Rick, obviously this is a carried over conversation from another post, or something, but you are having trouble with editing or something? I'd personally suggest forgetting windows moviemaker, and going for the real stuff, like Vegas, like you did, once you get used to a (sorry for saying this) crappy program, like windows moviemaker, it will be hard to move up to better stuff.

Anyway, yeah them clips are cool, I wish I would of thought of that. :D

Do you know if any of the new Nvidia and ATI cards are as good in terms of 2D performance and most importantly, display quality?

I mainly like the Matrox cards for the quality of their display, especially on my Sony Trinitron monitor. I just need basic 3D acceleration.

Ah, no Alex I am not having problems editing. I followed the I-Film set of instructions which suggest you use "Moviemaker". I looked at "Moviemaker" for a minute or two, said this is silly and went ahead and cut a short clip on Vegas.

New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/12/technology/12SOFT.html) article quotes computer industry veterans that Microsoft and HP are borrowing too heavily on Apples designs. Microsoft's preview of Longhorn, their new OS due in 2005, includes many features Apple introduced in OS X in 2001.

So what else is new?

Hasn't Apple's function always been to innovate so the PC world can copy it 6 months later?

As part of the regular Instant Films festival (www.instantfilms.tv), we are initiating the "Instant Documentary" this weekend. The Instant Films weekend involves 8 groups making short films over 48 hours, culminating with a gala screening in Los Angeles on Sunday night; the documentary of the weekend will also be screened on Sunday.

We need LA based camera crews to cover the event on Saturday and Sunday (the 17th and 18th). If you have a solid DV package and have experience shooting documentary/news and would like to participate in this exciting event, please email me at charles@instantfilms.tv with an equipment list and resume (or a description of your experience level). There is no pay, as is the case with the filmmakers who participate, but it is a lot of fun to be a part of.

Check out this article (http://us.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/12/offbeat.film.instant.reut/index.html
)on todays CNN.com homepage, also seen in the Hollywood Reporter:

i have the full 128mb card. It's really nice for video editing as it drives two LCD monitors and a NTSC monitor.

Does anyone know if these video cards work on a Power Mac?
Both the budget as well as the full-out Parhelia?
Thanks!

I run a Sapphire Radeon 9700 128mb card. VGA, TV out, and another multi-use output that can be used on another VGA display with an adapter (or plasma, tv, etc..)

Sapphire makes the ATI cards you see in stores. I decided against the Pro version, at about $150 more as the Sapphire's GPU and memory timings are unlocked. It easily handles any speed increases I give it.

Great for gaming, great TV out quality compared to most other offerings, and an extra output if I decide on two monitors for editing later.

IMO, the most convincing argument in favour of these new cards over the Parhelia is that they support AGP 8x rather than just AGP 4x.

Against them is the lower memory (only 64MB) and memory bandwidth, and the fact that they won't support the After Effects WYSIWYG plug-in.

The P650 will run two monitors, while the P750 will run three. A TV can be one of the monitors.

Matrox seems to be pushing the P750 more towards DV, with the P650 towards business desktops.

A full comparison is here: http://www.matrox.com/mga/products/comp_chart/gseries_pseries_parhelia.cfm

For me, it's a tough call between the Parhelia (128/256MB RAM, AE plug-in) and the P750 (AGP 8x), but I have to admit that the faster AGP port speed is more tempting.

If Matrox develops drivers for the Mac, it will be a first!

The average family going to Disneyland does not own a PD150.If I were ever to go to Disneyland (God forbid), I'd take my PC100, not my XL1s.

I'd never take a big cam like an XL1 to any amusement park. For starters, it screams STEAL ME! And obviously, it wouldn't do a whole lot of good on a roller coaster. Smaller is better in these cases.

Glenn,

This is Tom McKay. I don't get in to these forums much and I just noticed your question. DVX focus control is done but not in full production. If you have any questions about the new control you can call me at the office most anytime. It won't be on the site until it is very nearly ready to ship. If I put it on the site now we will get calls for orders we can not fill at this time and that is never much fun for the salespeople.

Best regards,

Tom

Ok, thanks for your reply Tom. I'm in no rush to buy, just curious.

