#VTR SEARCH CONTINUES!
47 messages in this thread
Hello All,
So I'm still on the track for frame-accurate VTRs and controllers. I have been
talking to a few suppliers around here (Vancouver) and in Toronto. I'm confused
and would love all your opinions on the subject.
I was checking for prices for the different formats. One shop said they would
even give me a price for rental or sale on the S-VHS, just because the quality
is so bad. Is this true? I understand it's not broadcast quality but would it
do for a short film or demo tape? Then another supplier said that the Hi-8s are
lousy as well! Well, that's the two more affordable formats out the door. At
this point I'm becoming a little "salesman weary". This same guy said they had
a 3/4" edit suite (frame accurate) for sale for $5000 – including Sony VO5850,
Sony VO5800, and the RM440 controller. Sounded pretty good to me – about 5
years old. Then he said "Naw, you don't want these – they won't hold out to
single-frame recording… You want the Beta-SP!" So this guy had handily worked
me up from the cheap stuff to the most expensive deck in the joint. A Sony
BVW400, $8000 (used).
I guess the question is: would Hi-8 or, even better, the 3/4" system work for
me – I love the idea of being able to edit my own stuff…
Thanks for the patience James
>>Sony VO5850, Sony VO5800, and the RM440 controller. Sounded pretty good to me
– about 5 years old. Then he said "Naw, you don't want these – they won't hold
out to single-frame recording…
FWIW : I've been using the 5850 for frame accurate editing / animation with a
diaquest and targa+ for over 18 months now. It runs flawlessly averaging about
1500 frames per week. In addition I do regular editing with SVHS and Hi8. All
the formats are OK, they have their own unique problems and benefits.
Basically, the 3/4 Umatic will be the strongest for dubbing work but the SVHS
is better on first generation. Hi8 is , in my opinion, only good for camera
acquisition. In the area another video company did animation to a SVHS 7750
and after seeing the results I got with the 3/4 Umatic he now sends all his
rendering to me. This will be short lived though as I understand he is going
Beta SP. Most of my business in animation is viewed at VHS level except for
the cable cast stuff I do which is 3/4 distribution. I recommend that you
decide what your market demands and stick with that. I also would shy away
from the old 3/4 umatics because if they are used decks they are most likely
beat. Frame accurate recording is much more demanding on a deck than regular
editing and a beat machine will drive you crazy with unnecessary problems.
Worse, most repair techs don't understand the demands that frame by frame
requires. If your doing this for hobby there is nothing wrong with Hi8 but $
for $ I think I would go into SVHS first. If your market is broadcast then
settle for no less than Beta SP or higher.
Good luck!
<<Basically, the 3/4 Umatic will be the strongest for dubbing work but the SVHS
is better on first generation. >>
How do you mean? The SVHS looks better on first gen than the Umatic, but wears
out quicker?
<<Hi8 is , in my opinion, only good for camera acquisition. >>
What is camera acqisition? And please tell me about the Umatic. What does it go
for?
I have heard most of the bigger animation houses are doing it SP – is this
true?
<<I also would shy away from the old 3/4 umatics because if they are used decks
they are most likely beat. >>
I hear you there. It sounded good for a couple minutes but then I started
thinking… At the moment, what I'm doing is compiling a demo tape to show
future clients and prospective development partners. I want it to look good.
And if we're going to buy a deck, I'm kinda moving towards one of the better
ones, simple because there's a good chance we may be able to purchase some SGI
gear, so…
Thanks for your help! James
It all depends on how much money you've got. A PVW2800 Sony Beta SP deck costs
around $16,000, I think, and so does the Sony LVR 3000. They're both great
choices, but they're very expensive unless you're making money off them.
As far as hating to replace equipment… you're in the wrong buisness, pal <g>!
Average lifespan of equipment here is 18mos. Video lasts longer, true, but
we're in a transitional phase where the broadcast big boys are moving to
digital, and the analog formats will be the domain of industrial, corporate,
and prosumer. I think it is very unrealistic, unless you're a very rich
person, to buy expensive equipment early on just so you don't have to buy it
later when your buisness actually needs it.
My advice is to absolutely blow off single frame recording and get a DPS PAR,
or even better, the Matrox MAX. The MAX will do claimed BetaSP quality, and
better, and will run you less than a PVW or LVR. The only thing is you need an
EISA buss in your machine (you should have one anyway, they kick butt!!!!). I
think the MAX (with harddrive and SCSI controller) and an industrial level
non-frame accurate deck (I recommend S-VHS) will run you $10,000. The DPS will
be a lot less, but not quite the quality of the MAX. But if you've got the
funds to even consider Beta or LVR, then go with the MAX.
