DV-L Sun, 25 Feb 2001 Volume 1 : Number 777
In this issue:
Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
: Re: Web Video
Re: DV-L V1 #776
re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
letterboxing 16:9
Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Re: DV-L V1 #776
Hello - Newbie to group
Re: Hello - Newbie to group
Re: R: Brice 3d
Re: halogen worklights and stupid tripods
Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
RE: new transmission algorithm capable
Re: Web Video
RE: UMMMM 16x9 DV Camera
Re: Web Video
Re: R: Brice 3d
More Bryce and Premiere...
Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Re: More Bryce and Premiere...
Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Firewire to Composite output/input
RE: Firewire to Composite output/input
flatbed scanner
Monitors
Re: More Bryce and Premiere...
Re: R: Brice 3d
DSR-11 ?? or ?
film res & dat setp--pl help
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 02:03:52 -0700
From: "Brent Wiscombe"
To:
Cc:
Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Message-ID: <00f101c09e41$0c779400$b7cf0118@mesa1.az.home.com>
Hello Bruce,
It sounds like you are experiencing a "techno-gotcha". This is one of those
phenomena that appears every so often in our lives to show us that even if
we do everything right, it turns out wrong.
It sounds like you are doing everything right, but the dub is not being
recorded very well. It also sounds to me like you are having equipment
problems, not operator problems. A proc-amp will not solve this problem. A
good player sending the signal over good cables and connections directly to
a single good VCR should provide an excellent recorded dub. At least as
good as the highest quality capable for the VCR being used. This problem
needs to be narrowed down to determine which piece of equipment is causing
the problem.
1. Try playing straight from the camera to the TV using more than one set
of cable if needed until a good picture is obtained. This will identify a
known good set of video cables and establish that the camera is working OK
and that the TV is working OK. If the TV image is still bad, switch to a
different TV or a different set of cables. By this stage you will have
found out if the camera works, if the TV works, and which cables work to
give a great image.
2. Using the known good components from the above test, add the VCR
recorder into the loop between the camera and the TV. The TV must be
connected to the output of the VCR. Watch the TV while making a dub
recording. Then play back the dub recording to verify that it looks the
same as when it was being recorded. If it doesn't look the same, then find
a recorder that does look the same during record as when playing back the
recording.
3. If all is well to this point and the camera-to-VCR-to-TV is looking
good, then swap the camera out and put the DSR 20 in its place, changing
nothing else. Play the same tape that the camera was playing and record it
on the VCR. Watch the TV during the recording and also during playback of
the recording to verify that it looks the same both times. You can use
either the 75 ohm shielded cable to connect the TV to the VCR or use
composite connections, but don't swap the cables. Leave the cabling setup
the same for both viewing situations.
If you do these various tests, you should find which unit or cable is
causing the problem, and be able to fix it so that the vhs recording looks
just as good on the TV while the tape is being recorded as when it is being
played back. I also make sure that I connect my monitor TV to the output of
my dub VCR just to make sure that it is showing exactly what is being
recorded. If the monitor TV is connected to the output of the DSR 20 so
that it is seeing the same signal that is going to the input of the VCR,
you are not guaranteed to see exactly what is actually being recorded.
Best of Luck,
Brent Wiscombe
bwiscombe@msn.com
Mesa, AZ
______________________
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Pattison"
To:
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 7:58 PM
Subject: lousy VHS dubs from DV
> When, however, I play a VHS dub back, all I see it on is the TV. And it
> looks just like the image I saw on the TV from playing the original DV
tape.
> It's a "good" dub. It just doesn't look good. It never looked good.
All
> the hardware is doing its job well. So it must be that I'm not.
> The transcoded analog image needs fixing. The digital image is great
and,
> except for within the computer software, un-adjustable. It's bits.
> What do I need, a proc amp between DV deck and VHS deck? OK, I need an
> experienced engineer, but I don't have one. The descriptions of proc
amps
> (would that be processor amplifiers?) in the Markertek catalog sound like
> they'd do what needs doing. How to assess adjustments? a waveform
scope?
> I think I shoulda took some tech classes.
>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:29:39 +1000
From: "Walter Starck"
To: "DV-L"
Subject: : Re: Web Video
Message-ID: <000401c09e44$9c341e80$2a8f16cb@hjs511s>
Stu Siegal wrote
>>...even with a broadband hookup web
>>video isn't worth the effort as anything more than an occasional novelty.
>>It's not even up to the standards of bad UHF reception.-(Stu)
------------
>to which Steve Bennett replied
>The thing is, video on computers and the web needn't be judged solely on
>the criteria used for television. These are completely different media
>that do and are different things.
I agree with Steve on this. Once acceptable quality is met web video does not have to
imitate TV. It can be quite different in both form and content.
On the web, video is only one element is a complex of media forms acting in a matrix of
interactive possibilities. Content too can be much more specialized for particular
audiences than the least common denominator approach of TV.
Walter Starck
www.goldendolphin.com
Home of the "S" stabilizer for video cameras
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:06:06 +0000
From: asvideo@t-online.de (armin schmid)
To:
Subject: Re: DV-L V1 #776
Message-ID:
>
> That's "sophisticated" for you, buster. "Sophistic" is something else.
>
read
Plato and Sophistic Thinking:
Plato Discussion Deck
http://westerncanon.com/cgibin/lecture/Platohall/cas/49.html
>Sometime I wonder whether Alzheimer's isn't such a bad thing at all.
45 years ago when you moved from Germany to USA your Alzheimer was not so
bad your manners better , but your english ? buster
--
Armin Schmid
asv multimedia
Consulting.. DV-Solutions..A/V Kompressionen
asvid@gmx.de
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 09:52:47 -0500
From: "Jeff Lynch"
To:
Subject: re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Message-ID: <001701c09e71$73eed960$8b00000a@default>
>Warning: you can play tapes, orinated on VO on both types, but BVU tapes
>will play back black / white on the VO series (AFAIR)
this is just plain misinformation. the VO series was marketed to
"non-broadcast" clients, the BVU's to broadcast (as in "broadcast video
umatic") ... principal differences: address track timecode, balanced audio,
and, if memory serves, internal TBC's but i might be wrong on that one ...
and a BIG difference in price.
you may be thinking of 3/4 *SP* decks that were marketed for a bit ... i
imagine that would result in the "black and white" result you describe.
a real concern about older 3/4 decks is oxide sheading from the tape, which
you learn the hard way as the heads clog in a BIG way.
best,
jeff.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 08:55:30 -0800
From: "Fraser Stables"
To:
Subject: letterboxing 16:9
Message-ID: <002701c09e82$9911edc0$90b58acf@symet.net>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0024_01C09E3F.8A2CE460
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
I need some advice on the best way to accurately letterbox 4:3 to 16:9. =
I have been working with an editing company, using mainly avid and =
mastering the original dvcam material on digital beta. Does the Sony =
digital beta machine have the capacity to produce an accurate 16:9 =
letterbox either on play or record? If so, where is it on the menu =
functions (sorry, I do not know the model number of the machine, but I =
expect they are fairly high end and current). We got the letterbox close =
using photoshop to generate a proportionallty correct box and then =
exporting that through the avid and doing a swipe. Is there an =
easier/more accurate way?
Any help is appreciated, I go back to finish the job on Monday.
(Thanks for peoples advice a few months ago regarding NTSC/PAL -- ended =
up going for the compatibility of NTSC while I am in the states.)
Fraser
------=_NextPart_000_0024_01C09E3F.8A2CE460
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
I need some advice on the best way to = accurately=20 letterbox 4:3 to 16:9. I have been working with an editing company, = using mainly=20 avid and mastering the original dvcam material on digital beta. Does the = Sony=20 digital beta machine have the capacity to produce an accurate 16:9 = letterbox=20 either on play or record? If so, where is it on the menu functions = (sorry, I do=20 not know the model number of the machine, but I expect they are fairly = high end=20 and current). We got the letterbox close using photoshop to generate a=20 proportionallty correct box and then exporting that through the avid and = doing a=20 swipe. Is there an easier/more accurate way?
