#Which deck is better
36 messages in this thread
Merlin,
Bailey, and everybody else with Targas (me too), don't like that the board
doesn't have hi-res 32 bit operation. That's one of the resons why some people
is moving to Matrox.
Any other way, the Targa+ is a great board.
ana /krazy images
You mean to tell me that a TARGA + 32 won't do 32-bit images at hi-rez! Oh man!
I just ordered that board! Just what is the highest rez at what bit is it
capable of? I just assumed that 32 meant 32 at 512 x486. I never got the spec
sheets from Truevision as promised about 3 months ago, I just went with this
board because it seemed like the thing to do, based on these threads, etc. I
am currently using a Cardinal SnapPlus board and wanted one with better
resolution as well as the frame buffer.
Merlin G. Farmer
Merlin,
the targa+ series is limited to 512×486 at 32-bit. Vista's and certain
illuminator pro's seem to be capable of the preferable 756 (or 726) x 486 x 32
bit resolutions. I have a targa+ and still do the vast majority of my stuff at
512×486. I'd have to use a service bureau to get the higher resolutions.
Martin,
Thanks for the info, I hope I have not made an error in ordering the
Targa + 32. I guess there is really not a choice at the moment since that is
about all the frame grabbing I can afford right now. I may upgrade next year
after I get out of the red. I was worried from a message on here that at
512×486 it did not do 32-bit rez and that would have made me kinda a sick as
that is basically why I bought the board.
Thanks,
Merlin G. Farmer
Merlin,
I bought the targa+ 2 years ago, but now, if I was in the market for a
framebuffer (I'm not), I think I'd buy the Illuminator Pro.
The message, I believe, said high resolution in reference to the
Targa+. 512×486 is not considered high resolution in any sense of
the term, so there's nothing to worry about. I use a Targa+, and
I'll say one thing about it: it works. Other than being a rock-solid
tank-like peice of hardware it's pretty plain vanilla.
Regards,
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
PS: Lot's of great animation and video done throughout the illustrious history
of the Targa+. It's not the hardware, it's the animator who makes animations.
John:
>> It's not the hardware, it's the animator who makes animations.
Well said!
Greg Pyros
Martin:
>> Vista's and certain illuminator pro's seem to be capable of the
>> preferable 756 (or 726) x 486 x 32 bit resolutions.
Not to beat a dead horse, but the AT-Vista will actuall do 1024x768x32 bit
non-recordable or 1008x486x32 bit NTSC recordable for those ultra-hi-res
broadcast images.
Greg Pyros
I can understand the possible potential benefit of using 1008×486 for
title screens and other still NTSC screens, but I think very few
would use anything higher than 726 (or 756) for "bulk" animation –
considering the law of diminishing returns. The top TV stuff
(Seaquest, Viper, Babylon 5) seems to be going via the Abekas route
so that limits that to 726.
Isn't Babylon 5 all toaster stuff? And if it is, is it reasonable to
beleive they are actually using the toaster for Abekas output? Ain't
that kinda pushing the Yugo over the cliff?
The companies doing Toaster (Lightwave) CG are using ASDG's Abekas
driver (Amiga version – runs within ADPro) to digitally layoff their
images. The Toaster's own display capability is used only for
testing.
the Toaster is just the dongle that is required to run Lightwave, the
3d ray-tracing software. The output is just saved to disk then
recorded to Exabyte tape, and I'm sure you know the rest. Why do
Yugo' have heated-rear windows? It's to keep your hands warm while
you are pushing them everywhere <g>.
They're using the Toaster to render the images. The frames are
typically saved to a big hard disk, often on a Novell server, then
they're translating those images to an Exabyte tape in Abekas
format. If "Yugo pushed over the cliff" means that the Toaster card
itself is serving as a dongle, well, yes and no. It certainly serves
as a good preview framebuffer.
Re: Babylon5 They render to 24bit image files. They used to dump
these to LVR, but I think I heard that they're using Abekas now.
BTW, Seaquest is being done with Lightwave too.
Viper? I have not heard of that. What is it?
That would be a Diamond Viper 2mb Vesa Local Bus graphics card.
Er, no – I think he was referring to the television show Viper – which
is coming this year.
It's a show about a guy with a Viper. What a concept.
A show about a guy with a video card? What is the world coming to…
First it's Lassie, then Gentle Ben, Flipper and, finally, Alf. Now
we're stuck with some guy and his pet video card, sheesh.
as far as I know it's a TV show in production for Paramount which uses
some 3d-animation. I don't know anything about the format or story.
We did some work with the crew on the Viper show at Paramount. Coming
this fall, it features a Viper car that computer morphs into
Defender, a fully automatic car with all defense mechanisims. We
worked on pre-visualization for the lair where the car is kept when
it's not out beating up the bad guys. Lots of 3D animation, in the
show, all SGI stuff, though.