As far as S-VHS goes, it's an excellent format. over 400 lines of resolution,
Y/C (not composite) input, which helps eliminate chroma delay, where the colors
get squishy, and high quality decks can be had at an affordable price. If you
plan on doing lots of generational dubbing (layering in editing and making
copies), then 3/4 Umatic or SP would be better. This is only better if you
plan on going more than 3 generations per tape, because for the 1st generation
the S-VHS signal is better. It equalizes at gen. 2, and starts to fall apart
at gen. 3, where 3/4 is still looking good.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Hey John,
Thanks for the detailed reply. You've given me a lot to think about and you're
right, thinking of buying the "good" stuff now, no matter what the cost, is
silly in this business – right, right. I just get excited.
The DPS PAR sounds really interesting, from what Greg describes. I don't have
EISA (I'm local bussed, but the standard escapes me – it's that tip of the
tongue thing – VL I believe). The MAX sounds cool, but I'm starting to think
I'm getting to excited about these expensive decks. I work with a film
production company who are wanting to get into the computer animation thing,
and I've got a certain amount of freedom to suggest what they should get. I
don't want to get greedly, and start dropping dough left right and centre. But
at the same time, I want to make sure that they have the proper equipment in
case a project comes along and they decide to go with 3DS or whatever. I split
two ways – so I just won't decide. I'll get the info and let them decide. It's
their stinking money! <g>
But I hear what you're saying about S-VHS. The only people to trash it as
salesmen who'd rather sell the SPs. I think 3 gens will be in order, but what
we'll do is render to S-VHS (or whatever) and then transfer to 3/4" for a
on/off line edit. I guess it's cheaper than doing 3/4" first off, and you feel
it's the same quality, so… I'm gonna look into the PAR. Thanks for the advice
– muchos!
James
John, John, John,
>> The DPS will be a lot less, but not quite the quality of the MAX. <<
Have you done a side-by-side comparison of the 2? If so, I'd like to know. The
only person who I know that has, (Don Landis) says he couldn't tell the
difference.
I only saw the SIGGRAPH demo of the PAR, and I've heard it's changed a bit
since then. I'm going to check out a MAX in a few days, since I'll be in
Montreal over Christmas.
The main difference for me is that I will not use IDE drives for anything. I
preferr EISA or other 32bit busses, and the increased throughput should tell
you right off the bat that the MAX will deliver less compressed, i.e. less
lossy images at the same frame rate. I've already got the EISA controller
needed for the system, and an HD I can use no problem (I'm pretty sure it's on
the list), so I only need the Matrox stuff, that's why I'm even considering it.
As far as bang for the buck, I imagine the DPS is a better deal, but I'm
currently attracting more clients who demand high-end video output so the MAX
seems better for me. I'm not sure if this is a phase or a taste of things to
come, so I'm going to wait a couple of months and see if I even need _any_ sort
of disk recorder since I've already got $$$ in single frame and Exabyte.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
The important number for hardrives suitable for video use is sustainable
throughput which is usually in 2-3MBps range, this has little to do with bus
design actually – it's more to with spindle speed, block size and other more
obscure factors. The only way to get major throughput improvement is to
interleave 2 or more drives.
I don't see how that can be true. The key factor, as I understand it, is to
use as little compression as possible, and an EISA buss fast SCSI II is
definitely faster (I get 10mb per second, 30mb burst rate), so you can
throughput larger frames (=less compression). If I'm off the mark, please let
me know what I'm missing <g>. BTW, the Abekas has approximately 40mb per
second sustained throughput (maybe more…) so there is no compression, and the
images DEFINITELY look better than the DPS, so there must be something to the
buss and throughput thing.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
What you're missing is that there is no bus involved when it comes to the PAR
unit. The hard disk is connected directly to the PAR hardware. The disk is
dedicated to the PAR and has its own format (it's not a DOS disk and it is not
connected to any "controller" in your computer). Other than that, everything
you said is right. The MAX has a greater throughput but because it uses SCSI
instead if IDE. It's got nothing to do with EISA or otherwise. Yes, because
SCSI-II disks are a bit faster than IDE, the MAX can use less compression but
the difference isn't that much though. At least not nearly proportional to the
added cost. You should take a very close look before committing the cash to a
MAX system (unless, of course, you have your mind set and don't care).
By the way, you can't possibly be getting a steady 10MB/sec out of your SCSI
disk. You controller (and your BUS!) cannot sustain that. You're more likely in
the 2mb/sec neighborhood at the most. If you want, I can upload a simple test
program that will tell you exactly what your transfer rate is.