I'd never take a big cam like an XL1 to any amusement park. For starters, it screams STEAL ME! And obviously, it wouldn't do a whole lot of good on a roller coaster. Smaller is better in these cases.That was kinda my point. The DVX100 comes in at over $4k, a cool grand more than the XL1s. Anyone who's invested the money in either will also invest in the insurance of a cheap and convenient palmcorder for days out...unless they're on a pro shoot or are a twit.

Strolling through wally world today I was dreaming to find some bargain DVD burner worth a million on clearence for 10 bucks (didn't happen). I did however see a DVD player which purplexed me. A Pioneer DV 250 ($78.64), reads DVD,DVD-R, CD-R, & MP3. It also touted having composite video out. Y-Pb-Pr, the audio was 192 Khz 24 bit. It was only a player. What would be the draw for such a product to have composite out and 24 bit audio? I am a semi techno-nerd (Lord help me the day I reach full nerdship), but things in electronic land take some studying to understand these days. Does the model designation (DV) have any importance?

Most of the Pioneer DVD players have either the designation DV or PDV (portable). An L means LaserDisc. It's just a model numbering scheme.

All the new Pioneer models have component outputs. I don't think it means much (or anything) to the player. However, lot's of high-end TVs now have component inputs. If you own one of those, you're going to be looking for input devices that will match.

And Monster sells more cables this way, too.

I'd go with component, then SVHS and then composite.

http://www.starwars.com/episode-ii/feature/20030516/index.html

Bigger / better camera's it seems...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0305/03052101displaytechevf.asp

Displaytech has announced the LightView 311k Display Module, the highest resolution display produced for digital still camera and camcorder viewfinders. The 311k is a 0.26-inch diagonal FLC on reflective CMOS microdisplay with 432 by 240 pixel display resolution. Each pixel has 24-bit color depth, and it operates at 120 Hz (360 Hz RGB field rate) to provide flicker free, full color video imaging.

They also claim "triad-free" color without "door effect".

What's "door effect"?

Vladimir, that is only about 100K pixels -- a very low resolution.

What is "door effect". I think they just abbreviated screen door effect. Screen door effect makes it appear as though you are looking through a screen door, very noticeable pixels.

Tiny 321 Studios fights the combined Goliath of the MPAA, DMCA, and a judge who seems to have her mind already made up.

NEWS
Continuing our ongoing coverage of the war between tiny 321 Studios, maker of DVD copying software, and the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), maker of DVDs that consumers want to copy, the case has finally been put in front of a judge. Unfortunately for 321 Studios, the judge seems far from open-minded on the subject of 321 Studios' right to sell software designed to allow owners to make copies of their DVDs.

"I am substantially persuaded by them", said U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, commenting on all previous cases decided in favor of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). MPAA lawyer Russell Frackman stated, "They can't just traffic in anticircumvention devices," arguing that the removal of copy protection, even from a legally owned DVD, is illegal and can be prosecuted under the DMCA. 321 Studios countered by claiming there is no evidence that its software is being used by pirates, but Judge Illston shot back, saying, "But it's marketed to allow circumvention." As the battle raged, Judge Illston consistently cited the DMCA, even going so far as to call a Department of Justice attorney to the stand. The attorney dutifully defended the constitutionality of the DMCA and firmly backed the MPAA.

321 Studios didn't get in many punches, but one argument did seemingly land with effect on Judge Illston. 321 Studios argued that after a copyright has expired the content can legally be copied, but the DMCA statute on removal of copy protection has no expiration date. Thus, material that is no longer protected by copyright could not be copied because removal of the copy protection would violate the DMCA. 321 Studios argued that this is tantamount to a permanent, infinite copyright on all works, something that is clearly in conflict with all existing patent and copyright law. The MPAA lawyer responded by saying that copying the content would be legal because the copyright had expired, but 321 Studios shot back, saying, "But it's encrypted. If it doesn't stop being encrypted, it's still encrypted," and pointed out that the DMCA prevents even non-copyrighted works from being decrypted and copied.

