milo@ndmath.UUCP (Greg Corson) (11/10/89)
I'm looking for a computer/video workstation with the following capabilities.
1. Ability to record/playback video (at least VHS-recorder quality) and
store the video on disk in DIGITAL form.
2. Ability to store about 1 hour of video.
3. Capability to do simple manipulations of video data in real-time.
4. Ability to do more complicated manipulations of data a frame at a time.
5. The ability to record video a frame at a time without undue wear.
What I'm interested in using it for is video production and editing, including
preperation of animations and composite video images.
I understand the Quantel "Harry" machine has capabilities like this, I'd be
interested in hearing more about "Harry" or about any other gadget that
can provide these capabilities.
Greg Corson
19141 Summers Drive
South Bend, IN 46637
(219) 277-5306
{uunet, rutgers}!iuvax!ndmath!milo
milo@ndmath
GEnie: GCORSONrick@hanauma.stanford.edu (Richard Ottolini) (11/10/89)
In article <1593@ndmath.UUCP> milo@ndmath.UUCP (Greg Corson) writes: >I'm looking for a computer/video workstation with the following capabilities. >1. Ability to record/playback video (at least VHS-recorder quality) and > store the video on disk in DIGITAL form. >2. Ability to store about 1 hour of video. VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. Sun TAAC compresses digital video to 5-10%, but this is still a lot of storage. The now defunct company called PEL offered a system in 1980 with one minute of video using a gigabyte disk farm. The National Supercomputer Center uses an Abacus (spelling?) system for digital video loops on the order of a minute. The Connection Machine plus Data Vault can store hour long movies at this resolution, but is expensive. It is an impressive digital movie machine.
ken@uc.msc.umn.edu (Ken Chin-Purcell) (11/10/89)
In article <6509@portia.Stanford.EDU>, rick@hanauma.stanford.edu (Richard Ottolini) writes: > In article <1593@ndmath.UUCP> milo@ndmath.UUCP (Greg Corson) writes: > >I'm looking for a computer/video workstation with the following capabilities. > >1. Ability to record/playback video (at least VHS-recorder quality) and > > store the video on disk in DIGITAL form. > > The National Supercomputer Center uses an Abacus (spelling?) system for > digital video loops on the order of a minute. We had an Abaqus A60 in for evaluation, and were quite pleased. It could store 750 frames (25 sec) and could play back at various speeds. One of its better features was connectivity. The Abaqus can sit directly on TCP/IP ethernet, and use ftp and rcp protocols to transfer images. There is also a scsi interface. Output is r/g/b and digital video. Ken Chin-Purcell (aka ken@msc.umn.edu) Minnesota Supercomputer Center 1200 Washington Ave. So. Minneapolis, MN 55415
jonson@zorro.megatek.uucp (Henrik Jonson) (11/11/89)
FYI - follow comp.sys.amiga and -.tech, for 'low-cost' versions.
smp@sei.cmu.edu (Stan Przybylinski) (11/11/89)
Digital video interactive (DVI) from Intel can do this stuff but it currently isn't low cost. *---------------------------------------*-----------------------------------* *Stan Przybylinski (Prez-ba-lin-ski) *These views do not represent those * *Software Engineering Institute *of Carnegie Mellon, the SEI, the * *Carnegie Mellon University *DoD or possibly even the author. * *Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890 * * *smp@sei.cmu.edu (412) 268-6371 *All the fits, that's news to print.* *---------------------------------------*-----------------------------------*
jchristy@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Jim Christy) (11/14/89)
> VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds > is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. This would imply that a standard VHS cassette tape has nearly 200 GB of storage capacity. Your multiplication is OK, but I think that's a little high, else we would all be using these as mass storage backup devices. Granted, this signal is stored in analog not digital form in the typical recorder. I suspect 24 bits of color is overkill for NTSC video. Roy Hall touches on this point in "Illumination and Color in Computer Graphics". I don't have the text handy to quote the page. May have botched the title slightly too, but you get the idea. I just have a tough time believing it takes nearly 100 compact discs to equal one $4.00 TDK VHS cassette. Jim H. Christy Hewlett-Packard, PCG 974 E. Arques Ave. MS 72UT Sunnyvale, CA 94086 jchristy@hpspcoi.hp.com