The figures you see in the literatures are only true in "optimum" cases and for
very specific amounts of data. Once you start reading a 30 megabyte file, even
if all sectors are contiguous, the rate will drop dramatically. The 10mb figure
is only true for data already loaded into the controller's memory. That's the
absolute maximum rate the controller will pump _that_ block of data to the
computer. As soon as the block spans over another DMA read (just 64k), or
worse, you have to seek the disk for another sector, you're way down. The
30mb/sec figure (burst mode) is only true for very tiny amounts of data. It
can't be even considered in this context.
This gets even more complicated if you really care to know the details. Another
note worth taking is that there are two sets of "rates". One thing is the rate
the controller can sustain between the hard disk and itself. The other rate is
between the controller and the computer. In your EISA system, I can guarantee
you your hard disk spends a lot of time waiting for the controller to transfer
data to the computer.
Another note, EISA is doomed. There us no reason whatsoever to keep it alive in
a VLB and PCI world. Both are orders of magnitude better, cheaper and by far,
more attractive to hardware manufacturers.
Good information, Gus.
Would you give us an A-B comparison for PAR vs. MAX:
on Compression ratios, resolution, file sizes.
Also would you clarify: Does the PAR disk get an assigned drive letter and can
one use dos commands to address the file structure. such as copy, rename, del,
dir etc.
>> Would you give us an A-B comparison for PAR vs. MAX:
Nop…
>> Also would you clarify: Does the PAR disk get an assigned drive
>> letter and can one use dos commands to address the file structure. such
>> as copy, rename, del, dir etc.
Yep, yep, yep… <g>
P.S. I guess "yep, yep" and "nop, nop" aren't in the non disclosure agreement.
In case they are, please disregard all of the above and erase it from your
memory banks… <g>
John,
Gus has explained this way better than I ever could. The fact is all those
quoted performance rates have nothing to do with the SUSTAINABLE throughput.
That means the rate the drive can pump out data for long periods of time
without a single pause or hiccup – forget cache, forget bus design – few drives
are designed for this kind of _sustained_, uninterrupted throughput. They are
generally geared towards small files, not the huge, long, animation sequences.
Like I said and Gus said, even for the fastest hardrives this is still only in
the 2-3MBps range. An Abekas is made up of a disk-array, meaning several drives
and I'm sure they are custom made for that application and have proprietary
formatting and other secret tricks.
Your best bet is to find a dealer who will let you do a side-by-side comparison
of an animation sequence _you_ have created, and already have layed-off via the
svhs and/or Abekas route, and then compare the outputs of the DPS PAR
side-by-side with the MAX and also your svhs and Abekas output. You'll then be
able to decide if the extra money the MAX costs is justified in your
circumstances. I'd hazard a guess that you'll decide it isn't, because the
quality of either JPEG solution will NOT be good enough for your high-end
clients, therefore the DPS PAR becomes an extremely cost-effective and fast way
of doing colour and motion-tests for you and your clients approval.
I still believe that for individuals or small animation companies the best
total solution for the least money, that will give you equal quality output to
anybody in the business is a PAR and a Exabyte.
I'm definitely not set on the MAX, especially since there's no justification
for the $$$ right now. I actually can't even justify a PAR since I've got
S-VHS and the multi-pass V-LAN utility makes things move quite fast.
I was looking for a solution for next year that would eliminate the need for
low-medium end single frame altogether (for clients), and my impressions from
siggraph of the PAR was that it would NOT be adequate. But I will check it out
again.
The other added feature of the MAX is the Illuminator Pro (count that as $2500
at least), which I would prefer over the Targa+ I have now. It's tough making
a _final_ judgment for the Abekas from the Targa+, and anything I can do to
eliminate double takes at the service bureau will pay for itself in a fair
amount of time.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John:
>> my impressions from siggraph of the PAR was that it would NOT be adequate.
>> But I will check it out again.
Good! Because the Siggraph PC stuff was not even really Alpha, and the PAR
quality is MUCH higher than that now!
Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] gpyros@pyros.com 20-Dec-93 at 9:04a PST
John don't jump to conclusions at this time, as of last week there was only one
controller and one drive that was "certified" for the MAX. More are being
tested, though. By the time they start shipping many should be available. I
don't know what your problem is with IDE but I find it a very fine and reliable
storage format. I also use EISA FSCSI II and appreciate its speed
capabilities over the IDE. Both require just as much maintenance. The cost of
my SCSI controller was 18 times the cost of my IDE controller. Both have 4 meg
cache.
I don't have a problem with IDE in itself, but I prefer EISA based SCSI because
of the speed difference. The SCSI controllers are more expensive, but when
you've got to wait on IDE HD's all the time then I consider it a wise
investment. My Adaptec is usually 30-50% faster than my VLB IDE drive, and
even more under some circumstances. I didn't time this out with a stopwatch
(don't have one), it's just an observation.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Here we go again. Your VLB IDE controller has to be at least 4 times faster
than your EISA SCSI. That's pure and simple math. What you do have is a way
faster SCSI disk than your IDE disk. It's got nothing to do with the BUS!
