CompuServe Thread

#PAR questions

14 messages in this thread
#119600From: John Mateer [PolyMedia]Aug 22, 1994 7:46 AM
I'm thinking about getting a PAR and wondering how you PAR users like it. Has it been reliable and worked well for you? Are the storage sizes they quote (ie. 540MB = 3-5 minutes, etc.) accurate? Is the quality true 4:2:2? Are there any idiosyncracies that I should know about? I assume I would treat it as a VTR in terms of rendering (render fields, etc.) – is this correct? Thanks for any info. PARchance I'll hear from the mighty God of PAR <g>. Cheers, John
#119604From: ROBERT RITGERAug 22, 1994 8:32 AM
John: The PAR has changed the whole process of creating animations for me. Going to tape was a frame accurate ordeal, the PAR makes editing and last minute changes possible and less painful. The storage sizes quote appear accurate, I have a 1 gig drive but I try not to fill it up to its total capacity. Field rendering works fine but saving images with Alpha requires resetting the Input Buffer Size. Cutting out a single frame, duplicating a frame for a pause, rendering many segments and joining them all up are all easy PAR tasks which make it quite valuable. The compression is saving me a ton of disk space and the ability to step thru frames forward and back, go to slo-mo, etc are causing my VTR to rest for extended periods of time. Bob
#119675From: John Mateer [PolyMedia]Aug 22, 1994 2:07 PM
Sounds good. I assume I'll need a seperate monitor for it. We don't do that much animation so I'm weighing the cost between purchasing a PAR and rendering to disk, having a full graphics house put it on tape. Thanks for the input. Cheers, John
#119684From: ROBERT RITGERAug 22, 1994 2:57 PM
John: An additional monitor would be your only way to see the video signal off of the PAR but you could use a TV if on a tight budget. Getting files off to a service bureau can cost a few bucks if you don't already own some form of removeable media. An Exabyte tape drive, for instance would cost more than the PAR card + the hard drive. Bob
#119707From: John Mateer [PolyMedia]Aug 22, 1994 4:12 PM
I have a Colorado Jumbo Trakker which works fine but is slow. A monitor isn't really a problem. PAR does sound like the way to go. Thanks for the advice. Cheers, John
#119699From: John EllisAug 22, 1994 3:37 PM
John, >> I'm weighing the cost between purchasing a PAR and rendering to disk, and having a full graphics house put it to tape. << Get a PAR. It will pay for itself in no-time, not to mention the fact that it will help develop your animation skills, and having the ability to play back in real-time will encourage more animation creation. Going to a service bureau is definitely going to limit your development, as the cost is prohibitive for just experimenting. And in a lot of cases the quality is up to PAR. <g> John
#119708From: John Mateer [PolyMedia]Aug 22, 1994 4:12 PM
It does seem reasonable to go with the PAR – all the feedback I've gotten so far has given it glowing praise. Do you know anything about the TVT-2000? My hesitation with purchasing any system is due to the fact we are using 3D Studio to build virtual worlds for VR systems as opposed to being a true animation house. We got 3D Studio solely for that purpose. I've been very pleasently surprised by the quality of the software and the look it can acheive. All in all it's an excellent program and a great value. But I digress… If a PAR is $2500-odd for a system, it's probably better to go that way. I guess the cost is just PAR for the course <g>. Thanks for the help. Cheers, John
#119745From: John EllisAug 22, 1994 7:45 PM
John, I see your point if you're strictly doing VR type work. I do some gaming work myself, although my animations are pre-built rather than what I think of as VR, namely real-time rendering, and I think the PAR is a great tool for testing which is the main reason I bought it. There may be other systems which are less expensive but that might meet your requirements. For my needs, which also include video animation, the PAR has been a real workhorse. So if its not a professional secret, may I ask how you use 3DS in VR gaming development? I'd be really interested. Thanks, John
#119762From: John Mateer [PolyMedia]Aug 22, 1994 9:28 PM
John, No big secret – 3DS has become a sort of "standard" for VR world creation. Several of the major VR authoring systems import .3DS files directly, including texture and opacity maps (Wavefront is the other major system used). Given that our real time platforms have limited resolutions and depths (a 512×512 limit on maps – yikes!) ultra high end systems (like Wavefront) are not cost effective. I've really been amazed by the quality of stuff produced with 3DS and how helpful everyone in the forum has been – the ultimate tech support! We're looking to use rendered sequences to prototype interactions before commiting to authoring them. The PAR sounds like a useful tool for this. 4:2:2 is icing on the cake but if we're going to invest in a system it should be broadcast spec. Cheers, John
#119785From: John EllisAug 23, 1994 12:00 AM
John, I don't think the PAR conforms to 4:2:2 sampling. There is no mention of it in the literature. It does provide analog component output, but 4:2:2 refers to the weighted digital sampling frequencies used to digitize the Luminance and color difference Components (Y,Cb,Cr) of digital component video. The only system of this type that has 4:2:2 output is the MAX which uses the Illuminator Pro as its framebuffer. I don't think there is 4:2:2 sampling in the conversion process of the original image in either system before or after JPEG compression except through the framebuffer on the MAX. Which is not the same as true 4:2:2 sampling like on a CCIR 601 compatible device such as an Abekas. >>broadcast spec. << I've been around and around on that one too. <g> My interpretation of "Broadcast Spec" precludes the use of a JPEG compression scheme. At least at this time. However both systems output a legal NTSC video signal. (Provided the images have been correctly created.) Enough technical stuff! 🙂 You say several of the majoring VR authoring systems import 3DS files directly. What authoring systems are these? Do they render these files directly in real time? Is the system you're using proprietary? If I wanted to explore this area of animation creation what package would you suggest? (My turn for questions. <g>) >> I'm really amazed by the quality of stuff produced with 3DS… << Have you seen the recent Sig 94 Demo tape? There's some extrodinary work on it. I agree that the render quality of 3DS is superb. Let me know if you're still interested in the PAR, maybe we can work out something on the Micropolis. John
#119655From: Aug 22, 1994 12:17 PM
John: Yes, the PAR is all it's cracked up to be. Works great for rotoscoping or layoff. One of the best JPEG compressed systems out there, and the best in it's price range. I'd go for the 1.0 or 1.7gig drive, though, not the 500m. Greg Pyros
#119676From: John Mateer [PolyMedia]Aug 22, 1994 2:07 PM
I guess I'll really have to look into it now. Unfortunately we just purchased a 1.7 GB Micropolis AV but it's a SCSI (PAR requires IDE, yes?) I haven't been able to see a PAR in person. If it is true 4:2:2 then it really seems worth it. Thanks for the info. (BTW, are you the god of PAR?) Cheers, John
#119716From: Aug 22, 1994 4:53 PM
John: >> Thanks for the info. (BTW, are you the god of PAR?) I've been called lots of things in my time, that's only one of the repeatable ones! <g> Yes, it needs an IDE disk, not SCSI. Greg Pyros
#119721From: John Mateer [PolyMedia]Aug 22, 1994 5:18 PM
Anyone want to make offers on a slightly used, 2 1/2 month old Micropolis 2217 AV? <sigh> Cheers, John