I want AMIGA / TOASTER Propaganda!
Revo9
Hello All.
My Email adress is - Re...@aol.com
Feel free to hit me hard Amiga evangelists!
People talk about how great the toaster/ amiga is, explain it to this
videographer / mac person who has only played around breifly with a
Toaster4000 once. What can it do besides video? What is under the hood?
Get techy. How Much? (used & New) explain what each model 2k,3k,4k, can
and cant do. Video or Non video related .Blow my mind. I know commodore is
gone but if you still believe I want to know why.
Thanks in advance.
Jeffery S. Jones
>Thanks in advance.
For the techy stuff, and costs, you can hop into the other newsgroups
easily enough, or search some web pages. rec.video.desktop.toaster is a
good place to start.
People's choices of platforms to work with (video formats, as well as
computers) often tend to hyperbole. For me, the Video Toaster is fast
and effective, generates good quality video, and does a very good job
for the money. Real-time effects and live switching are the key. There
are other systems that have some of these features, and they are worth
looking into. But when you start looking at the whole package,
especially with regards to ease of use, the Video Toaster/Flyer is a
good choice. Few NLE packages can be used by clients or younger
students with no extensive training, and few produce results in real
time.
Processor speed is not very relevant, when using a machine for NLE
operations which are performed in real time by the NLE card itself. If
you want rendering speed, the obvious solution is to network to another
machine, such as your Mac, and get the best of both worlds.
Outside of video work, the machine can do many things, much of which
are available on other platforms as well. But the Amiga was uniquely
designed to work with video, and its OS is designed to deal with
genlocking and video sync operations. Installation doesn't deal with
many of the problems that plague other systems which lack this
orientation, though _any_ NLE is a potential challenge for the
uninitiated to install in a machine. My dealer did all the
installation, so all I had to do was plug it in, read the manuals a bit,
and go to work.
--
*-___________________________| *Starfire* |__________________________-*
Jeff Jones email:jef...@execpc.com *//* Amiga Lives! |Born Again 1995
*Task Force Games* \\//http://www.task-force-games.com
*Starfire Design Studio* http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~seidl/starfire/
--
Myron Achtman
>re...@aol.com (Revo9) wrote:
>Feel free to hit me hard Amiga evangelists!
>People talk about how great the Toaster/Amiga is, explain it to this
>videographer / mac person who has only played around briefly with a
>Toaster4000 once. What can it do besides video? What is under the hood?
>Get techy. How Much? (used & New) explain what each model 2k,3k,4k, can
>and can't do. Video or Non video related .Blow my mind. I know Commodore is
>gone but if you still believe I want to know why.
>Thanks in advance.
===========================================================
OK revo9, I'll take some of the bait.
There is a fairly good variety of software for the AMIGA platform,
from word-processors to image processors. However, most of these
programs don't touch what's available on either the Mac or PC platform
- with ONE exception. That is Non-Linear Editing (NLE).
In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or
Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer
from NewTek, Inc. The only system, in today's NLE marketplace, that
rivals the Video Toaster/Flyer is the DraCo Vision system from DraCo
(http://www.draco.com/).
You have to spend "big bucks" to get a Macintosh- or PC-based NLE that
offers REAL-TIME effects. Anyone serious about editing will not accept
a system that does not offer REAL-TIME effects. Waiting for effects to
"RENDER" is ludicrous and it disrupts the flow of an edit session.
Anyone who disagrees with this must ask themselves why TARGA, AVID,
DPS, and all the "big players" in the NLE field are working feverishly
to bring out REAL-TIME boards.
It amazes me to this day that the Toaster/Flyer has offered REAL-TIME
effects and superb video quality, at a very reasonable cost, for more
than two years. Why is it taking the Macintosh and PC-based industry
so long to catch up. The answers are simple. For the Macintosh, as
great as it is, NLE manufacturers are proceeding with some caution
because of Apple's sagging sales performance.
For the PC, vast amounts of money are being invested in an attempt to
make an ass-backward architecture handle the throughput required to
make NLE work. In the end, it won't matter what kind of Operating
System (O/S) Microsoft dreams up because the "big players" will keep
designing new boards until they wedge their ass-end into the PC
architecture. Sure, given a 400 MHz microprocessor and 128 MB of RAM,
I'll concede that the PC NLE will outperform my 25 MHz AMIGA equipped
with 18 MB of RAM. Perhaps.
I have had the opportunity, in the last six months, to try many of the
existing PC-based NLE systems first hand. Low-end systems like the
MIRO DC-30 and FAST A/V Master offer very good value for the hobbyist
or casual editor. They are not serious post-production systems because
they don't offer REAL-TIME effects. They are also very difficult to
configure as evidenced by the number of "chronic" postings in this
newsgroup.
High-end systems from AVID and Data Translation make me DROOL, but I'm
not prepared to invest as much as my house cost to buy an NLE system.
I've had enough first-hand experience with a variety of NLE systems to
determine that my investment in the Toaster/Flyer was very wise. I've
tried to rationalize why I should dump my AMIGA in favor of a PC- or
Mac-based NLE. But so far I haven't found a competitively priced
system that can displace it.
Best regards,
Myron Achtman
ADITA Video Inc.
Visit us at http://www.adita.com
Tony
Hello Myron.... good to see that you are still out there. I do remember
the "Plum vs Flyer" discussions that were very informative. What now is
your impression of the Plum? Heard from Ed lately?? ;)
To'chan
In article <5mjj05$3o...@elmo.cadvision.com> ad...@adita.com writes:
>>re...@aol.com (Revo9) wrote:
>
>>Feel free to hit me hard Amiga evangelists!
>
>>People talk about how great the Toaster/Amiga is, explain it to this
>>videographer / mac person who has only played around briefly with a
>>Toaster4000 once. What can it do besides video? What is under the hood?
>>Get techy. How Much? (used & New) explain what each model 2k,3k,4k, can
>>and can't do. Video or Non video related .Blow my mind. I know Commodore is
>>gone but if you still believe I want to know why.
In a computer architectural point of view, the Amiga can do true
multitasking. That is, I can format a disk, run a tcp-ip client,
telnet somewhere, and print a file in a word processing application
without too much delay (assuming I'm using the latest model). My
PC can almost do the same, and I can't stand using macs because it
will not let me format a disk, print a file, and work in another w
window at the same time. My Amiga 2000 still manages to beat the
computers of the 1980's because it has stereo sound outputs (that
is internally processed through DMA ports).
In the line of video work that I do, the Amiga has an excellent
shareware program to let me do video subtitling with a large variety
of options (than the basic stuff you see in movies or close captioning)
to use. Titles can be placed anywhere on the screen, and Jacosub now
offers a small selection of font rendering effects if the user doesn't
own a high end genlock that would do the same. (Yes, this is a plug
for _Jacosub._ Look for it in your favorite search engine. :).
To'chan aka Ed irl
t
Franas
>re...@aol.com (Revo9) wrote:
>Feel free to hit me hard Amiga evangelists!
>People talk about how great the Toaster/Amiga is, explain it to this
>videographer / mac person who has only played around briefly with a
>Toaster4000 once. What can it do besides video? What is under the hood?
>Get techy. How Much? (used & New) explain what each model 2k,3k,4k, can
>and can't do. Video or Non video related .Blow my mind. I know Commodore
is
>gone but if you still believe I want to know why.
>Thanks in advance.
Well, I can relate that my 10-year old Amiga is still current after all
these years (Full Multitasking, multimedia-ready, plug 'n play, easily
upgradable and the rest). Try that with a 286 PC or a Mac Classic. It may
not have all the bloated full-featured programs but I can do everything
what I need on the Ami. This wonder machine can emulate a Mac or PC and be
with the "mainstream" if needed. In truth, I had a Mac emulation running
Photoshop, MS Word, etc. for a long time but never ever found the need to
use them so I removed it for redundancy. Of course, it's very memory
efficient (256k to multitask preemptively) ... I know you can now go out
and buy 64 megs ram quite cheaply to feed your hungry Pentium or PowerMac
but what rationale!! (Obesity is bad for your general well-being, and it
includes your computer). The A2k and 3k are older machines, the later with
a 32-bit architecture. The A4k has AGA-chipset which displays more colors
in native mode (18-bit or 256,000 colors). All models can be outfitted
with a graphic card to carry them to a higher level as needed. Of course,
all Amiga's are born video-friendly ... no expensive TV decorders needed.
For videographers, your choice is to pay a lot more for a comparable Mac
or PC system or have a well-tested and matured Toaster-Flyer based on the
Amiga. The anticipated arrival of the new PowerAmiga's should close the
gap with the CPU race. Maybe there is still a computing choice after Intel
and Microsoft ...
Mel Matsuoka
On Thu, 29 May 1997 09:43:12 GMT, ad...@adita.com (Myron Achtman)
wrote:
>You have to spend "big bucks" to get a Macintosh- or PC-based NLE that
>offers REAL-TIME effects. Anyone serious about editing will not accept
>a system that does not offer REAL-TIME effects. Waiting for effects to
>"RENDER" is ludicrous and it disrupts the flow of an edit session.
>Anyone who disagrees with this must ask themselves why TARGA, AVID,
>DPS, and all the "big players" in the NLE field are working feverishly
>to bring out REAL-TIME boards.
First of all, let me voice my disclaimer that I am a die-hard Amiga
fanatic who still uses an amiga2000 with a Toaster, but let's be
honest Myron. The tradeoff with the Toaster/Flyer's "realtime effects"
is in image quality. It's DVE's are horribly pixellated and virtually
unusable for high-profile broadcast projects. Realtime effects do
exist for many of the PC/Mac NLEs now, including Avid's MCXpress,
D-vision online 3.0, and Media100 le. Avid has also had realtime DVEs
on its Mac based Media Composers for quite awhile now, albeit at an
insanely high price.
I do often wonder though, why our 5 year old, $1,500 Toaster card can
do realtime 2D wipes, yet our $9,500 Targa2000RTX can only do realtime
dissolves and hardedged wipes using Avid MCXpress' $3,500 "realtime
option" (and only at a datarate /half/ that of a full video stream).
And it /still/ cant do realtime CG roll or crawl pages :(
>It amazes me to this day that the Toaster/Flyer has offered REAL-TIME
>effects and superb video quality, at a very reasonable cost, for more
>than two years. Why is it taking the Macintosh and PC-based industry
>so long to catch up. The answers are simple. For the Macintosh, as
>great as it is, NLE manufacturers are proceeding with some caution
>because of Apple's sagging sales performance.
Im not sure this is entirely true. Digital Media production is /still/
Macintosh dominated, and companies such as Avid have vociferously
reiterated thier continuing support for the Macintosh platform,
regardless of the fact that they have started PC ports of thier
products. And if you caught the "Quicktime Technologies Overview"
presentation at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference two weeks
ago (the videos of which are available for sale from
http://www.vwtapes.com), you would have seen that QuickTime 3.0 will
deliver the speed, quality and cross-platform compatibility that NLE
manufacturers can only cash in from, even if they only develop on the
Mac. This demonstration of QuickTime 3.0 completely blew me away, and
I no longer make fun of Quicktime as a result :) QT3.0's native
support for realtime SMPTE wipes and other more exciting effects was
particularly impressive.
>I have had the opportunity, in the last six months, to try many of the
>existing PC-based NLE systems first hand. Low-end systems like the
>MIRO DC-30 and FAST A/V Master offer very good value for the hobbyist
>or casual editor. They are not serious post-production systems because
>they don't offer REAL-TIME effects.
The only real-time effects that a "serious" postproduction NLE
/really/ needs are dissolves and basic 2D wipes. And you can get such
systems at about the same price as a fully loaded Flyer system. 90% of
the time, cuts and dissolves are all you ever use-- unless of course
you edit used car commercials or adult-videos :) -- and the speed of
the ever-evolving Pentium/PowerPC/Alpha processors makes rendering out
selected DVEs not bad at all, and they are a hundred times better
quality than the Toaster's realtime DVEs (which lest we forget is
/still/ based on the Motorola 680x0 series processor, which is dead
dead dead...)
>
>I've had enough first-hand experience with a variety of NLE systems to
>determine that my investment in the Toaster/Flyer was very wise. I've
>tried to rationalize why I should dump my AMIGA in favor of a PC- or
>Mac-based NLE. But so far I haven't found a competitively priced
>system that can displace it.
I have been doing some soul-searching about our recent purchase of a
Avid MCXpress NT system, and even though we paid twice as much for it
as we would have paid for a Flyer system, we are in no way regretful
of our purchase. The fact is, the Flyer's primary strength is in
"news" style editing, where there are mostly cuts and dissolves and no
multilayered effects and graphic compositing. I havent kept up with
Flyer development in the past 6-8 months so correct me if I'm wrong,
but afaik, the Flyer lacks many features that have come to be a
"given" on PC/Mac NLEs, such as batchcapture and redigitizing using
timecode and deck control, component video input/output, and the
ability to export/import standardized video CODECs for use with
programs such as Photoshop, Premiere and AfterAffects.
Again, dont get me wrong, I think the Flyer is a great system, but we
do television commercials and corporate/industrial videos, and most of
the things our clients want could not possibly be done on a
Toaster/Flyer in a reasonable amount of time or at the same quality as
a PC/Mac based NLE. I still wish we had a Flyer still around to crank
out the boring bread and butter jobs, like video slideshows (which
PC/Mac NLEs completely suck at), but the extra expense of a powerful
NLE on the "other" platforms usually ends up paying for itself in a
very short time, since most producers would rather work at a post
house with an Avid or Media100 than one with a Toaster Flyer.
$.02
--
mel matsuoka <melSPAMSUCKS@hawaiianKILLSPAMFORDimage+com>
Editor, Hawaiian Image Video Productions
Reply-to: line altered to foil spammers. Remove capital letters from
the above address & replace plus sign with a dot to reply via e-mail
Glenn Saunders
The mortal Mel Matsuoka wrote:
: honest Myron. The tradeoff with the Toaster/Flyer's "realtime effects"
: is in image quality. It's DVE's are horribly pixellated and virtually
: unusable for high-profile broadcast projects. Realtime effects do
SOME of the DVEs are pixellated. Not all. The bread and butter wipes,
dissolves, and push-pulls are not. Also realize that when other NLE's
render their DVE's they uncompress and then recompress the video, which
degrades the signal (just try re-jpegging a jpeg and watch the image
degrade). The Toaster/Flyer uses dual video streams and applies DVEs to
them ala automated A/B roll which is really the way to go with NLE, IMHO.
: I have been doing some soul-searching about our recent purchase of a
: Avid MCXpress NT system, and even though we paid twice as much for it
: as we would have paid for a Flyer system, we are in no way regretful
: of our purchase. The fact is, the Flyer's primary strength is in
: "news" style editing, where there are mostly cuts and dissolves and no
: multilayered effects and graphic compositing. I havent kept up with
: Flyer development in the past 6-8 months so correct me if I'm wrong,
: but afaik, the Flyer lacks many features that have come to be a
: "given" on PC/Mac NLEs, such as batchcapture and redigitizing using
: timecode and deck control, component video input/output, and the
: ability to export/import standardized video CODECs for use with
: programs such as Photoshop, Premiere and AfterAffects.
RenderFX gives you your layers. I've seen some impressive examples of
RenderFX work. Batch capture and redigitizing is available via AV8RPro+.
: Again, dont get me wrong, I think the Flyer is a great system, but we
: do television commercials and corporate/industrial videos, and most of
: the things our clients want could not possibly be done on a
: Toaster/Flyer in a reasonable amount of time or at the same quality as
: a PC/Mac based NLE. I still wish we had a Flyer still around to crank
The impressive examples of RenderFX work were doing corporate videos. I
myself did commercials for a law firm, and although there wasn't much
layering, many of them were hardly bread and butter. One made use of
every Toaster effect in its arsenal, from the old film look overlay, to
using a flyer clip as an image map sequece in a Lightwave animation, to
CG burnins, to Toaster DVEs.
It depends on how skilled the user is in maximizing a system like this,
and you have to be willing to try some of the 3rd party software.
Greg Zike
Mel Matsuoka wrote:
the Flyer lacks many features that have come to be a
> "given" on PC/Mac NLEs, such as batchcapture and redigitizing using
> timecode and deck control, component video input/output, and the
> ability to export/import standardized video CODECs for use with
> programs such as Photoshop, Premiere and AfterAffects.
All the above has been fixed except for the standardizing of codecs.
Batch Capture = Decision Maker or AV8R Pro
Timecode & Deck Control = AV8R Pro
Component Video I/O = Y/C Plus Card
TimeLine = AV8R Pro
After purchasing the above, you are still about $25k under an AVID
system. If the pixelated effects are that big of a deal, then render
them in Lightwave. The only effects that are pixelated are the DVE's,
and they could be recreated in Lightwave and rendered without the
blockiness.
I just edited an 1.5 hour project with 114 video clips, 21 dissolves, 20
wipes and DVE's and 10 audio clips in 9 hours. This includes digitizing
time (2+ hours) and the time it took to dump it to tape (1.5 hrs). I
would still be rendering on the PC and MAC. No thanks.
Greg Zike
Video Horizons
Ed Bennett
Hi Myron, hope things are going well for you! Saw your comments here
and didn't want to let you think that you could get away with this
propaganda!
Myron Achtman wrote:
>
> There is a fairly good variety of software for the AMIGA platform,
> from word-processors to image processors. However, most of these
> programs don't touch what's available on either the Mac or PC platform
> - with ONE exception. That is Non-Linear Editing (NLE).
>
> In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or
> Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer
> from NewTek, Inc. The only system, in today's NLE marketplace, that
> rivals the Video Toaster/Flyer is the DraCo Vision system from DraCo
> (http://www.draco.com/).
Ahem! Ummm.....anybody ever hear of the ////Fast Video Machine? Recall
any somewhat heated threads comparing Flyers and VMs? Seems that there
were just a couple... ok a few... alright many many areas in which the
VM outperformed the Flyer, using real time transitions and all! I'd be
happy to bring up the 2-3 page list of these features if anybody is
interested. ;-)
> You have to spend "big bucks" to get a Macintosh- or PC-based NLE that
> offers REAL-TIME effects. Anyone serious about editing will not accept
> a system that does not offer REAL-TIME effects. Waiting for effects to
> "RENDER" is ludicrous and it disrupts the flow of an edit session.
> Anyone who disagrees with this must ask themselves why TARGA, AVID,
> DPS, and all the "big players" in the NLE field are working feverishly
> to bring out REAL-TIME boards.
Excuse me, what do you mean by "Big Bucks?" As I recall, the VM (being
just one example of a PC based NLE that does real time effects) is price
competitive with the Flyer, offering far superior video quality and
professional features for equivalent (if not lower) pricing. In order
to come anywhere close to the power and flexability of the VM, you have
to add lots of third party widgets and software to the Flyer. Then
you'd be close, but still have a significantly inferior NLE system.
Even the VM Lite is superior.
Also, by your estimation I guess the folks at ILE (Industrial Light and
Magic) aren't serious about editing. After all, they make extremely
extensive use of AVID systems doing mostly rendered DVE's and offline
processing with virtually no real time editing.
Finally, have you ever heard of the Targa 2000 RTX? It's another PC
based card that does real time transitions. It's been out for almost a
year! They have a new one, the SDX, which does real time transitions
with a serial interface for DV (ya, DV: Something that the Flyer will
never do). I believe that there are now others out there with products
doing real time transitions. Do you suppose that all these companies
are still working "feverishly" to "catch up" with the mighty Flyer?
Bottom line: I think that there are serious editors that not only accept
but use NLE systems that primarily render DVE's. None of these editors
(including the gang at ILE) consider rendering to be "ludicrous". And,
I don't think that the vast majority of companies doing NLE systems are
working "feverishly" to introduce products with real time effects.
Perhaps you are unaware, DV is all the rage right now (putting these
guys yet another lightyear ahead of NewTek and their aging Flyer).
> It amazes me to this day that the Toaster/Flyer has offered REAL-TIME
> effects and superb video quality, at a very reasonable cost, for more
> than two years. Why is it taking the Macintosh and PC-based industry
> so long to catch up. The answers are simple. For the Macintosh, as
> great as it is, NLE manufacturers are proceeding with some caution
> because of Apple's sagging sales performance.
"Superb video quality"? Oh my, oh my, how our memories fade so very
quickly! Why, you yourself did the testing and reported to this very
newsgroup not long ago that the measly little $3500 Plum had better
video quality than the amazing Flyer (at more than twice the price).
And why shouldn't it, the Flyer is stuck dealing with composite video
and a narrow bandwidth. Let's just call it "adaquate video quality".
Also, I don't see any lack of investment into any Apple based platforms
when it comes to NLE. Don't you know that Media 100 has a real time NLE
on the Mac? Sure, it costs a bazillion dollars but doesn't that sound
like some sort of investment?
Gee, while we're on the subject of "investing in dying platforms", I've
noticed that NewTek has pulled the Lightwave plug on the Amiga
platform. I guess it's just not worth the investment anymore (told you
guys a year ago that they were going to do this!). Wonder how long it
will take for them to pull the Flyer plug as well. You know that
they're going to do it sooner or later.
