape drop-out etc, and no wear and tear on a VTR. This is something well worth looking into! With regard to the Targa 32+ and 64+ the difference is the 64+ has two 32 bit frame buffers. But unless the software is written to use both buffers it maybe a useless feature. The best application I know of which fully utilises the 64+ is Inscriber which is a character generator/titler program which has built in dissolves and transitions. Great for speaker support and Broadcast or industrial credit rolls. Now here is what I would recommend for the best of all worlds with the caveat there is no single answer. If we bypass the image compression approach which we can get into later, I would buy an Illuminator Pro with the CCR-601 specification for Broadcast, and the SoftVTR for my controller. This will give you better resolution than the Targa for a few hundred dollars more. I think the going price is about $1750 for the Matrox and you get 720×486 lines of resolution for D1. This board should keep you in good stead for awhile. From here you can buy an EXABYTE 8650 and go digital all the way to D1 with the ADG driver. This is another $3000 for the combination but you will be able to go D1 total digital and with the SoftVTR you can use most any other deck on the market to put your animations to tape. -JE P.S.
#53715From: VERNON P. SHURTZAug 17, 1993 5:29 PM
john I'm currently using the truevision videovga 16 but the frame rates for a semi complex .flc are real slow so you get alot of screen tear that is why I want to go frame accurate. I will definatly look into your recommendations. would you mind if after I get a prospective system figured out if I run it past you to see what you think of it? Thank you for your time. vern
#53724From: John EllisAug 17, 1993 6:54 PM
Vern – No problem, glad to help you get started on the right track, feel free to drop me a line. Happy hunting 🙂 -JE P.S. if you're happy with your Video VGA you might just want to consider going the Image compression route, which will give you as I said S VHS, NTSC, and Component output to tape. Then you could use a consumer deck for your tests and output to whatever other format you choose for final production in realtime. If your interested in a company that does this for $2500 plus the cost of a compatible hard disk you might want to call Digital Processing Systems Inc. at 606-371-3729. You wouldn't need a controller then. And you get really good output for an excellent cost/performance ratio.
#53752From: VERNON P. SHURTZAug 17, 1993 10:20 PM
john Does the compression system speedup the frame rates? My videovga is extremely slow with complex .flc's. If I can speed up my video output with compression equipment that may solve my problem. Please let me know what you think. vern
#53810From: John EllisAug 18, 1993 11:10 AM
Vern – The DPS system is a total system unto itself. It is designed to record animation sequences directly to hard disk and then play them back in real time. So basically you render your animation to disk in say a targa format, then push it through the DPS board which puts it in their format which can then be played back in realtime. This also give you the opportunity to do an unlimited number of first generation dubs. These animations can then be archived on standard tape backup like the Colorado. And as I said it has S-Video, NTSC and Component out. And the good thing is you don't have to burn tape until your ready to, don't have to rent a deck to test your animations, and because it plays back in real-time, you can pop into a production house for 10 or 15 minutes and quickly lay your animation to tape and get out fast. This can save you big bucks! Typically each frame takes 7 seconds or more to put to tape the conventional way, this may not sound like a long time but it adds up fast. Plus you don't need a controller. They also have a Time Base Corrector with which you can do rotoscoping should you be interested in the future. And their board gen-locks to house sync so you'll have a stable picture when transferring to tape. This may be a really good way for you to go for the type of things you're doing, and would be a useful tool regardless of the direction you may decide to go in the future. Call them up and have them send you some literature. I think you'll get excited! -John PS. It has variable speed playback and can hold 3 to 5 minutes of animation!
#53776From: John TissavaryAug 18, 1993 1:40 AM
I would be glad to give you my input on any system you put together, as long as I am familiar with the components. John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
#53809From: Bill StickneyAug 18, 1993 11:08 AM
I would like to invite any readers of this topic to seriously try and compare a single dedicated controller (hardware and/or software) with a V-LAN based solution. There are more V-LAN units used by professionals than all of the competitors combined…. no brag just fact. V-LAN is cost effective (a V-LAN express lists for $750) V-LAN units also have downloadable drivers (no charge) for many more transports that the others don't even acknowledge. V-LAN is standard on most SGI workstations and Indigo boards. V-LAN compatible products are sold and manufactured by other companies such as Grass Valley, Chyron, RGB, AVID, etc. There is a reason why it is the standard of the industry. Support is second to none—-world wide. The controllers you have mentioned don't even provide multi-machine synchronization, nor can they ever effectively be used or upgraded to A/B roll editing or even implemented into Microsoft's MCI drivers.
#53811From: John EllisAug 18, 1993 11:15 AM
Boy are you on some kind of trip! I'd like to see you back that one up! -JE