Any help is appreciated, I go back to = finish the=20 job on Monday.
(Thanks for peoples advice a few months = ago=20 regarding NTSC/PAL -- ended up going for the compatibility of NTSC while = I am in=20 the states.)
Fraser
------=_NextPart_000_0024_01C09E3F.8A2CE460--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:19:10 -0500
From: "Walt"
To:
Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Message-ID: <008401c09e75$568394c0$6401a8c0@design1>
I think you may have already identified the problem. If the picture looks
good on the Sony monitor but bad on the "cheap" TV that's where the problem
lies. The NTSC specs are the lowest common denominator of video performance
and 100% compliance with them will give an acceptable picture on any
properly adjusted monitor, but it won't be the same quality on all. Better
monitor = Better picture.
The output from your DSR-20 can exceed the spec in several areas. The only
way to guarantee that everything is correct is to use a proc amp and a
waveform monitor / vectorscope to assure the specs are met. That covers the
source side now on the TV side you need to be sure it is adjusted correctly
using a blue filter and smpte color bars. Of course the same should be done
for your Sony monitor too. They'll never match completely but you can at
least get them as close as possible that way.
To test the Sony and the TV try feeding a commercially produced DVD into
both monitor and compare the results. That will also point out the
manufacturing differences in the two monitors that you can't control. Also
try playing the VHS tape back through the Sony monitor and see how it
compares. Years ago in my linear edit suite I had 3 JVC color monitors for
sources and one Sony monitor for program output and I could never get them
to all match perfectly even though they were all fairly expensive monitors.
I adjusted them as close as I could and then I used the Sony, the best of
the lot, for qualitative assessments.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Pattison"
To:
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 9:58 PM
Subject: lousy VHS dubs from DV
> Right up front, I confess to technical inexperience, if not outright
> doofus-ness. That said, allow me an exploration.
> What monitors are we using to view a) the DV tape footage and b) the VHS
> dub? I have two monitors on my DSR 20, a good Sony
> Trinitron NTSC 500 line (S-video in), and a new $150 19" generic TV with
an
> RCA input. So when I play a DV tape, I see both, the great Sony image
and,
> on the TV, a kind of a simplified, rudimentary colors / contrasty steely
> image. It's OK, mind you. But it's not the same. It's been
> transmogrified.
> When, however, I play a VHS dub back, all I see it on is the TV. And it
> looks just like the image I saw on the TV from playing the original DV
tape.
> It's a "good" dub.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 05:57:57 -1000
From: Jon Burkhart
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: DV-L V1 #776
Message-ID: <3A97DA05.37646308@maui.net>
OK, all of us on the list understand you guys don't like each other. Enough, already.
Aloha,
Jon Burkhart
armin schmid wrote:
> >
> > That's "sophisticated" for you, buster. "Sophistic" is something else.
> >
> read
> Plato and Sophistic Thinking:
> Plato Discussion Deck
> http://westerncanon.com/cgibin/lecture/Platohall/cas/49.html
>
> >Sometime I wonder whether Alzheimer's isn't such a bad thing at all.
> 45 years ago when you moved from Germany to USA your Alzheimer was not so
> bad your manners better , but your english ? buster
> --
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:59:50 -0500
From: "xiao liu"
To:
Subject: Hello - Newbie to group
Message-ID: <00c101c09e7a$d1c4aca0$52c18318@mw.mediaone.net>
Hello,
I am new to this group and would like to say hi! I have recently purchased a Canon Gl1 and am just having a great time
with it. I have been reading the postings for a few months to learn more but still have a few questions for everyone
regarding tapes and editing. I am only doing this as a hobby and also to learning something new about digital editing
and home video making.
1. Is Sony the best tape to use? I bought the (5) Panasonic mini DV Master series
2. Is there a better video editor than the Ulead? I need something that could easily download 16:9 format and allows
me to adjust brightness, etc..
For computing power, I can upgrade too. Right now, I got a 450 MHz IBM machine with 256 Megs of Ram, 16 Megs ATI Rage
Fury video card, 46 Gig drive, HP- CDRW, Acer 2720s film scanner, Jazz 1 gig drive and a 17 inch Nokia monitor.
Suggestions are appreciated and keep up the interesting discussions.
doanh
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 11:43:26 -0500
From: "Walt"
To:
Subject: Re: Hello - Newbie to group
Message-ID: <00a101c09e80$efef1700$6401a8c0@design1>
It's best to use the same type of tape all the time so you don't have
problems with headclogs. Everybody has their favorite brand but in general
they all seem to be pretty good. I like the Sony Excellence, other have had
good performance from the Panasonic tapes so just pick one and stick with
it.
As far as editing goes I'm using Premiere. I just received my version 6
upgrade and it seems to be working just fine. You didn't mention if you were
using a Firewire card or not but you will find that Firewire will be much
better for editing than any low cost analog connection with your GL-1. For
cuts only editing there will be no degradation and other transitions which
have to be rendered will have such a small amount of loss you'll probably
not notice it at all. Far less than any analog conversion and compression
would cause.
The one thing you will want to address is your hard drive. You didn't
mention having but one drive and it's important to have at least two drives.
One for the system and the other for video. If you share the same drive the
potential for dropped frames increases due to the probability that both a
system access and video access hit at the same time. Obviously only one can
be serviced at a time so dropped frames are more likely. It's also easier to
reformat a separate drive than to defrag a large drive to improve
performance after finishing a project. Creating a separate partition won't
help it must be a separate physical drive. You can pickup a 15 or 20 gig
drive for a system drive for about $100 and it's money well spent.
So if you want to take the next step add a hard drive and a Firewire card.
I've had really good luck with the DVRaptor boards in PIII-450 or faster
machines and the Orange Micro OHCI card for my 700 MHz PIII notebook is
working well too. I bought my last DVRaptor from B&H just a few weeks ago
and paid $400 for it with Premiere 5.1 and a free upgrade to Premiere 6 when
the final drivers are ready from Canopus.
Walt
----- Original Message -----
From: "xiao liu"
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 10:59 AM
Subject: Hello - Newbie to group
> Hello,
>
> I am new to this group and would like to say hi! I have recently
purchased a Canon Gl1 and am just having a great time
> with it. I have been reading the postings for a few months to learn more
but still have a few questions for everyone
> regarding tapes and editing. I am only doing this as a hobby and also to
learning something new about digital editing
> and home video making.
>
> 1. Is Sony the best tape to use? I bought the (5) Panasonic mini DV
Master series
> 2. Is there a better video editor than the Ulead? I need something that
could easily download 16:9 format and allows
> me to adjust brightness, etc..
>
> For computing power, I can upgrade too. Right now, I got a 450 MHz IBM
machine with 256 Megs of Ram, 16 Megs ATI Rage
> Fury video card, 46 Gig drive, HP- CDRW, Acer 2720s film scanner, Jazz 1
gig drive and a 17 inch Nokia monitor.
>
> Suggestions are appreciated and keep up the interesting discussions.
>
>
> doanh
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:58:37 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
From: "Richard Taylor"
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: R: Brice 3d
Message-ID: <77452DD012CA.AAA3E1F@mail1.21stcentury.net>
--
http://www.freespeech.org/apophysis/>
> From: "ifmp1"
>>,,,,An example? My Athlon 600 is taking
>>>nearly sixteen minutes per frame right now as I write. My dual PIII 800
>>>machine does no better, but then, dual processors aren't supported. Anyone
>>>know if Bryce 5 will handle this?
>>
>> C4D Go is $200.oo. http://www.maxon.net/usa/index.html
>>
>> It's amazingly capable and you can probably export your
>> Bryce stuff to it. There's a demo at the above page.