efo@pixar.uucp (efo) (11/14/89)
Currently, one of the few machines that can handle digital video-like information at these rates is the Abekas A60 family ($60K). The Abekas, as some posters have noted, can sit on the the ethernet, and you can send stuff to it that way. Note the spelling of "Abekas". Note that most workstations (as such: Suns, Irises, etc.) either in themselves or as hosts to accelerators or framebuffers (TAACs, Pixar Image Computers) cannot do accurate real-time playback. In those few cases where they have enough bandwidth to handle, on average, 30 fps, they cannot deliver a consistant 30 fps (due, usually, to the scheduling of jobs under Unix.) For us this is a serious problem and precludes their use for playback - for you this may not be the case. Oftentimes, disk or framebuffer bandwidth is a bottleneck, too, of course. A cheap way to get low-grade single-frame NTSC with realtime playback, as described, is with a Panasonic or similar write-once video disk. These machines are in the $10K range, and can be controlled via an RS232 port. Even that's not so cheap. The other option is a professional video setup (>$100K). As you might imagine, this has been a serious issue for the animation group at Pixar. If there are new alternatives, we'd love to know more. Eben Ostby
rick@hanauma.stanford.edu (Richard Ottolini) (11/15/89)
In article <1360003@hpspcoi.HP.COM> jchristy@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Jim Christy) writes: > >> VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds >> is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. > >This would imply that a standard VHS cassette tape has nearly 200 GB of >storage capacity. Your multiplication is OK, but I think that's a little >high, else we would all be using these as mass storage backup devices. NTSC is rated at 3.5 MHz or 32 GB / hour given 2bits per Hertz, the minimum encoding under Nyquist limit. Most VHS systems barely reach 1 MHz. NTSC cheats by smearing the spatial intensity resolution a little and color resolution alot, but it fools the human visual system. Uncompressed digital is 100 GB, but I mention 95% compression schemes are not difficult (SIGGRAPH talk, Sun TAAC board), reducing the need to about 5 GB / hour. New mass storage systems such as Exabyte fit 2 GB digital on a standard videotape and I believe it it is almost 4 GB if one includes all the extra error checking.
schear@ttidca.TTI.COM (Steve Schear) (11/15/89)
In article <1360003@hpspcoi.HP.COM> jchristy@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Jim Christy) writes: > >> VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds >> is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. > >This would imply that a standard VHS cassette tape has nearly 200 GB of >storage capacity. Your multiplication is OK, but I think that's a little >high, else we would all be using these as mass storage backup devices. >Granted, this signal is stored in analog not digital form in the typical >recorder. > Well, not quite. A standard NTSC image does not contain the digital equivalent of 24 bits per pixel. The color coding scheme of NTSC provides high spatial frequency image data only to the luminance component of the picture. The color information is "smeared" atop this grayscale data at a much lower spatial frequency. The eye appears to notice little of this psychophysical magic due to, among other things, the larger size and wider spacing of the cones (as opposed to the rods) in the fovea of the retna. Another reason is the efficiency of analog coding, from a media standpoint. This difference in efficiency is one reason behind all the digital image coding efforts (e.g., CD-I, fractal compression).