> For the PC, vast amounts of money are being invested in an attempt to
> make an ass-backward architecture handle the throughput required to
> make NLE work. In the end, it won't matter what kind of Operating
> System (O/S) Microsoft dreams up because the "big players" will keep
> designing new boards until they wedge their ass-end into the PC
> architecture. Sure, given a 400 MHz microprocessor and 128 MB of RAM,
> I'll concede that the PC NLE will outperform my 25 MHz AMIGA equipped
> with 18 MB of RAM. Perhaps.
And why shouldn't they invest "vast amounts of money" into the PC?
Isn't this the logic that escaped NewTek? Why not invest in the world's
most popular computer platform? It just makes sense. No matter how
difficult it seems to be, you can't go wrong by creating an NLE system
that runs on the world's most popular computer platform. It would be
stupid to think otherwise. As for the performance comparison against an
Amiga...I just can't stop laughing!
> I have had the opportunity, in the last six months, to try many of the
> existing PC-based NLE systems first hand. Low-end systems like the
> MIRO DC-30 and FAST A/V Master offer very good value for the hobbyist
> or casual editor. They are not serious post-production systems because
> they don't offer REAL-TIME effects. They are also very difficult to
> configure as evidenced by the number of "chronic" postings in this
> newsgroup.
In spite of the fact that there are serious people using these low end
products for serious post production work, I have to agree that most
people don't consider them to be professional tools of the trade.
However, it's not for the reason you state (real time effects). It's a
matter of video quality and professional features. Still, I'd put any
of these systems up against a Flyer when it comes to DVE's and advanced
features (like layering). In fact, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if
video quality on these little sub $1000 cards was superior to that on
the Flyer (at least they can accept Y/C and process video in component
format).
> High-end systems from AVID and Data Translation make me DROOL, but I'm
> not prepared to invest as much as my house cost to buy an NLE system.
OOPS, you left out the mid-range systems! You know, that $3,000-$15,000
set of products (Plum, DPS PVR, etc.). These are the ones that produce
video that is clearly superior to the Flyer (by your own evaluation).
You know, the ones that aren't stuck in the dark ages of composite video
processing (like the Flyer). Ya, the ones that don't produce cheesey,
blocky, low end DVE's (like the Flyer does).
> I've had enough first-hand experience with a variety of NLE systems to
> determine that my investment in the Toaster/Flyer was very wise. I've
> tried to rationalize why I should dump my AMIGA in favor of a PC- or
> Mac-based NLE. But so far I haven't found a competitively priced
> system that can displace it.
Good for you. Isn't this what's important? Being happy with whatever
you own. Not putting down other people's systems with half truths and
misleading propaganda?
Ed Bennett
ejb at host primenet.com
Due to overwhelming spam email, you must
edit my "reply to" email address in order
to send me email. My user name is ejb and
my hostname is primenet.com
Mel Matsuoka
On Fri, 30 May 1997 10:32:55 -0500, Greg Zike <zi...@uiuc.edu> wrote:
>Mel Matsuoka wrote:
> the Flyer lacks many features that have come to be a
>> "given" on PC/Mac NLEs, such as batchcapture and redigitizing using
>> timecode and deck control, component video input/output, and the
>> ability to export/import standardized video CODECs for use with
>> programs such as Photoshop, Premiere and AfterAffects.
>
>All the above has been fixed except for the standardizing of codecs.
>
>Batch Capture = Decision Maker or AV8R Pro
>Timecode & Deck Control = AV8R Pro
>Component Video I/O = Y/C Plus Card
>TimeLine = AV8R Pro
>
>After purchasing the above, you are still about $25k under an AVID
>system.
Thats cool...third party amiga support comes thru once again! But are
you telling me that I can get a fully loaded Flyer system such as the
one you describe for between $1,000-$5,000? A fully loaded Avid
MCXPress NT system costs between $20,000-$27,000 (in our case, this
includes Dual PentiumPro200's, 16 gigs of UltraSCSI diskspace, 128
megs of RAM, Matrox Millenium w/4 megs, and the flexible Truevision
Targa2000RTX, which can be used with numerous other editing programs).
This gets you 3:1 compression, realtime dissolves, wipes and
Pictur-in-Picture effects (which btw, are NOT pixellated to hell like
the Toaster PiP). Plus you get the added benefit of having a kickass
graphics workstation (running Photoshop, FD Painter, Lightwave as well
as the newly released Adobe After Effects, which is reason enough to
get a PC/Mac system). I also believe that the new DVision 3.0 NLE
(which also uses the Targa board) is even more feature filled than the
MCX, at a much lower cost .
> If the pixelated effects are that big of a deal, then render
>them in Lightwave. The only effects that are pixelated are the DVE's,
>and they could be recreated in Lightwave and rendered without the
>blockiness.
Ha ha, thats a good one. Believe me, this is exactly what we used to
do before we got our PC/Avid. Setting up a Lightwave scene for each
transition effect is about as fun as a self-induced lobotomy. What
happens if your client wants to chenge the speed or style of the
transition? You're pretty much hosed using the "render it in
Lightwave" approach. Whereas with most PC/Mac NLEs, all you do is
change the settings of the DVE and rerender it. The "slowness" of this
render is NOTHING compared to the amount of time it would take redoing
the Lightwave scene and rerendering it on an Amiga. This is just a
fact.
>
>I just edited an 1.5 hour project with 114 video clips, 21 dissolves, 20
>wipes and DVE's and 10 audio clips in 9 hours. This includes digitizing
>time (2+ hours) and the time it took to dump it to tape (1.5 hrs). I
>would still be rendering on the PC and MAC. No thanks.
Again, im not disputing the fact that the Flyer is a great system that
can churn out projects extremely fast, however, my point is that the
tradeoff for this speed is in the quality of the effects. If your
clients aren't very demanding and find the blocky Toaster DVE's
acceptable (and mind you, I'm only referring to the Toasters *DVE's*,
not the 2D wipes), then the Flyer is more than adequate. However, if
your clients are expecting a finished product that looks as good as
everything else on TV, the Flyer just aint gonna cut it (unless its
all dissolves, cuts or wipes). The rendering time required to achieve
"broadcast quality" DVE's and compositing on low-priced PC/Mac NLE's
is certainly worth it in the end product.
$.04
Myron Achtman
>Tony <APi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
Hi Tony,
My impressions of the Plum are very favorable. I just wish it could
render effects in real time. Hopefully, Interactive Images is working
on a real time effects "engine".
Ed Bennett
Revo9 wrote:
> Feel free to hit me hard Amiga evangelists!
>
> People talk about how great the toaster/ amiga is, explain it to this
> videographer / mac person who has only played around breifly with a
> Toaster4000 once. What can it do besides video? What is under the hood?
> Get techy. How Much? (used & New) explain what each model 2k,3k,4k, can
> and cant do. Video or Non video related .Blow my mind. I know commodore is
> gone but if you still believe I want to know why.
"Propaganda" is about all you'll get. That's probably the best possible word
to describe the only "positive" things you'll hear about the Amiga. For
$2800, you can get a "has been" computer whose only remaining value is a few
patents that Gateway recently purchased rights to. It's truely a dino-box
with virtually no redeeming value when compared to what's available today for
A LOT LESS MONEY. The 68040 processor that the fastest Amiga uses has found
it's last practical use as an embeded controller in the lowest end laser
printers (HP LaserJet 5L printer, itself now being discontinued).
The same is true for the "amazing" Toaster/Flyer. For the same $7500 (plus
$2800 for the Amiga) it would cost you to get a new Toaster/Flyer, you can
put together a real NLE system that would kick it's butt all over the place.
If you can tolerate bare minimum broadcast quality video (SVHS quality), and
really ugly, blocky DVE's then pick up one of the many used Toaster/Flyer
systems that appear in this NG as well as rec.video.marketplace every single
day. They go for a mere fraction of their original cost.
The mantra of Toaster/Flyer advocates is "Real Time Transitions". They'll
try to make you believe that the Toaster/Flyer is the only reasonably priced
system with "Real Time Transitions" and that no self respecting video editor
can tolerate a system without "Real Time Transitions". The truth is that
there are systems on the market today that offer real time transitions with
much higher quality video at comparable prices. Also, you'll find all the
high end post houses using systems that render transitions. They will also
try to say that MJPEG processed video is much lower quality than the Flyer's
VTASC processed video. However, it's not even remotely true. Side by side
comparisons under controlled conditions using similar compression rates on
identical material has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that MJPEG based
cards produce superior video. You see, the Toaster/Flyer can only process
composite video and limits the bandwidth to 4.2 Mhz.
Their claims are just a bunch of mindless propaganda.
Ed Bennett
e...@primenet.com
Myron Achtman
>melo...@nospam.gov (Mel Matsuoka) wrote:
>I have been doing some soul-searching about our recent purchase of a
>Avid MCXpress NT system, and even though we paid twice as much for it
>as we would have paid for a Flyer system, we are in no way regretful
>of our purchase.
The AVID MCXpress is certainly a feature-rich NLE system that has
capabilities beyond the Toaster/Flyer. However, at twice the price of
a Toaster/Flyer, I would certainly expect these features. If your
business can justify the cost, MCXpress is a good investment.
>The fact is, the Flyer's primary strength is in
>"news" style editing, where there are mostly cuts and dissolves and no
>multilayered effects and graphic compositing.
Absolutely correct. It is simply not practical to do multilayered
effects with Lightwave. However, a new third party program called
RenderFX allows "layering" with short render times.
>I havent kept up with
>Flyer development in the past 6-8 months so correct me if I'm wrong,
>but afaik, the Flyer lacks many features that have come to be a
>"given" on PC/Mac NLEs, such as batchcapture and redigitizing using
>timecode and deck control, component video input/output, and the
>ability to export/import standardized video CODECs for use with
>programs such as Photoshop, Premiere and AfterAffects.
There are new third party programs that allow batch capture and
redigitizing as well as a time-line editing option. There are hardware
options that allow handling component video. BUT, there is nothing
practical for converting to standarized CODECs and no integration with
PC image processing programs. There is, however, ImageFX for the AMIGA
that integrates nicely with the Toaster/Flyer.
>Again, dont get me wrong, I think the Flyer is a great system, but we
>do television commercials and corporate/industrial videos, and most of
>the things our clients want could not possibly be done on a
>Toaster/Flyer in a reasonable amount of time or at the same quality as
>a PC/Mac based NLE. I still wish we had a Flyer still around to crank
>out the boring bread and butter jobs, like video slideshows (which
>PC/Mac NLEs completely suck at), but the extra expense of a powerful
>NLE on the "other" platforms usually ends up paying for itself in a
>very short time, since most producers would rather work at a post
>house with an Avid or Media100 than one with a Toaster Flyer.
>$.02
Is that US funds or Canadian? :-)
>--
>mel matsuoka <melSPAMSUCKS@hawaiianKILLSPAMFORDimage+com>
>Editor, Hawaiian Image Video Productions
>Reply-to: line altered to foil spammers. Remove capital letters from
>the above address & replace plus sign with a dot to reply via e-mail
Myron Achtman
>Ed Bennett <e...@primenet.com> wrote:
>The mantra of Toaster/Flyer advocates is "Real Time Transitions". They'll
>try to make you believe that the Toaster/Flyer is the only reasonably priced
>system with "Real Time Transitions" and that no self respecting video editor
>can tolerate a system without "Real Time Transitions". The truth is that
>there are systems on the market today that offer real time transitions with
>much higher quality video at comparable prices. Also, you'll find all the
>high end post houses using systems that render transitions. They will also
>try to say that MJPEG processed video is much lower quality than the Flyer's
>VTASC processed video. However, it's not even remotely true. Side by side
>comparisons under controlled conditions using similar compression rates on
>identical material has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that MJPEG based
>cards produce superior video. You see, the Toaster/Flyer can only process
>composite video and limits the bandwidth to 4.2 Mhz.
>Their claims are just a bunch of mindless propaganda.
>Ed Bennett
>e...@primenet.com
=================================================
Hello Ed:
In addition to the PLUM system, what other PC systems in the same
price range of the Toaster/Flyer would you recommend today? Can you
comment on the DraCo-Vision system?
Mel Matsuoka
On 31 May 1997 14:21:01 -0700, Ed Bennett <e...@primenet.com> wrote:
>"Propaganda" is about all you'll get. That's probably the best possible word
>to describe the only "positive" things you'll hear about the Amiga.
At least from you, Ed.
>For
>$2800, you can get a "has been" computer whose only remaining value is a few
>patents that Gateway recently purchased rights to. It's truely a dino-box
>with virtually no redeeming value when compared to what's available today for
>A LOT LESS MONEY.
Hmm...it's interesting that this "has been" computer, with an OS and
hardware older than Windows 3.11, is /still/ more efficient at
multitasking and memory usage than Mr. Bill's
joke-of-an-operating-system Windows95, and even NT4.0. This is just a
fact. Of course, one major problem with AmigaOS is its lack of native
virtual memory and memory protection, but there are third party
shareware programs (such as MCP) which take care of both of these
shortcomings.
But to say that the Amiga has "no redeeming value" is about as stupid
a statement that even you, Ed Bennett, could mutter. How in the hell
do you suppose this "dino box" has managed to defy Natural-selection
after all these years? The answer is simple: it has a superior
operating system and architecture which was years ahead of its time,
and is only now showing the scars of its lack of serious development
after the Commodore bankruptcy in '94.
>The 68040 processor that the fastest Amiga uses has found
>it's last practical use as an embeded controller in the lowest end laser
>printers (HP LaserJet 5L printer, itself now being discontinued).
You have once again exposed your ignorance of the Amiga with this
statement, Ed. The "fastest Amiga" utilizes the 68060 processor, which
may not exactly make the Pentium166+ and PowerPC family shake in thier
boots, but is still quite usable even for CPU intensive apps like
Lightwave. There are even people who actually make a living off of
'060 based Macintosh systems. The fact that we still use an '060 based
Amiga Lightwave system to actually MAKE MONEY on animation projects
(in addition to our Dual-PPro200 workstation) should be proof enough
that you have no idea what youre talking about, Ed. Of course I know
this wont matter to you...Ed Bennett couldnt /possibly/ be wrong about
his ideas about the amiga, could he?
>Also, you'll find all the
>high end post houses using systems that render transitions. They will also
>try to say that MJPEG processed video is much lower quality than the Flyer's
>VTASC processed video. However, it's not even remotely true.
I dont think thats what "they" mean by "lower quality". I think "they"
are referring to the fact that the VTASC codec has much more tolerable
artifacting than M-JPEG at lower resolutions.
>Side by side
>comparisons under controlled conditions using similar compression rates on
>identical material has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that MJPEG based
>cards produce superior video. You see, the Toaster/Flyer can only process
>composite video and limits the bandwidth to 4.2 Mhz.
I think what needs to be made clear in the
Flyer/vs-the-rest-of-the-world debate is that the VideoToaster and
Flyer has always been the favored system of "industrial"
videographers, where D1 or even broadcast BetaSP quality isn't a
requirement. I dont think even the most die-hard amiga zealot would
suggest that the Flyer can compete with an Avid Media Composer for
doing broadcast material, however not everyone can afford a $50,000
Avid, especially when all thats needed is UVW-betacamSP quality--which
regardless of what you may believe, Ed, *is* what a Flyer stream can
deliver to the naked eye. Of course you could get snotty about it and
bust out the waveform monitor to show the minute electronic
discrepancies of the Flyer signal vs. a BetaSP signal, but video
producers are there to satisfy the clients, and NOT nerdy broadcast
engineers. Virtually every producer and editor I know who has seen the
Flyer in action admits that produces very high quality video.
I myself would prefer to use our NT4.0 workstation with the Avid MCX
system, and would have limited use for a Flyer system now. But that
doesn't mean I cant admit that the Amiga/Toaster/Flyer still have very
valid and profitable uses.
>
>Their claims are just a bunch of mindless propaganda.
>
Ahhh! So THAT'S where you learned your tactics from!
aloha
Mel Matsuoka
On Fri, 30 May 1997 20:09:07 -0600, Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>Hi Myron, hope things are going well for you! Saw your comments here
>and didn't want to let you think that you could get away with this
>propaganda!
>
>Finally, have you ever heard of the Targa 2000 RTX? It's another PC
>based card that does real time transitions. It's been out for almost a
>year! They have a new one, the SDX, which does real time transitions
>with a serial interface for DV (ya, DV: Something that the Flyer will
>never do). I believe that there are now others out there with products
>doing real time transitions. Do you suppose that all these companies
>are still working "feverishly" to "catch up" with the mighty Flyer?
I wont let you get away with this, Ed :)
You make fun of the Flyer's poor video quality, and yet you wont own
up to the fact that the Targa2000RTX *CANNOT* perform realtime effects
at full bandwidth? In order to do realtime effects (at least on the
MCXpress) the data rate of the video stream must be at least half the
rate of the original clip. So at an original rate of 400k/frame, you
only get a-little-better-than-SVHS quality.
>Bottom line: I think that there are serious editors that not only accept
>but use NLE systems that primarily render DVE's. None of these editors
>(including the gang at ILE) consider rendering to be "ludicrous".
I'll agree with you here, just out of good faith :)
>Gee, while we're on the subject of "investing in dying platforms", I've
>noticed that NewTek has pulled the Lightwave plug on the Amiga
>platform. I guess it's just not worth the investment anymore (told you
>guys a year ago that they were going to do this!). Wonder how long it
>will take for them to pull the Flyer plug as well. You know that
>they're going to do it sooner or later.
Sure, Ed, but NewTek (unlike you) actually knows how great the Amiga
is as a platform, and has not completely pulled out the cord on the
amiga Lightwave and tossed it into the dumpster. Tim Jenison himself
has said that if a company like Gateway can get its shit together and
get the Amiga hardware updated to todays standards, they will continue
to develop the Amiga version of Lightwave--all it would take is a PPC
processor and PCI bus to get Lightwave back on the the Amiga. Of
course, I'm not holding my breath since we are happy with our NT
workstation. :)
>> I've had enough first-hand experience with a variety of NLE systems to
>> determine that my investment in the Toaster/Flyer was very wise. I've
>> tried to rationalize why I should dump my AMIGA in favor of a PC- or
>> Mac-based NLE. But so far I haven't found a competitively priced
>> system that can displace it.
>
>Good for you. Isn't this what's important? Being happy with whatever
>you own. Not putting down other people's systems with half truths and
>misleading propaganda?
Hmm...its amazing you don't see the irony in that statement, Ed. :)
Grim
In article <3391b2ce...@news.pixi.com>, melo...@nospam.gov says...
> On 31 May 1997 14:21:01 -0700, Ed Bennett <e...@primenet.com> wrote:
>
> >"Propaganda" is about all you'll get. That's probably the best possible word
> >to describe the only "positive" things you'll hear about the Amiga.
>
> At least from you, Ed.
>
> >For
> >$2800, you can get a "has been" computer whose only remaining value is a few
> >patents that Gateway recently purchased rights to. It's truely a dino-box
> >with virtually no redeeming value when compared to what's available today for
> >A LOT LESS MONEY.
>
> Hmm...it's interesting that this "has been" computer, with an OS and
> hardware older than Windows 3.11, is /still/ more efficient at
> multitasking and memory usage than Mr. Bill's
> joke-of-an-operating-system Windows95, and even NT4.0. This is just a
> fact.
A fact that is proved by? I'd like to see some examples to back up this
statement.
> Of course, one major problem with AmigaOS is its lack of native
> virtual memory and memory protection, but there are third party
> shareware programs (such as MCP) which take care of both of these
> shortcomings.
>
> But to say that the Amiga has "no redeeming value" is about as stupid
> a statement that even you, Ed Bennett, could mutter. How in the hell
> do you suppose this "dino box" has managed to defy Natural-selection
> after all these years? The answer is simple: it has a superior
> operating system and architecture which was years ahead of its time,
> and is only now showing the scars of its lack of serious development
> after the Commodore bankruptcy in '94.
Ed said 'virtually no redeeming value' -- not 'absolutely no redeeming
value'. There is a difference.
And how has the Amiga survived? People still use and write software for
the C64 but I wouldn't say that it's a viable platform to invest money
in. Amiga hasn't been a profitable venture for some time I'm sure. How
many companies are still developing software for Amiga? QuickPak is still
putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days? A report
that I saw several months ago stated that there had only been 6000 of
these boxes sold since their release. I've also seen Flyer systems for
sale in this group that were posted repeatedly for over two months --
that doesn't really indicate a high demand for the product.
Grim
J. Eric Chard
Mel Matsuoka wrote:
> >QuickPak is still
> >putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days? A report
> >that I saw several months ago stated that there had only been 6000 of
> >these boxes sold since their release.
>
> I dont know if this is true or not. However, marketshare is not the
> yardstick of a technology's quality.
The FACT that somebody--ANYbody-- is still putting together and
selling, at ANY level, a machine that hasn't had any serious technology
development in, what, five years? is a testimony to USEFULLNESS of the
Amiga platform.
Just imagine what the engineers could come up with today if they could
dump all the legacy stupidity of the PC platform.
