#Sanyo GVR-S950
30 messages in this thread
Got a Sanyo GVR-S950 today (Computer controlled single frame recorder,
see VTU p88). Looks cool so far. Used color bars to stripe the tape
and then laid a 360 frame animation to tape only to notice that the
color bars bleed thru into my animation. I guess from now on, I will
stripe with black! Live and learn… The animation looked great
after recording over black striping. The computer control seems to
work well. Paid $2795.00 which is probably not the best deal I could
have got, but my dealer has to make a living too. Give me a week or
two to work with the new deck and I will post a more detailed review
here.
On another note… Has anyone else noticed that when you use the
"Play Framestores" button on the "Render" dialog, that the "Last
Frame Displayed:" number does not display correctly? Any counts from
playbacks simply display on top of the last number displayed in the
box. Makes reading the current frame number almost impossible. Just
felt like complaining. Reloading the scene clears the old number,
but what a hassle.
Congrats on that new toy! I'm sure everyone will be interested in
hearing what you think about it once you get more time with it. Is
this your first deck?
It's wonderful. I've had mine for about 2 weeks and have already laid
down about 10 minuted of anims..pretty glitchlessly and 100%
accurately..the built in BCD-5000 controller is simply fantastic and
compatable with EVERYTHING!!
I eventually will need to buy something to render to. I've been
thinging about the unit that renders to disk. Sell for around $2400.
Can you tell me what would be the advantage or disadvantage of using a
hard drive unit over a VCR? My first thought would be that the hard
drive would not cause the extra wear on the VCR.
>> Can you tell me what would be the advantage or disadvantage of
using a hard drive unit over a VCR?
The reason I went with the 950 over the Personal Animation Recorder
(PAR) was my understanding that the PAR used JPEG compression and
that I might lose some quality in my playback. I still have not seen
a device that will play back full screen 24bit uncompressed frames at
30 frames a second. If one exists, I bet I can not afford it. Tape
is still the best media (Price/Performance) I could find.
The PAR looks like a great tool and I came very close to getting it
over the 950. Digital editing allows for a great deal of
flexability. I do digital editing of video on the PC for multi-media
applications and the digital format can not be beat in an editing
enviornment.
I thought that the PAR played back at 30 frames a second. What is it
doing, playing back at 30 fields per second?
A friend of mine has the Toaster and has been using his Panasonic 7500
recorder for rendering. He told me that he has had excessive head
wear. The tape actually wore a grove on the drum.
I need to maintain quality, but I keep wondering what happens to a
tape that is run back and forth over the same spot as it records one
frame at a time.
The specs sheet on the 950 is sitting in my editing room and I'm
almost ready to flip a coin to see which way to go.
FYI: The PAR does play back at 30 frames/60 fields per second!
As for why to buy it over a traditional deck there are many. If you
record the output of the toaster you are recording a composite signal
to your tape. The PAR offers Beta-Cam/MII S-VHS and composite
outputs. This means you could master your animation and then rent
local post house time and make first generation dubs. Anyone doing
comercial work for broadcast will at likely have to provide a
Betacam/MII or other high bandwidth tape.
Time is also a consideration, missed edit points, and all the other
problems that traditional VTRS have. The PAR was created out of my
frustration while using the Panasonic AG7500. Single frame editing is
very hard on a deck, even the most expensive ones. I have personally
burned out a couple of thousand dollars in heads single framing. Most
decks have mean time before falure rates in the 4000 to 10000 hour
range. Harddrive like the Seagate series we use have ratings in the
250,000 hour range.
In making a choice of how to judge solutions for getting your
animation to tape I would suggest taking the advice of someone that
has done alot of it and has some Video know how.
Tell me more about the PAR. I heard it only will work with certain
hard drives. How much time can it store? Does it output in s-video
right from the card?
It works with the Seagate 3600A, and now the 3655A from Seagate. We
could make it work with a lot of other drives but the output would be
like quicktime. These drives will consistantly give the data
transfer speed necessary for 30 frames/60fields per second over
several minutes. When reading specs from drive manufactures dont
believe any of the claims when it comes to playing video off a hard
drive. Asking for a 400 meg file is a lot different that copying
200 k files around a drive.
As far as the output, Composite and Svideo is concurent, yes there is both plus
Componet video (Betacam/MII).
For more info you can contact me at (606)371-5533\
Howdy David, that new Seagate drive that you guys just tested and gave
an ok to, How Large is it and approx How much Animation time will it
hold? Thanx for the info. Currently the original drive DPS is a bit
small for my needs, I'd like a Drive capable of approx 24 minutes of
Animation, Am I Dreaming here? 12-14 minutes would be ok too but the
3-5 for the older 1/2 gig drive would cause too many Edits for me to
use it.
Thanx for the info.
Midgard Graphics, Creators of Quality 3D Animation and Special FX
for the Hobbyist Videographer. Call 718-714-1423
It is also 500 megs formated. The new software release in Dec. will
support 2 drives and after comdex you might have the drives you
seek. For 24 minutes you are talking about 2.5 to 3 gigabytes of
drive space.