The picture quality of the last Star Wars was not very good. One of the reasons was letterboxing. Rodriguez did not use letterboxing and the picture on his Spy Kids 2 was excellent. The new CineAlta SR will will still need letterboxing for the Star Wars format, but the picture should be excellent. With the introduction of the SR format we'll see major shift of movie production into digital.

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Lohman : http://www.starwars.com/episode-ii/feature/20030516/index.html

Bigger / better camera's it seems... -->>>

Does that mean it'll be a better movie too? ;)

With the exception of their very good point that encryption effectively indefinitely extends copyright even after it's lapsed, I'm in favour of plaintiff on this one. A lot of us (myself included) copy CD tracks to make personal compilations, which although strictly against copyright is I think reasonable. But ripper and decryption software, although obstenibly marketed for personal use, is abused...either through commercial pirating or non-commercial file sharing.

Because file copying is abused, holier-than-thou Microsoft is introducing measures to clean up the industry act on pirating (while at the same time, condoning copyright infringement by making it easier to nab images from the WWW...hypocrite? Bill?)

At the end of the day, we all suffer. I cannot buy Sony CDs now, since I'm never sure if I'll be able to play them in my PC. I certainly won't be able to copy my favourite tracks for my own convenience.

I don't understand: how does 432 by 240 make 311k?! I can only count a litle over 100k....

Joseph, what is the source of this article? Can you provide a link, please?

Let's hope so, Dylan!

I'm waiting to see Rodriguez's: Once Upon a Time in Mexico....

"So Sony changed that format from YCBCR 4:2:2, which was 8-bit, to a RGB 4:4:4, which is 10-bit. That's more numbers to represent each color and each brightness value of the pixels, and a true RGB format which is what is used in feature post-production, film recording, and digital cinema."I count twelve bits.

You have to read the article, click on the link he provided. They are using something called field sequential color technology.

The article makes for a good read. This is display is on 1/4 inch diagonal, given the size, it's high resolution. It is meant to replace digital and analog VF. A link to the manufacture's site is in the article.

Guys, I don't remember the source. I also have another version of this that a friend sent me:

SAN FRANCISCO--The judge in a closely watched lawsuit challenging the legality of DVD-copying software said she was "substantially persuaded" by past court rulings that favored copyright holders, but closed a hearing Thursday without issuing a ruling in the case.

Seven movie studios are seeking to prevent 321 Studios from selling its DVD X Copy and DVD Copy Plus programs, alleging that the products violate the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's prohibition on software that can be used to circumvent copyright protections.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, considering a summary judgment motion, said she had carefully read decisions in two similar cases; judges for Motion Picture Association of America v. 2600 and U.S. v. ElcomSoft said that intellectual property holders can pursue software developers who offer products that crack copyright protections.



"I am substantially persuaded by them," she told both sides.

In the 2600 case, an appellate court ordered the hacker magazine to stop posting or linking to DVD-cracking code. In ElcomSoft, a jury acquitted a Russian software company of criminal charges over a tool that cracked the security on eBooks. But before the trial, a judge refused to toss the case out amid assertions that the DMCA should not apply.

At Thursday's hearing, the studios argued that 321's software violates the DMCA by stripping antipiracy protections out of DVDs to copy them. Essentially, the studios argue that it shouldn't matter what the consumers intend to do with the DVD after they've copied it--that the mere action of breaking the code runs afoul of the law.

"They just can't traffic in anticircumvention devices," Russell Frackman, a partner with Los Angeles-based Mitchell Silberberg & Knupp who's representing the studios, told the judge.

The DMCA has spawned a number of clashes between the entertainment industry, which fears the massive unauthorized distribution of its digital works, and technologists, who fear that a crackdown on software developers will thwart innovation.

During the hearing, the judge peppered attorney Darlyn Durie, a partner at San Francisco-based Keker and Van Nest who's representing 321, with questions about the DMCA's scope.

For example, when Durie opened her statements by saying the studios are mistakenly trying to argue that 321 is offering a tool for burglars, the judge fired back, "Under the statute, all it has to be is a circumvention device."

When Durie said there's no evidence consumers are using 321's products illegally and that it's not marketed toward pirates, the judge replied, "But it's marketed to allow circumvention."