>----------
>
>Cinema 4D Go (besides actually being free for FCP owners) is going to
>render faster than Bryce 4, but for integrating terrain and scene
>animations or objects with DV footage (or for anything photorealistic
>actually) it won't come close to the Bryce rendering engine (or terrain
>modeling, for that matter). Rendering in Bryce 4 may take a while in
>some codecs and on some machines, but it is really, REALLY good
>(especially for the money and simplicity!). I'd almost rather drop down
>to the simpler rendering in Bryce 3D or even Bryce 2. That would
>definitely be faster, but not as "awesome" in terms of end look. There
>have recently been a few computer magazines that offered both Bryce 3D
>and Bryce 2 for free on their CDs.
We must be talking 2 different programs. I've not seen
anything done in Bryce that came close. Yes... I've
been around the web pages.
Admittedly, I've not used Bryce 4 but from having used
2 and 3 {they gave away 2 and 3 with some magazines},
unless they made considerable improvements in 4...
that's just wrong.
If you want rayshading, photorealism, real animation,
modeling and control... 4d is much superior, in my opinion.
Terrain can be done in any of several public
domain, shareware and freeware programs, or Genesis
http://www.geomantics.com/ or terragen for that matter.
Strata 3d will map bitmaps to elevation maps.
Genesis makes Bryce look like a toy and there's a
free version as well as a "pro" version... Admittedly
you may have to learn something in order to be able
to use it.Check out Landscape Explorer as well.
If the guy plans on doing real 3d animation why would
he not want a full featured program rather than a bundle
of pre-sets?
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 09:29:06 -0800
From: Denise Ohio
To:
Subject: Re: halogen worklights and stupid tripods
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20010224091739.009f0320@pop.greenapple.com>
I have no problem believing you like them. But if I use the legs with a
different head, they're fine, if I use the head on other sticks, it's okay.
But when I put these specific two together...I don't know what it is, but
the thing just hates me.
I am aware that tripods have no consciousness, so they cannot have emotions
such as hate. But this one does. Every time I use it, I end up with a flesh
wound. I am not kidding. It has fallen on my head (while in the bag or
closed up, never while on duty), it has tripped me, bit me, scratched
me---everything but called me names and taken my milk money.
And yet I can't part with it. It's the only part of my Bolex kit that I
have left. I don't remember it ever failing. It is heavy enough, it sinks
way low, I've locked it onto dollies without a problem. The head isn't the
smoothest in the world, but for the price...if it didn't work, I'd sell it.
My tetanus shot is up to date and I carry band-aids on every shoot anyway.
Now, if you feel sorry for me, please send one Sachtler.
Ohio
At 12:33 AM 2/24/01 -0800, you wrote:
>Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 08:26:18 -0800
>From: " Vizion Communication"
>To:
>Subject: Re: halogen worklights and stupid tripods
>Message-ID: <003201c09db5$723262c0$3946989e@VIZION2000>
>
>I even use 3063 on 3041 ---
>
>those legs are cool, slim and I love the way they do the splits!!
>
>DE
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Jon Burkhart"
>To:
>Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 8:05 AM
>Subject: Re: halogen worklights and stupid tripods
>
>
> >
> >
> > Denise Ohio wrote:
> >
> > > It is called "That f*cking tripod."
> > >
> > > Bogen 3063 and 3036. I have even used other Bogens without any trouble.
> > >
> >
> > Now wait a minute. I like mine. It's heavy as hell but you don't have to
>worry about it blowing over in a strong wind. AND you don't have to worry
>about anyone stealing it ;^) Sure glad
> > I don't have two.
> >
> > Aloha,
> > Jon Burkhart
> >
> >
> > -- (cut off when replying)-----------------
> > This list is made possible by Lifetime DV-L Benefactors such as
>http://www.promax.com, http://www.videoguys.com,
>http://www.panasonic.com/broadcast and the contributions of its members.
> >
> > To contribute money: http://www.computervicestore.com/dvl.html
> > All about DV-L, to subscribe & unsubscribe:
>http://www.DVCentral.org/thelist.html
> >
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 09:40:31 -0800
From: Craig Andreiko
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Message-ID: <3A97F20E.644ECAAF@sprynet.com>
Hi,
I have an idea (maybe not a good one) on this topic. I have fought the
dub battle with high quality equipment: PD100, DSR20, SVO2100, TBC,
ProcAmps, Monster cables, Fuji Master tapes, video signal books, blah,
blah, blah. Although some, (people at Promax seminars, etc) thought my
dubs were good I was never satisfied. I wanted my tapes to play as well
as commercial VHS tapes. I think a lot of this discussion is steered by
different peoples values on what looks good. You have practical video
folks and you have people like me who are tend to be perfectionists.
Anyway, after a year of chasing this target I boughtthe JVC
miniDV/SVHS/VHS deck on Charles McConathy's advice. BTW, I am in no way
associated with Promax but I have found them to be completely credible
and Charles' advice has been unerring. OK, I got the deck, made a dub
and was blown away. Apparently JVC used some of their tricks to turn
this deck into what it is: a pro dub deck made just for our purpose.
To the chase: I would be glad to make dubs of some DV stuff on my
simple, push the button deck and send it to a couple of the video
knowledgeable folks on the list if some of the other guys will do same
with their rigs. Obviuosly we have to dub the same thing. Maybe Vidiot
or Charles would agree to rank the dubs?
Craig Andreiko
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 18:29:33 +0100
From: "Ton Guiking"
To:
Subject: Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Message-ID: <055c01c09e8c$ccd205a0$a5a16dc2@default>
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Jeff Lynch
Aan: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Datum: zaterdag 24 februari 2001 15:53
Onderwerp: re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
>>Warning: you can play tapes, orinated on VO on both types, but BVU tapes
>>will play back black / white on the VO series (AFAIR)
>
>this is just plain misinformation. the VO series was marketed to
>"non-broadcast" clients, the BVU's to broadcast (as in "broadcast video
>umatic") ... principal differences: address track timecode, balanced
audio,
>and, if memory serves, internal TBC's but i might be wrong on that one ...
>and a BIG difference in price.
Well, this ain't NOT true, read the post from Perry on this topic the other
day. I'm for 99% percent sure it's true what I'm saying (so BVU plays B/W).
Problem is that I still have a VO 5800 and VO 5850 but gave my 100 + Umatic
tapes away. There were some BVU recordings also, but can't check it now. I
only have some tapes left which have programs I once made. But these are all
U-matic low band tapes.
Ton
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:17:24 -0500
From: "Steve Mullen"
To:
Subject: RE: new transmission algorithm capable
Message-ID: <001301c09e8e$0976d020$c955a818@nyc.rr.com>
>The technology is a new transmission algorithm capable of
>compressing a HDTV data stream to the point where the HDTV and
>analog TV signals can be broadcast over the same channel.
It is nothing more than a paper on the math of doing it. IT doesn't
exist.
Best Regards,
Steve Mullen
Digital Video Consulting NYC
www.mindspring.com/~d-v-c
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:36:33 -0500
From: "Stu Siegal"
To:
Subject: Re: Web Video
Message-ID: <000a01c09e90$b9396700$921e7392@cable.rcn.com>
Steve,
> The thing is, video on computers and the web needn't be judged solely on
> the criteria used for television. These are completely different media
> that do and are different things.
>
Certainly in many ways they are, but not in this context. Ifilm, atom,
sputnik 7, etc.... they are all the same type of experience as tv, and it is
fair that they be judged by a similar standard.
>Hey, what about
> >rabbit ears on top of my monitor?-(Stu)
> Don't you see the irony, the silliness in that? As Walter himself
> pointed out on another list, this is like the horse's head ...
Yes, I do. It was just a joke. And, monitor and my tv are not so
incredibly different.
> If you want to watch great-looking television, there is likely a
> television in your house which could facilitate that.