cdouty@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Christopher Douty) (11/15/89)
In article <1360003@hpspcoi.HP.COM> jchristy@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Jim Christy) writes: > >> VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds >> is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. >This would imply that a standard VHS cassette tape has nearly 200 GB of >storage capacity. >Jim H. Christy NTSC video is approximately 20Mb/sec, or at least that is what the DVI people say. I am inclined to believe that figure. An hour of NTSC video is then 20Mb/sec x 3600 sec = 72 Gigabytes/hour. However a VHS recorder only stores about half of the NTSC signal (maybe less), so the standard t-120 tape holds about 72Gb worth of digital information (in analog form) at its fastest play speed. I do think that 24-bit color is maybe a little excessive for VHS format tapes, but it gives a stoarage prediction in the right ballpark. Christopher Douty cdouty@jarthur.claremont.edu with STANDARD_DISCLAIMER; use STANDARD_DISCLAIMER; "Gun control is being with SILLY_QUOTE; use SILLY_QUOTE; able to hit your target"
paul@hpldola.HP.COM (Paul Bame) (11/16/89)
> VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds > is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. Somewhere there is a recomendation regarding how many bits and at what speeds to do "broadcast-quality" NTSC digital video - and it's a heck of a lot less than 24 effective bits per pixel. For example, remember that limitations of NTSC prevent one from changing color too awful much within a single scan line - I think the NTSC digital stuff had the crominance separately recorded at a slower speed than the luminance. Wish I had the reference - if you're really interested I know someone who can probably find it. I think we were calculating being able to put 1-3 minutes of video on a 125Mbyte (HP7925) disc drive (including the magic to get it off the disc fast enough to record - which we never found the time to implement). -Paul
rick@electro.UUCP (Rick Kozak) (11/16/89)
In article <1360003@hpspcoi.HP.COM> jchristy@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Jim Christy) writes: > >I just have a tough time believing it takes nearly 100 compact discs to >equal one $4.00 TDK VHS cassette. > the problem is that the two things you are comparing are not the same. the CD stores EXACTLY the digital information that you want, where the VHS cassette only has to store approximately correct video information. if i'm allowed to do a backup of approximately what you have on your hard disk, then you could actually store many gigabytes of info on VHS tape, but since it's probably best to get back exactly what you saved, you could get maybe 300 MBytes on 6 hours if you store 8 bits per line of video. So, 1 CD = 0.5 VHS tape. bottom line is that analog is a much more efficient method of storing information, but you have to tolerate errors. rick
myers@hpfcdj.HP.COM (Bob Myers) (11/16/89)
>> VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds >> is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. >This would imply that a standard VHS cassette tape has nearly 200 GB of >storage capacity. Your multiplication is OK, but I think that's a little >high, else we would all be using these as mass storage backup devices. >Granted, this signal is stored in analog not digital form in the typical >recorder. The multiplication IS correct, and yes, you would need about 100 GB to store the information as given above in digital form. The joys of analog vs. digital storage - why do you think that no one's come out with a digital video disc yet, but you can get CDs anywhere? Of course, there are some assumptions in the above that aren't quite right - "VHS quality" is a long way from 24 bits/pixel, 640 x 480 resolution - particularly the color information, which is severely bandwidth-limited in basic NTSC, let alone VHS tapes. A more realistic approach might be to see how much storage would be required to store NTSC-encoded video; in other words, simply sample the NTSC output of a VCR (or whatever other video source you choose). Here's a rough attempt, and I'm trying to be conservative throughout. TV channels in the US are 6 MHz wide; now, not all of this space is taken up by video information, but let's assume that the NTSC signal needs to be sampled at 12 MHz. Further, we'll assume that 12 bits/sample is sufficient - actually, good results have been obtained sampling NTSC at 8 bits/sample - and that we want to store an hour of video. This gives: 12 x 10^6 samples/sec x 1.5 bytes/sample x 3600 seconds = 6.48 x 10^10 bytes! Your mileage may vary depending on assumptions, but this is a very realistic estimate of the storage required. Bandwidth is NOT cheap. Bob Myers KC0EW HP Graphics Tech. Div.| Opinions expressed here are not Ft. Collins, Colorado | those of my employer or any other myers%hpfcla@hplabs.hp.com | sentient life-form on this planet.
dave@imax.uucp (Dave Martindale) (11/16/89)
In article <1360003@hpspcoi.HP.COM> jchristy@hpspcoi.HP.COM (Jim Christy) writes: > >> VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds >> is 100 gigabytes uncompressed. > >This would imply that a standard VHS cassette tape has nearly 200 GB of >storage capacity. Your multiplication is OK, but I think that's a little >high, else we would all be using these as mass storage backup devices. >Granted, this signal is stored in analog not digital form in the typical >recorder. That computation is really saying that you need 100 Gb to store 1 hour of video at *better than broadcast quality*. Your image source needs to be better than the recording medium. Even if you used the very best analog video recorder, you wouldn't expect to get 100 Gb back from it. And that figure assumes you store the image as RGB. If you separate luminance from chrominance, you can get away with less spatial resolution in the two colour channels (and probably less intensity resolution too) while maintaining broadcast quality. Of course, VHS has poorer S/N and less resolution that broadcast quality, so fewer bits would be needed for "VHS quality", (if you can stand to watch VHS quality!). To come from the other end, there is a digital data recorder that stores 5 Gb on a VHS cassette, so its storage capacity is definitely above that.