David,
Will there be support for IDE drives larger than 512 megs?
//Jonathan,
\\//via AutoPilot
Larger drives will be supported as good ones become available. New
drives should be announced at Comdex this year.
David,
Thank you for your indepth answer to my question. I now see there are two camp
sights. The case you just made for rendering to a hard drive and the case that
Wayne Cole made in his message to me (# 66224).
Both remarks make a lot of sense. So, which is the correct way to go?
I attended a Toaster user group meeting last night in Rockville, Maryland. My
first meeting. One of the things I brought up was this same subject. Several of
the people attending mentioned that whenever you use a compression system, like
JPEG, you are going to suffer some loss of quality.
Several months ago, I was invited to attend a demonstration of the AVID NLE
system. The system I was shown cost about $90,000. The quality was amazingly
good. The only negative comment that I made was that moving objects seemed to
have a slight, very slight, jumping movement as they moved across the screen.
The AVID's sales persons answer was that the system I was looking at was
running at 30 fields per second. If I moved up to $125,000, I could run at 60
fields per second.
Here is what I am still wondering. Is the technology now available to provide
high quality video on a non-tape system. When working in video, I think you
will agree that the very best picture we can get is a live feed directly from a
broadcast quality 3 chip camera. The very first time that signal is recorded
onto anything, there has to be some loss, reguardless of how little that loss
is.
1", BETACAM, and MII are probably the best we can expect from tape. Then we
move to S-VHS and HI-8. 3/4 belongs somewhere in there. Finally, we end up with
standard VHS.
David, where would you place a hard drive storage system? I probably need to
conceed that we can't compare video generated by a camera with video generated
by a computer. The computer probably wins since the image started out
electronically not optical/electronic.
I would think that your system would be the way to go because it does not allow
a VCR to incur a lot of excess use. Forget the head wear and the possible
missing edit points. Let's assume that the VCR never misses an edit. What type
of extra pressure are we putting on a system that goes from record to stop to
re-cue to record. During a normally editing session, we may have 100 cuts. But,
in animation transfer, there are 30 cuts per second. That is a lot of
mechanical moves.
But, does that quality of that tape look better than the picture coming off a
hard drive? I've have not had a chance to see a comparison side by side.
Or are we really spliting hairs on quality of picture? If tape is better is it
better enough to really notice?
Then again, if I could see a jump in a $90,000 system, how does this quality
compare to a $3,000 system?
As a person who started in film back in 1956, I sometimes wish video had never
been. I owned an Arri and never needed to upgrade. I edited on an upright
Moviola for over 20 years before I ever used a flatbed. I don't remember having
to budget for the amount of equipment that I am now spending in video. But,
that's a completely different subject.
So, I am now going to sit back and watch the numerous message that I hope will
appear taking either side of the issue. And when the dust settles, maybe
technology will have moved another step and I'll make that next, never ending,
purchase.
Fred
Will the PAR be Pal compatible??
Geir Molstad, FAMO as, Fax +47 22381205
I've been using a JVC BR-S822 and PSFC for animation for quite some
time with none of the head problems mentioned. In fact, I took it to
JVC for a ROM change a while back and asked them to check heads and
alignment etc and they said it was all in tip-top shape. I've
experienced none of the horror stories related here by others re
excessive head wear. In fact, many of the video people I talk with
are not as concerned with head wear from animation as they are with
"mechanism banging". (I render frames uncompressed to disk or
removable media, then singleframe the pre-rendered frames to tape as
that saves a little wear and tear on the tape handling mechanisms.) I
think that head wear is only a function of the number of hours that
tape drags over the heads. I don't think it matters whether it is
done during single-framing or during regular editing.
PAR uses JPEG, I think. The degree of compression required for 30
fps probably depends on the complexity of the image, so the more
complex the image, the more loss will occur. (JPEG is a "lossy"
technique). You may not see it on the master, but if you have to go
a generation or two down for the "final-final" it may be real
noticable. PAR boasts Y/C out and compnenent out. There are other
(cheaper) ways to get that, even from the Toaster. DPS PCA, Y/C
Plus, Nova's Y/C++, et al. And this output will not "make up for"
any losses due to JPEG.
And eventually you have to get it off the PAR to tape anyway unless it
is for you own personal viewing anyway. You may also want to think
about what other video needs you have. If editing is in your plans,
PAR may take needed $ away from stuff more suited to direct support
of the editing process. Your animation may be the least of your video
chores, in which case you be better off with a good editing deck and
feeder(s). OTOH, if all you do is animation and someone else lays it
to tape, but you need to have preview capability or "draft" version
to low end tape cabability, PAR may make sense. And, if you have no
intention of going to tape and just want to be able to view
animations in real-time, PAR is prbably your best bet.