Gus (the busmaister)… <g>
I have to believe you, but I don't understand the math… EISA is 32bit and the
Adaptec 2742 is busmaster ( isn't that 33mhz?) plus an onboard RISC processor
to manage data transfer. VLB is also 32bit, 33mhz, and the only SCSI
controller I know of with a risc processor is the equivalent Adaptec 2742(x)
VLB, which claims the same or less transfer rate. I have yet to see a
manufacturer claim a VLB controller to be faster than an EISA busmaster, even
if they don't make an EISA card. You'd think they'd jump all over that
opportunity…
My VLB IDE controller is definitely NOT in the same league as these cards, and
I don't know of one that is (of course, that doesn't mean there isn't one).
I guess what I'm saying is I'm confused and must be missing a key bit of info,
because I don't see how VLB can be faster than my particular EISA card.
I'd love to check out that test program. I also didn't know, till Greg P. told
me, that the PAR's HD went into its proprietary controller. That makes perfect
sense.
I realize that the PCI buss is superior to EISA. I imagine the EISA buss is
doomed for more than just that reason: its peripherals are WAY overpriced (bang
for buck ratio). Can't wait to check out a PCI Pentium system (did you get
yours yet?).
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
BusWars ——- Here is the trap. EISA is limited to 16MHz. Local bus (be it
VESA or PCI) runs, as the name implies, at the same speed the CPU data bus
(33MHz for that matter). I have an Adaptec 2842VL. This board is, in theory,
twice faster than yours and I still don't get 10Mb/sec (even though the
literature says this boards supports rates "up to" 40Mb/sec). Well, I can't
even transfer from memory to memory at that rate! Much less Video RAM.
Another note worth taking. SCSI bus (the 50 pin cable you have between SCSI
peripherals) is limited to 8 bits transfer. That's pitiful. There is a SCSI-3
in the works which should bring that up to "todays" bandwidth. That won't make
your transfer rate go up to 120Mb/sec. It will just help keep a steady rate
when more than one device is sharing the bus (i.e. two hard disks, CD ROM,
etc.).
>> I imagine the EISA buss is doomed for more than just that reason: its
>> peripherals are WAY overpriced (bang for buck ratio)
One of the reasons for being overpriced is the much smaller market. VESA local
bus gained so much market acceptance that turned EISA obsolete. PCI is going in
the same direction. The war now will be between PCI and VLB-3 (64 bit). This is
going to be an interesting one to watch…
>> Can't wait to check out a PCI Pentium system (did you get yours yet?).
Nop. I can't wait either.
EISA is certainly faster than ISA IDE but you said you are using VLB IDE. VLB
should be faster than your SCSI EISA. It is here. If not then maybe you do
have more problems in your setup on your ISA platform. I seem to recall you
have a history of problems with conflicts and configurations on your platforms,
or, am I confusing you with someone else?
I do have a history of conflicts, but they've been completely cleared up (too
much hardware in one machine so I redistributed).
The VLB controller is fast, but it's definitely not as fast as the SCSI. I
guess I got the lowdown from Gus, in that the SCSI HD's are that much faster
than the IDE's and it has nothing to do with the buss.
Gus said he'd give me a routine that'll check my throughput, and I'll know more
about the real speed difference. Once again, I haven't done any real tests,
just observations from using both systems over an extended period of time.
Also, the Adaptec 2742T is EISA busmaster (33mhz?) and risc coprocessed. I
really believe it's faster than the VLB IDE controller, because the IDE drive I
have isn't THAT slow.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John:
>> I will not use IDE drives for anything…
You know you can never make such a sweeping statement in the computer industry!
Remember, the PAR uses an on-board controller and it's own formatting technique
to help get it's great speed and quality – it doesn't go through the system
bus, which is where most of your problems are. Martin had a very good reply –
when you are doing this, the characteristics of the disk itself matters more
than the type. Thermal recalibration is still a major problem on many SCSI
disks, and the PAR has that totally licked!
Also, now with manufacturers coming out with 1.0 and 1.7 gig incredibly fast
IDE disks, the format isn't dead yet!
Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] gpyros@pyros.com 19-Dec-93 at 10:35a PST
You're probably right about sweeping statements, especially since I still have
two IDE drives still running on my network<g>. I just don't plan on purchasing
any new IDE equipment, drives or whatever.
Having a proprietary, buss independent IDE on the PAR sounds like the right fix
for IDE/ISA problems. That would make a big difference, but as I understand
it, the MAX still uses significantly less compression than the PAR, and as I
understand it that does make a difference.