> My point is NOT that the Amiga is "better" than current PC or Mac
> platforms. Clearly in numerous aspects it's not. My point is that the
> Amiga is /still/ a very useful platform, and not "dead" by any stretch
> of the imagination. The fact that a great OS such as NeXTStep is being
> revived as a part of Apple's Rhapsody platform shows to me that a
> "dead" OS can indeed recieve new life. The day that Gateway2000
> abandons further development of the Amiga as a desktop platform is the
> only day I could honestly declare the Amiga "dead".
Plenty of companies got started in video with a Toaster. When all
these highly touted NLE's approach the price performance of a Toaster
system they can pat themselves on the back. Of course, it's years later
too-- they SHOULD be BETTER.
--
***********************************************************************
**jeric@accessone - Synergy Productions/Synergy Graphix & Animation **
** Shooting, Gaffing, and Animation for the End of the Millenium **
************************* Seattle *************************************
Mel Matsuoka
On Sun, 1 Jun 1997 16:25:07 -0500, gr...@mindspring.com (Grim) wrote:
>> Hmm...it's interesting that this "has been" computer, with an OS and
>> hardware older than Windows 3.11, is /still/ more efficient at
>> multitasking and memory usage than Mr. Bill's
>> joke-of-an-operating-system Windows95, and even NT4.0. This is just a
>> fact.
>
>A fact that is proved by? I'd like to see some examples to back up this
>statement.
O.K. How about the fact that it doesnt require 16 megs of RAM just for
the OS to be happy (much less the apps that run on top of it), the OS
itself only needs about 2-3 megs. How about the fact that when I run
ImageFX and VideoToaster at the same time, I dont have to wait for the
damn OS to stop swapping to the HD (there /is/ no swapping) or redraw
the screen when I switch between them. How about the fact that I was
able to run Lightwave comfortably in 8 megs of FastRAM on a a2000? (We
have since put in 22 megs, and were still finding a way to use it all
up) I'm not really a programmer, so I can't really explain the nerdy
details of /why/ AmigaOS is more efficient than the Microsoft OS's, I
just know the difference from using both platforms every single damn
day. The only thing that keeps me from being a fanatical Amiga user
who ONLY uses Amigas is the platform's processor speed and lack of
competitive applications (i.e. Photoshop, AfterEffects etc).
>And how has the Amiga survived? People still use and write software for
>the C64 but I wouldn't say that it's a viable platform to invest money
>in. Amiga hasn't been a profitable venture for some time I'm sure.
>How
>many companies are still developing software for Amiga?
I wasn't talking about money, dude. I meant that the AmigaOS has
survived by the nature of the quality of its OS and hardware, just
like the Macintosh, which /also/ hasn't been a "profitable venture for
some time" either. The comparison to the C64 is only valid in the fact
that it is a testament to the loyalty and affinity of C64 users.
Nobody writes C64 software nowadays to make money, they do it purely
out of nostalgia and as an intellectual exercise (can you believe that
there is actually a TCP/IP stack and Web browser for the C-64? :)).
Whereas there are many companies like NewTek who are /still/ writing
software for the Amiga for the express purpose of making money. Open
up any Amiga magazine and you'd know this. clickBOOM!, for example, is
developing the official Amiga port of Myst. The fact that a $5-billion
a year company like Gateway could possibly want to have anything to do
with the Amiga (much less *publicly state* how great the platform is)
should be vindication enough of the platform.
>QuickPak is still
>putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days? A report
>that I saw several months ago stated that there had only been 6000 of
>these boxes sold since their release.
I dont know if this is true or not. However, marketshare is not the
yardstick of a technology's quality. Remember Microsoft Internet
Explorer when it first came out? Nobody ever imagined that that joke
of a web-browser could be as good as it is today, or come close to
overtaking Netscape's marketshare.
My point is NOT that the Amiga is "better" than current PC or Mac
platforms. Clearly in numerous aspects it's not. My point is that the
Amiga is /still/ a very useful platform, and not "dead" by any stretch
of the imagination. The fact that a great OS such as NeXTStep is being
revived as a part of Apple's Rhapsody platform shows to me that a
"dead" OS can indeed recieve new life. The day that Gateway2000
abandons further development of the Amiga as a desktop platform is the
only day I could honestly declare the Amiga "dead".
--
Grim
In article <339218c7...@news.pixi.com>, melo...@nospam.gov says...
> On Sun, 1 Jun 1997 16:25:07 -0500, gr...@mindspring.com (Grim) wrote:
>
> >> Hmm...it's interesting that this "has been" computer, with an OS and
> >> hardware older than Windows 3.11, is /still/ more efficient at
> >> multitasking and memory usage than Mr. Bill's
> >> joke-of-an-operating-system Windows95, and even NT4.0. This is just a
> >> fact.
> >
> >A fact that is proved by? I'd like to see some examples to back up this
> >statement.
>
> O.K. How about the fact that it doesnt require 16 megs of RAM just for
> the OS to be happy (much less the apps that run on top of it), the OS
> itself only needs about 2-3 megs. How about the fact that when I run
> ImageFX and VideoToaster at the same time, I dont have to wait for the
> damn OS to stop swapping to the HD (there /is/ no swapping) or redraw
> the screen when I switch between them. How about the fact that I was
> able to run Lightwave comfortably in 8 megs of FastRAM on a a2000? (We
> have since put in 22 megs, and were still finding a way to use it all
> up) I'm not really a programmer, so I can't really explain the nerdy
> details of /why/ AmigaOS is more efficient than the Microsoft OS's, I
> just know the difference from using both platforms every single damn
> day. The only thing that keeps me from being a fanatical Amiga user
> who ONLY uses Amigas is the platform's processor speed and lack of
> competitive applications (i.e. Photoshop, AfterEffects etc).
Smaller requirements to run the OS don't really equate to better
multitasking ability. The 96MB that I put into my PC cost little more
than the 16MB I put into my Amiga five years ago to make it useful at
doing graphics. You can't create a 30MB TIF with 2MB of chip RAM. When I
saw that it would cost me $1000 to get an 060, I jumped ship. The lack of
CPU speed and no Photoshop are the primary reasons I stopped using my
Amiga.
> >And how has the Amiga survived? People still use and write software for
> >the C64 but I wouldn't say that it's a viable platform to invest money
> >in. Amiga hasn't been a profitable venture for some time I'm sure.
> >How
> >many companies are still developing software for Amiga?
>
> I wasn't talking about money, dude. I meant that the AmigaOS has
> survived by the nature of the quality of its OS and hardware, just
> like the Macintosh, which /also/ hasn't been a "profitable venture for
> some time" either. The comparison to the C64 is only valid in the fact
> that it is a testament to the loyalty and affinity of C64 users.
> Nobody writes C64 software nowadays to make money, they do it purely
> out of nostalgia and as an intellectual exercise (can you believe that
> there is actually a TCP/IP stack and Web browser for the C-64? :)).
> Whereas there are many companies like NewTek who are /still/ writing
> software for the Amiga for the express purpose of making money. Open
> up any Amiga magazine and you'd know this. clickBOOM!, for example, is
> developing the official Amiga port of Myst. The fact that a $5-billion
> a year company like Gateway could possibly want to have anything to do
> with the Amiga (much less *publicly state* how great the platform is)
> should be vindication enough of the platform.
Nothing Gateway has said has impressed me very much. The first thing they
stated for their reasons for purchasing Amiga was to increase their
intellectual property. Gateway doesn't write code nor do they design
hardware. I will be very impressed if they can write an OS that will run
on a new architecture and require less than 1MB though. Still, that won't
make me go out and buy one until there are some very serious apps to run
in native code. As for porting Myst, who cares? If Adobe was porting
AfterEffects, that would mean something.
> >QuickPak is still
> >putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days? A report
> >that I saw several months ago stated that there had only been 6000 of
> >these boxes sold since their release.
>
> I dont know if this is true or not. However, marketshare is not the
> yardstick of a technology's quality. Remember Microsoft Internet
> Explorer when it first came out? Nobody ever imagined that that joke
> of a web-browser could be as good as it is today, or come close to
> overtaking Netscape's marketshare.
> My point is NOT that the Amiga is "better" than current PC or Mac
> platforms. Clearly in numerous aspects it's not. My point is that the
> Amiga is /still/ a very useful platform, and not "dead" by any stretch
> of the imagination.
It is dead if there are, relatively speaking, very few developers and
people aren't buying new machines. Just because it is useful for a few
things, mostly running a Flyer, doesn't make me want to go out and buy
one.
> The fact that a great OS such as NeXTStep is being
> revived as a part of Apple's Rhapsody platform shows to me that a
> "dead" OS can indeed recieve new life. The day that Gateway2000
> abandons further development of the Amiga as a desktop platform is the
> only day I could honestly declare the Amiga "dead".
Apple has a considerably larger marketshare than Amiga to begin with...
What Gateway has said is that they want to supervise the direction that
Amiga takes, not pour millions into R&D. We'll have to see what happens
in the future but I'd not hold my breath if I were you.
Grim
squ...@avidsports.com
In article <5mm0ll$s...@nntp02.primenet.com>,> : honest Myron. The tradeoff with the Toaster/Flyer's "realtime effects"
> : is in image quality. It's DVE's are horribly pixellated and virtually
> : unusable for high-profile broadcast projects. Realtime effects do
>
> dissolves, and push-pulls are not. Also realize that when other NLE's
> render their DVE's they uncompress and then recompress the video, which
> degrades the signal (just try re-jpegging a jpeg and watch the image
> degrade). The Toaster/Flyer uses dual video streams and applies DVEs to
> them ala automated A/B roll which is really the way to go with NLE, IMHO.
>
Just a quick note. MCXpress for NT only does one decompress/recompress
no matter how many layers are used in an effect. All of the effect
calculation is done in RAM on the first generation images from each
source, so you never get more than one decompress/compress on any render.
At high data-rates (>200k/frame) one decompress/compress cycle is very
hard to detect... With realtime effects (RTX), there is no render with
MCXpress (like the Toaster/Flyer) either for wipes, dissolve, alpha, pip
etc....
Steve Quinn
<<Clipped...>>
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Ed Bennett
Let me see if I can summarize the important points that Mel Matsuoka
wrote:
> I wont let you get away with this, Ed :)
1. You think I'm getting away with something by saying that the TARGA
2000 RTX is a PC based NLE system that does real time transitions, in
contradiction to Myron's claim:
Myron Achtman Claimed:
In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC
or
Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video
Toaster/Flyer
from NewTek, Inc. The only system, in today's NLE marketplace,
that
rivals the Video Toaster/Flyer is the DraCo Vision system from
DraCo.
Gee, I think I provided two examples, the TARGA 2000 RTX and the
////Fast Video Machine. Interesting that you didn't choose to comment
on my reference to the Video Machine. Instead, you chose to try to
shoot down the RTX saying:
> You make fun of the Flyer's poor video quality, and yet you wont own
> up to the fact that the Targa2000RTX *CANNOT* perform realtime effects
> at full bandwidth? In order to do realtime effects (at least on the
> MCXpress) the data rate of the video stream must be at least half the
> rate of the original clip. So at an original rate of 400k/frame, you
> only get a-little-better-than-SVHS quality.
Well, I don't recall refusing to own up to anything. In fact, I don't
think that data rates were in question here. In fact, you've said
nothing that invalidates my original argument: Myron is wrong because
there *ARE* other NLE systems in the same price class as the
Toaster/Flyer on the PC or Mac that outperform the Toaster/Flyer. I
provided two examples: The RTX and the VM. Maybe the RTX is a weak
example, but it doesn't change the validity of my argument. Myron is
still wrong.
On a side note: are you saying that you'd rather be using your
Toaster/Flyer instead of the MCXpress? Do you believe that the Flyer is
superior to the RTX (give me a break!)?
> >Bottom line: I think that there are serious editors that not only accept
> >but use NLE systems that primarily render DVE's. None of these editors
> >(including the gang at ILE) consider rendering to be "ludicrous".
>
> I'll agree with you here, just out of good faith :)
Good thing, you'd lose a huge amount of credibility in this group if you
didn't.
> Sure, Ed, but NewTek (unlike you) actually knows how great the Amiga
> is as a platform, and has not completely pulled out the cord on the
> amiga Lightwave and tossed it into the dumpster.
I didn't say anything about tossing Amiga Lightwave into the dumpster.
But, they did pull the plug. The cord IS completely pulled out at this
point in time. Whether it gets put back in is another story. The
official announcement said that there would be no new versions.
> Tim Jenison himself
> has said that if a company like Gateway can get its shit together and
> get the Amiga hardware updated to todays standards, they will continue
> to develop the Amiga version of Lightwave--all it would take is a PPC
> processor and PCI bus to get Lightwave back on the the Amiga. Of
> course, I'm not holding my breath since we are happy with our NT
> workstation. :)
Good thing that you're not holding your breath. Gateway has simply
purchased some intellectual property and assets from *BANKRUPTCY*
proceedings (i.e.: yet another company goes down the tubes while trying
to make the Amiga fly). It happens all the time. They got themselves a
bunch of stuff for pennys on the dollar. In the official press release
it said:
"The company [AMIGA International] will operate as a separate
business
unit and retain its current president, Petro Tyschtschenko, who
will work
to develop new products for the Amiga market."
This says nothing about Gateway developing a new PPC based PCI version
of the Amiga. In fact, it says nothing about Gateway being involved at
all in any Amiga development. It's reasonable for them to expect the
"Amiga division" to turn a profit and so they will probably get involved
at the P&L level. However, by not changing any of the management at the
top, Gateway is essentially indicating a belief that the current team
with their current plans can pull it off.
> >Good for you. Isn't this what's important? Being happy with whatever
> >you own. Not putting down other people's systems with half truths and
> >misleading propaganda?
>
> Hmm...its amazing you don't see the irony in that statement, Ed. :)
Oh, but I do! I didn't make the claims putting down other's systems, I
just refuted them, showing them to be lies and revealing the truth.
--
Ed Bennett
Myron Achtman wrote:
> Hello Ed:
>
> In addition to the PLUM system, what other PC systems in the same
> price range of the Toaster/Flyer would you recommend today? Can you
> comment on the DraCo-Vision system?
>
I haven't seen a DraCo-Vision system so I can't comment on that. I
recently did some comparison testing between the Plum (what I have) and
the DPS PVR. I'd have to say that the PVR is pretty darn impressive for
the money. Both the Plum and the PVR run less than half the cost of a
Toaster/Flyer. If you absolutely had to have real time transitions,
then I'd recommend the ////Fast Video Machine with Dual DPR. Price is
comparable to an equivalently configured Toaster/Flyer but has lots of
significant advantages (like component video quality).
--
Ed Bennett
ejb at host primenet.com
Home of the TS-Aligner
http://www.primenet.com/~ejb
Ed Bennett
Mel Matsuoka wrote:
>
> On 31 May 1997 14:21:01 -0700, Ed Bennett <e...@primenet.com> wrote:
>
> >"Propaganda" is about all you'll get. That's probably the best possible word
> >to describe the only "positive" things you'll hear about the Amiga.
>
> At least from you, Ed.
Oh, come on Mel. You don't expect me to say anything positive about the
Amiga do you?
> >For
> >$2800, you can get a "has been" computer whose only remaining value is a few
> >patents that Gateway recently purchased rights to. It's truely a dino-box
> >with virtually no redeeming value when compared to what's available today for
> >A LOT LESS MONEY.
>
> Hmm...it's interesting that this "has been" computer, with an OS and
> hardware older than Windows 3.11, is /still/ more efficient at
> multitasking and memory usage than Mr. Bill's
> joke-of-an-operating-system Windows95, and even NT4.0. This is just a
> fact. Of course, one major problem with AmigaOS is its lack of native
> virtual memory and memory protection, but there are third party
> shareware programs (such as MCP) which take care of both of these
> shortcomings.
Depends on what you mean by "more efficient". The "fact" that you can
get a bare-bones system up on less memory doesn't mean anything to me if
you are virtually (ie: it's not practical, I didn't say impossible)
incapable of rendering complex transitions.
"Mr. Bill's" "joke-of-an-operating-system" (as you call it) made more
money in the first day of sales than Amiga will ever make through the
rest of eternity. Now that's a joke I can laugh at! It provides
virtual memory, memory protection, device independance, and a whole host
of "real" operating system features right out of the box. It has a
massive and colossol software support base, hundreds of times the size
of AmigaOS. There was a time, long ago, when the Amiga was (repeat:
WAS) revolutionary. NOW IT'S A DINO-BOX.
> But to say that the Amiga has "no redeeming value" is about as stupid
> a statement that even you, Ed Bennett, could mutter.
I must remind you that I said "virtually no redeeming value". The
stupidity was in the interpretation, not the statement.
> How in the hell
> do you suppose this "dino box" has managed to defy Natural-selection
> after all these years? The answer is simple: it has a superior
> operating system and architecture which was years ahead of its time,
> and is only now showing the scars of its lack of serious development
> after the Commodore bankruptcy in '94.
The "answer" is quite a bit more simple than you think. The "dino-box"
has managed to survive natural selection the same way that any other
inadequate species does: Wacko-Fanatical fringe-lunatic people
artificially protect it against forces that would naturally cause it's
extinction. If the Amiga truely had redeeming qualities that made it
competitive in TODAY'S MARKETPLACE, then why has it taken such
monumental intervention through several bankruptcies just to keep it
*BARELY* alive?
> >The 68040 processor that the fastest Amiga uses has found
> >it's last practical use as an embeded controller in the lowest end laser
> >printers (HP LaserJet 5L printer, itself now being discontinued).
>
> You have once again exposed your ignorance of the Amiga with this
> statement, Ed. The "fastest Amiga" utilizes the 68060 processor, which
> may not exactly make the Pentium166+ and PowerPC family shake in thier
> boots, but is still quite usable even for CPU intensive apps like
> Lightwave.
Oh, a million pardons for this monumental mistake! I was merely typing
off the top of my head, not bothering to remember that there is a $1000
upgrade for the A4000 which allows you to swap out this sub $50
processor chip, thus providing a whopping 50% performance improvment
(merely 1000% slower than a similiarly priced Pentium system). Please
forgive my ignorance but I think you'll agree that the 68000 series of
processors is very obsolete and has been for quite some time. In fact,
I tried to track down the price of an '060 processor only to find that
even Fry's Electronics in the Bay Area discontinued them long ago.
> There are even people who actually make a living off of
> '060 based Macintosh systems. The fact that we still use an '060 based
> Amiga Lightwave system to actually MAKE MONEY on animation projects
> (in addition to our Dual-PPro200 workstation) should be proof enough
> that you have no idea what youre talking about, Ed. Of course I know
> this wont matter to you...Ed Bennett couldnt /possibly/ be wrong about
> his ideas about the amiga, could he?
There are people that make money with four function calculators. People
make money driving '74 Pinto's. People make money on old IBM XT's.
I've even talked to a person that is still using a TRS-80 to make money
and I'll bet that there's some idiot out there making money with a
Comode-ore 64! Big Deal! Only an idiot would waste $2800+ on a new
Amiga today to render animations using Lightwave. Just think how many
times faster it would go if you took that same $2800+ and invested it in
a Pentium system (minutes versus days)! Not to mention the fact that
you'd be able to get future upgrades to Lightwave. The mere existance
of of these vastly more powerful systems at equivalent and lower prices
makes the Amiga "VIRTUALLY" useless. It's a VALUE statement. Would you
pay $2800 for a 80486-66? Absoluetly not! Then why pay that much for
an equivalently powered Amiga? To run a Toaster/Flyer? GEEZ, mistake
upon mistake!
> >Also, you'll find all the
> >high end post houses using systems that render transitions. They will also
> >try to say that MJPEG processed video is much lower quality than the Flyer's
> >VTASC processed video. However, it's not even remotely true.
>
> I dont think thats what "they" mean by "lower quality". I think "they"
> are referring to the fact that the VTASC codec has much more tolerable
> artifacting than M-JPEG at lower resolutions.
I've actually done the direct "side by side" comparison. I'd rather
have MJPEG. Also, we're not just talking about lower "resolutions" (I
think you mean to say "higher compression ratios"). First of all, VTASC
only operates on a composite analog sighal, encoding all the standard
composite video artifacts (dot crawl, cross chroma, cross luma, etc.).
Second, VTASC begins by limiting the bandwidth of the composite analog
signal to 4.2 MHz, eliminating high frequency luma detail (UGH!). Then
it digitizes the remaining signal and uses a Huffman encoding (a 50 year
old data compression algorithm). If the resulting frame rate isn't low
enough yet, then VTASC starts to throw out data by converting lower
occurance values with higher occurance values (adding noise). The
results look like second generation tape noise.
For the same price you can get a component based NLE system that does
not fall prey to composite video artifacts, does not limit input
bandwidth, and uses a modern image compression algorithm that doesn't
add visible noise at comparable data rates.
> >Side by side
> >comparisons under controlled conditions using similar compression rates on
> >identical material has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that MJPEG based
> >cards produce superior video. You see, the Toaster/Flyer can only process
> >composite video and limits the bandwidth to 4.2 Mhz.