PAR with the non-included HD will set you back about what the deck you
are considering will. Do you already have a deck that you can record
from PAR with? (rhetorical). Just some points to ponder that really
have to be answered by you on the basis of a) how much you have to
spend and b) what kind of quality out MUST you have (as opposed to
WANT – as in BetaCam/D1/D3….;^}
Wayne,
I don't know if you read the answer I received from David White before you sent
me your message. But, the timing was just perfect as they appeared on my
computer screen.
Both sides of the same issue, described in depth and accuracy.
Please read the answer that I sent to David. I posted it in the same session
that I am send this to you, so it should be very close in this thread.
I am looking for a lot of opions on this subject. Because the system I go with
is going to stay with me for a while. I am honestly undecided although I
probably am leaning just a little towards the hard drive system only because of
the wear and tear on the VCR
I own a JVC editing system. BRS-610 for source and BRS-810 for recorder. If I
went with a tape system, I would purchase the Sanyo since it is designed for
single frame recording. I would not need a single frame controller for my JVC
and I would not tie up my editing system rendering.
Fred
Fred,
Your other problem with the 10 series is the parallel IF and the expense
of adding time code/parallel SFC or adapting it to RS 422. If you had a
RS 422 deck with TC built in already, $425 gets you the PSFC and you are
ready to lay down animations.
wmc – via Autopilot!
I've been banging out anims to an AG7750 for two years now, using a
Personal SFC and using images rendered to a HD. About 14K+ frames (I
loop sequences a lot) and nary a glitch. Image quality is fine for
SVHS. 600hrs on the deck, and the heads look new. The mechanicals
may be wearing, but I'm not seeing any editing errors creep in from
that yet.
Add a sparkle to one frame that's already on a finished tape? No
Problem! Make the change with TPaint, and snap it in there. Takes
three minutes. 8{)
When Nucleus comes out with their Personal Editor (they are getting
real close, finally), I'll be able to do frame accurate cuts and such
(AG7650 player) for just an upgrade fee.
I've used the setup with a BVU850 and 950 with no problems that
weren't tape related.
Has anybody done much with the PAR where there are really big deltas?
It seems that this is where the difference would show up the most.
Logos and such probably don't tax the compression schemes much, but
moving the camera around inside mechanical devices and photorealistic
architecture scenes might. … Nate.
>Has anybody done much with the PAR where there are really big deltas? It
>seems that this is where the difference would show up the most.
I have played around with the PAR for a long while and I can tell you that
it is NOT a `delta' based player. It deals with each image independently
so it doesn't matter if you have the same pic looping or if you have every
single pixel change.
We put together our 3 minute submition for the SCI-FI contest with the PAR
and having almost full-screen delta changes didn't bother it. Playback is
consistent 30 fps.
Thats GREAT news regarding the PAR, Thanx for the info even tho it was for
Nate.
Tony,
Thanks, that's the info I needed. If it just uses JPEG or similar HW
compression and is not delta based, then it is still on my wish list.
Right behind an '040, VT4K, a 3/4SP deck, etc.! 8{)
… Nate.
>> I thought that the PAR played back at 30 frames a second.
I am not an expert here or anything, but it is my understanding that
the PAR plays back compressed video (Delta factor information
updates, not full frame animation) at 30fps. I do not think anyone
has gotten digital playback at 30fps with full frame update (Not in
my price range anyway). Anyone out there got a PAR and wish to
comment on it's quality?
Mike,
I've got a PAR and a TBC-IV along with a Toaster in my 3000. The PAR
works great – nothing like seeing your anim full speed, full frame and
full color right after rendering without having to single frame.
Rick – On Autopilot from Vancouver
A friend of mine has a PAR and the quality looks excellent to me. He
uses the PAR to dump his SGI animations to Beta SP for broadcast. He
nitpicks about it not being QUITE as good as single framing but his
customers don't complain and I can't see anything wrong with the
output.
>it is my understanding that the PAR plays back compressed video (Delta
>factor information updates, not full frame animation) at 30fps.
The PAR does play back compressed video but not based on Delta
changes. It compresses each image of a anim with a JPEG type method
and then can sequencially play them back at 30 FPS. This is the
reason it will ONLY work with the fastest IDE drives.
>I do not think anyone has gotten digital playback at 30fps with full
>frame update (Not in my price range anyway).
Noone has gotten UNcompressed full frame playback at 30 FPS but the
PAR CAN do compressed.
>The PAR looks like a great tool and I came very close to getting it over
>the 950.
It is a nice tool and plays back rendered images with almost NO loss
whatsoever although real-time capture has some loss to it because it
has to compress them more.
>I do digital editing of video on the PC for multi-media applications and
>the digital format can not be beat in an editing enviornment.
You do realize that the DPS board is NOT a editing system but more of
a `animator's player'. You are not able to do any `real' editing
although you can split and join anims.
Pretty gitchlessly?
okokok GLitch-LESSly
don't be pernickity!!<g>