djones@awesome.berkeley.edu (David G. Jones) (11/16/89)
In the recent discussion of NTSC bandwidth, Steve Schear adds his 2 cents: In article <7645@ttidca.TTI.COM> schear@ttidca.tti.com (Steve Schear) writes: > .... The eye appears to notice little of >this psychophysical magic due to, among other things, the larger size and >wider spacing of the cones (as opposed to the rods) in the fovea of the retna. > There are *no* rods in the center of your fovea, besides rods are mostly saturated in bright, daytime settings. The cones in your fovea are about 1 second of visual angle apart, which is very well matched to your resolution acuity of 60 cycles per degree - not what I'd call widely spaced. The 3 different cone types do occur with different frequency, "blue" being the least frequent. the vision police. djones@awesome.berkeley.edu
dave@imax.uucp (Dave Martindale) (11/16/89)
In article <6640@portia.Stanford.EDU> rick@hanauma.UUCP (Richard Ottolini) writes: >NTSC is rated at 3.5 MHz or 32 GB / hour given 2bits per Hertz, the >minimum encoding under Nyquist limit. The NTSC bandwidth is 4.2 MHz. Nyquist says your sample *rate* has to be twice that; 2 samples per Hz. However, sampling theorem assumes infinite precision per sample, not just 1 bit/sample. In practice, digital video hardware samples at 8 or sometimes 10 bits/sample at a somewhat higher sample rate That's 30 Gbytes/hour. And it's not exactly easy to convert between sampled NTSC waveforms and RGB images. >Uncompressed digital >is 100 GB, but I mention 95% compression schemes are not difficult (SIGGRAPH >talk, Sun TAAC board), reducing the need to about 5 GB / hour. Depends on whether you will accept some degradation in the image, or insist on lossless compression.
jbm@eos.UUCP (Jeffrey Mulligan) (11/17/89)
djones@awesome.berkeley.edu (David G. Jones) writes: >There are *no* rods in the center of your fovea, besides rods are mostly >saturated in bright, daytime settings. The cones in your fovea are about >1 second of visual angle apart, which is very well matched to your >resolution acuity of 60 cycles per degree - not what I'd call widely spaced. 60 seconds / minute 60 minutes /degree A spacing of 1 second would yield a resolution of 1800 cycles/degree. The smallest spacing is about 30 seconds or arc (or half a minute), and is consistent with 60 cycles/degree. >the vision police. must be on the take -- Jeff Mulligan (jbm@aurora.arc.nasa.gov) NASA/Ames Research Ctr., Mail Stop 239-3, Moffet Field CA, 94035 (415) 694-3745
brian@ucsd.Edu (Brian Kantor) (11/19/89)
Disclaimer: I'm working from what's left of my memory, so maybe some of these numbers are off a little. Recall that the broadcast NTSC luminance bandwidth is about 4.2 MHz, I is 1.5 MHz, and Q is .5 MHz, so it's not necessary to store lots of color information if you're dealing with NTSC in and out. One older special-effects real-time video toy that I've worked on stored NTSC as YIQ components: 492 vertical lines with 512 pixels per line for luminance (Y), 256 for the Inphase chroma signal, and 64 for the Quadrature chroma. Each was 8 bits. A back-of-the-envelope calculation (divide the bandwidth by the horizontal scan frequency) will give you 267 pixels per line luminance, 95 I, and 31 Q: a rough indication that these pixel numbers are probably about right - you lose just a bit of luminance, and you're actually storing the chroma at slightly more resolution than needed. (Don't forget Dr. Nyquist: sample at twice the max frequency.) Just for reference, so you don't have to go look it up: R = .94I + .62Q + Y G = -.27I + .65Q + Y B = -1.11I - 1.70Q + Y and Y = .30R + .59G + .11B I = .60R - .28G - .32B Q = .21R - .52G + .31B Note that to save money, most television receivers do NOT directly demodulate I and Q; instead a 33 degree shift of the chroma carrier phase is used to demodulate R-Y, G-Y, and B-Y, with a reasonably good approximation of the original RGB camera signal resulting. Also, these bandwidths means that having more than 30 or so distinctly different shades of color on an NTSC scan line isn't generally possible; the Q carrier can't shift that fast! An implication of this is that one should NOT expect horizontal color wedges to look anywhere as good as vertical ones - a fact which is good to keep in mind when planning graphics images for broadcast use. Aliasing in color looks particularly bad. I think it would be wise for any graphics house to routinely encode their workstation images into NTSC and view them after perhaps two generations of 1" video recording, just to make sure that the consumer is going to see what the artist drew. What looks really great on the workstation monitor can really look like garbage in the home. - Brian