Yes, but at this point one of the main benefits of web video is that I can
see things I can't see on tv. If I want to see selections from RESfest, or
clips from Rob Nillson's new film, I have to stream them. At present, this
is EXACTLY what I want from web video. A passive viewing experience of
alternative content that is uncensored by a handful of media conglomerates.
As well, b2b webcasts, a huge chunk of the streaming media world, are
nothing more than television. Are they in their infancy? Yes. Are they
clunky and barely watchable? Yes. Is the answer to attempt to improve
streaming, or redefine the genre? Well, it's both. Please don't get me
wrong, I'm not an anti-change, "it's gotta be like tv" kinda guy. In fact,
I'm the farthest thing from it. I want to see new forms of media emerge as
much as anyone. But I'm also not willing to write off web video as it is
now, audio & picture streamed.
It seems we have a difference in our definition of the term "Web Video".
In the context of Walter's post, I took it literally. Clearly to you it
represents something much broader, and in the process of being defined. But
I think you responded based on what you want web video to become, and in
doing so summarily dismissed what it is right now. You're also saying in
effect "web video should not be experienced like tv". That's unfair.
> You probably don't expect a (passive anyway) "quality viewing
> experience" with other software applications on your computer. You are
> probably more interested in DOING something when you use your computer.
Not necessarily. It depends not on the appliance, but the nature of the
activity and the content. As I mentioned, there are many times when I do
simply want to watch something on the computer. In fact, I've yet to hit
an interactive sight that I return to regularly. Sometimes they provoke a
"Hey, cool" response, but they are still by and largely novelty experiences,
at present. Some examples: MTV's webeos, Spumco's interactive comics, and
any of a sea of flash sites. Television audiences have consistently
rejected interactive experiences in favor of passive viewing. Will this be
the same on the web? It's unsure. Yes, the nature of the hardware has
changed, but I think mainstream audiences still want to come home after a
long day and be passively entertained.
>Sure, video and other forms of motion pictures will
> continue to be used by people who want to be merely occupied or
> entertained in a passive way. But computers in general, and much of what
> the web is now, is about being "productive" or "creative" - 2 things
> that few would associate with the activity of TV viewers now, but which
> will become important features of functions (and devices!) using video
> and other media over networks into the future.
I have to say that this is both too broad and a bit elitist. Not all tv and
cinema are empty, passive entertainment. Certainly, much of it is crap, but
a very small handful of both are thought provoking, challenging, and not
sitcom/drama/newspeak drivel. Both tv and cinema offer non-mainstream
choices with merits beyond mindless entertainment, you just have to work to
find them. Many of the people on this list work to produce them. And while
it's certainly noble to espouse productivity and creativity, well, who are
we to criticize working people who come home and want to unwind in front of
the set or the computer? I think aspiring to raise the quality level of
content as opposed to criticizing viewing habits is a far worthier pursuit.
Again, I'm all for new media, whatever that may come to mean, but I stand by
my assertion that part of what it may become shares a lot of basic
characteristics with old media, and in that form in order to be viable its
got to be viewable.
Stu
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 12:48:09 -0500
From: "Crittenden, Jan"
To: "'DV-L@dvcentral.org'"
Subject: RE: UMMMM 16x9 DV Camera
Message-ID: <8FF8AAED9EE8D411836F0003472487A409D75C@mecasecu007.meca.panasonic.com>
John wrote:
> Now that Pannie is on the right DV track with the 215,
You mean the AG-DVC200 right?
how
> about a nice
> affordable 16x9 version with a flip-out tv screen (gotta keep
> up with the
> DSR500 and JVC 700, right?)
Neither of these cameras have a flip out screen. Due to their cost, feature
set and performance, I think we end up shifting to the DVCPRO arena and look
at the AJ-D610. This is a killer camera, but just a smidge over priced, I
think, but performance wise is a match for these cameras and then some. We
are continuing to bargain with the factory over the price issue. If it were
just a little less, it would give the DSR500 a real run for the money.
What I want is the same DVC200 in a DVCPRO body with 16:9, firewire and
maybe the opportunity to switch back and forth between DV and DVCPRO. I am
not a big fan of the little LCD, been in the business too long. To get the
signal out to the LCD, it has to go back to Base Band Video (analog) and
with no controls, I would be concerned over time if I were making color
judgment by the LCD. Analog circuits change and drift over time, and there
is no reason for the LCD not to be guilty of the same thing over time. I
know that many find it to be a useful feature, but I am from the old school,
and you know what, it isn't in my job description to be a camera designer,
I'm the training manager. I will send the wish list along John, thanks for
the input.
>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 17:51:15 -0500
From: "ifmp1"
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: Web Video
Message-ID: <20010224212349.UBWC27260.mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net@[12.78.200.88]>
RE:
----------
>From: "Stu Siegal"
>To:
>Subject: Re: Web Video
>Date: Sat, Feb 24, 2001, 1:36 PM
>> The thing is, video on computers and the web needn't be judged solely on
>> the criteria used for television. These are completely different media
>> that do and are different things.-(SB)
>Certainly in many ways they are, but not in this context. Ifilm, atom,
>sputnik 7, etc.... they are all the same type of experience as tv, and it is
>fair that they be judged by a similar standard.-(Stu)
----------
Well, I wouldn't call those sites very good examples of web video
implementation at any rate. They apparently don't exist to push any real
limits beyond public common sense. These are more along the lines of a
"business concept" than any kind of true exploration into the nature and
capabilities of web media, and even on simple video compression alone,
the "quality" one sees on these sites is close to abysmal.
----------
>>Hey, what about
>> >rabbit ears on top of my monitor?-(Stu)
>
>> Don't you see the irony, the silliness in that? As Walter himself
>> pointed out on another list, this is like the horse's head ..(SB)
>
> Yes, I do. It was just a joke. And, monitor and my tv are not so
>incredibly different.-(Stu)
----------
Well, there's really no need to get steamed up. Just relax, crack open a
sixpack, and lie back on the couch in front of your computer. The
differences will become more incredible the more you do this.
----------
>> If you want to watch great-looking television, there is likely a
>> television in your house which could facilitate that.-(SB)
>Yes, but at this point one of the main benefits of web video is that I can
>see things I can't see on tv. If I want to see selections from RESfest, or
>clips from Rob Nillson's new film, I have to stream them. At present, this
>is EXACTLY what I want from web video. A passive viewing experience of
>alternative content that is uncensored by a handful of media
conglomerates.(Stu)
----------
That's a noble desire, and one that has potential to be met in many ways
- BUT, there are some obvious technicalities in the way. In fact, I've
been having very similar problems getting good-sounding concert material
on my telephone,,, and my walkie-talkies.
-----------
>,,,,,I'm not an anti-change, "it's gotta be like tv" kinda guy. In fact,
>I'm the farthest thing from it. I want to see new forms of media emerge as
>much as anyone. But I'm also not willing to write off web video as it is
>now, audio & picture streamed.
>
>It seems we have a difference in our definition of the term "Web Video".
>In the context of Walter's post, I took it literally. Clearly to you it
>represents something much broader, and in the process of being defined. But
>I think you responded based on what you want web video to become, and in
>doing so summarily dismissed what it is right now. You're also saying in
>effect "web video should not be experienced like tv". That's unfair.
-------------
Actually, I really am referring to what web video is at this very
moment. The interactivity is all there right now. TV-like video quality
is NOT there now. I think you have it backwards. I think what remains to
be defined are the sensibilities through which the whole of it is
approached, and the telephone analogy is a better example than some may
think. There's a medium which has tremendous interactivity and similar
bandwidth and compression bottlenecks, yet people usually don't really
"tune in" to the telephone just to listen passively, right? But in fact,
there is a whole history of early attempts to utilize telephony as a
form of "cable radio", complete with dial-in live concerts and plays.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't listen to concerts on their
telephone, or sit back and enjoy feature films on their iMac, just that
grueling sports like these may require adult supervision and OSHA-like
safety standards.