>
> I think what needs to be made clear in the
> Flyer/vs-the-rest-of-the-world debate is that the VideoToaster and
> Flyer has always been the favored system of "industrial"
> videographers, where D1 or even broadcast BetaSP quality isn't a
> requirement. I dont think even the most die-hard amiga zealot would
> suggest that the Flyer can compete with an Avid Media Composer for
> doing broadcast material, however not everyone can afford a $50,000
> Avid, especially when all thats needed is UVW-betacamSP quality--which
> regardless of what you may believe, Ed, *is* what a Flyer stream can
> deliver to the naked eye. Of course you could get snotty about it and
> bust out the waveform monitor to show the minute electronic
> discrepancies of the Flyer signal vs. a BetaSP signal, but video
> producers are there to satisfy the clients, and NOT nerdy broadcast
> engineers. Virtually every producer and editor I know who has seen the
> Flyer in action admits that produces very high quality video.
Trust me, there are some die hard Amiga/Toaster/Flyer zealots here in
the newsgroup that believe the stupid "lossless D2 quality video" crap
and claim perfect reproduction of BVW Beta SP.
I've heard all the stupid "naked eye" nonsense. It comes mostly from
people that haven't even done the comparison. Show me a person that
can't tell the difference between component video and composite video
and I'll show you someone that can't see the TV. The difference between
Beta SP, even UVW, and the Flyer output is vast. The side by side
comparisons that we did last Summer were recorded to SVHS tape. When
viewed on my studio monitor the difference between Flyer output and Beta
SP, even after transfer to SVHS was absolutely plain as day. So, I took
the tape to my living room and played it on a consumer deck using a
consumer TV set to view it. The difference was still plain as day (just
not quite as pronounced). I can only conclude that you make this
completely absurd claim because you've never actually compared the two,
or perhaps your eyesight is bad, or maybe you do all your editing on
cheepie little $128 composite only TV sets. In any case, you're not
talking to someone that hasn't done their homework in this area and I
won't be fooled for even a second. Plain and simple: it's just stupid
nonsense.
> I myself would prefer to use our NT4.0 workstation with the Avid MCX
> system, and would have limited use for a Flyer system now. But that
> doesn't mean I cant admit that the Amiga/Toaster/Flyer still have very
> valid and profitable uses.
GEEZ! After all this you're willing to admit that you actually prefer
the Avid MCX and that the Flyer is of limited use to you. Just stop and
think for a second. What I'm saying isn't all that far off: given that
there are much better systems available at comparable prices the Amiga
and the Toaster/Flyer are virtually useless. NOT useless in an absolute
sense. Useless compared to other things that are available. It makes
no sense for someone to buy either of these new because they wouldn't
provide anywhere near the best price/performance value.
> >Their claims are just a bunch of mindless propaganda.
> >
>
> Ahhh! So THAT'S where you learned your tactics from!
No, Mel, I don't think so.
--
Ed Bennett
ejb at host primenet.com
Due to overwhelming spam email, you must
Tony
>Oh, come on Mel. You don't expect me to say anything positive about
>the Amiga do you?
You never have or will. You "hate" the Amiga for some perverse reason.
>"Mr. Bill's" "joke-of-an-operating-system" (as you call it) made more
>money in the first day of sales than Amiga will ever make through the
>rest of eternity. Now that's a joke I can laugh at! It provides
>virtual memory, memory protection, device independance, and a whole
>host of "real" operating system features right out of the box.
And lemmings jump off the cliffs in thousands. I guess that means it's
ok and healthy to do it (you Wintel lemming you...).
> > But to say that the Amiga has "no redeeming value" is about as
> >stupid a statement that even you, Ed Bennett, could mutter.
Ed is known for that.
>I must remind you that I said "virtually no redeeming value". The
>stupidity was in the interpretation, not the statement.
Webster' Collegiate; virtually 1. almost entirely; 2. for all practical
purposes. So here again you are showing your bias and how uninformed
you are.
>The "answer" is quite a bit more simple than you think. The "dino-box"
> has managed to survive natural selection the same way that any other
> inadequate species does: Wacko-Fanatical fringe-lunatic people
> artificially protect it against forces that would naturally cause it's
> extinction. If the Amiga truely had redeeming qualities that made it
> competitive in TODAY'S MARKETPLACE, then why has it taken such
> monumental intervention through several bankruptcies just to keep it
> *BARELY* alive?
Showing ignorance again. It is the MISmanagement of Commodore (ever do a
history study of how it happened? I think not, inspite of how many times
you were told before and seem to conviently forget). Escom had
overextended themselves plus OTHER bad investments (not the purchase of
Amiga) the caused them to go down too. You pass off what you say as
being factual, when in reality it is not (and I wont resort to the name
calling that you are so good at when you are shown you are wrong).
>Oh, a million pardons for this monumental mistake! I was merely typing
>off the top of my head, not bothering to remember that there is a $1000
> upgrade for the A4000 which allows you to swap out this sub $50
> processor chip, thus providing a whopping 50% performance improvment
> (merely 1000% slower than a similiarly priced Pentium system).
See what happens when you think? Shown you are wrong AGAIN. You have to
CONSTANTLY be corrected because you "think off the top of your head". If
I were you, I would avoid that. You know that it further ruins your
credibility.
>I've even talked to a person that is still using a TRS-80 to make money
>and I'll bet that there's some idiot out there making money with a
>Comode-ore 64! Big Deal! Only an idiot would waste $2800+ on a new
>Amiga today to render animations using Lightwave. Just think how many
>times faster it would go if you took that same $2800+ and invested it
>in a Pentium system (minutes versus days)! Not to mention the fact
> you'd be able to get future upgrades to Lightwave. The mere existance
> of of these vastly more powerful systems at equivalent and lower
>makes the Amiga "VIRTUALLY" useless. It's a VALUE statement. Would you
> pay $2800 for a 80486-66? Absoluetly not! Then why pay that much for
> an equivalently powered Amiga? To run a Toaster/Flyer? GEEZ, mistake
> upon mistake!
See what I mean about name calling? I learned a long time ago about
people that resort to that. See how demeaning you are? And you expect
anyone to listen to you? Really now. If you don't have what Ed says you
should have or use, you are and idiot. Thus speaks Mr Ed (remember the
horse????). Gee... surprised you are still out there. But then you live
for this type of stuff. Otherwise you are silent in this newsgroup.
> Trust me, there are some die hard Amiga/Toaster/Flyer zealots here in
> the newsgroup that believe the stupid "lossless D2 quality video" crap
> and claim perfect reproduction of BVW Beta SP.
Trust you? Never. And... who are those out there that actually claim
this? I haven't read it in this newsgroup. I read this group everyday
and have seen no one saying it.
Tony
> Ed said 'virtually no redeeming value' -- not 'absolutely no redeeming
> value'. There is a difference.
Gee.. another anti-Amiga person heard from. Read my reply to Ed on
definition of "virtually". You guys are just playing a word game. We
know exactly what you mean. Remember. Us Amiga owners are far ahead of
you guys. Remember, we had what you are just getting YEARS ago
(remember, we went thru all this before).
> And how has the Amiga survived? People still use and write software
> for the C64 but I wouldn't say that it's a viable platform to invest
> money in.
According to who... you?!?!? What credentials do you have to make a
statement like this?
> Amiga hasn't been a profitable venture for some time I'm sure. How
> many companies are still developing software for Amiga? QuickPak is
> still putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days?
Again.. according to YOU?!?!? Who died and left you king? I would like
to see some facts sir. And if QuickPak is putting them together, they
MUST be selling them and making money doing it. But I guess that escapes
you. You and Ed determind what is viable. What is really profitable. Who
are idiots.
> Grim
You certainly are.
Tony
> To my eye that the Flyer HQ5 footage from a UVW1800 BetaSP is
> "virtually" indistinguisable from the original; (if you look at it
> long enough you can tell- but not easily).
Rob... you asked for it. You know that Ed will say that you are blind
and Grim will repeat it after Ed says it.
Grim
In article <339581...@ix.netcom.com>, APi...@ix.netcom.com says...
> > Ed said 'virtually no redeeming value' -- not 'absolutely no redeeming
> > value'. There is a difference.
>
> Gee.. another anti-Amiga person heard from. Read my reply to Ed on
> definition of "virtually". You guys are just playing a word game. We
> know exactly what you mean. Remember. Us Amiga owners are far ahead of
> you guys. Remember, we had what you are just getting YEARS ago
> (remember, we went thru all this before).
What you think it means, and what it actually does are two different
things, even though you took the trouble to look it up in a dictionary.
Is there a difference between "absolutely" and "almost entirely"? I guess
not where you come from. If you had read the post you were replying to,
you would have seen you would had seen that I'm a former Amiga user (89-
95), I doubt you've ever been "far ahead" of me in any capacity.
> > And how has the Amiga survived? People still use and write software
> > for the C64 but I wouldn't say that it's a viable platform to invest
> > money in.
>
> According to who... you?!?!? What credentials do you have to make a
> statement like this?
What credentials do I need to see that Amigas are rarely used any longer?
Please give me some examples, other than using a Toaster/Flyer, for a
graphics/video professional to use an Amiga. The CPU is slow, it has slow
graphics and 8 bit audio. Sure you can increase the specs by adding on
boards but the performance still lags behind what you can get, for
similar cash -- if not cheaper, on other platforms. The cutting edge of
current Amiga technology is rather dull and rusty.
> > Amiga hasn't been a profitable venture for some time I'm sure. How
> > many companies are still developing software for Amiga? QuickPak is
> > still putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days?
> Again.. according to YOU?!?!? Who died and left you king? I would like
> to see some facts sir. And if QuickPak is putting them together, they
> MUST be selling them and making money doing it. But I guess that escapes
> you. You and Ed determind what is viable. What is really profitable. Who
> are idiots.
What facts would you like to see? I already posted that I saw how
incredibly small the numbers of A4000Ts sold were. Who cares if QuickPak
is making Amigas? I know people that custom build computers and make a
living, one at a time. How big is QuickPak anyway? Three, five, ten
employees? Even NewTek has dropped Lightwave development for Amiga. Do
you need a nail driven into your skull before you see the Light?
Grim
Grim
In article <339582...@ix.netcom.com>, APi...@ix.netcom.com says...
viable professional platform -- nonsense.
Grim
Ed Bennett
Tony wrote:
>
> > Ed said 'virtually no redeeming value' -- not 'absolutely no redeeming
> > value'. There is a difference.
>
> Gee.. another anti-Amiga person heard from. Read my reply to Ed on
> definition of "virtually". You guys are just playing a word game. We
> know exactly what you mean. Remember. Us Amiga owners are far ahead of
> you guys. Remember, we had what you are just getting YEARS ago
> (remember, we went thru all this before).
Choke, cough, cough, wheez, choke,....please, this is just too much!
"Us Amiga owners ARE far ahead of you guys." Choke, cough, choke,
wheez! Pardon me for saying so but if you pull your head out long
enough to recognize reality, you'll realize that what WE have today, you
Amiga owners WILL NEVER HAVE, EVER!
<snip>
> > Amiga hasn't been a profitable venture for some time I'm sure. How
> > many companies are still developing software for Amiga? QuickPak is
> > still putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days?
> Again.. according to YOU?!?!? Who died and left you king? I would like
> to see some facts sir. And if QuickPak is putting them together, they
> MUST be selling them and making money doing it. But I guess that escapes
> you. You and Ed determind what is viable. What is really profitable. Who
> are idiots.
Again, your head must be current lodged in such a way as to prevent you
from seeing reality. I'd say that the bankruptcy courts have given us a
very clear picuture of of the viability of the Amiga. You might argue
over one bankruptcy. Two might cause you some serious doubt. However,
when it comes to the Amiga we're way beyond any slightest shadow of a
doubt! How many times does a product line have to be bailed out before
you'll begin to doubt it's viability? Three, four, five?
Ed Bennett
Tony wrote:
>
> >Oh, come on Mel. You don't expect me to say anything positive about
> >the Amiga do you?
>
Gee, you know me well enough to say that I "hate" the Amiga? And you
have carefully discerned that it is due to a "perverse reason"? I'll
let you in on a little secret. I don't hate the Amiga. I hate
ignorance, especially when the ignorant use lies to try to attract
others into being equally ignorant. There's nothing perverse about
hating ignorance and it's propagation. There is something perverse
about maintaining ignorance and trying to convince others to join you.
> >"Mr. Bill's" "joke-of-an-operating-system" (as you call it) made more
> >money in the first day of sales than Amiga will ever make through the
> >rest of eternity. Now that's a joke I can laugh at! It provides
> >virtual memory, memory protection, device independance, and a whole
> >host of "real" operating system features right out of the box.
>
> And lemmings jump off the cliffs in thousands. I guess that means it's
> ok and healthy to do it (you Wintel lemming you...).
There are many operating systems available on many platforms. Some
better than the Windows collection and some worse. My comment has
nothing at all to do with what is the best. I used a bit of humor to
get a point across. Something that generates billions of dollars in
revenue is NO JOKE. If you had a product that generated billions in
revenue you wouldn't call it a joke. If you had something that has
barely managed to stay alive even with the heroic efforts of die hard
fanatics and has been through multiple bankruptcies you might call it a
joke. When you compare that to a very successful multi-billion dollar
product I call it real big time JOKE!
> > > But to say that the Amiga has "no redeeming value" is about as
> > >stupid a statement that even you, Ed Bennett, could mutter.
>
> Ed is known for that.
>
> >I must remind you that I said "virtually no redeeming value". The
> >stupidity was in the interpretation, not the statement.
>
> Webster' Collegiate; virtually 1. almost entirely; 2. for all practical
> purposes. So here again you are showing your bias and how uninformed
> you are.
Thanks for backing up my point with a Webster definition. It fits my
statement perfectly, describing exactly what I intended to convey.
"Virtually no redeeming value", "almost entirely without value", "for
all practiacl purposes: useless". It's not absulutely useless. Even I
could find uses for it ;-). As a computer system, when compared to
modern systems, it has virtually no redeeming value.
> >The "answer" is quite a bit more simple than you think. The "dino-box"
> > has managed to survive natural selection the same way that any other
> > inadequate species does: Wacko-Fanatical fringe-lunatic people
> > artificially protect it against forces that would naturally cause it's
> > extinction. If the Amiga truely had redeeming qualities that made it
> > competitive in TODAY'S MARKETPLACE, then why has it taken such
> > monumental intervention through several bankruptcies just to keep it
> > *BARELY* alive?
>
> Showing ignorance again. It is the MISmanagement of Commodore (ever do a
> history study of how it happened? I think not, inspite of how many times
> you were told before and seem to conviently forget). Escom had
> overextended themselves plus OTHER bad investments (not the purchase of
> Amiga) the caused them to go down too. You pass off what you say as
> being factual, when in reality it is not (and I wont resort to the name
> calling that you are so good at when you are shown you are wrong).
The mismanagement theory can work through one bankrupcy. Perhaps you
can stretch it through two. You'd be saying that two companies in a row
managed to miss the boat entirely. Three? Not likely. Four? Geez,
what are the chances that four completely separate and independantly
managed companies could just happen to screw up and entirely miss the
value that you Amiga fanatics seem to think is absolutely plain as day?
NOBODY HAS BEEN ABLE TO MAKE A SUCCESSFUL GO AT MARKETING THE AMIGA.
Does that tell you ANYTHING?
Even your explanation, when followed to it's logical conclusion doesn't
cast a favorable light on the Amiga. Think about it. The only
companies that have been willing to try to resurrect the Amiga haven't
been very financially savvy. Your claim is that they were fiscal
idiots, making bad investments that caused their demise. Also, are you
trying to say that wiser, more fiscally responsible companies just can't
seem to recognize the great value of the Amiga? In the last attempt,
financing could not be obtained as even the bank refused to fund such
folly. Was this bank clueless or was the risk just plain unreasonable?
Now, before you cite Gateway I want to remind you that they have not
promised to resurrect the Amiga. They simply purchased a bunch of
intellectual property from bankruptcy proceedings at a real bargain.
They are leaving the current operation alone, including all the current
management.
> >Oh, a million pardons for this monumental mistake! I was merely typing
> >off the top of my head, not bothering to remember that there is a $1000
> > upgrade for the A4000 which allows you to swap out this sub $50
> > processor chip, thus providing a whopping 50% performance improvment
> > (merely 1000% slower than a similiarly priced Pentium system).
>
> See what happens when you think? Shown you are wrong AGAIN. You have to
> CONSTANTLY be corrected because you "think off the top of your head". If
> I were you, I would avoid that. You know that it further ruins your
> credibility.
So, what are you saying here? Should I be like you and not think? You
would advocate not thinking if you were me? If you were me, you
wouldn't be able to improve on what I do by thinking? Hmmm....This
explains a lot! Well, having actually admitted an error on one small
detail (processor version number) before the mighty Amiga fanatics, I'm
now branded for life, and will never be able to recover from such an
embarrassing and monumental mistake. This will now go down in history
to be recalled each and every time I make a valid and severely damaging
point against the Amiga. Discredit the messenger no matter how valid
the message is, right? That's ad-hominum ("against the man"). It's a
classic FALSE argument. Sorry you have no answer to my statements. I'm
sorry that the only reply you can make is to try to make me look bad.
Is a new A4000 $2800? Is the 68060 upgrade $1000? Isn't the resulting
computer system still incredibly slow when compared to current Pentium
systems at similiar ($3800) prices? ANSWER THE POINTS!
> >I've even talked to a person that is still using a TRS-80 to make money
> >and I'll bet that there's some idiot out there making money with a
> >Comode-ore 64! Big Deal! Only an idiot would waste $2800+ on a new
> >Amiga today to render animations using Lightwave. Just think how many
> >times faster it would go if you took that same $2800+ and invested it
> >in a Pentium system (minutes versus days)! Not to mention the fact
> > you'd be able to get future upgrades to Lightwave. The mere existance
> > of of these vastly more powerful systems at equivalent and lower
> >makes the Amiga "VIRTUALLY" useless. It's a VALUE statement. Would you
> > pay $2800 for a 80486-66? Absoluetly not! Then why pay that much for
> > an equivalently powered Amiga? To run a Toaster/Flyer? GEEZ, mistake
> > upon mistake!
>
> See what I mean about name calling? I learned a long time ago about
> people that resort to that. See how demeaning you are? And you expect
> anyone to listen to you? Really now. If you don't have what Ed says you
> should have or use, you are and idiot. Thus speaks Mr Ed (remember the
> horse????). Gee... surprised you are still out there. But then you live
> for this type of stuff. Otherwise you are silent in this newsgroup.
Ad hominum. Notice here how he doesn't address a single point that I
made. There are absolutely no arguments to refute my points. This is
simply a very straight forward attack against my person. Ad hominum.
The theory is that if you attack me then you cast doubt on what I say.
Too bad I don't fall for this stupid and ignorant crap. ANSWER THE
POINTS OR SHUT UP.
> > Trust me, there are some die hard Amiga/Toaster/Flyer zealots here in
> > the newsgroup that believe the stupid "lossless D2 quality video" crap
> > and claim perfect reproduction of BVW Beta SP.
>
> Trust you? Never. And... who are those out there that actually claim
> this? I haven't read it in this newsgroup. I read this group everyday
> and have seen no one saying it.
Every day since when? Last year I de-bunked a whole batch of them. One
guy used a BVW-75 (a $60K Beta SP deck) and claimed "no difference"
between Flyer output and Beta SP. Maybe his name would ring a bell: Ray
Cronise of ProWave. Ever heard of him? I finally got him to admit (in
private email) that he didn't even have a TV set that would do S-video
let alone a real studio monitor that would do component video. It only
came out after I challenged him several times to just try it (he claimed
to be one of these "to the naked eye", "only the big picture matters"
guys). Myron Achtman also started out repeating the mantra until he
*ACTUALLY* did the side by side testing and honestly reported the
results to this group (my hat's still off to you Myron!). Deja News
claims 15 occurances of the words "lossless D2" with reference to the
Flyer over the last year in this newsgroup alone. On Tuesday, in
rec.video.desktop.toaster, Kevin Elders said:
I suffered badly because I bought the Flyer truly believing I'd
have 8
mps D2 lossless by now. I lost out on a televsion series to CBS
because
HQ5 just wasn't up to the task. I've realized D2 8 mps will never
happen, but I invested based on a brochure.
Oh my god! CBS says that the Toaster/Flyer output isn't suitable for
broadcast! Holy cow, what an incredible revelation! Where have you
been Tony? What have you been reading? NewTek makes these absurd
claims in their literature and on their web site. Toaster/Flyer
fanatics believe it and toss it up at every turn like bad potato salad.
At least your ignorance of this issue has protected you from getting
burned like Kevin.
Jim Davis
> > Amiga hasn't been a profitable venture for some time I'm sure. How
> > many companies are still developing software for Amiga? QuickPak is
> > still putting A4000Ts together but how many are being sold these days?
> Again.. according to YOU?!?!? Who died and left you king? I would like
> to see some facts sir. And if QuickPak is putting them together, they
> MUST be selling them and making money doing it. But I guess that escapes
> you. You and Ed determind what is viable. What is really profitable. Who
> are idiots.