MJB@cup.portal.com (Martin J Brown-Jr) (11/19/89)
If you're talking $60k for an Abekas, why not just get a D2 digital
recorder. A couple of years ago at a NAB(?) convention, a D2 machine was
about $80k, a bit more than 1/2 the previous year's D1 recorder. D2
machines are getting popular at post houses here in Hollywood, and
maybe the price is even more reasonable (!? :-> )
- MJB -mitchh@gold.GVG.TEK.COM (Mitch Hendrickson) (11/21/89)
In article <6509@portia.Stanford.EDU> rick@hanauma.UUCP (Richard Ottolini) writes: >VHS quality 24 bits x 640 pixels x 480 lines x 30 Hertz x 3600 seconds 24 bits? BAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! for VHS? Somebody oughta tell all those folks out there in 4:2:2-land... -Mitch -- Mitch Hendrickson mitchh@gold.gvg.tek.com Grass Valley Group, Inc. (of course I don't speak for them!!) .signature under construction...
rick@hanauma.stanford.edu (Richard Ottolini) (11/22/89)
Dec 89 ACM Comm HDTV article cites 14.25 MB /sec for NSTC, although it is not clear where this number comes from. Then one hour equals 51 GB.
wayneck@tekig5.PEN.TEK.COM (Wayne Knapp) (11/22/89)
In article <24213@cup.portal.com>, MJB@cup.portal.com (Martin J Brown-Jr) writes: > If you're talking $60k for an Abekas, why not just get a D2 digital > recorder. A couple of years ago at a NAB(?) convention, a D2 machine was > about $80k, a bit more than 1/2 the previous year's D1 recorder. D2 > machines are getting popular at post houses here in Hollywood, and > maybe the price is even more reasonable (!? :-> ) > > - MJB - This sounds very interesting. Just what is a D2 machine and where does one find more information. Is is possible to use a computer to write in memory of the recorder and then record that frame to video tape. What kind of format would be used? I've started to learn about digital video. I'm really interested in recorder that a RAM frame buffer that could be written to by a computer and sinlge framed on to video tape. Also if the video from the frame buffer could be displayed this would allow one to do animation with almost any kind of computer. Is this kind of thing even possible today? Can this be bought for less than $5000? Thank you, Wayne Knapp
hui@joplin.mpr.ca (Michael Hui) (11/23/89)
Has anyone thought about executing the video expansion (de-compression?) algorithm used in Intel's Digital Video Interactive (DVI) system? The IEEE Spectrum article that discussed this scheme mentioned that custom chips were developed to do the job. But could the equivalent be done with a TMS34020 or TMS320C30 on a frame buffer card, with the compressed video fed via the bus from a hard disk? I notice that the Intel system is rather inflexible, in terms of integration into the current mainstream graphics environment (X window, TIGA from TI, etc.) but since both standards do run on the TMS340 family, it might be worth investigating whether the algorithm could be run on those chips also, rather than use Intel's chip set.
thompson@gunflint (William B. Thompson) (11/29/89)
Lyon-Lamb and others have for some time made VCR tape edit controllers
that allow single frame writes onto video tape. The controllers take
commands across an RS-232 link. They require a deck that supports insert
edit mode. Quality is comparable to the Panasonic write-once video disk.
We've successfully used a Lyon-Lamb Mini-Vas for several years.
- Billmalcolm@Apple.COM (Malcolm Slaney) (11/29/89)
In article <24213@cup.portal.com> MJB@cup.portal.com (Martin J Brown-Jr) writes: >If you're talking $60k for an Abekas, why not just get a D2 digital >recorder. Has anybody tried using a write once video disk? Do any of the writer/readers do single frame stuff? I don't know anything about them but if they don't cost very much you can throw away a lot of used discs for $60k. We have both Abekas and D2's here on campus but we are limited by the network interfaces. I've had better luck writing images to a frame buffer and then using a relatively slow Umatic deck to put it on video tape. Cheers. Malcolm Slaney Apple Speech and Hearing Project
rick@hanauma.stanford.edu (Richard Ottolini) (11/29/89)
Some numbers from a Bay Area talk by Industrial Light and Magic today: They work with film resolutions from 640 x 480 to 3200 x 2300 at 24 frames a second and 36 bit color. They can store about 10-15 seconds per 2.2 GB Exabyte tapes.