I'm sure a lot of people have been lying back in front of their PC, a
beer in hand, staring at,,, Photoshop, all these years too. More power
to 'em. In fact, with web sites and all this confusing interface design
out there, I may even join them in that activity!
------------
>> You probably don't expect a (passive anyway) "quality viewing
>> experience" with other software applications on your computer. You are
>> probably more interested in DOING something when you use your computer.
>
>Not necessarily. It depends not on the appliance, but the nature of the
>activity and the content. As I mentioned, there are many times when I do
>simply want to watch something on the computer. In fact, I've yet to hit
>an interactive sight that I return to regularly. Sometimes they provoke a
>"Hey, cool" response, but they are still by and largely novelty experiences,
>at present.
-------------
Exactly. And novelty that comes in large part by having this "half-way"
experience of one device or media looking and acting a little like
another one. It really IS novelty. After the novelty wears off, we start
to see that people hunched over a PC, where they are used to DOING and
MANIPULATING, don't feel comfortable sitting for extended periods
without "accomplishing" anything. This is why "short" movies have come
into favor. Its funny to watch it don on people so slowly, just as it
may have been quite hilarious to watch people trying to listen to stage
plays on their,,, telephone.
Its just as funny going the OTHER way around too - slapping a keyboard
in dad's lap while he's lying on the couch, expecting him to type away
into a trivia chat list or buy cars online while he watches a game.
Let's face it. This is all pretty new, and we are all the Beverly
Hillbillies trying to figure out what a flush toilet is. Looks a little
bit like a big white tuba, but don't put yer lips on it Jed.
-------------
>>Sure, video and other forms of motion pictures will
>> continue to be used by people who want to be merely occupied or
>> entertained in a passive way. But computers in general, and much of what
>> the web is now, is about being "productive" or "creative"-(SB)
>I have to say that this is both too broad and a bit elitist. Not all tv and
>cinema are empty, passive entertainment. Certainly, much of it is crap, but
>a very small handful of both are thought provoking, challenging, and not
>sitcom/drama/newspeak drivel. Both tv and cinema offer non-mainstream
>choices with merits beyond mindless entertainment, you just have to work to
>find them. Many of the people on this list work to produce them. And while
>it's certainly noble to espouse productivity and creativity, well, who are
>we to criticize working people who come home and want to unwind in front of
>the set or the computer? I think aspiring to raise the quality level of
>content as opposed to criticizing viewing habits is a far worthier pursuit.
--------------
Lets look at the telephone again. This is like saying we need to really
examine and improve the content of telephone conversations in order to
understand or improve it as a medium. But then, who am I to criticize
working people who come home and just want to unwind by listening to,
say a Rod Stewart concert, on their telephone?
----------
>Again, I'm all for new media, whatever that may come to mean, but I stand by
>my assertion that part of what it may become shares a lot of basic
>characteristics with old media, and in that form in order to be viable its
>got to be viewable.
----------
I'm sure that, as with telephones in the near future, the bandwidth and
resolution to handle web video and other media will increase to the
point that you will be satisfied with comparisons to things like the way
television looks and sounds today. But there is now, and will be then, a
lot more to it.
Steve Bennett
www.ifmp.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 18:32:14 -0500
From: "ifmp1"
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: R: Brice 3d
Message-ID: <20010224220415.URLS27260.mtiwmhc27.worldnet.att.net@[12.78.200.88]>
RE:
----------
>From: "Richard Taylor"
>To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
>Subject: Re: R: Brice 3d
>Date: Sat, Feb 24, 2001, 1:58 PM
> If you want rayshading, photorealism, real animation,
> modeling and control... 4d is much superior, in my opinion.
>
> Terrain can be done in any of several public
> domain, shareware and freeware programs, or Genesis
> http://www.geomantics.com/ or terragen for that matter.
> Strata 3d will map bitmaps to elevation maps.
>
> Genesis makes Bryce look like a toy and there's a
> free version as well as a "pro" version... Admittedly
> you may have to learn something in order to be able
> to use it.Check out Landscape Explorer as well.
>
> If the guy plans on doing real 3d animation why would
> he not want a full featured program rather than a bundle
> of pre-sets?
------------
I dunno, but the fact remains, he said he was using Bryce 4. I would bet
that a lot of people who would like to add some CGI elements and scenery
to their DV movies would naturally gravitate towards Bryce 4. I also use
Lightwave, ElectricImage and others, depending on the task, but the
rendering in Bryce 4 is, regardless of what you say from not having used
it, VERY good. It also allows DV moviemakers to create very realistic
CGI scenery without devoting so much of their lives to more complex 3D
applications. The results they will get from an incomplete skillset in
these complex applications will not look as good as what they can make
in Bryce 4 after a day or two of study.
I haven't seen any good DV feature type work done in Landscape Explorer.
Do you know of any?
Steve Bennett
www.ifmp.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:22:19 +0100
From: "Enrico Quaglia"
To:
Subject: More Bryce and Premiere...
Message-ID: <002501c09eb8$a36bdca0$f1dbfea9@athlon>
-----------------------------------------------------
BTW, I usually render my animations uncompressed. This means they get very
very large by the time it's all done. If the final avi is over 2GB, will I
have problems importing it in Premiere? I had a problem this morning with
one that "weighs" 2,1GB and Premiere didn't recognize it. However, the whole
project seemed to be jinxed so I'm not sure whether the 2GB limit is an
issue
here or if it would have happened with a smaller file....
Any ideas?
Ciao.
Enrico
Turin - Italy
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:32:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Bill
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Message-ID: <20010224233220.13607.qmail@web4003.mail.yahoo.com>
>
> >>Warning: you can play tapes, orinated on VO on
> both types, but BVU tapes
> >>will play back black / white on the VO series
> (AFAIR)
> >
> >this is just plain misinformation. the VO series
> was marketed to
> >"non-broadcast" clients, the BVU's to broadcast (as
> in "broadcast video
> >umatic") ... principal differences: address track
> timecode, balanced
> audio,
> >and, if memory serves, internal TBC's but i might
> be wrong on that one ...
> >and a BIG difference in price.
>
> Well, this ain't NOT true, read the post from Perry
> on this topic the other
> day. I'm for 99% percent sure it's true what I'm
> saying (so BVU plays B/W).
> Problem is that I still have a VO 5800 and VO 5850
> but gave my 100 + Umatic
> tapes away. There were some BVU recordings also, but
> can't check it now. I
> only have some tapes left which have programs I once
> made. But these are all
> U-matic low band tapes.
> Ton
>
>
Well, you may be having some confusion between BVU and
3/4 SP. Any VO 5800 deck will play any BVU 800 tape
and vice versa, and in color. I've edited in edit
suites with both decks working together. I've taken
tapes from 5800's and edited with them in BVU suites,
and even in JVC 3/4 suites. If one of them plays only
black and white, then there is something wrong with
one of the decks.
In Europe they had high band 3/4 before we had 3/4 SP
in the U.S. That could be another source of the
problem. But, unless it's PAL or unless it's SP, in
the U.S., 3/4 is (or was) 3/4.
Unfortunately 3/4 still rears its ugly head and bites
me on occasion--I ran into a cable TV station a year
or so ago that wanted a 3/4 dub of a spot.
Fortunately, our friendly neighborhood dub house still
has a 3/4 deck.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:40:37 -1000
From: Jon Burkhart
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: More Bryce and Premiere...
Message-ID: <3A984675.F6C2AF0D@maui.net>
The best results I've had with animation (in Lightwave) is to render them as a series of BMP or TGA stills. You can then import them into Premiere as a sequence (need to put a little check
mark in the box when loading). Render them in Premiere and then export an AVI file.
Does Brice have the ability to render a still sequence like that?
Aloha,
Jon Burkhart
Enrico Quaglia wrote:
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> BTW, I usually render my animations uncompressed. This means they get very
> very large by the time it's all done. If the final avi is over 2GB, will I
> have problems importing it in Premiere? I had a problem this morning with
> one that "weighs" 2,1GB and Premiere didn't recognize it. However, the whole
> project seemed to be jinxed so I'm not sure whether the 2GB limit is an
> issue
> here or if it would have happened with a smaller file....
