Hi Wayne,

What do you mean by british style ?

I have done much research via the web, and one thing that makes me want to tear my hair out is big European corporate websites, I don't often go to them but many times they look like they have been designed by deranged people, and it is near impossible to find things in there (even products that are listed there). You spend much time running around looking everywhere the information is supposed to be (if your lucky and they do at least that much). Being bedazzeled by flashy graphics, features that don't work or slow you down, and offer little reward, indeterminate broken disctributed information, that say much about very little. Finally you give up trying to do it the "easy" way (the, normally, easy way) and try their search functions, iof iot works at all, which often have too little options to stop you being flooded with many hits, a lot of which you have to waid through, and most of which canbe irrelavent. Plus they love distributing peices of information over multiple sites, maybe with ireelavent naming, and maybe even redo them all in a years time. So if it's like that, or broken, most of the time, I try to find the Bristish version of the site, and everything is easier, the site is simple, less flashy, coherent, information, is tree structured, listed simply, and more gauranteed to work on your non windows browser, pluss faster with less flashy features to drag along. Plus the bristish sites have a tendacy to list information before the parent companies site does, and also before official release dates ;), and keep older information up longer. They seem to unbderstand that part of information revolution (not super highway pile up), a tool for convience, not something for it's own sake. The American sites are much better too, but the British sites tend to be better.

We Australians know American and British culture, and believe me for good straight forward reliable professiona/technical information I often buy British technical magazines, because they are ussually the best (with the exception of Circuite Cella Ink). In the past most of the magazines in the computer section were British, they sold more han the Australian ones.

Sorry, the issue of website design really bugs me, as it can take ten times longer to do research when done wrong resulting in many many wasted hours. The way the web is structured, and search engines, also makes it take 10 times longer again sometimes, I would like to make some submissions there too.

sorry for the LACK of info group..I am still waiting on the 64bit cards to ship..I am told 21st of this month they will have product that can be shipped...we are still playing with the 3300rgb and it looks GREAT. VERY usable and a good chip all around..we are working on cutting the CPU cycles via DirectDraw display of the data..this will help us have enough CPU left over to save 10bit 1080p files on 2 SATA 74MB/sec drives...I will not be working on the design of the camera case untill we have a working prototype in our hands for test shooting..but I hope that time is near. as always I will keep everyome posted.

This might be an oldy, but it's a goody -- miniITX computer with 8" touchscreen on a Vespa. Could be the model for an on-camera machine, eh?

edit: check this out, too -- http://www.littlepc.com/

$595 gets you an OEM 6.4" LCD flat-panel display -- the 12" option looks better, though...

- jim

Of course 80ms response time is horrible for an LCD. You're going to get some interesting ghosting artifacts with that setup.

Hadn't thought about that -- good point. I see the larger screens have 30ms, typical response time. Is that acceptable? I'm hoping to get 20-60fps max, what would the minimum response need to be at various framerates?

- jim

I believe my Mac cinema display has a response of around 20ms. So 20-30 is good territory, not that 80 is unusable, but again, there may be a bit of ghosting in your preview screen.

Just devide 1000 by the respones and if it's higher than your frame rate, your sweet (but even higher the better). 1000/30=approx 33fps.

Have beenn sailing and now back for some days, hope all had a nice Xmas and a lot new ideas for 2005. Me beeing off next wekk for another 10 days but like to be back on board soon.

Good to hear.

Editing Software
 

Sorry its my first posting here and my english writing may have many mistakes.
I'm not realy used to forums so I hope that I make every thing right and sorry if I did anything wrong if its like this let me now that i can avoid it next time thank you.

I did read in this thread and perhabs i have a solution for Editing.
I'm a Sound engeneer and have a small recording studio.
about 3 years ago we started with recording classical concerts
for DVD and we needed a video editing software for this. The problem was that we do multitrack recording for the sound we mixed it into two tracks and import it into the video editor were we had to syncronize it to the pictures. Everybody told us we have to use adope premiere but we were very unlucky with it because
bevore we can check the syncronization we had to render the project. Than we found a much cheeper but powerfull tool working in realtime. Since the last release the company implementet Hd I could'nt check it but I will try to find out more about that. (I could render uncompressed HD including 44,1hz 16 bit audio)
The software is Magix Video deluxe plus
it costs between €50 and €100 (it depends on were you buy it I payed €80) you can find more under http://www.magix.de .

Thank you jay..do you know if it's 10bit or 8bit video ?

WHOOA they are saying AVID EXPRESS PRO HD will edit 10bit HD....could this be 1080P? or only 720p?

and the codec looks alot like the SheerVIdeo one....

It ain't SheerVideo by far . . .

10-bit 220Mb/s lossy DCT (I'm assuming it's this, not wavelet like Cineform) compression at 1920x1080 is not what I call SheerVideo. But I'm sure it'll do fine for now.

Hi Obin
>>>Thank you jay..do you know if it's 10bit or 8bit video ?

I'm not sure with it but i contacted the company they will send
further informations.

I talked to a technician about editing in HD he said there are only two little aspects:

The first one is to get the video inside the editing machine if it´s on hard disc, it´s no problem.

The second aspect is the performance of your computer.

In my indi camera design I think about a one box design with exchangeable hard-discs and the capturing computer inside. So I can after recording the project take the hard-disc or the discs out of the camera and put it into the editing-computer.

Avid acts like it is more like Wavelet with "multi generation" MASTER quality support for "All your post needs"......dunno how can we find this out?