I do think that if the client base is in the low-mid end area or you just use
it for preveiws, then the PAR is a WAY better deal than the MAX. But I want to
check the MAX out to see if it will work as a final output device, as is
claimed. If so, then it's a WAY better deal for me, since I don't have a high
end single frame solution in house, and don't want to pay somebody else for D1
that ends up on somebody's VHS consumer deck.
BTW, how are things down by you? Is the ground holding up under the rain?
How's buisness and, hey <g>, how are you?
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
JT:
Actually, things are great! I got my last chapters off FedEx on Saturday, and
am just waiting on author review, which starts as soon as the tech editors get
through our stuff.
Susan and I are heading to Mammoth for Christmas, (I still like a White
Christmas, even with the pretty lights on all the palm trees down here!) to do
some skiing and plan out the next few months in terms of marketing and
equipment purchases. Be good, Santa!
Greg Pyros
>>How do you mean? The SVHS looks better on first gen than the Umatic, but
wears out quicker?
SVHS will have more detail than 3/4 SP in the first generation original but a
dub mode copy ( Y/C 629) will result in loss of these details to the point that
it looks less quality than a dub mode 2nd gen (YC 688) COPY IN 3/4. It
continues to diverge from there.
Camera acquisition is using that format to record your camera originals, as in
camcorder.
I bought my 3/4 stuff 3 years ago new but I've seen the $3500 5850 decks and I
didn't like the condition they were in. SP is "superior performance" and is
achieved by elevating the lum freq. and is similar the difference between VHS
abd SVHS or reg,. 8 and Hi8. They all do the same thing. Some formats also
go to metal tape. There are other differences as well. In the 3/4 Umatic the
SP adds about another 50 lines of horizontal resolution to the format.
You should really decide on your budget and who the intended market is. As
Paul Linde would say," My customers wouldn't even look at anything less than
D1" On the other end of the scale: My customers want just VHS tape for
preview.
Bottom line this year is real time output using the MAX or the PAR. I'm
planning to go the PAR route and then Beta SP later on. If after Beta SP my
market goes more of the ad agency stuff I'll look to buy the MAX. So you see
how the market drives the decision process?
Hello Don,
Thanks for the reply and "lesson". It's tough to shop for this kind of
equipment if you aren't chrystal clear on what each format has to offer and
lacks.
So what do you think of the idea of rendering to SVHS and then dubbing the
"rushes" to 3/4" – from which I would use to edit and make final tapes.
Probably 4 gens in all, but does the loss of details happen slower in 3/4" than
SVHS?
Everyone seems to be really interested in the MAX and PAR. I was thinking about
it last night and it just doesn't seem realistic. For one, you'd need an
enormous amount of harddisk space to store a full animation (3-5 or more
mintues worth). Can these systems be connected to optical disks, or are the
hard drives special? It's VERY interesting, but I guess I'm so "film" oriented
that when we get away from the frame-by-frame thing, my mind seizes.
Thanks again James
James,
>> Everyone seems to be really interested in the MAX and PAR. I was thinking
about it last night and it just doesn't seem realistic. For one, you'd need an
enormous amount of harddisk space to store a full animation (3-5 or more
mintues worth).<<
You are missing the point, mate. The animation in a PAR or MAX is compressed
with JPEG and that means it is compressed by factors of 10:1 to 30:1. If
full-motion, uncompressed video needs a sustainable 27mb/sec transfer speed
(like an Abekas), video compressed at a 10:1 ratio would need 2.7mb/sec
transfer speed (a special single hardrive could manage this). No tricks, just
logic <g>.
<<You are missing the point, mate. The animation in a PAR or MAX is compressed
with JPEG and that means it is compressed by factors of 10:1 to 30:1. If
full-motion, uncompressed video needs a sustainable 27mb/sec transfer speed
(like an Abekas), video compressed at a 10:1 ratio would need 2.7mb/sec
transfer speed (a special single hardrive could manage this). No tricks, just
logic <g>.>>
Ah ha! Well described, mate <g>. Now it makes a lot more sense – and of course,
it is logical. I don't know why I didn't think of good friend J. Peg.
Hmmmm…
James
You have the right idea of jumping formats, if possible, to edit. I do this
ALL the time. One thing though, if you have it I'd jump to Beta SP or MII for
edited master. These higher formats will not only hold together longer but will
also preserve the higher resolution of the SVHS detail. At any rate the 3/4
will not preserve the hor. resolution of SVHS but will hold the solid colors
together longer and look better after 4 generations as opposed to staying in
SVHS. One bit of advice, never forget the signal to noise ratios of these
formats. SVHS is lower than the higher formats and when copying will compound
the noise. In addition, using dub mode is recommended because it has a much
lower noise figure because dub mode eliminates much of the video signal
processing and is the best form of component (Y/C) duplication. When crossing
formats decks must have this feature to utilize it. I use a EVO9800 Hi8 deck
that has the Y/C 688 dub out connector. This is 3/4 compatible. VHS is Y/C
629. When I do editing, I use dub mode for all my cuts assembly, in the insert
edit mode. When I need an effect such as dissolves and wipes I switch to
composite video mode because my switcher is only composite.