milazzo@bbn.com (Paul Milazzo) (11/30/89)
malcolm@Apple.COM (Malcolm Slaney) asks: >Has anybody tried using a write once video disk? Do any of the writer/readers >do single frame stuff? I've used a Panasonic TQ-3031F (list price k$18) to do single-frame animation recording; it's very easy. I'm not completely happy with the quality, though; occasional frames have one or two tiny, brightly-colored specks. I have a *very* early model of the recorder, and was using the blank disc that came with it, so I might just have experienced early disc manufacturing problems. For the curious, I'll include a few TQ-3031F specs: disc geometry: 54000 frames/side normal, 36000 frames/side hi-res resolution: >380 lines normal, >450 lines hi-res video S/N: >45 dB audio S/N: >70 dB recording mode: luminance: FM color: FM R-Y, B-Y line sequential video inputs: composite, S-video, RGB+sync, dubbing, sync, SC video outputs: composite, S-video, RGB+sync, dubbing audio I/O: stereo (~300mV unbalanced) control port: RS-232C, typical industrial videodisc command set Paul Milazzo <milazzo@bbn.com> BBN Systems & Technologies Cambridge, MA
msa@tel4.tel.vtt.fi (Markku Savela) (12/01/89)
Going back to the original subject line, I have run against a
description of new interface card for IBM PC/XT/AT (and 100% compatibles),
which claims to do pretty much the same as Parallax offers for Unix
workstations (btw, does parallax work on Apollo DN3500?).
This card is DVA-4000/ISA from Videologic. Says, it's Digital Video
Adapter for VGA, uses VGA monitor, non-interlaced, full motion digitized
video (30 frames/sec NTSC, 25 frames/sec PAL), Video-Audio-Graphics mixing,
video windowing/scaling/positioning, input from NTSC/PAL/RGB/S-VHS/CDI/VDI,
etc... Works under DOS/Microsoft Windows. Designed to be used with M.I.C
(Multimedia Interactive Control) system software. This all from short
description I have.
Any experience of using this? ISA-version availability is Nov 89, but
the MCA version should have been available earlier. Anyone used M.I.C?
I have only very hazy idea of the cost, complete package with sofware
under $5000? I would be interested seeing some discussion comparing
this and Parallax (and others, if there are any), good and bad points
for both...
I really have nothing to do with VideoLogic. We are just looking
ways to get live video on a workstation as cheap as possible and this
DVA looks interesting.
And to prevent some of the obvious followup questions, here are
the two addresses of Videologic:
* VideoLogic Ltd., Home Park Industrial Estate, Kings Langley,
Herts, U.K. (09277)60511
* VideoLogic Inc.,124 Mount Auburn Street, #200, Cambridge,
MA 02138, USA, 617 576-5720
--
Markku Savela, Technical Research Centre of Finland, Telecomm Lab.
Internet: savela@tel.vtt.fi (DON'T use msa@tel4.tel.vtt.fi--it won't work)good@pixar.uucp (The Ice Cream truck in my neighborhood plays Helter Skelter.) (12/01/89)
In article <36840@apple.Apple.COM> malcolm@Apple.COM (Malcolm Slaney) writes:
:
:Has anybody tried using a write once video disk? Do any of the writer/readers
:do single frame stuff? I don't know anything about them but if they don't cost
:very much you can throw away a lot of used discs for $60k.
We do single-frame stuff now and then. Our Panasonic TQ-2026F Optical Disc
Recorder is at least pretty fast. You get 24,000 frames on each 8" disc.
The machine is controllable via rs232, so it's pretty easy to make it dance.
The main drawback is the image quality: it really bites. I mean, it makes
VHS look good. Still, it's a useful tool for checking animation and is
a lot cheaper than an Abekas, which is why we have two of them.
