#Help-FS to MAC via ADpro
21 messages in this thread
Calling all ADPRO-types,
Does anyone here know the "specifics" on how I could go about transferring Art
or specifically TIFF files from my Amiga to a clients MAC?
I know that there are specific rules conceerning the pixel aspect that I will
have to know before I attempt to set those parameters in ADPRO, but I don't
know what they are….
How about resolution? When I talk to the clients MAC artist about those things
they just tell me something about pixels per centimeter, etc.
What I have to do is frame grab a few stills from an SVHS tape with my Toaster
and then convert them to 24bit tiffs…
Got any ideas on where to start?
(I am a videographer, Jim, NOT an artist)
Hal Waterhouse
Who is more real? Homer or Ulysses? Shakespeare or Hamlet?
Burroughs or Tarzan? = Robert Heinlein <\\\^AP 1.80^///>
Hal,
If your client can handle Targa files you can use LW to render out the
framestores as an image sequence. Load the files into LW as an image sequence
then render out as Background sequence with square pixels to what ever res you
like. Transfer files via CrosDos PC format floppies. Should have no problems. I
prefer transfering file as JPEG at about 10-1 compression. Never noticed any
loss on an IRIS Ink jet prints :^)
Anyone with Photoshop can easily handle the TGA files that LW creates. Let me
know if you need any more details.
….John
John,
You said:
>>>>>Load the files into LW as an image sequence then render out as Background
sequence with square pixels to what ever res you like.
I have used IFF Hi-Res images as backgrounds before when I have rendered out
static scenes with 3-D models like the Camcorder that comes with Toaster 2.0.
Is this what you mean….I can load Framestores directly into a scene and then
render out the scene without any 3-D objects. At whatever resolution that I
choose medium, or high-res? Does the "sequence" get saved on the hardrive
instead of rendering on the screen, or does it save while it is rendering. (I
don't need a PAR card do I, because I don't have one…?)
I will probably have to use motion-removal to create the original framestore
Should I use Frame or Field? 4-field, 2-field or 1-field?
Sorry I'm so dense on this stuff but I am just the opposite of those users who
consider the Toaster as a "dongle" for LightWave.
Thanks,
Hal
Who is more real? Homer or Ulysses? Shakespeare or Hamlet?
Burroughs or Tarzan? = Robert Heinlein <\\\^AP 1.80^///>
Hal,
LW is a Great 2D/3D image processing and DVE (Digital Video Effects) engine.
Lots of commercial s/w has been written to take advantage of LWs image
rendering abilities.
Sounds like you pretty much got it, I guess your not an animator YET. Once you
get a taste you may like it :^) Thats where the Amiga REALLY shines.
I'll try and go through the whole process for you:
1)
Grab the frames you want with the Toaster and make sure they are named
sequentially (grab.001,grab.002…). You may need to save the Framestores out
as IFFs through TPaint. LW should be able to handle FS format sequntial images
as long as the names are correct.
2)
Load the Sequence into LW and set it as a Background Sequence in the Effects
pannel.
3)
Next you need to set up LW to render the images you want. In the Camera pannel
set Square Pixels in the Pixel Aspect Ratio req. Set whatever Image res and
degree of AA you may want. Not much use scaling the images unless your
transferring the images on something besides floppy. It just makes things more
difficult when files are larger than a single floppy.
4)
In the Record pannel set Save RGB Images to where ever you want to save the
rendered images and a file name for the sequence (like ram:grab-n.). Be sure to
add the . at the end of the file name and LW will add the frame #s after that.
Select the RGB Image Format youd like to use (IFF, or Targa ). Targa is one of
the most universal image formats around and everyone seems to support it with
little trouble. Its just not a copressed format so the files are kinda big
relatively.
5)
Theres no need to add a 3D object to your scene in LW. It renders Background
images very quickly :^) Now go to the Render panel and set to render the frames
you want and Automatic then OK..
Now take a break and let LW do its thing.
6)
Transfer Targa files to PC formatted floppies and your ready to go :^)
Hope this helps,
….John
Wonderful……,
Thanks, John.
This should work great… I'm going to try it immediately.
Thank you for your line by line tutorial, that should make things much
easier… you deserve a special crown in heaven for that <BIG Grin>.
I didn't realize that LW could be so useful.
Thanks again,
Hal
Who is more real? Homer or Ulysses? Shakespeare or Hamlet?