The DPS PAR and MAX are worlds apart in price but very close in quality of
output. I have looked at them both on BVM1910 broadcast monitors. The
storage capacity of each is dependent on the compression ratio being used. In
theory, the MAX uses much lower ratio and therefore has not only higher quality
but will store far less time than the PAR. The MAX is the choice if money is
no object, you're planning to dedicate a platform to it's implementation, and
the highest possible quality is desired for real time output. If your clients
see the animation in one of the lower formats then the PAR will probably fit
the bill. Due to the PAR's dedicated IDE drive it requires a much higher
compression ratio so the files size is smaller per field. With the smaller
file size the IDE transfer rates attain the 60 field per second required
output. The side benefit is the quantity of animation storage possible per
megabyte of disk space. Actually I see this capacity only useful for frame
grabbing, not for animation. Face it, how long does it take you to model and
keyframe and render 3-5 minutes of 3DS animation? So this 3-5 minutes of
animation storage, in my book, is a silly specification to brag about. It
really is an indicator of higher compression ratios and therefore higher
quality loss. But that's what you get with the lower priced unit.
Hello Don,
Thanks for the indepth reply. It's hard to keep up with all this new, fangled
technology, and produce good quality animations (takes time, eh?) AND have a
personal life. You've saved me a few hours by describing this.
I think I'm going to have to get some data on each of the formats, just so I
know where everything lies. So SVHS has a better horiz resolution than 3/4"?
Interesting. Now, what does Y/C stand for. I take it it's a protocal for
machines to take to each other, say in dub or edit modes? Must the two decks be
exactly Y/C 688 or Y/C 629? And you say the VHS is Y/C 629 – how does this
interface with the 3/4"?
I'm glad you've said it about the DPS PAR. I guess the question is, at what
level of compression does it become noticable on a NTSC screen? I wonder if one
were to render at double the resolution (say 800×600) and then compress. But
this is kinda beside the point. Who says I have to have every frame of my four
minute short on disk. If I was recording single frame, I wouldn't have anything
on disk. I think a shot by shot rendering routine would work.
But in you HO, do you think the quality of the image will deteriate quicker on
dubbing, if the original image was compressed and decompressed?
Thanks Don James
Y/C is the simplest form of component video used first by SVHS and then by Hi8
and now by Betacam SP as well. Y/C followed by a number is a special format
of Y/C called DUB mode. Special dub-out and dub-in connectors are required on
the decks. The numbers have to match for it to work. Experts say it is
equivalent to 1/2 generation loss as opposed to the standard video cable
duplication of one generation loss.
My guess is that the deterioration in tape duplication would have nothing to do
with whether the image was once compressed. The deteriation of the picture
from video duplication manifests itself as Timebase errors, chroma noise, luma
noise, Y/C delay, and resolution loss. I have equipment here that can lower
the losses in all but the noise. Even though I do have video noise reducers
here, using them also causes loss in resolution. I don't have enough
experience with PAR type compression/decompression to comment on what artifacts
show up on the picture from its use. Maybe G. Pyros could comment here, since
he has had the system in use for awhile.
If I were you I'd talk to a different dealer. This guy's obviously trying to
squeeze as much $$$ out of you as possible. Tell him to piss off! S-VHS has
its place, does Hi-8, 3/4, SP, etc… . Tell him Beta SP sucks and why doesn't
he sell you a D1 or Digital SP machine or is he living in the stone age or what
<g>?!
For what you're doing I would suggest either one of the new non-frame accurate
solutions like the DPS PAR and Matrox MAX, or a decent S-VHS deck, unless you
plan on doing lots of editing and dubbing, and then Don's right, get 3/4 Umatic
or SP.
And if you've got money to spend on Beta SP, why not go with a Sony CRV laser
disk recorder?
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Actually, John, he did mention the Digital SP, but I laughed quite loudly at
that point and I guess he's not a stupid salesman. <g>
The thing is, I hate replacing equipment. I don't want to spend $3500-$4000
now, and then two years time, move to a higher level of animation, or suddenly
get a contract to do some broadcast logos, and have to go out and get something
better than I have. Does that make sense? On the other hand, having a SVHS to
test render on and then pulling out the SP sounds cool, but I don't know if
that's feasable.