After the hearing, 321 Studios CEO Rob Semaan said he wasn't worried by the judge's questions, because he thinks Durie raised some more issues for the judge to consider. "At least, out of the gate, she was starting at their end of the spectrum," he said. "But being persuaded and bound are two different things."

During the hearing, 321's attorney argued that declaring the company's products illicit would amount to "a ban on the digital printing press," because it would ban acts of copying and excerpting film that traditionally have been legal in the non-digital world.

"A copyright holder has no right to prevent someone from engaging in fair use," Durie said, noting that the studios' position would prevent students from excerpting film clips for school projects or parents making backups of their work. "That, I would suggest, can't be right. That can't be what the drafters of the DMCA intended."

Throughout the case, the judge and lawyers from both sides talked repeatedly about the example of a movie reviewer who wanted to excerpt clips of films.

Restricting free speech?
Durie said that under the studio's interpretation of the DMCA, a movie reviewer could be banned from excerpting a digital work, a prohibition that would violate free-speech laws.

When the movie studios' attorney said that such fair use would not be banned, the judge asked, "Isn't it made more difficult? What about Siskel and Ebert?"

Frackman sidestepped the question, saying that at least one of the famous movie reviewers seems to be doing quite well. "Ebert and whoever can still talk about what they want to talk about (and) can still play clips of what they want to talk about," he said.

But he added that Ebert has no more of a right to make full copies of a movie than anyone else.

At one point, the judge called on Department of Justice attorney John Zacharia to answer some questions about the DMCA. The attorney has weighed in on the side of the studios in an attempt to defend the constitutionality of the DMCA.

Illston asked Zacharia to explain the conundrum of locking up copyrighted works behind encryption and then making the breaking of that encryption illegal, even after the copyrights on those works expire. The judge wondered if it would effectively extend copyrights to keep such works out of the public domain.

Zacharia said it would not, because the copyright had expired.

"But it's encrypted. If it doesn't stop being encrypted, it's still encrypted," Illston said, adding that such protected works still couldn't be legally copied.

The numbers after the words are number of samplings and
actually have nothing to do with bits..... MJPEG 4:2:2 sampling
is 16 bits for example. They use 8 bits for Y and 4 bits for U
and V totalling 16 bits per sample. RGB 4:4:4 is normally 8 bit
per channel or 24 bits combined. I think this article is talking
about bits PER CHANNEL. Not total number of bits. DV is probably
around 12-16 bits or something.

<<<-- Originally posted by Jeff Donald : Joseph, what is the source of this article? Can you provide a link, please? -->>>

I read it on Yahoo news 2 or 3 days ago. I think they carry mostly AP stuff. If they have a recent archive, it should be there.

At least, so they promise:

http://www.planetanalog.com/story/OEG20030527S0023

They focus on still cameras, as the market is mostly there. But they have some design wins in videocams as well:

http://www.nucoretech.com/nu2/30_pr/pressProduct.html

Can anybody comment on noise of JVC DV-300 and DV-5000? Do they really stand-out in their class?

Interesting developments... But I still prefer to begin with as
clean a picture as possible. You can never increase quality
after it has already been made. You can minize the effect or
the visibility of it, ofcourse. Anyway, still interesting!

Anyone going? I'm there this Friday. I'll probably be wearing my ZGC/Canon DV bucket cap. Stop me if you see me, I have long hair.

Exciting... we'll be bringing back a Pro35 on this trip. Right on!

Hi Justin,

I wish I was going but I am currently in orlando working the InfoComm Show. I think Mizell Wilson will be at the ZGC booth, definitely stop by and say hello to him. I am sure he would be interetsed to see some of your Mini35 footage.

Have fun at the show!

- don

Justin,

Personally I prefer the ZGC baseball cap. Like Don, I'm currently stuck in Orlando for InfoComm and June 6th is a travel day for me to go back to Texas. Sure wish I was going... it would be great to finally get to meet you! I'm expecting to go to the Showbiz Expo / L.A. DV Show thing near the end of June, but it's not confirmed yet.

Funny, Chris.