Burroughs or Tarzan? = Robert Heinlein <\\\^AP 1.80^///>
What your client is asking is to stamp the TIFF file with the correct scanning
resolution. Since you have done a frame grab and Video does not do resolution
the same way an artis using Photoshop does the stamp is arbitrary. Your image
will come out at approximately 720×480 and the stamp normally used for video
image is 72 dots per inch. But like I say is just a stamp and it does not
affect the original image quality just the way it will be loaded in a
publishing package for example at 72dpi the frame grab will be loaded as a 10×6
2/3 inches picture. I normally change thes in Photoshop anyways and not in
ADPro but it might worth a while to you to do it from ADPro because that way
your client will have to do less.
If you talk to the same Mac artist and aske them wht resolution is you 19"
monitor they will tell you something like 65 dpi instead of 1024×768 (or
whatever).
Eduard Joseph
Volt Information Sciences, Inc.
Eduard,
What do you mean by a "stamp"?
My Mac artist at work says that in order to produce a 150 line printed piece, a
120 pixels per centimeter TIFF file is needed.
When you say 65 dpi (or 72) you cannot possibly mean the same thing as the way
the term is used with my "600 dpi" Hewlett-Packard laser printer can it?
If so, the pixels (at 72 dpi) ought to show up as big as pebbles, and
stair-stepping would be really bad….
Geez, I think I need a slide-rule…..
I'm confused, I think!
Hal
Who is more real? Homer or Ulysses? Shakespeare or Hamlet?
Burroughs or Tarzan? = Robert Heinlein <\\\^AP 1.80^///>
On many formats there is size in pixels (i.e. 720×480) normally refer to screen
pictures and a size in inches that is used for printing, and is in many times
determined by the scanned resolution.
Your Mac artist is used to the paper size so that is why he is talking about
dots per centimeter. Unfortunetly, most artist (specially Mac artists) are
ignorant of anything else other their world and they refuse to talk any other
language.
I say this by experience and not to be disrespectful to anyone.
In reality you should not need to do anything other than giving him the file in
a format that he can read (if he had PhotoShop even IFF would be acceptable).
Since, he should have all the tools to converted to whatever he needs. But all
I have found is that doing anything other than changing their routine leads to
disastrous results.
Now what you need to do find out what size should it be printed at.
I will try to extract the stuff I used when we had to convert video images in
the past and I will post them here. (Is not a program but notes on what to do
and in what order)
By the way, YES I meant 72 dpi like your laser printer is 600DPI but another
thing you are forgetting is your laser printer is 600dpi x 2 (2 colors black or
white) while the Mac screens are 72dpi x 256-2mil (256 colors to 2 million,
depending if is 8 or 24 bit card, from a palette of 2 million). The toaster in
"Mac talk" would be (when shown in a 13" monitor) a 72 dpi screen. But because
it has tons of colors froma palette of 2 million that is why you don't see the
BIG pebbles. In addition the images are antialiased (that is the colors do
not change very rapidely).
Anyways, that is a long topic by itself.
I will see what I can do.
Eduard Joseph
Eduard,
The Mac artists can indeed be a bit "proud" (and provincial) about their
platform (as I guess we are the same way about ours…. ;^)
Thank you for your good explanation…. sometimes this stuff (resolutions) can
get very complicated… I read a good article in the now defunct AmigaWorld
that didn't explain it half as well as you did… I never realized that the
Toaster would be considered a 72 dpi screen… Since the Mac folks keep asking
me what my screen resolution is, now I can tell them.
Thanks again for any upcoming help on your part,
Hal Waterhouse
Who is more real? Homer or Ulysses? Shakespeare or Hamlet?
Burroughs or Tarzan? = Robert Heinlein <\\\^AP 1.80^///>
Hal,
As long as you give the Mac guys images with square pixels you shouldn't have
any problems. They can take it from there.
I've lately been transfering files via PC floppy after JPEGing to about 10to1
then using PS to go from there. Works great for LW Print Res stuff :^)
….John
John,
I'm still exploring this problem…. as usual, the ball is now in the
customer's court, and he has yet to give me any test footage to frame-grab
from, and I'm too busy with my last wedding to give the problem any serious
thought right now…
May I contact you (and any others that have helped me in the past few days)
later with questions, when I can sit down with the actual programs (AdPro,
ImageFX, LWave, etc.) and hash out the procedure? I really appreciate the help
that you folks here have given me. :')
There is a light on at the end of the tunnel!
Thanks Again,
Hal
Who is more real? Homer or Ulysses? Shakespeare or Hamlet?