--Craig
...{ucbvax,sun}!pixar!good
Armed, you are a citizen. Unarmed, you are a subject.msa@tel4.tel.vtt.fi (Markku Savela) (12/01/89)
In article <8911301843.AA01794@harriett.ncsa.uiuc.edu> sam@NCSA.UIUC.EDU (Sam Milosevich) writes: > The current address and phone number for VideoLogic is > 245 First Street > Cambridge, MA 02142 > (617) 494-0530 > (as I discovered when calling for product information). Posting this correction from comp.mail.multi-media back to comp.graphics, my own posting contained old address :-( -- Markku Savela, VTT/TEL (Technical Research Centre of Finland)
bio_zwbb@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (William Busa) (12/01/89)
In article <7925@pixar.UUCP> good@pixar.uucp writes: > >We do single-frame stuff now and then. Our Panasonic TQ-2026F Optical Disc >Recorder is at least pretty fast. You get 24,000 frames on each 8" disc. >The machine is controllable via rs232, so it's pretty easy to make it dance. >The main drawback is the image quality: it really bites. For those who need higher image quality, check out the Panasonic TQ-2028F. It is a modified version of the 2026 discussed above, intended, I guess, for medical and scientific applications. The resolution is 450 horizontal lines, S/N is 45 dB minimum. Best price I found was $12,500 via Adco Aerospace, Ft. Lauderdale, FL. Quality is certainly better than VHS, and the most important point is that it is particularly suitable for single frame stuff, since single-frame playback displays NO flagging and doesn't eat up the physical medium the way video tape is eaten by still playback. THE CATCH: the increased resolution (vs the 2026) is due to the fact that this machine records and plays MONOCHROME only. -- Dr. William Busa, Dept. of Biology, The Johns Hopkins University, Charles & 34th Sts., Baltimore, MD 21218 (301) 338-8207 bio_zwbb@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu uunet!mimsy!jhunix!bio_zwbb
roseman@rd1632.Dayton.NCR.COM (Robert D. Roseman) (12/05/89)
In article <MSA.89Nov30115343@tel4.tel.vtt.fi> savela@tel.vtt.fi (Markku Savela) writes: > >... a description of new interface card for IBM PC/XT/AT ... >which claims to do pretty much the same as Parallax offers for Unix > > This card is DVA-4000/ISA from Videologic. Says, it's Digital Video >Adapter for VGA, uses VGA monitor, non-interlaced, full motion digitized >video (30 frames/sec NTSC, 25 frames/sec PAL), Video-Audio-Graphics mixing, >etc... Works under DOS/Microsoft Windows. Designed to be used with M.I.C > > Any experience of using this? ISA-version availability is Nov 89, but I have recently ordered this card and software (not yet received) and would be glad to share my results with anyone interested in 1-2 mos. After investigating (discussions and reading only) these types of products, I believe that the DVA-4000 will give the most bang for the buck. I have also purchased a VideoWindows card from New Media Graphics (780 Boston Road, Billerica, Mass 01821 -- 508-663-0666) which has similar functionality. I have not been able to test it yet. >I have only very hazy idea of the cost, complete package with sofware >under $5000? I would be interested seeing some discussion comparing DVA-4000 $2495 MIC System 150 MIC Ref. Manual 75 MIC Dev. Tools 495 If anyone else has used these products or would like a product summary of my findings, please email and I will reply in Feb. Rob Roseman rob.roseman@dayton.ncr.com Software Technology, R&D Div. NCR World Headquarters Dayton, Ohio
berry@lll-crg.llnl.gov (Berry Kercheval) (12/08/89)
In article <36840@apple.Apple.COM> malcolm@Apple.COM (Malcolm Slaney) writes: >In article <24213@cup.portal.com> MJB@cup.portal.com (Martin J Brown-Jr) writes: >>If you're talking $60k for an Abekas, why not just get a D2 digital >>recorder. >Has anybody tried using a write once video disk? Do any of the writer/readers >do single frame stuff? I don't know anything about them but if they don't cost >very much you can throw away a lot of used discs for $60k. The Panasonic TQ-3031 comes with a RS-232 port and a transcoder built in (!). It will take RGB at NTSC rates directly. I was able to interface it to our computers in about 2 hours, most of which was spent figuring out that I needed DTR brought through the null modem... The disks cost from $200-$400 each, and are good for about 30 minutes. The unit itself is in the $20,000 neighborhood. --berry -- bERRY Kercheval :: berry@lll-crg.llnl.gov