>
> > Grim
>
> You certainly are.
>
I find I am amazed at how fast some people are ready put down this amazing
system at every chance they get. I have used both Wintel and Amiga systems
and both have their merits . The fact is that the Amiga has servived two
bankruptcies and is still around should tell you something about the
power of the Amiga . After all why would Gateway 2000 who one of the most
successful PC clones companies around be interested in Amiga. That's right
if you haven not heard the news yet AS of May 16 Gateway 2000 owns Amiga .
You can read the press release on Gateway's Web site as well as at
http://www.amiga.de/diary/g160597e.htm . I guess you just can keep a good
system down
JED
Glenn Saunders
The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
: 1. You think I'm getting away with something by saying that the TARGA
: 2000 RTX is a PC based NLE system that does real time transitions, in
: contradiction to Myron's claim:
DV magazine's listed pricetag is almost $11K for the Targa, card alone.
Toaster and Flyer cards together are less than $6. Is this really the
same price range???
BTW, stop using fudging your email return address. It's cowardly.
Glenn Saunders
This thread is a good example of why there is a dedicated toaster
newsgroup.
There are plenty of PC NLE boards that don't have the highest specs in
every category (many in heavy use with poorer specifications than the
Flyer) but discussions about these coexist without these attacks.
Ed Bennett
Glenn Saunders wrote:
>
> The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
> : 2000 RTX is a PC based NLE system that does real time transitions, in
> : contradiction to Myron's claim:
>
> Toaster and Flyer cards together are less than $6. Is this really the
> same price range???
Well Glenn, Myron's claim was as follows:
In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC
or Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video
Toaster/Flyer from NewTek, Inc.
Notice he said "price class", not "lower price" or "equivalent price".
Both of these systems are pretty well accepted as falling into the
midrange NLE price class ($5K-$15K, products like the Plum and PVR
perform like midrange products but cost around $3.5K). Besides, $6K is
a little low for the Toaster/Flyer combination. Try $7.5K barebones,
according to the NewTek web site. Keep in mind that the Toaster/Flyer
won't operate at that price, it still needs TBC's (built into the
Targa). I only answered Myron's claim because it was false. I didn't
just cite one example (the Targa RTX) either. I also cited the ////Fast
VM.
In that same spirit, I'm answering your article because it's blatently
wrong also. In addition, you seem to think that the Toaster/Flyer is
unjustly picked on. It deserves what it gets because of the absurd
false claims that are made about it. People don't pick on other NLE
systems nearly as much because no other system makes such stupid and
outlandish claims.
>
> BTW, stop using fudging your email return address. It's cowardly.
Huh? Do you think that it takes some sort of courage to put up with
10-20 junk emails per day? Are you a big man because your mailbox is
full of "get rich quick" and "come to our sex site" messages? Am I a
coward because I'm sick and tired of being harrassed every day by this
stupid crap? Geez Glen! If you want to send me email, just use your
brain for 10-12 nanoseconds and type my email address into the little
box!
Ed Bennett
Well Glenn, why is it that the Toaster/Flyer, among all the other NLE
systems, suffers such persecution? What do you think are the reasons
for such attention?
Could it be that people, perhaps like myself, go out of their way to
harrass Toaster/Flyer owners just for fun? I don't think so. After
all, the rec.video.desktop.toaster group would be the perfect hunting
ground for for that sort of activity and yet I've never seen this sort
of thread in that group.
Could it be that there's some sort of hatred for the Toaster/Flyer
that's stems from ignorance about the system. Kind of a prejudice that
would dissapate if people could really see the output and understand
what the system is all about? I don't think so. After all, who would
know better about the system than ex-users, many of which are very
critical. Personally, as I've learned more about the system and have
seen it's output I've developed a strong sense of responsibility to
respond in threads like this.
What other reasons could you think of Glenn? Perhaps, like me, people
are just plain outraged at the wild claims and absurd assertions that
NewTek and Toaster/Flyer users make. This system, which was originally
intended for home and low end industrial use is being promoted as a high
end "lossless D2", "broadcast quality", "Beta SP accurate" system and it
doesn't even remotely come close! People ask "what is a Toaster/Flyer"
and Toaster/Flyer users come back and claim that "In its price class,
there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or Macintosh platform
today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer from NewTek, Inc."
When someone asks what a Plum or a PVR is you don't hear anybody make
even a remotely similiar claim. Nobody says that a Miro DC30 or
////Fast AV Master are better than any other NLE systems available on
the Mac or PC today. But that is, in essense, what Toaster/Flyer owners
are saying. They have even been known to say that it's better than high
end Avid or Media 100 systems! No other NLE systems get picked on like
the Toaster/Flyer because none of their users have the stupidity and
arrogance to make such absurd, ignorant claims.
Do you want to eliminate all the persecution and attacks? Well then,
when someone asks what the Toaster/Flyer is all about, tell them the
truth. Tell them that it's an old (1990) composite-only two channel
real time video switcher connected to an old (1994) two channel
composite-only 8 bit digital video recorder using a "story-board" based
NLE program. Tell them that it uses a proprietary CODEC that isn't
compatible with any other CODECs in modern use. Tell them that it was
originally designed for home and low end (price sensitive) industrial
use. Tell them that it runs only on an Amiga, which was a revolutionary
multimedia home computer designed in 1985 but is now obsolete. It's
maker went bankrupt, and all subsequent attempts to resurrect the Amiga
have also been met with bankruptcy. Tell them that there are NLE
systems on the PC and Mac at half the price that can produce higher
quality video with far better digital video effects. Tell them that
systems in the same price class on PCs and Macs are far superior in
virtually all aspects. IF YOU TELL THEM THESE TRUTHS, YOU'LL ELIMINATE
THE PERSECUTION.
Radiobyfm9
>>
Lets face it, when HDTV comes put in full force (when who knows) ALL of
our equipment (composite, component, etc.) will be obsolete anyway.
>>
Oh when the day comes!
Hey, i can't believe i read this enitre thread!
I work at a college tv cable station....When you look at the quality of
video that you get at home on live freakin tv it never looks as good as it
did before being broadcast. Something to do with that broadcast thing.
And if i look at the cable tv at home, which looks better than the
antenna, it still really looks like crap----regardless if it was produced
on an avid or toaster. Garbage in, Garbage out
The toaster is really a kick-ass piece of equipment....how old is it? How
many are in use today? How many people are making good money with one?
And, ya know, I really like my DPS Perception card....but it won't switch
4 inputs, 2 DV buffers, and a bkg. It won't cg over live video. I bought
that FX accel card, but it won't do live transitions. But, gee, there are
times when that toaster is a cool thing to have...And it is still useable.
Just wish that people at newtek, and commodore (RIP) were'nt full of such
marketing idiots. Imagine what kind of boxes we'd be working with,
costing less money.
Tony
> Again, your head must be current lodged in such a way as to prevent
> you from seeing reality. I'd say that the bankruptcy courts have
> given us a very clear picuture of of the viability of the Amiga.
> You might argue over one bankruptcy. Two might cause you some serious
> doubt. However, when it comes to the Amiga we're way beyond any
> slightest shadow of a doubt! How many times does a product line have
> to be bailed out before you'll begin to doubt it's viability?
> Three, four, five?
Talk about heads being stuck somewhere.... the last time I looked,
Gateway has made FAR more $$$ than you. And THEY think that the Amiga is
worth saving. I guess that aren't as smart as you.... but who is????
Tony
> Gee, you know me well enough to say that I "hate" the Amiga? And you
> have carefully discerned that it is due to a "perverse reason"? I'll
> let you in on a little secret. I don't hate the Amiga. I hate
> ignorance, especially when the ignorant use lies to try to attract
> others into being equally ignorant. There's nothing perverse about
> hating ignorance and it's propagation. There is something perverse
> about maintaining ignorance and trying to convince others to join you.
Ignorance once again according to.... What was stated concerning the
Flyer to the the person seeking information was not misINformation at
all. It was you chiming in right away telling the person what you
thought was the truth (at least your version). Then you proceeded to
state MISinformation again. We went through this before and I really
hate going over it again. REeducating you on prices and uses of the
Amiga. The Amiga is definately useless to you and you dont use it. But
that doesn't mean that is useless to others that most definately use it.
And to say that they are idiots IS wrong of you.
> There are many operating systems available on many platforms. Some
> better than the Windows collection and some worse. My comment has
> nothing at all to do with what is the best. I used a bit of humor to
> get a point across. Something that generates billions of dollars in
> revenue is NO JOKE. If you had a product that generated billions in
> revenue you wouldn't call it a joke.
So... why would GATEWAY bother spending ANY money on purchasing the
Amiga???? DUH! I would think that they know FAR more about the Amiga
than you. Oh, and Gateway is over the billion dollar mark. I guess they
got there listening to you.
> If you had something that has barely managed to stay alive even with
> the heroic efforts of die hard fanatics and has been through multiple > bankruptcies you might call it a joke. When you compare that to a
> very successful multi-billion dollar product I call it real big time > JOKE!
See what I am talking about? Your ignorance of fact??? ONCE AGAIN.. The
Amiga DID NOT CAUSE THE BANKRUPCY OF COMMODORE OR ESCOM. Got that ED!?!
Commodore was a billion dollar a year company before they went under.
And what did they sell? The Amiga. C64. But... MISMANAGEMENT caused them
to go under. The Amiga had NOTHING to do with Escom going under. But
then, you wouldn't know. But you act like you do. You talk like you do.
But you really don't know nothing about it at all. Even when informed
you continue to repeat the same MISinformation. And once again, if the
Amiga were a joke, why would GATEWAY bother purchasing it??? And as for
multiple, it was only a couple of companies that went under pal. Get
your facts straight.
> Thanks for backing up my point with a Webster definition. It fits my
> statement perfectly, describing exactly what I intended to convey.
> "Virtually no redeeming value", "almost entirely without value", "for
> all practiacl purposes: useless". It's not absulutely useless. As a
> computer system, when compared to modern systems, it has virtually no > redeeming value.
Matter of YOUR opinion. Not a fact.
> The mismanagement theory can work through one bankrupcy. Perhaps you
> can stretch it through two. You'd be saying that two companies in a row
> managed to miss the boat entirely. Three? Not likely. Four? Geez,
> what are the chances that four completely separate and independantly
> managed companies could just happen to screw up and entirely miss the
> value that you Amiga fanatics seem to think is absolutely plain as day?
> NOBODY HAS BEEN ABLE TO MAKE A SUCCESSFUL GO AT MARKETING THE AMIGA.
> Does that tell you ANYTHING?
Excuse me.. name the four bankrupt companies that owned the Amiga.
> The only companies that have been willing to try to resurrect the
> Amiga haven't been very financially savvy. Your claim is that they
> were fiscal idiots, making bad investments that caused their demise.
Well sir, if you read the reports (you haven't) then you would know (but
you dont know). And once again, I guess GATEWAY doesn't know what they
are doing. They have money to spend carelessly on things that just arent
profitable. And you, oh wise billion dollar a year Ed, knows much better
than them.
> Also, are you trying to say that wiser, more fiscally responsible > companies just can't
> seem to recognize the great value of the Amiga? In the last attempt,
> financing could not be obtained as even the bank refused to fund such
> folly. Was this bank clueless or was the risk just plain reasonable?
No, you are saying it. But then Gateway doesnt know what they are doing
either. Maybe they should hire YOU to advise them!!! As for the last
attempt... what are you referring to (do you know?)?
> Now, before you cite Gateway I want to remind you that they have not
> promised to resurrect the Amiga. They simply purchased a bunch of
> intellectual property from bankruptcy proceedings at a real bargain.
> They are leaving the current operation alone, including all the
> current management.
ROL... you really dont have a clue!!
> So, what are you saying here? Should I be like you and not think?
No.. you should think first, then reply (at least that is if you can).
.....HUGE snip of mindless ramblings....
> Every day since when? Last year I de-bunked a whole batch of them. One
> guy used a BVW-75 (a $60K Beta SP deck) and claimed "no difference"
> between Flyer output and Beta SP. Maybe his name would ring a bell: Ray
> Cronise of ProWave. Ever heard of him? I finally got him to admit (in
> private email) that he didn't even have a TV set that would do S-video
> let alone a real studio monitor that would do component video.
Oh.. private mail..... uh huh.....
As for Myron... yes there was a difference. Component is better than
composite. Under a microscope.... or greatly magnified images. There
were those at the Olympics that thought the output more then adequate
(you did read that issue didnt you?????).
As for the rest of you message.. I tire quickly trying to explain to you
what has been already. You are happy with your Plum. Fine. There are
others happy with Targa, DPS and others. To each their own. Just get
your facts straight about the Amiga and the Flyer
Johan Otterstrom
Myron Achtman Wrote 29-Maj-97 04:43:12
>There is a fairly good variety of software for the AMIGA platform,
>from word-processors to image processors. However, most of these
>programs don't touch what's available on either the Mac or PC platform
>- with ONE exception. That is Non-Linear Editing (NLE).
>In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or
>Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer
>from NewTek, Inc. The only system, in today's NLE marketplace, that
>rivals the Video Toaster/Flyer is the DraCo Vision system from DraCo
I've never seen a toaster/flyer live, since they are NTSC only. DraCo ROCKS,
that's for sure. If you want to see what users think worldwide subscribe to
VIDEOTEC:
Subject: VLab Motion / DraCo user forum
An occasional post for any lost VLM/DraCo/MovieShop users:
Thanks to "list-owner" Bill Ranck at Virginia Polytechnic (US), users of
VLab Motion and DraCo NLE systems are using an otherwise obsolete Listserv
list called VIDEOTEC.
To join VIDEOTEC, send an e-mail message to <LIST...@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU> with
no subject, containing only the line SUBSCRIBE VIDEOTEC [your name]. You
should receive confirmation and information on setting your "preferences"
- PLEASE read and keep this.
Please pass the word to other users. Hope to read you on VIDEOTEC!
Ps. DraCo uses AmigaOS and will run most other Amiga software. Amiga seem to
be back on track with the fortune 500 company, Gateway 2000, as new owners. A
platform that won't die! Check out Aminet, the worlds largest filearcheive,
only Amiga files.. This says something about the Amiga user group..
Best regards Johan Otterstrom
--
Orebro Videoreklam-DraCo/Casablanca/Amiga
--------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.flevel.co.uk/videoking * THE ULTIMATE DraCo Site *
email: vide...@mbox200.swipnet * Arthur Wilkins Software *
Johan Otterstrom
Glenn Saunders Wrote 30-Maj-97 02:47:01
>SOME of the DVEs are pixellated. Not all. The bread and butter wipes,
>dissolves, and push-pulls are not. Also realize that when other NLE's
>render their DVE's they uncompress and then recompress the video, which
>degrades the signal (just try re-jpegging a jpeg and watch the image
>degrade). The Toaster/Flyer uses dual video streams and applies DVEs to
>them ala automated A/B roll which is really the way to go with NLE, IMHO.
Sure there's a slight degradation in recompressing frames (Flyer does not use
M-JPEG AFAIK). On DraCo you can work on multiple layers of video and still
only have one recompression. Many other systems do a recompression between
each layer, here I can understand that you loose quality, one recompression is
not noticable at all. There's also a huge difference in quality of video on
different systems that has the same datarate, here both DraCo and Casablanca
excell. A non relatime approach gives higher quality wipes and transitions
also gives greater freedom. Since operators and layers can be combined with up
to 1000 layers there's a lot one can do. Import multiple alpha channels etc
etc.
Tony
> > To my eye that the Flyer HQ5 footage from a UVW1800 BetaSP is
> > "virtually" indistinguisable from the original; (if you look at it
> > long enough you can tell- but not easily).
> >
> > Rob... you asked for it. You know that Ed will say that you are
> > blind and Grim will repeat it after Ed says it.
> >
> And you, Tony, will blather on with your pathetic -- Amiga is still a
> viable professional platform -- nonsense.
hit a sore spot eh?? GATEWAY knows better than you. A billion dollar a
year company knows better than you. A PC clone maker knows better than
you. Live with it.
Tony
> What you think it means, and what it actually does are two different
> things, even though you took the trouble to look it up in a
> dictionary. Is there a difference between "absolutely" and "almost
> entirely"? I guess not where you come from. If you had read the post
> you were replying to, you would have seen you would had seen that I'm
> me in any capacity.
What was implied was clear. Only you are to blind to see it. As for
being ahead of me, have you ever OWNED and USED a Toaster/Flyer system
since this is what we are talking about?? If not, you aint ahead (and
you havent).
> What credentials do I need to see that Amigas are rarely used any > longer?
> Please give me some examples, other than using a Toaster/Flyer, for a
> graphics/video professional to use an Amiga. The CPU is slow, it has
> slow graphics and 8 bit audio. Sure you can increase the specs by
> adding on boards but the performance still lags behind what you can
> get, for similar cash -- if not cheaper, on other platforms. The
> cutting edge of current Amiga technology is rather dull and rusty.
It seems that the memory of you and others is remarkably short. We went
through this before. You have not seen the Amiga in use because you
don't want to see it in use. There were examples of it being used. If
you go to the newsgroup (any of the Amiga ones), you will see them being
used. But that requires you to actually do some research. Much better to
sit behind a keyboard and send off your inaccurate biased remarks with
no proof. Typical.
> What facts would you like to see? I already posted that I saw how
> incredibly small the numbers of A4000Ts sold were. Who cares if
> QuickPak is making Amigas? I know people that custom build computers
> and make a living, one at a time. How big is QuickPak anyway? Three,
> five, ten employees? Even NewTek has dropped Lightwave development for
> Amiga. Do you need a nail driven into your skull before you see the > Light?
Ahhh.... take time to READ what has been written. No one is making money
off the Amiga. No one is doing any work with the Amiga. No one cares
about the Amiga. The Amiga is a waste of time and money. You can't do
anything with the old Amiga. Well pal... as much as you think that,
GATEWAY thinks otherwise and has publically stated it! Now I guess you
and Ed and other naysayers just have to live with it. GATEWAY believes
and the Amiga and bought it and plans on continuing to develope for it.
But you know soooooooo much more.....
> Grim
you certainly are, especially since a large PC company feels that the
Amiga is worth saving.
Tony
> >In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or
> >Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer
> >from NewTek, Inc. The only system, in today's NLE marketplace, that
> >rivals the Video Toaster/Flyer is the DraCo Vision system from DraCo
> >(http://www.draco.com/).
>
> seem to be back on track with the fortune 500 company, Gateway 2000,
> as new owners. A platform that won't die! Check out Aminet, the
> worlds largest filearcheive, only Amiga files.. This says something
> about the Amiga user group.
Johan, you were fine until you mentioned the word Amiga. That word
chokes certain people online here. Just as GATEWAY buying the Amiga does
too!!! Like you said, you can't keep and great computer down!
Stephan Schaem
gateway assemble PC parts...
That do not make them god in the computer industry and make them know
how to manage an OS & architecture?
All that can be sayed about gateway is that they have money...
But the theory of having a dollard in your pocket making you smarter is
amuzing :)
Stephan
Ed Bennett
Tony, you continue to speak in generalities, never specifically answering
any of my points. You still spend lots of time trying to draw attention
away from my points by talking about me. What's wrong Tony?
Tony wrote:
> Ignorance once again according to.... What was stated concerning the
> Flyer to the the person seeking information was not misINformation at
> all.
OH, well let's just review it:
In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC
or Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video
Toaster/Flyer from NewTek, Inc.
When I replied I supplied examples proving this statement to be false.
False statements contain "misINformation" [sic]. Hmmm....I think I just
proved another statement false. False statements contain "misINformation".
You're the one that made this false statement. Therefore, you're spreading
"misINformation".
> It was you chiming in right away telling the person what you
> thought was the truth (at least your version). Then you proceeded to
> state MISinformation again. We went through this before and I really
> hate going over it again. REeducating you on prices and uses of the
> Amiga.
I made a general statement AFTER the classic Amiga/Toaster/Flyer propaganda
was posted. Go ahead, check DejaNews and look at the dates/times.
Now, if you don't want to address my specific points and would rather just
keep saying that I'm stating "MISinformation" [sic] then my statements still
stand, no matter how wrong you say that they are.
> The Amiga is definately useless to you and you dont use it. But
> that doesn't mean that is useless to others that most definately use it.
> And to say that they are idiots IS wrong of you.
I didn't say that the Amiga was completely useless to me, just that it was
useless when compared to modern computers. If someone wants to ignore the
last 10 years of progress in the computer industry in favor of the Amiga,
then I have no problem with that. I may have hit a nerve when I said that
only an idiot would spend $2800 on a new Amiga when they could get so much
more for that money. Was I calling you an idiot? If you recall, I said
that if someone really had to have one that they should buy one of the many
used systems that come up for sale every day in this newsgroup for a mere
fraction of their original cost.
> So... why would GATEWAY bother spending ANY money on purchasing the
> Amiga???? DUH! I would think that they know FAR more about the Amiga
> than you. Oh, and Gateway is over the billion dollar mark. I guess they
> got there listening to you.