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Ciao.
> Enrico
>
> Turin - Italy
>
> -- (cut off when replying)-----------------
> This list is made possible by Lifetime DV-L Benefactors such as http://www.promax.com, http://www.videoguys.com, http://www.panasonic.com/broadcast and the contributions of its members.
>
> To contribute money: http://www.computervicestore.com/dvl.html
> All about DV-L, to subscribe & unsubscribe: http://www.DVCentral.org/thelist.html
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:35:17 -0800
From: "John Holmgren"
To:
Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Message-ID: <001b01c09eba$72a203e0$3807aace@jh570>
Is that the JVC SR-VS10U?
JH
----- Original Message -----
From: "Craig Andreiko"
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
...
> Anyway, after a year of chasing this target I boughtthe JVC
> miniDV/SVHS/VHS deck on Charles McConathy's advice. BTW, I am in no way
> associated with Promax but I have found them to be completely credible
> and Charles' advice has been unerring. OK, I got the deck, made a dub
> and was blown away.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 00:53:38 +0100
From: "Ton Guiking"
To:
Subject: Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Message-ID: <02ae01c09ebd$1ad5ca40$41a26dc2@default>
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Bill
Aan: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Datum: zondag 25 februari 2001 0:32
Onderwerp: Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
>
>>
>> >>Warning: you can play tapes, orinated on VO on
>> both types, but BVU tapes
>> >>will play back black / white on the VO series
>> (AFAIR)
>> >
>> >this is just plain misinformation. the VO series
>> was marketed to
>> >"non-broadcast" clients, the BVU's to broadcast (as
>> in "broadcast video
>> >umatic") ... principal differences: address track
>> timecode, balanced
>> audio,
>> >and, if memory serves, internal TBC's but i might
>> be wrong on that one ...
>> >and a BIG difference in price.
>>
>> Well, this ain't NOT true, read the post from Perry
>> on this topic the other
>> day. I'm for 99% percent sure it's true what I'm
>> saying (so BVU plays B/W).
>> Problem is that I still have a VO 5800 and VO 5850
>> but gave my 100 + Umatic
>> tapes away. There were some BVU recordings also, but
>> can't check it now. I
>> only have some tapes left which have programs I once
>> made. But these are all
>> U-matic low band tapes.
>> Ton
>>
>>
>
>In Europe they had high band 3/4 before we had 3/4 SP
>in the U.S. That could be another source of the
>problem. But, unless it's PAL or unless it's SP, in
>the U.S., 3/4 is (or was) 3/4.
I think it's PAL related , Perry also pointed in that direction.
As soon as I get hold of a BVU tape I'll check it out!
Ton
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:53:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Martin Heffels
To: dv-l@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Message-ID: <200102242353.f1ONrlw71175@newsguy.com>
At Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:32:20 -0800 (PST), you wrote
>
>Any VO 5800 deck will play any BVU 800 tape
>and vice versa, and in color.
>From my experience, I will join the row of playing back in b/w. I don't
remember
what BVU recorder (was a borrowed one) we used then exactly, but the material
played b/w in the 5850 (PAL).
-martin-
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 23:55:54 -0000
From: "Perry"
To: "DV-L"
Subject: re: sony vo and bvu .... NOT!
Message-ID:
Jeff Lynch posted:
>>Warning: you can play tapes, orinated on VO on both types, but BVU
tapes
>>will play back black / white on the VO series (AFAIR)
>this is just plain misinformation. the VO series was marketed to
"non-broadcast" clients, the BVU's to broadcast (as in "broadcast video
umatic") ... principal differences: address track timecode, balanced
audio, and, if memory serves, internal TBC's but i might be wrong on
that one ...and a BIG difference in price.<
Sometimes I think I'm talking to a brick wall! As I previously
explained, there IS a basic difference between VO and BVU in PAL.
There WAS an internal TBC option on later BVU machines, complete with
the infamous 'Hadamard' transform to reduce noise. Infamous, because I
never met anybody that could tell me exactly what it was!
Perry Mitchell
Video Consultant
http://www.perrybits.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:05:04 -0800
From: Craig Andreiko
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Message-ID: <3A984C30.E733CEE4@sprynet.com>
Yes, it is.
John Holmgren wrote:
>
> Is that the JVC SR-VS10U?
>
> JH
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig Andreiko"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 9:40 AM
> Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
>
> ...
> > Anyway, after a year of chasing this target I boughtthe JVC
> > miniDV/SVHS/VHS deck on Charles McConathy's advice. BTW, I am in no way
> > associated with Promax but I have found them to be completely credible
> > and Charles' advice has been unerring. OK, I got the deck, made a dub
> > and was blown away.
>
> -- (cut off when replying)-----------------
> This list is made possible by Lifetime DV-L Benefactors such as http://www.promax.com, http://www.videoguys.com, http://www.panasonic.com/broadcast and the contributions of its members.
>
> To contribute money: http://www.computervicestore.com/dvl.html
> All about DV-L, to subscribe & unsubscribe: http://www.DVCentral.org/thelist.html
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:06:47 -0800
From: Craig Andreiko
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
Message-ID: <3A984C97.2CAA7C51@sprynet.com>
Sorry, it is the HR-DVS1U which I am told is identical to the SR-DVS1U
other than cosmetics.
John Holmgren wrote:
>
> Is that the JVC SR-VS10U?
>
> JH
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Craig Andreiko"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 9:40 AM
> Subject: Re: lousy VHS dubs from DV
>
> ...
> > Anyway, after a year of chasing this target I boughtthe JVC
> > miniDV/SVHS/VHS deck on Charles McConathy's advice. BTW, I am in no way
> > associated with Promax but I have found them to be completely credible
> > and Charles' advice has been unerring. OK, I got the deck, made a dub
> > and was blown away.
>
> -- (cut off when replying)-----------------
> This list is made possible by Lifetime DV-L Benefactors such as http://www.promax.com, http://www.videoguys.com, http://www.panasonic.com/broadcast and the contributions of its members.
>
> To contribute money: http://www.computervicestore.com/dvl.html
> All about DV-L, to subscribe & unsubscribe: http://www.DVCentral.org/thelist.html
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 17:22:02 -0700
From: "Nancy L. Spoolman"
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Firewire to Composite output/input
Message-ID:
--============_-1229061968==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Hi!
I have a couple of questions I hope someone can answer. For over five
years I have had a Macintosh 8500. It has been upgraded with
firewire, USB, U2W SCSI card, and a G3 processor. Unfortunately it's
time to upgrade. I am buying an iMac (for now). Those who are
familiar with the 8500 Power Mac are aware it has the S-video in/out
and composite video in/out card built in. This has made everything so
simple over the years. The video mirroring has been built into my
system since day one. I still need the composite and S-video
capabilities. My main question is, will a Sony media converter box
DVMC-DA2 basically replace and do the same thing that my built-in
video card has done on my 8500? I am afraid I show my ignorance when
I have no clue what I really need to tell it to project out from an
iMac to the TV/VCR. With my 8500 all I did was turn on video
mirroring, put the VCR to line in and record. I read the
specifications of the DVMC-DA2 and it sounds as if it will do what I
want, but how does it know to go out the firewire, into the firewire
converter box, out the composite jacks of the converter box, and in
the VCR composite jacks? Am I missing something? Or doesn't it work
like that? Somewhere in this entire configuration do I also have to
have my TRV 900 connected? I do not want to record to my TRV 900, I
just want to get it from my computer to my VCR. With an iMac I'm just
not certain what exactly will do this. (Yes, I also want to be able
to bring something in from a VHS tape to my computer, without having
to tape everything to my TRV 900 first.)
