DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Convergent Design Odyssey (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/convergent-design-odyssey/)
-   -   Future Flash XDR Program Changes Request (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/convergent-design-odyssey/478306-future-flash-xdr-program-changes-request.html)

Mark Job May 11th, 2010 02:48 PM

Good Demonstration Proof of Concept
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Luben Izov (Post 1525733)
Hi Mark,
Yes, I know, but, we can make it very smooth in post. That was only the very rough after writing hand is removed.
I know what you are saying but, you really (maybe) do not need that.... don't know for sure... a frame control would eventuality make it way more smooth...
cheers

PS
I'll remove the link now

...Hey Luben:
You don't have to remove the link. I think your digital animation piece is a good demonstration proof of the concept.

Robin Probyn May 12th, 2010 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Job (Post 1525716)
...Hey Robin: What ? You mean you don't want feature after feature after feature ? Let us be dancing with features ! Whooo ! Hooooo ! ;-)

haha! too much to worry about !!!!! :)

Mark Job May 16th, 2010 06:46 PM

Recording Data Rate Increase Request for Nano/XDR
 
Hi Dan:
Would it be possible to up the recording data rate from Max 280 Mbps I-Frame to 320 Mbps I-Frame ? I don't know what your top end is on your codec encoding rate is, but I would imagine it might be possible with the Sandisk Extreme IV or faster CF card media.

Dan Keaton May 16th, 2010 07:57 PM

Dear Mark,

For competitive reasons, we prefer not to divulge our "top speed".

We try to be a very open company, but this is something that we do not currently divulge.

Please note that the video quality difference between 220 Mbps and 280 Mbps is very slight.

Going from 280 to 320 Mbps would be even less.

I hope you will understand.

Mark Job May 16th, 2010 08:45 PM

Sorry-But that's Not the Point
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton (Post 1527726)
Dear Mark,

For competitive reasons, we prefer not to divulge our "top speed".

....Ooops ! I didn't think about that - Sorry.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton (Post 1527726)
try to be a very open company, but this is something that we do not currently divulge.

Please note that the video quality difference between 220 Mbps and 280 Mbps is very slight.

Going from 280 to 320 Mbps would be even less.

I hope you will understand.

....Uhhh yeah, but - If we XDR users aren't going to get uncompressed recording, then we hope to at least get as high a *Compressed* I-Frame data rate (Read- As low a compression rate) as possible. I don't consider it's really connected with your company being open or closed. I hope you understand.

Dan Keaton May 16th, 2010 08:49 PM

Dear Mark,

Have you tried 280 Mbps?

Mark Job May 16th, 2010 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Keaton (Post 1527745)
Dear Mark,

Have you tried 280 Mbps?

...Yes. It's really sweet ! :-) I'm using my top end SONY LMD 940 W 3G HD-SDI Monitor to make the visual evaluations. I can absolutely confirm there is a discernible difference between 220 & 280 Mbps. Therefore, I have concluded there would be a similar difference if we went from 280 Mbps up to 320 Mbps.

EDIT: Frankly, I wish we could bring it up to 400 Mbps to equal the low end setting of the Sony HDCAM SR VTR's minimum recording setting. I want to be able to tell the CTV Network we can equal the HDCAM VTR data rate.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:57 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network