DUH! You act like you know nothing of intellectual property law and
intellectual assets. I don't know (and never claimed to know) about every
patent and trademark associated with the Amiga. Could it be, perhaps, that
there is some technology or term that Gateway wants to use in their PC?
Could it be that they just wanted to expand their European presence and
found the Escom bankruptcy to be a great deal (pennies on the dollar!)?
You, because of your Amiga-centric thinking, believe that Gateway could be
after only one thing: resurrection of the Mighty Amiga. Yet, I have seen no
announcements from Gateway about doing that. What did Gateway really say?
Did they say that new Amigas with PCI bus and high speed processors were on
the way? NO. This is what they said in regards to acquiring Amiga
International:
"It will strengthen our intellectual property position and
invigorate a company that has been a pioneer in multimedia
solutions and operating systems technology".
Check out the words "has been", how revealing. Not "is" or "will continue
to be" or even "might become again". What did they say their plans were for
the newly acquired Amiga International? Did they say that they would be
investing heavily into the Amiga? NO. Here are the plans:
"AMIGA Technologies will be renamed AMIGA International. The
company will operate as a separate business unit and will
retain its current president, Petro Tyschtschenko, who will
work to develop new products for the AMIGA market."
Do I know what I'm talking about? Maybe, maybe not. If you can correct any
of my statements then I have no problem admitting that I've been wrong. If
you insist on continuing to attack me rather than my points, then the points
still stand, I really do know what I'm talking about, and you're just
another raving Amiga fanatic. YOU determine your own status by what you say
and do. Facts or fanatic, take your pick.
> > If you had something that has barely managed to stay alive even with
> > the heroic efforts of die hard fanatics and has been through multiple
> > bankruptcies you might call it a joke. When you compare that to a
> > very successful multi-billion dollar product I call it real big time
> > JOKE!
>
> See what I am talking about? Your ignorance of fact??? ONCE AGAIN.. The
> Amiga DID NOT CAUSE THE BANKRUPCY OF COMMODORE OR ESCOM. Got that ED!?!
Did I say "the Amiga caused the downfall of Escom"? NO. I said: "...and
has been through multiple bankruptcies...". GOT THAT TONY?
> Commodore was a billion dollar a year company before they went under.
> And what did they sell? The Amiga. C64. But... MISMANAGEMENT caused them
> to go under. The Amiga had NOTHING to do with Escom going under.
"Mismanagement caused them to go under. Well of course! But to say that
the Amiga had nothing to do with Commodore or Escom going under is absurd.
If the Amiga was a strong and profitable product line then it's revenue
would have significant influence on the financial health of an organization.
Instead, the Amiga is a very weak performer and undoubtedly consumed more
resources than it generated.
> But
> then, you wouldn't know. But you act like you do. You talk like you do.
> But you really don't know nothing about it at all. Even when informed
> you continue to repeat the same MISinformation.
No evidence, no counter points, no valid arguments. Just plain old
fashioned ad-hominum. You haven't informed me on anything. I see no quotes
from Gateway supporting your suppositions. I see no evidence. I see no
precise examples of what I said was wrong. I'm not repeating
"MISinformation" after being informed, I'm making valid and accurate
statements to which you have no answer except to criticize my person.
> And once again, if the
> Amiga were a joke, why would GATEWAY bother purchasing it??? And as for
> multiple, it was only a couple of companies that went under pal. Get
> your facts straight.
I said that comparing the Amiga to Windows was a joke so make an attempt
next time to get your facts straight. There are many many reasons why
Gateway would buy the assets of Amiga International. You seem to be
fanaticly fixed on one and only one reason: to resurrect the Almighty Amiga
in all it's former "glory" (as if it ever had any). As I've already stated,
there are many possible reasons, and no evendence to support your
supposition that Gateway purchased Amiga International because the Amiga was
a vital and profitable product line.
Oh yes, Commodore went bankrupt, then Escom. VisCorp tried to buy the
Amiga assets from bankruptcy proceedings but couldn't get funding. Now,
Gateway owns it. OK, while "multiple" isn't technically wrong, "couple" is
more appropriate. "Multiple" does sound better for arguments sake!
> > Thanks for backing up my point with a Webster definition. It fits my
> > statement perfectly, describing exactly what I intended to convey.
> > "Virtually no redeeming value", "almost entirely without value", "for
> > all practiacl purposes: useless". It's not absulutely useless. As a
> > computer system, when compared to modern systems, it has virtually no
> > redeeming value.
>
> Matter of YOUR opinion. Not a fact.
Yes, my opinion. You are free to continue thinking that today's PCs and
Macs are less powerful and less versatile than the Amiga for the same money.
It's a pretty absurd claim IN MY OPINION but you're free to do so. It does
give you the appearance of an fanatic, since the vast, overwhelming majority
of computer users hold the same opinion as I do.
> > The mismanagement theory can work through one bankrupcy. Perhaps you
> > can stretch it through two. You'd be saying that two companies in a row
> > managed to miss the boat entirely. Three? Not likely. Four? Geez,
> > what are the chances that four completely separate and independantly
> > managed companies could just happen to screw up and entirely miss the
> > value that you Amiga fanatics seem to think is absolutely plain as day?
> > NOBODY HAS BEEN ABLE TO MAKE A SUCCESSFUL GO AT MARKETING THE AMIGA.
> > Does that tell you ANYTHING?
>
> Excuse me.. name the four bankrupt companies that owned the Amiga.
There aren't four. There are two. Yes, I exaggerated by posing a fictional
third and fourth bankrupcy (hasn't happened yet). For a while there I
wasn't sure if you were going to challenge any of my points! To you, the
only explanation of why the Amiga has suffered through two bankruptcies is
"mismanagement". It's not the only possible reason and as you increase the
number of bankruptcies it becomes an unlikly reason. There are other
reasons for the Amiga's rocky road and they don't become absurd as time
progresses.
My final statement, which you choose to ignore, still remains true: NOBODY
HAS BEEN ABLE TO MAKE A SUCCESSFUL GO AT MARKETING THE AMIGA. All of you
claim that the Amiga is superior and amazing and yet nobody has been able to
sustain a profitable business from it. The two ideas just don't seem to go
together very well.
> > The only companies that have been willing to try to resurrect the
> > Amiga haven't been very financially savvy. Your claim is that they
> > were fiscal idiots, making bad investments that caused their demise.
> Well sir, if you read the reports (you haven't) then you would know (but
> you dont know). And once again, I guess GATEWAY doesn't know what they
> are doing. They have money to spend carelessly on things that just arent
> profitable. And you, oh wise billion dollar a year Ed, knows much better
> than them.
Here you go again, thinking Gateway purchased the assets of Amiga
International because of the strength of the product line. There are many
other valid reasons that you are ignoring. I think that they know what they
are doing. Let's just assume that Gateway made their pruchase because the
Amiga was all you claimed. They saw great potential in the Amiga product
line and bought it so that they could resurrect the Amiga and make some
real money. Where's the announcement? Why haven't they said anything about
these super-Amigas? This would be such a big piece of news but it seems to
be absent from every public statement Gateway has made about their recent
acquisition. Strange, isn't it?
In search of some clues as to what Gateway is doing, I went to their
website. I did a search on "amiga" and came up with 15 references. Other
than the two press announcements and a bunch of file format definitions,
there were two very interesting pieces of information. First, from their
corporate history:
...In August 1995,
Gateway acquired Osborne Computer of Sydney, Australia,
and began selling to the Australian market. In September of
1995, the company announced plans to build its third United
States manufacturing facility in Hampton, Virginia.
Manufacturing operations began there in July 1996, an in
December 1996, the company announced plans to add a
technical support call center in Hampton as well. In December
of 1995, Gateway opened a manufacturing facility in Malacca,
Malaysia. This facility manufactures Gateway 2000 desktop
systems and serves the growing Asia/Pacific markets. In
March 1997, the company made an offer to acquire the assets
of AMIGA Technologies, GmbH, including all patents,
trademarks and trade names. In April 1997, Gateway 2000
announced a planned expansion of its Hampton manufacturing
facility that will increase production capacity by 50 percent.
Construction is scheduled to be completed by August 1997.
We haven't seen a resurrection of the Osborne computer, have we? They were
acquired for access to the Austrailian market.
Then, there was a funny little story of Gateway with an imaginary character:
Holly the Holstien.
"Wait!" Holly exclaimed, remembering that
her 'boss'y had confided in her the day she
departed on her adventure: "Agent M007,
we've acquired a special (very secret) gadget to
save your spots when you're in a pickle." Holly
reached into her feed bag and in 20 seconds her
Amiga computer was morphing her into a ...
guard!
"we've *ACQUIRED* a special (very secret) gadget..." It's not the Amiga
computer, it's something in the Amiga computer. From this I would guess
that there was a key graphics patent that Gateway wanted so that they could
incorporate it into their product line.
> > Also, are you trying to say that wiser, more fiscally responsible >
> > companies just can't
> > seem to recognize the great value of the Amiga? In the last attempt,
> > financing could not be obtained as even the bank refused to fund such
> > folly. Was this bank clueless or was the risk just plain reasonable?
>
> No, you are saying it. But then Gateway doesnt know what they are doing
> either. Maybe they should hire YOU to advise them!!! As for the last
> attempt... what are you referring to (do you know?)?
I'm referring to the VisCorp attempt to acquire the assets of Amiga
International from the Escom Bankruptcy proceedings. VisCorp was unable to
raise any funding, even the bank turned them down. Didn't you know?
> > Now, before you cite Gateway I want to remind you that they have not
> > promised to resurrect the Amiga. They simply purchased a bunch of
> > intellectual property from bankruptcy proceedings at a real bargain.
> > They are leaving the current operation alone, including all the
> > current management.
>
> ROL... you really dont have a clue!!
Well, either remain in your ignorance or go read the press releases! I
don't have a clue? Geez! Instead of trying to defame my character, why
don't you just go produce some evidence to the contrary! If you think that
Gateway has announced more than what I've said then shut up and show us!
> > So, what are you saying here? Should I be like you and not think?
> No.. you should think first, then reply (at least that is if you can).
>
> .....HUGE snip of mindless ramblings....
The "mindless ramblings" were:
1. Yet another request to answer the points or shut up. I even
repeated the points for you. Are these points "mindless
ramblings?"
2. The accusation that you weren't answering my points, just trying
to change the subject by attacking my person (ad-hominum). I
guess you just don't want to deal with that. You'll call it
"mindless ramblings" to try to dismiss the fact that you are
avoiding the issues.
> > Every day since when? Last year I de-bunked a whole batch of them. One
> > guy used a BVW-75 (a $60K Beta SP deck) and claimed "no difference"
> > between Flyer output and Beta SP. Maybe his name would ring a bell: Ray
> > Cronise of ProWave. Ever heard of him? I finally got him to admit (in
> > private email) that he didn't even have a TV set that would do S-video
> > let alone a real studio monitor that would do component video.
>
> Oh.. private mail..... uh huh.....
This was Ray's response to yet another plea for him to "just try it and
see". Ray just kept avoiding the issue, probably knowing that if he
actually tried it he would be proven wrong. Here's the exact exchange:
On 10/28/96, Ed Bennett said:
I'm really confused here. As we continue these exchanges I'm
becoming less and less confidant that I understand where you're
coming from. In an earlier message you said:
Sat, 3 Aug 1996 19:18:20 -0400
Many people don't know that there really aren't that many Avid
systems out there. They are extremely expensive. The video
quality is no better than the output of the the Flyer, I've used
both.
So, you made a comparison between the video output of the Flyer
and that of an Avid system and concluded that the Flyer produced
equivalent video quality. If this were true then I'd be the
first to conclude, especially at the cost savings involved, that
the Flyer was a far better choice. But, in another message you
said:
Fri, 20 Sep 1996 00:30:05 -0400
I don't own a *true* svhs monitor, and neither do my clients and
customers.
So how did you judge the video quality between the Flyer and the
Avid? It's like using a beaker to compare the accuracy between a
pipette and a graduated cylinder (to use a chemistry analogy).
Undoubtedly, this is another "big picture" judgement. You see no
difference when using the common viewing device, a composite TV
set with 200-300 lines horizontal resolution and a notch filter.
How can you judge noise content? How can you judge color accuracy?
How can you judge resolution? I just don't know. Again, by this
"big picture" logic you could be easily satisfied with a Miro
DC-30 or an AV/Master and save yourself $6500 on the cost of the
NLE system.
Go ahead and ask Ray. If he denies ever saying this he's lying.
> As for Myron... yes there was a difference. Component is better than
> composite. Under a microscope.... or greatly magnified images. There
> were those at the Olympics that thought the output more then adequate
> (you did read that issue didnt you?????).
Yes, there was a difference. No, it wasn't "under a microscope... or
greatly magnified images." It was plain as day! Yes, there will always be
those like yourself that don't mind the output of the Flyer (or have such
lousy equipment that they can't tell the difference). Who the hell cares?
The fact (repeat: FACT) is that the Flyer is promoted through ignorance and
doesn't live up to all the claims that yourself and others make about it.
If you knew what Beta SP looked like on a real studio or broadcast monitor
you would shut up in a hurry. If you compare a broadcast of Flyer footage
from that of Avid (or even Plum) footage you would quit your nonsense.
Plain and simple: In order to reamin a loyal Toaster/Flyer proponent, you
must maintain ignorance about what else is available.
> As for the rest of you message.. I tire quickly trying to explain to you
> what has been already. You are happy with your Plum. Fine. There are
> others happy with Targa, DPS and others. To each their own. Just get
> your facts straight about the Amiga and the Flyer
Poor Kevin Elders. You don't want to comment on his situation, in which a
real broadcaster (CBS) told him that his Flyer output was inadequate for
broadcast. Why not? Aren't you ready to tell us all that CBS doesn't know
anything about broadcast quality video? Maybe CBS doesn't know all this
stupid assinine nonsense about "the big picture" and "what really matters",
and "to the naked eyeball" and the rest of the Toaster/Flyer fanatic crap.
I've got my facts straight. You would rather ignore my points and try to
attack my character. All I've done is to tell the whole story.
--
Ed Bennett
e...@primenet.com
Home of the TS-Aligner
http://www.primenet.com/~ejb/
Ed Bennett
PUT UP OR SHUT UP! Show us all where Gateway said that the Amiga is worth
saving. Don't give us any more of your stupid nonsense suppositions. Just
provide an actual quote from Gateway. You're so hell-bent and obsessed with
saving the Amiga that you just can't see any other reason for Gateway to
acquire Amiga International's assets. There are lots of other reasons that
you are completely blind to. If you can't produce an actual public statement
from Gateway that they are going to resurrect the Amiga then just shut up.
--
Ed Bennett
e...@primenet.com
Larry
Ed have you ever used an amiga?
After amiga, windows 3.1, unix, windows95, and now a mac225/128/7.6os my
favorite is right now to this day the amiga hardware and os.
just an observation. It a shame the world doesn't fully realize what it
could do.
Larry
Jim Davis
> Oh.. private mail..... uh huh.....
>
> As for Myron... yes there was a difference. Component is better than
> composite. Under a microscope.... or greatly magnified images. There
> were those at the Olympics that thought the output more then adequate
> (you did read that issue didnt you?????).
>
>
> As for the rest of you message.. I tire quickly trying to explain to you
> what has been already. You are happy with your Plum. Fine. There are
> others happy with Targa, DPS and others. To each their own. Just get
> your facts straight about the Amiga and the Flyer
>
Thank You Tony You saved me the Trouble of correcting Mr. ED.
JED
Jim Davis
ED should Get a Life . Or is Badmouthing The Amiga His only interest on
this newsgroup. I for one have been following this for the last year and am
amazed that he is still at it. I would have thought he would gotten bored
with it by now. I know I am . This newsgroup is about Video Production and
the exchange of ideas . Not an Amiga (or any other platform) slamfest. Give
is up and contribute something positive to this newsgroup ED . Stop wasting
valuable bandwidth on this nonsense.
JED
Ed Bennett
Jim Davis wrote:
>
> ED should Get a Life.
I probably have about 10 times the life you have. My interest in video
and video production is about #6 on the list of priorities, behind such
things as running my own manufacturing business. Perhaps for you
answering a couple of posts per day would consume your entire life.
> Or is Badmouthing The Amiga His only interest on this newsgroup.
Not at all. I scan it regularaly for all kinds of information.
Sometimes I actually contribute useful information. If you're an A/T/F
fan, you probably haven't noticed because you ignore all of the
advancements that have been made in the real world over the last several
years (it's the only way an A/T/F fan can maintain the obsession).
> I for one have been following this for the last year and am
> amazed that he is still at it.
I'm amazed that you have been following this topic for a whole year when
it's only been active for a couple of weeks at most. The last time it
was active wasn't even a year ago (9/96). Did you take your Prozak
today or is this just another brazen lie?
> I would have thought he would gotten bored
> with it by now. I know I am.
Nope. Keeping the A/T/F gang under control is a challenging diversion
to all of my other activities.
It's absolutely plain and obvious that you're not bored. If you were,
you'd just skip over the articles and not read them. It wouldn't bother
you in the slightest that this conversation is happening. Have you
posted a similiar message to the virtually perpetual Miro bashing
threads? Of course not. You're not bored, and in contradiction to your
next statement, you don't give a damn what is discussed in this group so
long as it isn't negative about the Amiga/Toaster/Flyer. Aren't I right
Jim?
> This newsgroup is about Video Production and
> the exchange of ideas . Not an Amiga (or any other platform) slamfest.
Couldn't agree with you more. Perhaps you haven't noticed but part of
Video Production and the exchange of ideas is the discussion of the pros
and cons of various systems/platforms. In fact, if you removed those
discussions from this group there would be virtually nothing left.
Let me help you avoid some ignorance that seems to be hindering your
understanding here. This isn't an "Amiga slamfest". If the A/T/F
fanatics stop posting the lies, then I'll have nothing to correct. It
started with the following false statement (essentially slamming
midrange NLE on the PC and the Mac):
In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC
or Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video
Toaster/Flyer from NewTek, Inc.
> Give
> is up and contribute something positive to this newsgroup ED . Stop wasting
> valuable bandwidth on this nonsense.
Nice try. This is something positive! I'm preventing the next Kevin
Elders from wasting his money on lousy NLE system and missing the big
contract with CBS (or some other client that cares about video
quality). Kevin (or anybody else for that matter) could save $3500 and
buy a DPS PVR or Plum and get the CBS contract.
The A/T/F gang can't answer the statements that contradict their
propaganda so first they try character assassination and now
embarrassment (how completely predictable!). What's next guys? Let me
give you a clue: the ignore treatment will work. Stop posting lies and
propaganda and I'll have nothing to answer. Better yet, sign up for the
truth:
When someone asks what the Toaster/Flyer is all about, tell them the
truth. Tell them that it's an old (1990) composite-only multi channel
real time video switcher connected to an old (1994) two channel
composite-only 8 bit digital video recorder using a "story-board" based
NLE program. Tell them that it uses a proprietary CODEC that isn't
compatible with any other CODECs in modern use. Tell them that it was
originally designed for home and low end (price sensitive) industrial
use. Tell them that it runs only on an Amiga, which was a revolutionary
multimedia home computer designed in 1985 but is now obsolete. It's
maker went bankrupt, and all subsequent attempts to resurrect the Amiga
have also been met with bankruptcy. Tell them that there are NLE
systems on the PC and Mac at half the price that can produce higher
quality video with far better digital video effects. Tell them that
systems in the same price class on PCs and Macs are far superior in
virtually all aspects.
--
Glenn Saunders
The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
: harrass Toaster/Flyer owners just for fun?
Yeah, because that's how it comes across.
Glenn Saunders
The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
: midrange NLE price class ($5K-$15K, products like the Plum and PVR
Depends on where you draw the line. $10,000 is a pretty wide gap to
define a "range".
: perform like midrange products but cost around $3.5K). Besides, $6K is
: a little low for the Toaster/Flyer combination. Try $7.5K barebones,
: according to the NewTek web site. Keep in mind that the Toaster/Flyer
Oh, please, anyone who buys a new T4K is an idiot the way used prices are,
especially if you have an Amiga 2000 (used Toaster 2Ks are 5-600 bux).
: won't operate at that price, it still needs TBC's (built into the
Used TBCIV's have been seen for $500.
: unjustly picked on. It deserves what it gets because of the absurd
: false claims that are made about it. People don't pick on other NLE
What are the false claims?
Glenn Saunders
The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
: buy a DPS PVR or Plum and get the CBS contract.
NLEs that don't support realtime DVEs aren't that useful for time-critical
broadcast applications. That's why Avid is king.
Ed Bennett
Glenn Saunders wrote:
> The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
> : Both of these systems are pretty well accepted as falling into the
> : midrange NLE price class ($5K-$15K, products like the Plum and PVR
>
> Depends on where you draw the line. $10,000 is a pretty wide gap to
> define a "range".
Yes, it is a personal judgement. I have trouble calling anything under
$15K a "high end" system. Clearly, the under $1K sysetms are low end.
