CompuServe Thread

Forum unknown · Videophile

##67236-Videoscapre 3-D

45 messages in this thread
#68389From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 19, 1987 12:49 PM
It's very simple. We send the contents of a file over the serial port (if the file is there … it has a special name) for each frame. So we are assuming a RS232 based controller that has a command (or commands) that will accomplish a "shoot the frame" command. I don't know if you can get that for the Bolex. We also have a manual single frame mode… By the way, you can setup your animation to work with any time base (16, 24, or 30 frames per second) as all timing in Videoscape is frame based.
#68434From: Vince MacdonaldMay 19, 1987 7:51 PM
Thanks – what you describe sounds adaptable to my use, although I'm afraid no one makes RS232 based controllers for Bolex H16's. I'll obviously have to roll my own. Two more questions: (1) Can I write my own file with whatever I want in it and give it your "special name"? (2) Does the RS232 controller have to send a message back to Videoscape when it's captured the frame? Just a thought, but I could hook another computer up to the Amiga's serial port and program it to wait for your command, trigger a solenoid through its parallel port to operate the camera and then send a message back to the Amiga. Is that roughly what your program is expecting? Thanks, Vince
#68526From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 20, 1987 1:07 PM
You can put whatever you want in the serial file. We do not expect any reply. Your idea of using another computer (C64?) as a solonoid controller is a good one. Good luck.
#68544From: Mike SchulteMay 20, 1987 4:43 PM
Pardon me for butting in on this thread, but is it too late for the Videoscape programmers to consider looking for a public message port with a name like "VTRControl"? Then sending a simple message to it to cause the record and waiting for the reply to verify the record is finished. This would allow the user to write a custom vtr controller using either the Amiga's serial or parallel port with no need for another computer in the middle. Perhaps even a standard message format could be worked out to command the most common vtr functions, so that anybody's animation programs could use the same controller. Just a thought…. Regards, Mike Schulte
#68579From: John DraperMay 20, 1987 8:01 PM
And a fine thought indeed Mike! That makes a lot of sense. If there is no message port, Videoscape could do whatever it would do normally. I think we definitely need more thinking like this, especially on the part of commercial programmers. Regards, Larry.
#68579From: John DraperMay 20, 1987 8:01 PM
And a fine thought indeed Mike! That makes a lot of sense. If there is no message port, Videoscape could do whatever it would do normally. I think we definitely need more thinking like this, especially on the part of commercial programmers. Regards, Larry.
#68698From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 21, 1987 12:57 PM
For now we are sending a file over the serial port for each frame. All the VCR controllers we have seen that support single frame (VAS 5, from Lyon Labs etc…) work in this manner. Also due to ANIM single framing is no longer a requirement. But it's a good suggestion ….
#68743From: John DraperMay 21, 1987 8:18 PM
Though some of pro units (most of them?) may accept a file over the serial port, I think that you may be surprised at the number of people who would want to do something at home, with equipment of their own design, etc. The advantage of doing search for a named message port should not be underestimated, for the reason already stated, and for future compatibility with any method that might be used on amateur or professional equipment. You say that single framing is no longer a requirement, but I'm afraid you are off base in that statement. You have mentioned sequences of 4-5 seconds, and have spoken of hard disk storage for longer sequences. This is all fine and good for those who have access to an editing suite, but falls short of the mark for those with less sophisticated equipment, including, as one member mentioned, movie cameras. My advice is to spend the small extra effort to look for a message port, and if available, send whatever status commands are needed. In addition, I would urge you to fully document the procedures and messages. It will serve to make your program more useful to a wider range of people. Another thing to keep in mind is that anything sent out the serial port should be completely under control of the user. It is annoying to say the least to see data pouring out to my modem as I use a program, and I imagine it is even more annoying to those who have a printer attached. Regards, Larry.
#68841From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 1:58 PM
You can do 4 to 5 seconds of Video Res (352 x 440) graphics on a 512K machine. A Hard Disk helps but memory is more important. If you can supply sample code for talking to a message port (I am VERY tied up in projects….) we may be able to get it into VideoScape. No promises as the manual and boxes are already in production …. but I will let everyone know about the suggestion (a good one).