Burroughs or Tarzan? = Robert Heinlein <\\\^AP 1.80^///>
As a print graphics Pro I definately prefer thinking in pixels, and those
pixels are square. I print stuff between res 12 and res 60 every day. Res 12 =
300 DPI IRIS prints. Res 60= about 1500 DPI, the maximum for our film recorder.
We occasionally do 11×14 trans at res 48, thats alot of pixels and a killer
image if the original scans are large enough :^) Most of our in-house stuff is
scan at a relativly low res. so the Paintbox artists are free to work at near
realtime. A common framestore for us is about 4kx5k!!!
Its mainly desktop Mac guys that talk in DPI cause thats what their proofing
output is, be it a monitor or hardcopy.
Later,
….John
>>As a print graphics Pro I definately prefer thinking in pixels
I am also in the industry. And since I have to talk to several people from
other departments and from this or other companies, I do prefer talking in DPI
when is appropiate but sometime DPI has nothing to do with the issue. I
usually talk in pixels since most of my work is in video graphics. But when I
have to go to printers (and not all have the same resolution) DPI + aspect
ratio is the way to talk.
>>and those pixels are square
That is one thing I like of printing most of the time is square pixels. Makes
calculations much easier.
>>Its mainly desktop Mac guys that talk in DPI cause thats what their proofing
output is, be it a monitor or hardcopy.
That might be so, but I have problems one day in our graphics department when
they asked me if I could get them another monitor and I ask what resolution of
a monitor you need and they answer 72 dpi. Well I can get them a 13, 14, 15,
17 or 19 monitor. Some go up to certain resolution at certain frequency, some
are interlace some are not, and non are refer by the DPI by any manufacturer.
Why? cause the DPI is dependent on the card that runs it and how you adjust the
monitor (to cover severe underscan to sever overscan). All I know is that it
took me 4 hour to find out that they were runnning at 800×600 non interlace.
Anyways when they say they wanted the highest resolution possible (by DPI). I
told them that they will hate it. That the lowest (DPI) would be easier to
see. Then I proved it by digging an 8" monitor we have on a kiosk promo
station and put it in (I calculated about 130DPI once I shrunk the image to
have the largest black border possible). Then I what them have the oddest look
in their faces. 🙂
By the way, I am also in printing, I do printer device drivers for our
propriatory software (from HP II to RIP). We do contract work for a lot of
yellow pages companies in the world and we started doing newspapers and
magazines. One of our division manufactures hi-speed typesetters.
And since I have to talk to several people from other departments and from this
or other companies, I do prefer talking in DPI when is appropiate but sometime
DPI has nothing to do with the issue. I usually talk in pixels since most of
my work is in video graphics. But when I have to go to printers (and not all
have the same resolution) DPI + aspect ratio.
Eduard Joseph
well a 72dpi 800×600 screen is a 15 or 17 inch monitor
a 19 inch monitor would create a 65 dpi inch 800×600
For me DPI in a monitor is irrelevant since normally what I care is what size
the image is displayed in the monitor. Because the graphics card is the one
that determines that not the monitor. I could have a monitor that can have 144
DPI (1600×1200 in a 15" screen) and if you displayed using 800×600 the system
will still display "72 DPI". Also if you change the monitor setting to be
severe underscan (reducing the image by 1/2 inch you "increase" the
resolution).
but a mac video resolution ,the monitor does make a difference…that's why mac
monitors cost an arm and a leg
>>but a mac video resolution ,the monitor does make a difference…that's why
mac monitors cost an arm and a leg
Say what?
As far as I know there is NO differences. We ussed Sonys, NECs, and
Mitsubishis here for the Mac (they are getting rid of them by the truck load)
🙂
Not because they were cheaper (since they were not cheaper) but beacuse they
were better and they were not really Mac monitors but just GOOD monitors that
ould be used for any computer (some would scan down to Amiga frequency).
I take you are a Mac user.
Eduard Joseph
(In his last days of CIS)
most mac screens are either 64 dots per inch or 72 dots per inch,keep the file
resolution in multiples of 16,use lzw or uncompressed tiff files…
I don't understand Lepido….
Unless you mean 64 x 16 = 1024
Is this the X dimension…
If so what would be the "Y" then?
(My head hurts……………)
;^)
Hal
Who is more real? Homer or Ulysses? Shakespeare or Hamlet?
Burroughs or Tarzan? = Robert Heinlein <\\\^AP 1.80^///>
well at 64dpi the reolution would be 1024×768
at 72dpi its 640×480
the resolution of x,y is in multiples of 16
typical mac screens are in
512×384
640×400
640×480
875×6??
1024×768
1158×900
and targa/tiff files are in multiple formats…try tiff /lzw format of tiff
files….any of the other formats confuse machines,and don't use 16 color
tiffs…Macs have trouble handling them