I am struggling with the same thing in our school district. Teachers
have new iMacs and they all have a TV/VCR in their rooms. All they
want to do is to project to their TV. We have ordered and tried
several output projection devices (IView, MyView, Tview , XLR8, and I
can't remember all the names) only to find the audio is out of sync,
or everything is jerky. It's a mess when over a hundred people want
to do something so simple.
Thank you for any help/advice you can give me.
Nancy S.
--============_-1229061968==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Hi!
I have a couple of questions I hope someone can answer. For over five years I have had a Macintosh 8500. It has been upgraded with firewire, USB, U2W SCSI card, and a G3 processor. Unfortunately it's time to upgrade. I am buying an iMac (for now). Those who are familiar with the 8500 Power Mac are aware it has the S-video in/out and composite video in/out card built in. This has made everything so simple over the years. The video mirroring has been built into my system since day one. I still need the composite and S-video capabilities. My main question is, will a Sony media converter box DVMC-DA2 basically replace and do the same thing that my built-in video card has done on my 8500? I am afraid I show my ignorance when I have no clue what I really need to tell it to project out from an iMac to the TV/VCR. With my 8500 all I did was turn on video mirroring, put the VCR to line in and record. I read the specifications of the DVMC-DA2 and it sounds as if it will do what I want, but how does it know to go out the firewire, into the firewire converter box, out the composite jacks of the converter box, and in the VCR composite jacks? Am I missing something? Or doesn't it work like that? Somewhere in this entire configuration do I also have to have my TRV 900 connected? I do not want to record to my TRV 900, I just want to get it from my computer to my VCR. With an iMac I'm just not certain what exactly will do this. (Yes, I also want to be able to bring something in from a VHS tape to my computer, without having to tape everything to my TRV 900 first.)
I am struggling with the same thing in our school district. Teachers have new iMacs and they all have a TV/VCR in their rooms. All they want to do is to project to their TV. We have ordered and tried several output projection devices (IView, MyView, Tview , XLR8, and I can't remember all the names) only to find the audio is out of sync, or everything is jerky. It's a mess when over a hundred people want to do something so simple.
Thank you for any help/advice you can give me.
Nancy S.
--============_-1229061968==_ma============--
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 18:38:09 -0600
From: "Scott Sanders"
To:
Subject: RE: Firewire to Composite output/input
Message-ID:
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09E90.EFA633E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Firewire to Composite output/inputIn a word yes. You'll use the Imovie
program that comes with the DV Imacs to play out to the DVMC.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy L. Spoolman [mailto:nanc@spoolman.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 6:22 PM
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Firewire to Composite output/input
Hi!
I have a couple of questions I hope someone can answer. For over five
years I have had a Macintosh 8500. It has been upgraded with firewire, USB,
U2W SCSI card, and a G3 processor. Unfortunately it's time to upgrade. I am
buying an iMac (for now). Those who are familiar with the 8500 Power Mac are
aware it has the S-video in/out and composite video in/out card built in.
This has made everything so simple over the years. The video mirroring has
been built into my system since day one. I still need the composite and
S-video capabilities. My main question is, will a Sony media converter box
DVMC-DA2 basically replace and do the same thing that my built-in video card
has done on my 8500? I am afraid I show my ignorance when I have no clue
what I really need to tell it to project out from an iMac to the TV/VCR.
With my 8500 all I did was turn on video mirroring, put the VCR to line in
and record. I read the specifications of the DVMC-DA2 and it sounds as if it
will do what I want, but how does it know to go out the firewire, into the
firewire converter box, out the composite jacks of the converter box, and in
the VCR composite jacks? Am I missing something? Or doesn't it work like
that? Somewhere in this entire configuration do I also have to have my TRV
900 connected? I do not want to record to my TRV 900, I just want to get it
from my computer to my VCR. With an iMac I'm just not certain what exactly
will do this. (Yes, I also want to be able to bring something in from a VHS
tape to my computer, without having to tape everything to my TRV 900 first.)
I am struggling with the same thing in our school district. Teachers have
new iMacs and they all have a TV/VCR in their rooms. All they want to do is
to project to their TV. We have ordered and tried several output projection
devices (IView, MyView, Tview , XLR8, and I can't remember all the names)
only to find the audio is out of sync, or everything is jerky. It's a mess
when over a hundred people want to do something so simple.
Thank you for any help/advice you can give me.
Nancy S.
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09E90.EFA633E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In a=20 word yes. You'll use the Imovie program that comes with the DV = Imacs to=20 play out to the DVMC.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy L. Spoolman=20 [mailto:nanc@spoolman.com]
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2001 = 6:22=20 PM
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Firewire to = Composite=20 output/input
Hi!
I have a couple of questions I hope someone = can=20 answer. For over five years I have had a Macintosh 8500. It has been = upgraded=20 with firewire, USB, U2W SCSI card, and a G3 processor. Unfortunately = it's time=20 to upgrade. I am buying an iMac (for now). Those who are familiar with = the=20 8500 Power Mac are aware it has the S-video in/out and composite video = in/out=20 card built in. This has made everything so simple over the years. The = video=20 mirroring has been built into my system since day one. I still need = the=20 composite and S-video capabilities. My main question is, will a Sony = media=20 converter box DVMC-DA2 basically replace and do the same thing that my = built-in video card has done on my 8500? I am afraid I show my = ignorance when=20 I have no clue what I really need to tell it to project out from an = iMac to=20 the TV/VCR. With my 8500 all I did was turn on video mirroring, put = the VCR to=20 line in and record. I read the specifications of the DVMC-DA2 and it = sounds as=20 if it will do what I want, but how does it know to go out the = firewire, into=20 the firewire converter box, out the composite jacks of the converter = box, and=20 in the VCR composite jacks? Am I missing something? Or doesn't it work = like=20 that? Somewhere in this entire configuration do I also have to have my = TRV 900=20 connected? I do not want to record to my TRV 900, I just want to get = it from=20 my computer to my VCR. With an iMac I'm just not certain what exactly = will do=20 this. (Yes, I also want to be able to bring something in from a VHS = tape to my=20 computer, without having to tape everything to my TRV 900 = first.)
I am struggling with the same thing in = our school=20 district. Teachers have new iMacs and they all have a TV/VCR in their = rooms.=20 All they want to do is to project to their TV. We have ordered and = tried=20 several output projection devices (IView, MyView, Tview , XLR8, and I = can't=20 remember all the names) only to find the audio is out of sync, or = everything=20 is jerky. It's a mess when over a hundred people want to do something = so=20 simple.
Thank you for any help/advice you can give = me.
Nancy=20 S.
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C09E90.EFA633E0--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 01:58:27 +0100
From: "Ton Guiking"
To:
Subject: flatbed scanner
Message-ID: <030801c09ec6$26e61520$41a26dc2@default>
Hello,
I have a Sony TRV 900 (well, a TRV 890, that is; which is the TRV 900
without DV in enabled), a Sony DHR-1000, a G4 450 MP with FCP. That's all
DV...
And sometimes it's handy to insert stills in DV films, from photo's or
whatever. You can use your camera, but also a flatbed scanner.
He he... now it's no longer O.T. to this list so I can safelly go on...
I posted the following on the Epson printer list (which has a tradition of
also discussing camera's etc. sometimes) but got no response.
Maybe someone on this list can help me out...
I've got a (simple, 200 MMX) PC and a G4. Photoshop is at PC but soon also
on Mac. I'm about to buy a flatbed scanner. The Epson 1640 has SCSI and USB.
Since my PC has SCSI and the G4 USB, can I connect the scanner to both, and
use it alternatively on both?
(G4 is primarily for Final Cut Pro, not connected to internet etc. PC for
officework, mail etc. It would be handy to have a scanner for both).
If not possible, I can add a USB card to PC. Then maybe the cheaper 1240 U
could also do the job.