#68895From: John DraperMay 22, 1987 8:32 PM
The easiest way would be for me to point you at Rob Peck's book, "Programmer's Guide to tthe Amiga". Starting on page 58, you will see Signals, followed by Messages starting on page 64, complete with code fragments. As well, there are examples in the chapter on multitasking. The code required is fairly minimal, and of course if you did a FindPort() and found nothing, then you wouldn't need to send anything to it. If you find one, then a message need only be sent when an event occurs that is of interest. I hope you can put it in, and if not, then perhaps in the next release.
#69057From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 23, 1987 7:04 PM
I love the Peck Book, but I'm kinda of dissapointed that the examples will not run (Unmodified) in AZTEC 16bit mode. It would have been easy to make them run with 16bit int, and it wouldn't have made it incomptable with Lattice. I will check out that section …. thanks.
#69057From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 23, 1987 7:04 PM
I love the Peck Book, but I'm kinda of dissapointed that the examples will not run (Unmodified) in AZTEC 16bit mode. It would have been easy to make them run with 16bit int, and it wouldn't have made it incomptable with Lattice. I will check out that section …. thanks.
#68895From: John DraperMay 22, 1987 8:32 PM
The easiest way would be for me to point you at Rob Peck's book, "Programmer's Guide to tthe Amiga". Starting on page 58, you will see Signals, followed by Messages starting on page 64, complete with code fragments. As well, there are examples in the chapter on multitasking. The code required is fairly minimal, and of course if you did a FindPort() and found nothing, then you wouldn't need to send anything to it. If you find one, then a message need only be sent when an event occurs that is of interest. I hope you can put it in, and if not, then perhaps in the next release.
#69007From: Vic WagnerMay 23, 1987 3:17 PM
This ain't the best solution, but if the manuals are already being printed, an addition in the form of a Read-Me file would suffice. Those who need the feature would be overjoyed and those who don't won't care much (they won't have to read all the stuff about public port "AegisVideoScape3DMagicPort1" which keeps the serial port from getting something for each frame. I can assure you that the word will get out if the feature exists independent of whether the box mentions it at all.
#69061From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 23, 1987 7:08 PM
I am going to have some dicussion about it this week. It's till a question of time… but the feature could allways make it into a revision.
#69061From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 23, 1987 7:08 PM
I am going to have some dicussion about it this week. It's till a question of time… but the feature could allways make it into a revision.
#69007From: Vic WagnerMay 23, 1987 3:17 PM
This ain't the best solution, but if the manuals are already being printed, an addition in the form of a Read-Me file would suffice. Those who need the feature would be overjoyed and those who don't won't care much (they won't have to read all the stuff about public port "AegisVideoScape3DMagicPort1" which keeps the serial port from getting something for each frame. I can assure you that the word will get out if the feature exists independent of whether the box mentions it at all.
#68841From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 1:58 PM
You can do 4 to 5 seconds of Video Res (352 x 440) graphics on a 512K machine. A Hard Disk helps but memory is more important. If you can supply sample code for talking to a message port (I am VERY tied up in projects….) we may be able to get it into VideoScape. No promises as the manual and boxes are already in production …. but I will let everyone know about the suggestion (a good one).
#68743From: John DraperMay 21, 1987 8:18 PM
Though some of pro units (most of them?) may accept a file over the serial port, I think that you may be surprised at the number of people who would want to do something at home, with equipment of their own design, etc. The advantage of doing search for a named message port should not be underestimated, for the reason already stated, and for future compatibility with any method that might be used on amateur or professional equipment. You say that single framing is no longer a requirement, but I'm afraid you are off base in that statement. You have mentioned sequences of 4-5 seconds, and have spoken of hard disk storage for longer sequences. This is all fine and good for those who have access to an editing suite, but falls short of the mark for those with less sophisticated equipment, including, as one member mentioned, movie cameras. My advice is to spend the small extra effort to look for a message port, and if available, send whatever status commands are needed. In addition, I would urge you to fully document the procedures and messages. It will serve to make your program more useful to a wider range of people. Another thing to keep in mind is that anything sent out the serial port should be completely under control of the user. It is annoying to say the least to see data pouring out to my modem as I use a program, and I imagine it is even more annoying to those who have a printer attached. Regards, Larry.