Tell me about non-frame accurate VTRs and SVHS. I've heard a couple people slam
SVHS and now I'd like to hear someone support it.
And what about a laser recorder? I've seen them in passing but never anything
in depth. Are they good? I figured they'd be way out of my league, money wise.
Are the WORM?
Thanks John James
James:
My recommendation in your situation would be to get the DPS-PAR and a pro-sumer
non-single frame accurate SVHS deck. For around $3,500 you have the single
frame output and something to send it out the door on. Then save up and get
that BetaSP after you have made some money with it!
Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] 16-Dec-93 at 6:04p PST
Hey Greg,
So what is a DPS-PAR and pro-sumer non-single frame accurate SVHA desk? I don't
know these and my eyes have glazed over for a moment – Another choice?! <g>
James
James:
Where have you beeeeen? <g> Digital Processing Systems (DPS) is a company that
has created a product called the Personal Animation Recorder (PAR). It should
be shipping in mid January, last I heard.
It consists of an ISA board that fits in your computer, and has up to two
dedicated hard disks attached directly to it (NOT through your computer bus!)
You simply copy the Targas to it or render directly to the PAR. It will then
play back in real-time, 60 fields per second. Direct outputs include
Composite, Component, and SVHS (Y/C).
File size is 752×480. Extremely high quality. List price is $1,995 without
the hard disk, add around $650 for a 500 meg (5 minutes of animation). They
are certifying 1gig and 1.7 gig disks as we speak.
There is also an optional $995 TBC which will allow you to input live video and
capture it real-time. The best rotoscoping equipment imaginable.
What I was suggesting for your budget is to get the PAR plus an SVHS deck that
does not do single frame accurate recording. These can be purchased in the
neighborhood of $500 to $1,000 at your local electronics store. You can then
place your animations on the PAR and record them real-time on SVHS to send to
clients.
We have been playing with two of them for a while now (we wrote the drivers for
them) and have no complaints! For clients who only want VHS output, it can be
considered final. If someone needs higher end, you can use it as a final test,
then send the files out to be layed on high-end tape or laser.
In that price range, for those needs, it can't be beat, IMHO.
Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] 17-Dec-93 at 11:58a PST
Hey Greg,
Well, I wouldn't believe it if it had come from anyone else. REAL-TIME
recording from a HARD DRIVE?? Okay, and you say it looks good? I think, for
now, VHS is the way to go. I can't imagine anything I make being broadcast or
played for anyone but… I don't know. Now that I think about it, what the hell
am I doing with all this expensive hardware on my desk. Tell me, who would be
happy with VHS? At what point and who is considered when we start talking 3/4"
and Beta-SP?
But definitely this system sounds sweet. I'm interested in how you figure
500megs can hold 5 MINUTES of animation? I mean, I'm not questioning (well, I
am) but it's with the utmost respect (you'd know <g>). I get 9000 frames… and
most of my image renderings for each frame run at about 300k – that's 2.7 G (I
think – actually, I could be completely screwed up). Anyway, it's a silly point
and not ment as a criticism, but more of me saying "God, maybe my frame sizes
are too big!"
James
James:
I have a text-based info pamphlet I'll upload to you on the PAR. Check your
e-mail!
Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] gpyros@pyros.com 17-Dec-93 at 10:49p PST
Thanks muchos, Greg.
So does Pyros sell hardware, as well as software?
And while I'm writing, do you all sell the Yost group IPAS'? I think I want to
pick up the BLUR one very soon…
Thanks
James:
Well, since you asked… <g>
Pyros Partnership, Inc. does all sorts of things. We carry all the major lines
of computer hardware, as well as video. We purchase direct from Sony, if that
gives you a better feel for how much we do! We represent all the major lines
of software and IPAS routines, as well as all the materials CDs and meshes.
Our programming department is world-renowned (at least on CIS <g>) for all the
drivers and IPAS routines we do, as well as many custom proprietary routines we
write on contract. Major companies like Autodesk, Sony, Fast Forward Bandit,
and DPS have all hired us to program for them.
We also offer rendering services and tape layoff services – we have 16 486/66s
with 48 to 64 megs of RAM on each one for quick turnaround, and output to
either the DPS-PAR or recordable laserdisc, and then dub to the format of your
choice. We also offer full post-production and editing services.
We have a full digital sound studio, and compose and perform our own music for
a complete audio / video service for clients.
That's the short version – you should see me when I get carried away!
Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] gpyros@pyros.com 18-Dec-93 at 12:23p PST
Hey Greg,
You got quite the setup there. And, the big question, Pyros Partnership? You
own rig, or the family business?