I hope you get credit for your company's part in the show. I doubt
I'll get credit for my work in the 2 films I worked on at Sony. When
I asked about credit they said it was a "politically sensitive
issue". Many big corporations seem such a pain to deal with, most
people are so afraid to do step on anybody's toes it seems amazing
that anything ever gets done.
to be exact they use 3dstudio formost of the modeling and lightwave
for the rendering , and they go to the exabyt tape. they where
thinking of using 3dstudio for viper but last time i was there it was
still up in the air. the reason for using 3dstudio for the modeling
is because lightwave falls a bit short in it own modeling and booleen
functions. and the trick to why there so dam good at it is there
experience in the lighting to blend the animation with real footage.
hopefully, they'll eventually see the light and use 3dsr3 for
everything.
It can do 512×486 resolution! I was talking about hires broadcast resolution. I
love the board, and personally don't need more resolution… for now 🙂
ana /krazy images
I was under the impression that the TARGA+32 was broadcast quality. Guess I was
wrong.
Merlin G. Farmer
>>I was under the impression that the TARGA+32 was broadcast quality.
Guess I was wrong. Maybe so — maybe not. First you need to define
what broadcast quality is. And then, it will be YOUR definition, not
necessarily what others will agree with. That's the trouble with
trying to evaluate technical stuff with salesman's jargon.
Fact is, there is no such thing as "broadcast quality" as a specification.
Maybe you mean RS-170A video specification?
I may have meant RS-170A, but I haven't the foggiest what that
would be. (g). I suppose I am just a little jumpy about the board as
I have never seen it in action. As far as the broadcast quality
standard goes, I did not realize there was none. To me broadcast
quality means quality good enough to be broadcasted, but that is
rather vague as I have produce three of my own commercials with the
lowley SnapPlus board and it was excepted at a local tv station.
After I saw it "broadcasted" I was dissapointed. The T.V. station
uses very old equipment and I made a better VHS tape than they did
Beta. It looked like a third generation tape and they taped it
straight from my machine. (It did not look that way before they took
it to the studio.) Obviously my standard is higher than theirs is.
However, I have no formal education in this field or broadcasting.
Whew, there I go again, gonna have to lay off that coffee. (g)
Merlin G. Farmer
Merlin: a very good response. Your experience completely describes
the lack of a "broadcast quality" standard. It really is a station
standard and I'm not so sure of that. I once did a piece for a
national network show on VHS (underwater shoot) and it aired in prime
time and won "best of season" for adventure segments. The network
boys did a good job of making the VHS stuff look good though. Point
is: go by the actual specs on the board to make your decision. Then
get opinions on this forum as to whether the specs are valid. I
found that to most on this forum "broadcast quality" is whatever they
have that is best in house. To some it's SVHS, to others it's beta
SP, and some it's Abekas /Exebyte/ Svc. Bureau. As far as targa+ is
concerned I've been very happy with mine and I've done broadcast
destined work with it. Remember, when you go for the high(est) end
technology it takes a bigger bite to amortize the investment and
start turning profits. My philosophy is this industry has a quality
treshhold that you must determine and reach as minimum to get any
business at all. After reaching it you just park yourself in the
market and see how far your talent will get you.
Don,
NIce input Don. That helps alot. One of the local stations
here is thinking about switching over to SVHS, (I would not imagine
so, but) so if they do then we can keep everything edited down from
the 'master' eliminating one generation of mixing/editing. I did not
know that VHS was even usable in broadcasting. This rather suprises
me. As for the highest end technology, well it is not in the budget.
I have maxed out my companies resources. The TARGA+32/ANIMAX and
SVO9600 will just have to get it. Sure I would like the Exabyte from
what I have read, but its not reality for me right now. Thanks for
your philosophical input, that helps too. My imagination and
experiences and determination brings and sharpens my talent, (with
the aid of this wonderful 3DS package) of which is increasing on a
daily basis. I guess marketing and getting established is my major
drawback at the moment, well, lack of ram and hard drive space too I
suppose, (g)
Nice reply guys.
Subjectivity is the spice of life. RS-170 is no exception
<gggggggggggggggggggggg>
I think "broadcast quality" with respect to frame buffers is
considered to be 720×486 or better. The higher the resolution the
less the aliasing artifacts ("jaggies"). For some animations, you
can display at 512×486 and see no jaggies with med. or high
antialiasing. With others they are bad. I wonder if the better
antialiasing in R3 will make the resolution issue less important.
But look on the bright side: rendering at 512×486 takes less time than
720×486, and the files are smaller <G>.
Bailey,
I see clearly now. Well, I do indeed work with my
NTSC monitor on to avoid the type and size and colours of objects
that dislike NTSC signals. Say, I was told by the dealer that sold
me r2.01a that he has seen r3 in action and he did not see any
jaggies,,,,,,,he was raven about the anitliasing feature beefup. Man,
I need to cough up more blood, I mean money (g) and snatch up on the
new release.
hehehehehehehe, funny how there is always a bright side to something eh?