#68796From: Vic WagnerMay 22, 1987 2:36 AM
I'd like to add my vote to Larry's…..see message : #: 68743 S6/Videophile 21-May-87 18:18:15
#68842From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 1:58 PM
I'll pass it along …. but time is VERY short.
#69006From: Vic WagnerMay 23, 1987 3:17 PM
I understand, I must have been asleep at the wheel, I generally have opinions about everything (as soon as I hear about them), and comment on them. Well, we all have 20/10 hindsight, keep up the good work.
#69006From: Vic WagnerMay 23, 1987 3:17 PM
I understand, I must have been asleep at the wheel, I generally have opinions about everything (as soon as I hear about them), and comment on them. Well, we all have 20/10 hindsight, keep up the good work.
#68842From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 1:58 PM
I'll pass it along …. but time is VERY short.
#68796From: Vic WagnerMay 22, 1987 2:36 AM
I'd like to add my vote to Larry's…..see message : #: 68743 S6/Videophile 21-May-87 18:18:15
#68836From: Mike SchulteMay 22, 1987 1:12 PM
One of the reasons I made the suggestion about the public port was that I checked out our 1" machines at work the other night (Ampex VPR-2's & VPR-80's) and none of them have the serial edit control interfaces. Only the standard "dumb" interface port is there. I imagine that this is true of the machines bought by many television stations. Little thought was given to the thought of computer control and in-house animation when we went from 2" to 1" machines several years ago. When you walk into management and tell them what wonders could be done with an under $200 program they're all ears until you mention that another computer must be aquired or another little black box must be wired in get it to work. Even in our top 10 market they won't spend the extra dollars required. Your serial port file is a good idea and I would still keep it in for users who have an intelligent controller to talk to, but it would be nice to have the user programmed option available, after all, isn't that what sets a multitasking machine apart from the crowd?
#68843From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 2:00 PM
The problem is one of timing … I do not know if there is enough time to add the feature. Do you think that second party developers will be able to create software/hardware combos that can drive the video editing controllers directly??? Let me know.
#68853From: Mike SchulteMay 22, 1987 4:07 PM
I can't speak for 2nd party developers other than end users. In most large to medium market TV stations at least one person, usually more loves to tackle interface projects like this, as long as they have access to interface signals at both ends (machine to machine, or in this case program hooks to machine.). Most vtr's basic remote connections consist of a connection paralleling the front panel buttons (logically if not physically) and connections paralleling the front panel lamps. All the hardware that is usually needed to interface to external controllers (such as a parallel port) is a handfull of opto-couplers. A quick example of a vtr controller that one of my fellow workers did about seven years ago; He designed, wire wrapped and programmed a Z80 based controller that hooked into 4 Sony BVU-200's, provided the operator variable speed search cueing facilities, once the tape was at the head of the desired segment, one button was pushed, it backed the machine up 5 seconds and passed starting control to the operator in the control room. This device was in service for the 5 years we used BVU-200's to air news stories from. So I do think the people are out there that could put the message port to use. I also understand the timing constraints that Aegis is under trying to get Videoscape out. I'll bet that once it is released you'll hear even more suggestions for enhancements, so perhaps this could wait for Videoscape 2.0? At least that would give more time for the idea to be fully thought out and a standard (generic) vtr interface developed. As an owner of a competetor's animation program it would be nice if they could use the same user controller interface if they ever release a version 3.0 of theirs. The IFF statdard has done wonders for graphics and sound interchangeability in my estimation, it would be nice to have a standard for controlling some real world events. regards, Mike Schulte
#69055From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 23, 1987 7:01 PM
It's a good idea that (if I get the same kind of responce form the customers that I got here) … could wind up in the VideoScape system (if not the first release …. than maybe a revision). I tried this approach with the Draw package back during development in 1985 (I was one of the designers). At that time mucking with message ports was very difficult. The situation seems to have improved since then. Thanks.