There are many $1K-5K systems that don't measure up to midrange
performance but a couple do. So, I refer to the $5K-$15K the midrange
class and so do many others.
> : perform like midrange products but cost around $3.5K). Besides, $6K is
> : a little low for the Toaster/Flyer combination. Try $7.5K barebones,
> : according to the NewTek web site. Keep in mind that the Toaster/Flyer
>
> Oh, please, anyone who buys a new T4K is an idiot the way used prices are,
> especially if you have an Amiga 2000 (used Toaster 2Ks are 5-600 bux).
The $7.5K is list price for NEW Toaster/Flyer boards only. This doesn't
include the Amiga. I completely agree (and even stated it much the same
way you did here) that only an idiot would buy all this stuff new. I
got flamed for calling people names! If someone really needs/wants a
Toaster/Flyer (and I can see reasons why, even I have been tempted...)
then by all means, they should save themselves $thousands$ and get one
of the many used systems offered for sale every day for literally
pennies on the dollar.
> : won't operate at that price, it still needs TBC's (built into the
>
> Used TBCIV's have been seen for $500.
Which is probably adaquate to retain the video quality of the
Toaster/Flyer. No sense in wasting any money on a high end TBC.
> : unjustly picked on. It deserves what it gets because of the absurd
> : false claims that are made about it. People don't pick on other NLE
>
> What are the false claims?
False claims:
"In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or
Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer
from NewTek, Inc."
I supplied counter examples.
"You have to spend "big bucks" to get a Macintosh- or PC-based NLE that
offers REAL-TIME effects."
I supplied counter examples.
"The Toaster/Flyer produces lossless D2 video."
This claim is generally false for all practical purposes. Certain
simple, low frequency and low noise material might pass through
lossless.
etc...
Ed Bennett
The paranoid Glenn Saunders wrote:
>
> The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
> : harrass Toaster/Flyer owners just for fun?
>
> Yeah, because that's how it comes across.
You're being just a bit over sensitive Glenn. I have yet to go out of
my way to harrass Toaster/Flyer owners and don't know of anyone else
that has either. I have started no threads against the
Amiga/Toaster/Flyer. All I have ever done is to correct false claims
and reveal the facts as I know them. Whenever my facts have been wrong
I've accepted correction.
I frequently read the rec.video.desktop.toaster newsgroup and see a huge
number of opportunities to "harrass" Toaster/Flyer owners. Geez, I
could have chimed in on the recent Trinity thread and joined Lee
Stranahan in trying to shake some sense of reality into the heads of the
particularly dense. However, I don't "go out of my way" to harrass
Toaster/Flyer owners. I have been known to reply to questions via email
because nobody in r.v.d.t knows the answer or is willing to admit the
truth. For example, I answered the following via email. It was
recently posted without answer:
One thing that has bugged me (and many others, including a
few people at NewTek, based on my talks with Chuck and a
few others at NAB in '96) about the Flyer is the way color
gradients look when converted from CG, LW, & TPaint into
Flyer clips of stills, even at HQ5 settings. The colors
no longer blend smoothly, but rather show a banded,
dithered look. I've asked NewTek about this several times
over the past year, and whether a fix is on the horizon.
Have received no response.
The answer is simple but not popular among the Toaster/Flyer cult. It's
the result of 8 bit sampling, trying to encode the entire video signal
(in this case a 24 bit gradient) with only 256 values. It's not going
to be fixed without new ADC/DACs. It's also a problem with D2, being one
of the reasons it's an obsolete format. I could have turned the whole
thing into a great spring board on all the other Toaster/Flyer
deficiencies but I didn't because I'm *not* out to get you.
With the number of threads that have been started by Toaster/Flyer
people putting down PC and Mac systems, I'm the one who should be
paranoid.
Ed Bennett
Glenn Saunders wrote:
>
> The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
> : buy a DPS PVR or Plum and get the CBS contract.
>
> broadcast applications. That's why Avid is king.
Glenn, I don't know what opportunity Kevin Elders lost with CBS but the
vast majority of editing in a network show is cuts and simple 2D
transitions (wipes and dissolves). A DPS or Plum setup can do cuts in
real time and render simple 2D transitions in 5-15 seconds. They are
useful in time-critical applications but I don't think that this was the
problem in Kevin's situation. Time critical work (like preparing
footage for a news broadcast) isn't usually out-sourced. Weekly shows
are (in fact, the entire production is typically contracted). This work
is very commonly done on systems that render transitions. It was the
video quality that excluded Kevin from consideration and the
Toaster/Flyer couldn't produce acceptable results.
Also, AVID has been king a lot longer than their systems have had real
time transitions. I don't know where you got this notion from. Real
time DVEs are useful and save lots of time but this one feature isn't so
all important that it determines who leads the NLE market. After all,
if real time DVEs were more important than video quality or the ability
to do complex effects then the Toaster/Flyer would be the market
leader. Instead, it maintains a pretty low spot in the overall
ranking.
Myron Achtman
>Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>>Used TBC IV's have been seen for $500.
>Which is probably adaquate to retain the video quality of the
>Toaster/Flyer. No sense in wasting any money on a high end TBC.
This is very poor advice. With its VTASC compression algorithm, the
Flyer thrives on the cleanest possible video signals. The better the
TBC, the better the "look" of the resulting video.
>False claims by Myron Achtman:
>"In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or
>Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer
>from NewTek, Inc."
Ed, I still stand by this claim. When I made the statement, the word
"outperform" was referring to the speed and ease of use of the Flyer
over any other comparable NLE system on the market. For
straightforward editing projects that involves cuts, dissolves, 2-D
wipes, titles, and mixing two additional audio layers, any other NLE
system in the Flyer's price class will take 200% - 400% longer to
complete a project.
However, the competitive systems offer many advantages when dealing
with more "complex" projects. For example, they can "render" multiple
layers of video much faster than anything you can do on the Flyer. You
can do "blue screen" effects (chroma keying) which is not practically
possible on the Flyer. It's easier to do complex audio layering - some
programs offer 99 audio event layers. For 3-D wipes, competitive PC
and Mac systems can "render" clean antialiased edges, unlike the
Toaster's pixellated 3-D transitions. Finally, products such as the
Perception Video Recorder can handle component and Y/C video,
resulting in a cleaner final product.
Therefore, for editing straightforward projects, I feel that the
Toaster/Flyer represents the most productive NLE system in its price
class on the market today. In our business, 90% of post-production
needs can be addressed with the Flyer. It would be nice to be able to
offer the other 10% (e.g. video layering, clean 3-D effects, etc.) to
our clients, but the Flyer doesn't support these. For those that need
to be able to offer the full gammut of post-production "goodies",
there are better PC-based and Mac-based systems. It's worthwhile to
note that these "advanced" capabilities add a tremendous amount of
time and effort to completing a production.
As far as the video quality issue goes, the Flyer DOES produce very
good results. Granted, systems like the Perception PVR and PLUM are
cleaner. But for the client who gets his distribution copies on VHS,
it won't matter one iota whether the program was edited on the Flyer
or the Perception.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention one other very important fact.
Professional editors demand real-time interaction with any editing
system -- linear or non-linear. If an editor can't get a scene to play
back immediately in its intended finished form, the system is simply
not useable or workable. Serious editors dismiss any computer-based
editing system that does not support real-time interaction. The NewTek
Flyer has offered this essential attribute from the beginning. The PC
and Mac-based NLE manufacturers are now focusing most of their NLE
design efforts on delivering real-time effects boards. There is simply
no acceptable option for a professonal editor.
Best regards,
Myron Achtman
ADITA Video Inc.
Visit us at http://www.adita.com
Ed Bennett
Myron Achtman wrote:
>
> >Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>
> >>Used TBC IV's have been seen for $500.
>
> >Which is probably adaquate to retain the video quality of the
> >Toaster/Flyer. No sense in wasting any money on a high end TBC.
>
> This is very poor advice. With its VTASC compression algorithm, the
> Flyer thrives on the cleanest possible video signals. The better the
> TBC, the better the "look" of the resulting video.
Understandably true. However, there are diminishing returns for pouring
money into the front end of the Toaster/Flyer. For example, why pour
$3K-$4K into high end TBCs when you'll still be stuck with Toaster/Flyer
quality video on the output?
> >False claims by Myron Achtman:
> >"In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available on the PC or
> >Macintosh platform today, that can outperform the Video Toaster/Flyer
> >from NewTek, Inc."
>
> Ed, I still stand by this claim. When I made the statement, the word
> "outperform" was referring to the speed and ease of use of the Flyer
> over any other comparable NLE system on the market. For
> straightforward editing projects that involves cuts, dissolves, 2-D
> wipes, titles, and mixing two additional audio layers, any other NLE
> system in the Flyer's price class will take 200% - 400% longer to
> complete a project.
Well then, how do you reply to the counter examples that I supplied?
Specifically, the ////Fast VM with dual DPR is in the same price class.
Like the Toaster/Flyer, it does effects in "real time". However, that's
where the similiarities end. The system is far superior to the
Toaster/Flyer, especially with regard to the video quality. So, I still
maintain that your first claim is false, even with your recent
redaction, and this new one:
"For straightforward editing projects that involves cuts,
dissolves, 2-D wipes, titles, and mixing two additional
audio layers,any other NLE system in the Flyer's price
class will take 200% - 400% longer to complete a project."
Is also false with the same example (the VM with DPR) proving it wrong.
Come on Myron!
> However, the competitive systems offer many advantages when dealing
> with more "complex" projects. For example, they can "render" multiple
> layers of video much faster than anything you can do on the Flyer. You
> can do "blue screen" effects (chroma keying) which is not practically
> possible on the Flyer. It's easier to do complex audio layering - some
> programs offer 99 audio event layers. For 3-D wipes, competitive PC
> and Mac systems can "render" clean antialiased edges, unlike the
> Toaster's pixellated 3-D transitions. Finally, products such as the
> Perception Video Recorder can handle component and Y/C video,
> resulting in a cleaner final product.
So with regard to speed and ease of use, your claim is that the
Toaster/Flyer is the superior performer over anything available on the
PC or Mac in the same price class. If you had used the words "many
other" or "lots of other" instead of "any other" then you'd probably be
OK here. We've already seen how this is false with regard to speed.
"Ease of use" cannot be argued (see below). Maybe I'm a little slow
here but I'm at a complete and utter loss to see anything at all about
the Toaster/Flyer that is superior to what's available on PC and Mac
systems. Perhaps you'd like to further refine (revise) your claim
keeping in mind that the ////Fast VM with dual DPR runs on a PC and has
actually existed for quite some time now.
"Ease of use" is mostly a subjective measure. Perhaps someone would
find it easier to use a Toaster/Flyer, or perhaps Adobe Premiere.
Personally, the story board motif would drive me crazy because I'm used
to receiving lots of visual information directly from a time line
representation. I'd find it cumbersome to have to click on something
every time I wanted to know how long it was or if it contained audio,
etc. I like dragging the pointer across the timeline so that I can
scrub both video and audio and very quickly locate edit points rather
than have to play a clip over to find an in/out point.
"Ease of use" is subjective until you are asked to do something that is
impossible or very difficult on a particular system. For example, if
someone handed you two tapes and told you to create a single tape with
synchronized audio from one of the tapes, you'd find that very difficult
to do using only the Toaster/Flyer. Piece of cake in Premiere. If they
asked you to produce a layered montage it would be the same story. In
fact, anything beyond simple A/B roll editing would be difficult on the
Toaster/Flyer, some tasks being just plain impossible. For all of these
situations, your "ease of use" argument is invalid.
> Therefore, for editing straightforward projects, I feel that the
> Toaster/Flyer represents the most productive NLE system in its price
> class on the market today. In our business, 90% of post-production
> needs can be addressed with the Flyer. It would be nice to be able to
> offer the other 10% (e.g. video layering, clean 3-D effects, etc.) to
> our clients, but the Flyer doesn't support these. For those that need
> to be able to offer the full gammut of post-production "goodies",
> there are better PC-based and Mac-based systems. It's worthwhile to
> note that these "advanced" capabilities add a tremendous amount of
> time and effort to completing a production.
Unfortunately, that 10% represents a huge and monumental segment of the
market. You are saying that the Toaster/Flyer caters the the customer
that doesn't need:
- High quality video
- 3D DVE's
- Chroma keying
- Alpha channel effects (keying, etc)
- Layering
- Synchronizing tapes from a multi-camera shoot (audio/video)
- etc.
Most of these "advanced" capabilities do not add a tremendous amount of
time and effort to the project. For example, high quality component
video is a given with no extra time or effort. 3D DVE's are just as
easy to drag and drop onto the time line as any wipe or dissolve. They
do take more time to render. Chroma keying and Alpha effects and
layering take very little effort to create and some time to render but I
wouldn't call it "tremendous". Synchronizing audio is a snap using my
Plum with Premiere but a virtually impossible task on the Toaster/Flyer
requiring a huge amount of time and effort.
So, who is this "customer" that you speak of that is perfectly satisfied
with results from the Toaster/Flyer? It's not anybody from network
broadcasting as the video quality is unacceptable for that purpose.
Most of the cable network channels make extensive use of 3D DVE's,
chroma keying, Alpha effects, layering, etc. so they're not going to
want it. Most commercial advertising utilizes pretty "sophisticated"
effects these days, even local commercials here in Boise, ID use
layering. Corporate marketing videos also utilize lots of video effects
that the Toaster/Flyer just can't do. Maybe industrial training videos
could be done by a Toaster/Flyer. Perhaps weddings and birthdays too!
So, what percentage of the market are the "industrial training, wedding,
and birthday" videos? Compared to the entire broadcast industry? 90%?
Not in a million years! 10% of the features, 90% of the market and it
gets worse every single day. The A/B roll edit system is rapidly being
squeezed out of even the low end markets as people adopt low cost
desktop NLE systems on the PC and Mac.
> As far as the video quality issue goes, the Flyer DOES produce very
> good results. Granted, systems like the Perception PVR and PLUM are
> cleaner. But for the client who gets his distribution copies on VHS,
> it won't matter one iota whether the program was edited on the Flyer
> or the Perception.
OK, I'm getting the picture. The Toaster/Flyer caters to the customer
that only needs simple A/B roll transitions with 2D analog effects for
final production onto VHS tapes. This $7500 setup does what any $2500
composite analog linear setup will do with one advantage: random disk
access for video/audio. In fact, I could buy a ////Fast Video Machine
Lite for $2295 and get random tape access and higher quality video. To
go one step further, I'd be hard pressed to find any other NLE system on
the market today that is as limited and basic as the Toaster/Flyer.
> I would be remiss if I didn't mention one other very important fact.
> Professional editors demand real-time interaction with any editing
> system -- linear or non-linear. If an editor can't get a scene to play
> back immediately in its intended finished form, the system is simply
> not useable or workable. Serious editors dismiss any computer-based
> editing system that does not support real-time interaction. The NewTek
> Flyer has offered this essential attribute from the beginning.
This is a completely absurd and bogus notion. I really don't know how
you come up with this nonsense. Perhaps your idea of a "professional"
is a bit different than mine. I'm thinking of the thousands of
professionals that regularly do all their editing offline and produce an
EDL for an online system (this is the highest quality video editing
solution). I'm thinking of the thousands of professionals that use
non-real time Avids and Media 100s every single day and have been doing
so for years and years. You'll find these people all over the broadcast
industry fron major national networks all the way down to the Public
Broadcasting station here in Boise, ID. If I called all of the video
editors in my yellow pages I'd be willing to bet that 9 out of 10
professionals, running their own business, use NLE systems that render
effects. Yet, you say that professionals consider these systems to be
"simply not useable or workable." Balderdash! This is pure, fermented
bovine fecal matter!
> The PC
> and Mac-based NLE manufacturers are now focusing most of their NLE
> design efforts on delivering real-time effects boards. There is simply
> no acceptable option for a professonal editor.
First of all, while real time effects are important, they don't drive
the industry. If "real time effects" was the critical feature that
determined "professional use" then why don't all the manufacturers pump
out cheap Toaster/Flyer clones? Why don't all professionals use a
Toaster/Flyer? After all, you say right here that "There is simply no
acceptable option for a professional editor." Certainly, the technology
in the Toaster/Flyer (being several years old) would be a piece of cake
to replicate in an ASIC if it were so valuable. I just can't seem to
reconcile what you're saying with reality. The truth is that the
Toaster/Flyer is *NOT* the choice of most professionals. NO OTHER
COMPANY produces such a basic and limited composite only NLE system for
"professional use". NO OTHER COMPANY has sacrificed video quality and
the quality of DVE's just for real-time effects and tried to pass it off
as "professional NLE".
The big factor that drives the professional NLE market is video
quality. It's been that way for a long time now. It's how Avid has
earned their top ranking spot. The valuable technology that has earned
several ASICs is component video MJPEG, MPEG, and other DCT compression
schemes (like DVC).
This "professional" world that you believe in just plain doesn't exist.
What "professionals" are you thinking of? What systems are are they
using? What platforms are they based on? What happened to Avid, Media
100, ////Fast, Truevision, Pinnacle? Do you think that only
"non-professionals" use these systems? Is a $50,000 Avid setup designed
for "hobbyists" and other "non-professionals"?
Secondly, the industry is focused on digital video right now. There are
some companies working on NLE systems with real time effects. Their
goal is to preserve high quality component video and provide fully
anit-aliased DVEs in the process. Real time effects are only useful to
the professional if professional quality results can be accomplished.
That's why these systems cost so much.
The problem with Toaster/Flyer fanatics (yourself included Myron) is
that they are completely unaware of what's happening in the "real world"
of video editing. They play around doing all their work by trial and
error and think that it's "the professional way" to edit video. Year
after year goes by and the Toaster/Flyer sinks farther and farther
behind the mainstream video editing world. Technology marches forward
but the Toaster/Flyer stands still. Almost a whole year has passed
since the last time I was involved in a Toaster/Flyer thread and NewTek
has done absolutely nothing to improve or update the Toaster/Flyer
(except for a maintenance release to fix bugs). Meanwhile, there have
been new products for the PC and Mac from virtually every major player.
You say that professionals can't make use of any of the systems
currently available on the PC or Mac but the fact is that more
professionals are using these systems today than have ever used a
Toaster/Flyer. The real truth is that most professionals don't look at
the Toaster/Flyer as a professional level product because it isn't.
Myron Achtman
Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>The Flyer story board motif would drive me crazy because I'm used
>to receiving lots of visual information directly from a time line
>representation. I'd find it cumbersome to have to click on something
>every time I wanted to know how long it was or if it contained audio,
... Ed, your lack of knowledge about the Flyer is showing here. Clip
icons or "croutons" that contain audio are immediately evident because
they display a small "headset" symbol which means audio is included.
>etc. I like dragging the pointer across the timeline so that I can
>scrub both video and audio and very quickly locate edit points rather
>than have to play a clip over to find an in/out point.
... Ed, your lack of knowledge about the Flyer is showing here. You
don't "play a clip over to find an in/out point" on the Flyer. Rather,
there is a control panel for scrubbing clips by using the mouse. It's
really not much different from scrubbing clips in any other NLE
package.
>"Ease of use" is subjective until you are asked to do something that is
>impossible or very difficult on a particular system. For example, if
>someone handed you two tapes and told you to create a single tape with
>synchronized audio from one of the tapes, you'd find that very difficult
>to do using only the Toaster/Flyer. Piece of cake in Premiere.
... Ed, your lack of knowledge about the Flyer is showing here. This
is SUPER EASY on the Flyer. A simple AREXX script allows you to
replace the "bad" audio track on the second digitized tape with the
"prime" audio track from the good tape. Presto, identical audio
quality on both sets of digitized footage.
>So, who is this "customer" that you speak of that is perfectly satisfied
>with results from the Toaster/Flyer? It's not anybody from network
>broadcasting as the video quality is unacceptable for that purpose.
Well Ed, it's MY CUSTOMERS that are ecstatic with the programs we
produce for them on the Flyer. I don't do commercials and I don't do
any broadcast work. Sometimes our naive clients ask about having a
fancy animated logo "intro". But when they find out that their 6
second Lightwave animation will cost as much as the entire editing
job, they ALWAYS back off and settle for a STATIC graphic instead.
Maybe you are dealing with corporate clients with $10,000.00 budgets,
but we deal with people that find $2000.00 a real stretch.
ADITA Video Inc. fills an important market niche. We turn out lots of
high-quality videos for low-budget productions with extremely short
time fuses. Last week I fully digitized and edited two 45 minute
productions in 15 hours each on the Flyer. At $50.00/hr., that's
$1500.00 for 30 hours of work. Mind you, the clients also ordered 200
dubs which basically doubled our income for these two jobs!
>OK, I'm getting the picture. The Toaster/Flyer caters to the customer
>that only needs simple A/B roll transitions with 2D analog effects for
>final production onto VHS tapes. This $7500 setup does what any $2500
>composite analog linear setup will do with one advantage: random disk
>access for video/audio. In fact, I could buy a ////Fast Video Machine
>Lite for $2295 and get random tape access and higher quality video. To
>go one step further, I'd be hard pressed to find any other NLE system on
>the market today that is as limited and basic as the Toaster/Flyer.