I like the bucket cap purely for practical reasons. It shadows my face and head with full 360 degree coverage, plus it's floppy and I can flip up the brim when I need to operate cameras. But my perfect lid is a straight brimmed cowboy hat. Great for the outdoors, but bad for the viewfinder...

I digress.

I might go down to the showbiz expo. We could meet there and continue the hat topic.

Okay...now we're tech talkin. I too am a new devotee to the ZGC/Canon hat that make me look like Fonda in "On Golden Pond". On a recent TV shoot for a new sports stadium I spent the day waiting between shots under overcast skies, with my baseball cap in the VF backwards position. I'm bald. I ended up with a long oval scorch mark on my forehead. I immediately washed and shrank the extra large ZGC hat to fit my sensitive head for future outdoor work. It looks goofy, but it is truly functional for sunny outdoor shooting.

Anyone going to be at the NYC DV Expo in July? I believe I'll be part of a Canon/ZGC/P&S digital film makers roundtable...or are all you guys strictly left coastal?

Jim, I'll be at DV Expo East, and I'm looking forward to meeting you in person there!

I look goofy in any hat, but especially the bucket hat. I can appreciate its practicality, though.

Finally, some justice is served. Hope this guy makes alot of new friends.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030613/wr_nm/crime_ebay_dc_2

I think that's the first time I've seen news like that.

If only all states had high tech crime bureaus like California.

If only they caught all the guys who ripped us off.

You do realize you wrote 'composite' video, right? Composite video is just one RCA cable. I figure you meant component, and component is the highest quality you can get until DVD players start using DVI, which will probably never happen. And 192 khz, 24 bt it the quality of DVD audio discs, but I doubt that a $78.64 player would support DVD-A.

I guess I wasn't that much help on this, but thats my 2 cents worth.

Admittedly I may have used the component - composite thing wrong, but the specs, Y-Pb-Pr was one of the outputs and the box also touted 192 khz 24bit audio (DVD players double as CD players so it would obviously have CD quality audio), And the price was everything but taxes. Lightening strikes my parents DVD player a few days ago so for Fathers Day I go back and buy an RCA DVD player that plays CD DVD VCD etc. and also stated that if you have picture cd's all you have to do is throw it in and it would play them to?

<<<-- Originally posted by Don Parrish : Admittedly I may have used the component - composite thing wrong, but the specs, Y-Pb-Pr was one of the outputs and the box also touted 192 khz 24bit audio (DVD players double as CD players so it would obviously have CD quality audio), And the price was everything but taxes. Lightening strikes my parents DVD player a few days ago so for Fathers Day I go back and buy an RCA DVD player that plays CD DVD VCD etc. and also stated that if you have picture cd's all you have to do is throw it in and it would play them to? -->>>

Thats what I figured, I only pointed it out because I know a lot of people that use the terms totaly wrong, thats why they never undestand them. But more on the audio, CD's would max out at 16 bit, 96khz. I don't know the standard on DVD-V discs, it's probably no better than any other player, but I like Pioneer it's a good brand. Most palyers will play VCD's, but not as many will play the picture CD's. Again, the future is DVD-A. I won't even buy CD's anymore. 192khz is higher than the human ear can distinguish (sp?) but 24 bit sampling means that it will be a truer sound, more like the quality of vinyl! Ive got the Black Album, STP "Core" and Carly Simons "No Secrets" and they all sound amazing in 6.1, unfortunally there aren't too many titles I like yet. A lot of classical and stuff like that.

I have seen a use of Y-Pb-Pr outputs as here in the UK some of the newer projectors that are around have these inputs. So a DVD player can be connected up to these connections.

>until DVD players start using DVI, which will probably never happen.

Bravo makes a DVD player called the 'D1' with DVI output, but a review in Sound & Vision, the D1 analog output is slammed.
I'm not sure that the anlog performance is relevant when the
key feature is a digital output.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/fo/20030620/bs_fo/2c7601c7b5517aec3e2793352c2ad678

Basically these guys tell they can reproduce huge dynamic range in the image from 1 to 65000 lux. Now how do we squeeze this into 8bit DV resolution. Looks like a large gamma factor is necessary.