#69165From: Mike SchulteMay 24, 1987 3:49 PM
I just had a thought about another application of this same message port idea that could find use in VideoScape or any other software using ANIMs. If an external editing controller were able to send a "go" command to the Amiga, one generation of tape could be avoided. In effect using the Amiga as a source VTR. The time delay for passing the message in the Amiga in this case would have to be less than one frame, but I shouldn't think this would be much of a contraint. regards, Mike
#69165From: Mike SchulteMay 24, 1987 3:49 PM
I just had a thought about another application of this same message port idea that could find use in VideoScape or any other software using ANIMs. If an external editing controller were able to send a "go" command to the Amiga, one generation of tape could be avoided. In effect using the Amiga as a source VTR. The time delay for passing the message in the Amiga in this case would have to be less than one frame, but I shouldn't think this would be much of a contraint. regards, Mike
#69055From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 23, 1987 7:01 PM
It's a good idea that (if I get the same kind of responce form the customers that I got here) … could wind up in the VideoScape system (if not the first release …. than maybe a revision). I tried this approach with the Draw package back during development in 1985 (I was one of the designers). At that time mucking with message ports was very difficult. The situation seems to have improved since then. Thanks.
#68853From: Mike SchulteMay 22, 1987 4:07 PM
I can't speak for 2nd party developers other than end users. In most large to medium market TV stations at least one person, usually more loves to tackle interface projects like this, as long as they have access to interface signals at both ends (machine to machine, or in this case program hooks to machine.). Most vtr's basic remote connections consist of a connection paralleling the front panel buttons (logically if not physically) and connections paralleling the front panel lamps. All the hardware that is usually needed to interface to external controllers (such as a parallel port) is a handfull of opto-couplers. A quick example of a vtr controller that one of my fellow workers did about seven years ago; He designed, wire wrapped and programmed a Z80 based controller that hooked into 4 Sony BVU-200's, provided the operator variable speed search cueing facilities, once the tape was at the head of the desired segment, one button was pushed, it backed the machine up 5 seconds and passed starting control to the operator in the control room. This device was in service for the 5 years we used BVU-200's to air news stories from. So I do think the people are out there that could put the message port to use. I also understand the timing constraints that Aegis is under trying to get Videoscape out. I'll bet that once it is released you'll hear even more suggestions for enhancements, so perhaps this could wait for Videoscape 2.0? At least that would give more time for the idea to be fully thought out and a standard (generic) vtr interface developed. As an owner of a competetor's animation program it would be nice if they could use the same user controller interface if they ever release a version 3.0 of theirs. The IFF statdard has done wonders for graphics and sound interchangeability in my estimation, it would be nice to have a standard for controlling some real world events. regards, Mike Schulte
#68843From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 2:00 PM
The problem is one of timing … I do not know if there is enough time to add the feature. Do you think that second party developers will be able to create software/hardware combos that can drive the video editing controllers directly??? Let me know.
#68836From: Mike SchulteMay 22, 1987 1:12 PM
One of the reasons I made the suggestion about the public port was that I checked out our 1" machines at work the other night (Ampex VPR-2's & VPR-80's) and none of them have the serial edit control interfaces. Only the standard "dumb" interface port is there. I imagine that this is true of the machines bought by many television stations. Little thought was given to the thought of computer control and in-house animation when we went from 2" to 1" machines several years ago. When you walk into management and tell them what wonders could be done with an under $200 program they're all ears until you mention that another computer must be aquired or another little black box must be wired in get it to work. Even in our top 10 market they won't spend the extra dollars required. Your serial port file is a good idea and I would still keep it in for users who have an intelligent controller to talk to, but it would be nice to have the user programmed option available, after all, isn't that what sets a multitasking machine apart from the crowd?
#68698From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 21, 1987 12:57 PM
For now we are sending a file over the serial port for each frame. All the VCR controllers we have seen that support single frame (VAS 5, from Lyon Labs etc…) work in this manner. Also due to ANIM single framing is no longer a requirement. But it's a good suggestion ….