So theoretically I could buy one of these fancy DPS-PAR's from you, or a SVHS
machine? Do you want to send a price quote for both (thinking canadian here),
although I think you mentioned that the DPS wouldn't be available til Jan. But
maybe you could ballpark it? <g> And the deck I have my eye on is a Sony
SVO9600. Send it e-mail, if you like.
And thanks for the help!
James
James:
I started Pyros Partnership 12+ years ago by myself (it just sounded bigger
somehow for a 1-man shop <g>). We are now incorporated, and the company has
two owners – myself, CEO, and my wife Susan, President, who's the real boss!
This means I have to ask her whenever I can buy new equipment, and she actually
makes me justify it! Can you believe the nerve of that woman! When I want a
new toy, why can't I just have it NOW? <bg>
Yes, we can supply you with everything you need.
Greg Pyros [Pyros Partnership, Inc] gpyros@pyros.com 19-Dec-93 at 10:41a PST
Thanks Greg,
Maybe in the new year, we'll be able to "do some bidness"…
James
>>layoff services…
I thought the government had an office for that! <g>
James,
Not sure what you are after, and I am not a video expert, but I do know what
looks good. Let me tell you something about the SONY SVO9600 SVHS deck. For
one, It has very good quality. Not Beta, but no where close to VHS either. It
has a couple of hundred more lines of resolution as opposed to VHS. VHS I
beleive is around 240 lines of horizontal resolution, SVHS is 400 lines of Horz
Res. Hi 8 is but 400 or 450 lines of Horz-Rez. Beta-SP is around 550 lines MII
is about the same 550, so for the dollar, SVHS is a good buy.
Now, the SONY SVHS SVO9600PRO has four audio channels, two HI-FI 90db recorded
onto the Video track and two NORM recorded onto the audio track. YOu can add a
RS-422 or 232 (better with 422) board and a SMPTE TIME CODE Generator board.
There is also a Digital Noise Reducer board available for this model as well.
But you will NEED the RS-422 and the TIME CODE board for sure. The deck is then
FRAME ACCURATE and delivers GOOD quality video and takes Frame by frame
animation with the proper controller, ANIMAX controller for example.
The deck has two VU meters switchable from HI-FI to NORM (time code goes onto
track two of the HI-FI.
The deck is affordable, and If I wanted or needed two or three decks for
editing then I would buy two or three of these. Here is what I paid for mine:
SONY SVO9600 $2,295.00
TIME CODE 400
RS-422 600
ANIMAX 1044
That's $4339.00 So for $8678 you can have two frame accurate decks. (they have
gone up a little so I counted the ANIMAX cost twice. I don't think that is too
bad a deal.
As for broadcast quality, I will repeat to you what a wise forumer told me,
there is not a STANDARD for broadcast quality.
I have done some work for a local T.V station and MY quality in my opinion
exceeds what they have. They except my work on SVHS (I have to bring my deck
into the station and then we dump to a 3/4 machine). It looks better than most
of the local commercials after being broadcasted, providing the T.V. guys don't
botch up the editing.
I am not a dealer of these machines. I know how confusing it can be,
especially when dealing with certain salespersons. (I hate wabbits) and I
only have experience with this machine, and Hi-8 camcorders.
My recomendation is to buy from a dealer on the forum so you can have quick
support if needed. If you buy the SVO9600 then tere are a few on this forum
that know the set up. Mediavison (ANIMAX) also has a forum called VLAN. They
also make audio SMPTE Controllers and from what I understand are developing a
QuickPass type of Software that will cost you nothing if You buy the
controllers they make, and their controllers NETWORK for editing purposes.
Well, this is my opinion. mainly formed from hanging on the forum here and
listening.
Sure hope this helps you in your desicion making, I been there, and it is a
headache.
Merlin G. Farmer
Hey Merlin,
Thanks very much for the detailed message. You got a GREAT deal on you deck –
the cheapest SVHS decks I've found here in Vancouver have been at $5000. But
I'm a die-hard Sony fan – literally grew up with it. I have my eye on a
ANIMATION COMMANDER made here in Canada. Supposed to be pretty good (I guess).
Heard of it? Maybe I'll post a forum message on it to find out if anyone is
using it.
The audio is important to me. I'm not sure what I'm going to do once my short
is rendered – sound wise. It's going to need a good mix, and a lot of sampling,
but four tracks would be sweet.
And I understand what you say about BROADCAST QUALITY. I'm actually one who
doesn't mind a bit of noise (oh, I can hear people cringing) just because I'm
not in love with the perfection of a computer generated image. Sometimes that
random distortion thing can be okay.
Well, now I'll check into the SONY deck. I wonder if there would be duties
charged at the border, since this is a piece of computer hardware… Who
knows…
Thanks James