BTW, I've got a 35 mm. filmscanner. What about the qualities of the 1640 SC
photo scanner, for larger negatives? (6*6 cm) And maybe someone has used the
1240 U photo for this purposes?
Thanks in advance,
Ton Guiking
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 18:45:55 -0700
From: "Nancy L. Spoolman"
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Monitors
Message-ID:
One more question. My 1710AV died a few months or so ago. I don't
care to rely on the tiny iMac screen. I've recently tested 2
Viewsonic A90's (heard about them through this list & after some
research decided to try one.) I noticed tiny diagonal lines & thought
maybe it was because of my older computer. I brought home an iMac
from work & it did the same thing. I went back to Office Depot & got
another. It did the same thing. I even brought home my G3 tower from
work to test it. I still saw the diagonal lines. After more research
& reading I had someone order a Mitsubishi 900U or something
comparable. It came in as a NEC multisync FP950. OK. I liked how it
displayed color & I can live with the two horizontal lines like the
Apple monitors have. Until I noticed vertical lines in the center of
the screen & I knew it had been damaged in shipping. Needless to
say... it was returned.
Back to square one. A 19" monitor? I don't need the BNC connectors of
the FP950. All I want is a reliable, sharp, clear color 19" monitor.
I have not been that impressed with the Apple Studio Display, but
mine at work came with the G3 tower, so maybe they have improved...
except they are 17". Any suggestions?
Thanks in advance!
Nancy S.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 23:36:42 -0500
From: "ifmp1"
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: More Bryce and Premiere...
Message-ID: <20010225030914.MMWB26039.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@[12.78.198.79]>
RE:
----------
>From: Jon Burkhart
>To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
>Subject: Re: More Bryce and Premiere...
>Date: Sat, Feb 24, 2001, 6:40 PM
>The best results I've had with animation (in Lightwave) is to render them
>as a series of BMP or TGA stills. You can then import them into Premiere
>as a sequence (need to put a little check
>mark in the box when loading). Render them in Premiere and then export an
>AVI file.
>
>Does Brice have the ability to render a still sequence like that?
-----------
Yes. You can export a series of uncompressed stills from Bryce, then
import and squash them in your NLE or After Effects, and this works
fine. Two things to think about though are 1) If you are going to output
DV format anyway, you are just making your NLE app do all the
compressing, and in a real sense, throwing away the added image detail
of the uncompressed files anyway. 2) Even if you kept the full res
detail, this would almost certainly make your CGI stuff stand out like a
sore thumb when composited with "normal" DV footage or elements.
I've found that half the work in making convincing photorealistic
composites (for DV movies) is actually in "degrading" the CGI elements
to the point where they exhibit similar color handling problems, depth
of field, motion blur, and funky contrast range as the DV footage they
are going to be seen against. And motion blur (among other things) in DV
footage itself looks different than motion blur made in an animation
sequence or in AE. I usually like to get CGI clips into the DV realm and
looking the way I want them in After Effects before importing them into
the timeline of an editing project with other video footage.
I'd certainly be interested in how others have done this kind of thing,
and the workflow they use on their own DV projects. I'm sure it will
vary according to the type of project too, like CGI interface elements
for a DVD or corporate piece as opposed to building skies or buildings
for a feature-length movie type project, and so on.
Steve Bennett
www.ifmp.net
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 21:35:24 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
From: "Richard Taylor"
To: DV-L@dvcentral.org
Subject: Re: R: Brice 3d
Message-ID: <77452E27996.AAA34BD@mail1.21stcentury.net>
--
http://www.freespeech.org/apophysis/>
> From: "ifmp1"
>>From: "Richard Taylor"
>
>> If you want rayshading, photorealism, real animation,
>> modeling and control... 4d is much superior, in my opinion.
>>
>> Terrain can be done in any of several public
>> domain, shareware and freeware programs, or Genesis
>> http://www.geomantics.com/ or terragen for that matter.
>> Strata 3d will map bitmaps to elevation maps.
>>
>> Genesis makes Bryce look like a toy and there's a
>> free version as well as a "pro" version... Admittedly
>> you may have to learn something in order to be able
>> to use it.Check out Landscape Explorer as well.
>>
>> If the guy plans on doing real 3d animation why would
>> he not want a full featured program rather than a bundle
>> of pre-sets?
>------------
{Sorry... I just don't like Bryce all that much and really shouldn't
post so soon after waking up. That probably should have read "Strata
3d will build terrain-like models from bitmaps and probably should
have been readable.}
>I dunno, but the fact remains, he said he was using Bryce 4. I would bet
>that a lot of people who would like to add some CGI elements and scenery
>to their DV movies would naturally gravitate towards Bryce 4. I also use
>Lightwave, ElectricImage and others, depending on the task, but the
>rendering in Bryce 4 is, regardless of what you say from not having used
>it, VERY good. It also allows DV moviemakers to create very realistic
I did wander around this afternoon and looked at some newer stuff...
It has improved a bit. It's not any better than C4D though.
http://www.maxon.net/pages/Gallery/gallery_frameset.html
http://www.watchfuleye.com/brycegallery.html
>CGI scenery without devoting so much of their lives to more complex 3D
>applications. The results they will get from an incomplete skillset in
>these complex applications will not look as good as what they can make
>in Bryce 4 after a day or two of study.
Possibly true. I don't see any reason to buy something that you
know is going to be limited when, for about the same, you can get
started towards something that you can realistically use, learn
and expand on for quite some time.
I suppose it depends on what you want, though rendering speed
seems to be an issue here.
>I haven't seen any good DV feature type work done in Landscape Explorer.
>Do you know of any?
No... landscape explorer is pretty new.
Genesis does some really nice stuff. It *can* be really
frustrating. I don't think all that many folk know about it.
It does fractal landscapes at any rate... works for me. :}
{Ah well... I'm off to try the Aura demo. {www.newtek.com}}
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 18:16:49 -0000
From: "Perry"
To: "DV-L"
Subject: DSR-11 ?? or ?
Message-ID:
Dave Campbell posted:
>Can this unit do LP mode?<
DVCAM doesn't have an LP mode, and although the DSR-11 can also record
in DV mode, it doesn't support LP.
LP mode should only really be used when recording and playing back on
the same deck, and within a short timeframe.
>Does this unit have random editing like the DHR-1000?<
No
>Could this unit be used with a DHR-1000 to do random editing between
decks?<
Yes, as the player with control from DHR-1000 via LANC.
>Is there a cheaper Sony DV deck that can use full size tapes and do LP
mode?<
There is no Sony deck that can use full size tapes and which supports LP
mode. A full size DV cassette will play for 4.5 hours which is enough
for most folk!
Perry Mitchell
Video Consultant
http://www.perrybits.co.uk
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 13:08:35 +0530
From: indiancinema
To:
Subject: film res & dat setp--pl help
Message-ID:
hai members
one of our clients have film footage ( in neg as well as positive )
who wants to change speed for few shots ( sort of high speed & slow motion
effects & 3 simple compositing fx with afterfx/commotion pro )
we have a G4 400 & analog capture card ( aurora igniter basic0 )
they want the final in film res quality ( atleast 2k ) .
thinking of asking them to scan their material to dat dump to our drive do
the effects then dump back to DAT then sacn to a film
can somone pl brief this 'hardware setup " process & also provide which DAT
& how to do dump properly to powermac G4 ..is there any other alternative
method .
by the way can a acard ahard raided dual 40 gb harddrive will be OK for
doing 2k res footage we understand that we have to wait for long renders .
aprt from is there any other hitch .
pl inform & share opinion
sorry for the mail being bit long
thanks a lot
IC
------------------------------
End of DV-L V1 #777
*******************
-- (cut off when replying)-----------------
This list is made possible by Lifetime DV-L Benefactors such as http://www.promax.com, http://www.videoguys.com, http://www.panasonic.com/broadcast and the contributions of its members.
To contribute money: http://www.computervicestore.com/dvl.html
All about DV-L, to subscribe & unsubscribe: http://www.DVCentral.org/thelist.html