#68544From: Mike SchulteMay 20, 1987 4:43 PM
Pardon me for butting in on this thread, but is it too late for the Videoscape programmers to consider looking for a public message port with a name like "VTRControl"? Then sending a simple message to it to cause the record and waiting for the reply to verify the record is finished. This would allow the user to write a custom vtr controller using either the Amiga's serial or parallel port with no need for another computer in the middle. Perhaps even a standard message format could be worked out to command the most common vtr functions, so that anybody's animation programs could use the same controller. Just a thought…. Regards, Mike Schulte
#68728From: Louis MarkoyaMay 21, 1987 7:02 PM
After a long wait, several questions and explanations, I finally got a copy of Infinite Loop today. WOW!!!!! This is what the personal computer world has been waiting for (In video applications at least) My compliments to both Aegis and Alan for an incredible demo. Will the program come with any sample animations for tutorials?
#68840From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 1:55 PM
Yes, there will be sample animations and a ton of predefined objects (from Infinite Loop and elsewhere). I'm really excited with what the video industry will be able to create with VideoScape 3D.
#69471From: John FoustMay 26, 1987 11:48 PM
I'm now looking at Byte-by-Byte's Sculpt 3D program from Eric Graham, previewing it for the upcoming Amazing Computing Video issue. (Wish I could have had VideoScape!) Using a program like this, I can see the immense importance of a standard format for objects. Talking with Alan Hastings, I learned that VideoScape uses ASCII files for interchange of created objects, similar to Aegis Animator. Poking around in Sculpt 3D, I see it uses something that looks like IFF, but with new hunks. Grr! I think an interchange program will be of the greatest import to the future legions of three-dimensional program users. I don't want to nag, Bill, so instead I'll pick up the ball myself. If I pester Eric Graham to release and document his object format, will Hastings release his format, so SOMEONE can consider an interchange program? (Ah, I saw the message you posted this this effect later in the message base… Still, could you post an early version of the spec?)
#69471From: John FoustMay 26, 1987 11:48 PM
I'm now looking at Byte-by-Byte's Sculpt 3D program from Eric Graham, previewing it for the upcoming Amazing Computing Video issue. (Wish I could have had VideoScape!) Using a program like this, I can see the immense importance of a standard format for objects. Talking with Alan Hastings, I learned that VideoScape uses ASCII files for interchange of created objects, similar to Aegis Animator. Poking around in Sculpt 3D, I see it uses something that looks like IFF, but with new hunks. Grr! I think an interchange program will be of the greatest import to the future legions of three-dimensional program users. I don't want to nag, Bill, so instead I'll pick up the ball myself. If I pester Eric Graham to release and document his object format, will Hastings release his format, so SOMEONE can consider an interchange program? (Ah, I saw the message you posted this this effect later in the message base… Still, could you post an early version of the spec?)
#68840From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 22, 1987 1:55 PM
Yes, there will be sample animations and a ton of predefined objects (from Infinite Loop and elsewhere). I'm really excited with what the video industry will be able to create with VideoScape 3D.
#68728From: Louis MarkoyaMay 21, 1987 7:02 PM
After a long wait, several questions and explanations, I finally got a copy of Infinite Loop today. WOW!!!!! This is what the personal computer world has been waiting for (In video applications at least) My compliments to both Aegis and Alan for an incredible demo. Will the program come with any sample animations for tutorials?
#68526From: Aegis DevelopmentMay 20, 1987 1:07 PM
You can put whatever you want in the serial file. We do not expect any reply. Your idea of using another computer (C64?) as a solonoid controller is a good one. Good luck.
#68434From: Vince MacdonaldMay 19, 1987 7:51 PM
Thanks – what you describe sounds adaptable to my use, although I'm afraid no one makes RS232 based controllers for Bolex H16's. I'll obviously have to roll my own. Two more questions: (1) Can I write my own file with whatever I want in it and give it your "special name"? (2) Does the RS232 controller have to send a message back to Videoscape when it's captured the frame? Just a thought, but I could hook another computer up to the Amiga's serial port and program it to wait for your command, trigger a solenoid through its parallel port to operate the camera and then send a message back to the Amiga. Is that roughly what your program is expecting? Thanks, Vince