YES, you could do it on "any $2500 composite analog linear setup". BUT
you show me anybody that could have edited these 45 minute productions
even in 45 hours each and I'd be impressed. Furthermore, composite
linear systems won't have the quality of the Flyer. S-VHS linear
systems would, but not composite linear systems.
...snip
>This is pure, fermented bovine fecal matter!
Ed, I liked this expression the first 200 times you used it.
>The problem with Toaster/Flyer fanatics (yourself included Myron) is
>that they are completely unaware of what's happening in the "real world"
>of video editing.
AHEM... Ed, I teach Non-Linear Editing using ADOBE Premiere 4.2 on PCs
at a Community College here in Calgary. It's an excellent NLE software
package. But for outright editing productivity, the Flyer blows the PC
away.
>Technology marches forward
>but the Toaster/Flyer stands still. Almost a whole year has passed
>since the last time I was involved in a Toaster/Flyer thread and NewTek
>has done absolutely nothing to improve or update the Toaster/Flyer
>(except for a maintenance release to fix bugs). Meanwhile, there have
>been new products for the PC and Mac from virtually every major player.
OH YES, technology marches forward. That's why the Windows OS is still
crippled by the 2 GB AVI filesize limitation. That's why MIRO still
hasn't delivered NT drivers for its products. That's why REAL-TIME
effects are unavailable unless you want to spend $10,000.00 plus for a
TARGA RTX board. That's why PC configurations are so temperamental
that if you don't have the right INTEL chip set, or the right graphics
card, or the latest BIOS revision, or the latest ActiveX, or the right
brand of PC, the you're shit-out-of-luck for NLE on the PC.
Some day I really hope to be doing NLE on the PC platform. But today,
the Toaster/Flyer is a system that works -- and works well. It's a
mature system that allows highly productive editing sessions with
minimal down time. When Microsoft gets rid of that 2 GB AVI filesize
restriction, when the Windows OS is firmed up, when affordable
REAL-TIME effects are possible, when NLE becomes fast and productive
on the PC, I'll buy in. Until then, I'm Flying.
Ed Bennett
***** revised edition, contains changes from earlier edition *****
Myron, you didn't mention anything about maintaining your position on
your false claim:
"In its price class, there isn't an NLE system available
on the PC or Macintosh platform today, that can outperform
the Video Toaster/Flyer from NewTek, Inc."
So, should I just assume you conceed the issue? How about the second
false claim:
"For straightforward editing projects that involves cuts,
dissolves, 2-D wipes, titles, and mixing two additional
audio layers,any other NLE system in the Flyer's price
class will take 200% - 400% longer to complete a project."
You completely ignored that issue too. In fact, you ignored a lot of my
points, often trying to change the focus of the discussion. For
example, your quick to point out that I got some detail about the
Toaster/Flyer wrong instead of answering the issue at hand (like ease of
use). If you're going to reply then you should answer the issues,
especially the questions that I put to you.
Myron Achtman wrote:
>
> Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>
> >The Flyer story board motif would drive me crazy because I'm used
> >to receiving lots of visual information directly from a time line
> >representation. I'd find it cumbersome to have to click on something
> >every time I wanted to know how long it was or if it contained audio,
> ... Ed, your lack of knowledge about the Flyer is showing here. Clip
> icons or "croutons" that contain audio are immediately evident because
> they display a small "headset" symbol which means audio is included.
Thanks for the correction. The point that I tried to make here is that
the story-board interface does not provide as much information at a
glance as the time line interface. For me, that's an ease of use
issue. Maybe this time you can address my point rather than just point
out some detail about the Toaster/Flyer that I don't remember
correctly. Do you still have to click on a clip to know how long it
is? Can you tell anything about audio levels from the "crouton"? Can
you tell if it's mono or stereo? Please let us know just how much
detail is included at a glance. Or better yet, since you're an
instructor for Adobe Primere, maybe you could just tell us the
differences.
> >etc. I like dragging the pointer across the timeline so that I can
> >scrub both video and audio and very quickly locate edit points rather
> >than have to play a clip over to find an in/out point.
> ... Ed, your lack of knowledge about the Flyer is showing here. You
> don't "play a clip over to find an in/out point" on the Flyer. Rather,
> there is a control panel for scrubbing clips by using the mouse. It's
> really not much different from scrubbing clips in any other NLE
> package.
Thanks again for the correction. Even though I've gotten some detail of
the Toaster/Flyer interface wrong, I'm still trying to demonstrate that
many ease of use issues are subjective. I find having to open a clip to
find out what's there an ease of use issue. Help me to understand
exactly what you mean here. Can you scrub audio and video directly from
the "crouton" view? Or, do you have to open the clip in this "control
panel" first? As you know, in Premiere (and other time line packages)
you just drag the pointer along the time line and you're scrubbing audio
and video (including rendered transitions). Is it the same for the
Flyer or is it more like moving a slider control? The reason I ask this
is that scrubbing is most useful for finding edit points without
constantly zooming in and out (or opening and closing a clip). When I
get the pointer on the frame that I want, then it's easy to use a tool
(like the razor tool) to perform some modification (like splitting the
clip). Would you compare this "control panel" scrubbing to opening the
preview window in Premiere and using the slide bar to "scrub"?
> >"Ease of use" is subjective until you are asked to do something that is
> >impossible or very difficult on a particular system. For example, if
> >someone handed you two tapes and told you to create a single tape with
> >synchronized audio from one of the tapes, you'd find that very difficult
> >to do using only the Toaster/Flyer. Piece of cake in Premiere.
> ... Ed, your lack of knowledge about the Flyer is showing here. This
> is SUPER EASY on the Flyer. A simple AREXX script allows you to
> replace the "bad" audio track on the second digitized tape with the
> "prime" audio track from the good tape. Presto, identical audio
> quality on both sets of digitized footage.
Well, thanks again for the correction but my point is that there are
real things that are not subjective when it comes to ease of use. You
might argue (as you have many times) that having "real-time" transitions
is an ease of use issue. It's somehting that many (not all) PC and Mac
based systems don't have. I was going on information from a thread
last year (9/11) on synchronizing audio. You stated:
"Apparently, there is a new product coming out for the Video Toaster
Flyer that will automate this process. You can JAM SYNC the audio from
one camera to the other (or others) and the good audio will
automatically be transferred to the digitized clips with the "bad"
audio!"
The implication here is that the Toaster/Flyer doesn't have this
capability, a third party product has been announced that should take
care of it. In your answer here you don't make reference to that
product. In fact, your description doesn't make any reference to
synchronizing the audio. I'm assuming that this AREXX script somehow
does this "automaticly"? Replacing the audio of one clip with that of
another is understandably easy, but you're saying that this AREXX script
guarantees perfect lip sync? How does it synchronize some seemingly
arbitrary audio to the video clip?
How about the other "ease of use" issue that I mentioned? You
completely ignored it. What if your customer wants some layered
effects? Isn't this going to be a real pain in the butt on the
Toaster/Flyer? I know it can be done by building the layers one at a
time, feeding the video back into the Flyer. I can't see how this isn't
a real objective "ease of use" issue.
> >So, who is this "customer" that you speak of that is perfectly satisfied
> >with results from the Toaster/Flyer? It's not anybody from network
> >broadcasting as the video quality is unacceptable for that purpose.
> Well Ed, it's MY CUSTOMERS that are ecstatic with the programs we
> produce for them on the Flyer. I don't do commercials and I don't do
> any broadcast work. Sometimes our naive clients ask about having a
> fancy animated logo "intro". But when they find out that their 6
> second Lightwave animation will cost as much as the entire editing
> job, they ALWAYS back off and settle for a STATIC graphic instead.
> Maybe you are dealing with corporate clients with $10,000.00 budgets,
> but we deal with people that find $2000.00 a real stretch.
Yes, in my case I am my own client and I do have a big budget. I do
marketing promotional videos on my own products. These customers that
ask about having an animated logo (or some other "special effect")
aren't naive. They're looking to get something added to their video
that they see all the time in other videos and on TV. In fact, it's so
common that they probably don't even think of it as special. What would
happen if somebody came along and offered to do the spinning logo, lots
of other sophisticated effects and higher quality video all for the same
price as your mundane A/B roll job? Some customers might stick with you
but I'd bet that the majority wouldn't think twice about switching.
> ADITA Video Inc. fills an important market niche. We turn out lots of
> high-quality videos for low-budget productions with extremely short
> time fuses. Last week I fully digitized and edited two 45 minute
> productions in 15 hours each on the Flyer. At $50.00/hr., that's
> $1500.00 for 30 hours of work. Mind you, the clients also ordered 200
> dubs which basically doubled our income for these two jobs!
I'm trying to understand why you think that this would take 200-400%
longer on a PC or Mac based timeline system. It's all A/B roll, 2D
effects, no layering, no animation. Piece of cake!
I recently did a tradeshow demo video in which I boiled down almost 2
hours of raw footage from two cameras to 24 minutes containing layered
effects (up to six deep in some spots), animated titles on almost every
clip (Flying Fonts is *wonderful*), and several customized full motion
3D fully anit-aliased transitions. Began the project at about 6PM,
started rendering transitions at about 12:30am (went to bed). Got up in
the morning and reviewed the results, made a couple of changes,
re-rendered the changes and had a finished 2 hour "loop" tape in hand
before noon. Total working time was about 8 hours and I had time to eat
breakfast and return phone calls. It consumed about the same hourly
rate that your projects did but was significantly more sophisticated and
had better video quality. If I had charged this to an outside customer
at $50/hr, he wouldn't have had to pay any premium for all the extra
"high end" effects (geez, I hesitate to call them "high end" because
virtually everyone is doing them, even sub $1000 products) and high
quality video.
> >OK, I'm getting the picture. The Toaster/Flyer caters to the customer
> >that only needs simple A/B roll transitions with 2D analog effects for
> >final production onto VHS tapes. This $7500 setup does what any $2500
> >composite analog linear setup will do with one advantage: random disk
> >access for video/audio. In fact, I could buy a ////Fast Video Machine
> >Lite for $2295 and get random tape access and higher quality video. To
> >go one step further, I'd be hard pressed to find any other NLE system on
> >the market today that is as limited and basic as the Toaster/Flyer.
> YES, you could do it on "any $2500 composite analog linear setup". BUT
> you show me anybody that could have edited these 45 minute productions
> even in 45 hours each and I'd be impressed.
Hold on here just a second and think about what you're saying. Is
creating an edit decision list by arranging clips on a timeline (the
////Fast Video Machine motif) any more time consuming than digitizing
and arranging "croutons"? I don't think so. It might take a little
more time for the tape decks to shuttle around but not much.
> Furthermore, composite
> linear systems won't have the quality of the Flyer. S-VHS linear
> systems would, but not composite linear systems.
Back up the video tape just a second! The composite linear system is
almost guaranteed to have better video quality. First of all, it won't
suffer any digitizing/compression artifacts. With the Flyer's bandwidth
limiting filters, 8 bit encoding, and noise adding VTASC you're
virtually guaranteed that the video will all look like second generation
*AT BEST*. Most of the work on a linear suite will be from first
generation tape, second generation *AT WORST* (because it's only A/B
roll edits) with no bandwidth limiting or digitizing/compression
artifacts.
Also, what makes you think that composite video on the Toaster/Flyer is
comparable to Y/C on other systems (like a linear suite)? There's no
magic here, composite is composite is composite. The Flyer's composite
video doesn't defy the laws of physics. If you ignore all the bandwidth
limiting, 8 bit digitizing, and VTASC noise then the best possible
result is video quality that is equivalent to a composite linear setup.
When it comes to quality, the on-line linear systems are still king (so
long as we're talking analog acquisition formats).
> ...snip
It's especially revealing to discover what you chose to snip here. It's
an argument that you've made before that still doesn't hold any water.
You continue to claim that professionals cannot accept or tolerate
systems that don't do real time effects. I posed lots and lots of
counter examples proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that this is yet
another false statement. I ended it with:
> >This is pure, fermented bovine fecal matter!
> Ed, I liked this expression the first 200 times you used it.
Is that all you can say about the subject? What about the professionals
that you speak of? Who the hell are they? Can you provide any examples
(other than yourself and other "trial and error" Toaster/Flyer
fanatics)? Can't you tell me that any of my counter examples are
wrong? Or, is this just your way of conceeding the argument?
You made another point "in the snip" that you have made before but is
also bogus. It's the idea that "real-time effects" are the hottest
thing in the industry and that all the PC and Mac based NLE vendors are
working on products that have "real time effects". I proved it wrong
with many arguments but you ignored it. How about another argument:
Let's look at all the new products that have been announced so far this
year and count how many have "real time effects". Let's compare that to
the number of DV products announced/delivered so far this year. Gosh,
from this comparison you'd be forced to conclude that perhaps DV (with
it's higher quality component video) really is more important to the
industry than "real time effects". Care to comment?
> >The problem with Toaster/Flyer fanatics (yourself included Myron) is
> >that they are completely unaware of what's happening in the "real world"
> >of video editing.
> AHEM... Ed, I teach Non-Linear Editing using ADOBE Premiere 4.2 on PCs
> at a Community College here in Calgary. It's an excellent NLE software
> package. But for outright editing productivity, the Flyer blows the PC
> away.
Then you have even less excuse for being ignorant. Keep in mind that
we're not just talking about Premiere. It's not the only video editing
package available for PCs and Macs. Perhaps you can argue that the
Flyer "blows Premiere away" (pretty tough argument to win) but you're
completely wrong to say that the Flyer "blows the PC away". How many
times do I have to remind you of the ////Fast Video Machine with Dual
DPR? There are systems, like the VM/DPR, on PCs in the same price class
as the Toaster/Flyer that completely overshadow it's capabilities. Your
statement is FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE! The problem is that you
know it's false and just keep repeating it and ignoring the evidence.
That's willfull ignorance.
> >Technology marches forward
> >but the Toaster/Flyer stands still. Almost a whole year has passed
> >since the last time I was involved in a Toaster/Flyer thread and NewTek
> >has done absolutely nothing to improve or update the Toaster/Flyer
> >(except for a maintenance release to fix bugs). Meanwhile, there have
> >been new products for the PC and Mac from virtually every major player.
> OH YES, technology marches forward. That's why the Windows OS is still
> crippled by the 2 GB AVI filesize limitation.
Before I answer this I just want to point out something so that you'll
be aware that it didn't slide by me. In my statement above I make the
claim that the Toaster/Flyer is stagnant and constantly falling further
and further behind in technology. You don't answer this issue. You
ignore it completely. Instead, you launch this attack on PCs and the
AVI file format and Miro's lack of NT drivers etc. What happened to my
claim that the Toaster/Flyer is stagnant? YOU AVOIDED THE ISSUE. All
this criticizm against the PC is diversion, a smoke screen to try to
make people forget that what I said is absolutely true: The
Toaster/Flyer is becoming a Dino-Box, just like the computer it's
inseparably based on. So are the people that become obsessed with the
Toaster/Flyer. They become oblivious to the progress in the world
around them and delude themselves into thinking that this 8+ year old
technology is superior.
So, since you seem to suffer acutely from this malady, let's see if we
can get you caught up to 1997:
The 2 GB AVI filesize limit doesn't cripple anyone that owns a Plum,
Targa, DPS, VM, and AV-Master (yes, new drivers play from the timeline
rendering only transitions) just to name a few. So tell me, if we took
away the SCSI controller on the Flyer and made it use the Amiga OS file
system through the Amiga backplane, how crippled would the Flyer be?
ABSOLUTELY DEAD IN THE WATER! So, as we can clearly see from this
blatently obvious example, you have absolutely no cause to criticize
Windows or it's file system or the AVI file definition. The fact that it
exists and works makes it far superior to *ANYTHING* available for
native Amiga/Amiga OS.
> ["technology marches forward"] That's why MIRO still
> hasn't delivered NT drivers for its products.
You criticize one company for it's lack of drivers for one of its
products (DC 20 has NT drivers, DC 30 doesn't) for just one operating
system option. Would you care to enumerate the plethora of NLE systems
available on the Amiga that sell for under $1000? What's wrong, can't
count to *ZERO*? Miro happens to have been the *first* company to ever
offer a sub $1K NLE solution on *any* platform. While they're not my
favorite company to deal with, Miro has done a lot to march technology
along.
It really amuses me to hear all the Amiga fanatics brag about how it has
all this wonderfully elegant architecture that's "made for video
editing". If it's so wonderful, and the PC/Windows is so terrible and
clumbsy and kludgey then why isn't there a bunch of sub $1K NLE systems
for the Amiga? How come there are so many sub $1K NLE systems available
for the PC if it's such a bad architecture? Come on Myron, where's the
beef? I'll tell you what the problem is: the Almighty Amiga and it's
Almighty Amiga OS just can't handle it. The best it can do is be a
fancy control panel for an NLE system. About the only thing the
Toaster/Flyer gets from the Amiga is power from it's backplane, a
keyboard, and a display. You're never going to be able to shove video
data through the I/O bus on an Amiga or use an Amiga hard disk to store
and play it back video. That's why you'll never see anything on the
Amiga that's even remotely close to what's available on the PC and the
Mac.
> ["technology marches forward"] That's why REAL-TIME
> effects are unavailable unless you want to spend $10,000.00 plus for a
> TARGA RTX board.
Why do you continue to insist on being so willfully ignorant? Why don't
you stop ignoring that the ////Fast VM with DPR exists? What's the
problem Myron? The reason nobody has done a cheap real-time system on
the PC is because nobody in their right mind would invest money on a new
product with such lousy video quality as the Toaster/Flyer has. The
world of composite only switchers and D2 data streams has completely
sunk into the USED EQUIPMENT market (except, of course, for the
Toaster/Flyer). It's ancient technology. EVERYONE doing NLE today is
doing it with component video processing and modern, sophisticated ASIC
based hardware CODECS (except, of course NewTek). The real video world
of today demands high quality video more than real time effects. Even
consumer video is rapidly switching to digital component based systems
(DVD, DVC, DBS, D-VHS).
> ["technology marches forward"] That's why PC configurations are so
> temperamental that if you don't have the right INTEL chip set, or the
> right graphics card, or the latest BIOS revision, or the latest
> ActiveX, or the right brand of PC, the you're shit-out-of-luck for NLE
> on the PC.
Another ignorant interpretation of the situation. You've been away from
progress for so long you forget what it's like. You're talking about
the "cutting edge" (or sometimes called the "bleeding edge") of
technology. There's a tremendous amount of change going on and
everybody is trying to take advantage of every latest innovation. The
world of modern computers (both Mac and PC) isn't stagnant like the
world of the Amiga and the Toaster/Flyer. It's a dynamic world of
rapidly changing standards. You're stuck with a proprietary solution
that interfaces to NOTHING ELSE. It does not conform to modern
standards and is not dynamic. IT'S STAGNANT and outdated and has been
that way since the day it was introduced.
> Some day I really hope to be doing NLE on the PC platform. But today,
> the Toaster/Flyer is a system that works -- and works well. It's a
> mature system that allows highly productive editing sessions with
> minimal down time. When Microsoft gets rid of that 2 GB AVI filesize
> restriction, when the Windows OS is firmed up, when affordable
> REAL-TIME effects are possible, when NLE becomes fast and productive
> on the PC, I'll buy in. Until then, I'm Flying.
Not true. I just cannot accept a word of this as your honest opinion.
None of these "obstacles" actually exist. NLE systems have overcome the
2GB AVI filesize restriction. No active and progressing technology will
ever be as "firmed up" as the 1985 Amiga. The ////Fast VM has supplied
affordable "REAL-TIME" effects in an open architecture sysetm with
support for component video for quite some time now. NLE is fast and
productive on the PC so why are you hanging on to your Flyer? The
evidence conpletely contradicts your stated willingness to switch to a
PC based system. You really underestimate me and the rest of the people
in rec.video.desktop if you expect us to accept this statement.
If you choose to reply, try sticking to the points this time.
Chris Fenwick
after reading ALL of Ed Bennets post I have a few things to say...
ONE
wow, you know a lot of words....
TWO
My flyer paid for itself in 5 months....
Bought me a new House
Paid two freelancers that work for me
Bought me a new Mac for "photoshoping"...
Bought cat food
Bought a few flashlight for my work bag....
All kinds of neat stuff....
THREE
I have to get back to work now....on the flyer....making money
see ya....
fen
Actually I wont leave it at that....you really are an angry man tho...a
shame...The fact of the matter is that there are MANY MANY LEVELs of
work out there and there are MANY soapboxes that MANY people choose to
stand on... I Can't imagine why you would spend so much time givng Myron
such a hard time....drop...go back to work...there is a world out there
ED...
CHILL
all of you now....BREAK IT UP....back to your corners....AND BEHAVE
--
Chris Fenwick
Director/Graphic Designer
Broadcast Business Graphics
http://www.bbgroup.com
Tony
> ONE
> wow, you know a lot of words....
> TWO
> My flyer paid for itself in 5 months....
> Bought me a new House
> Paid two freelancers that work for me
> Bought me a new Mac for "photoshoping"...
> Bought cat food
> Bought a few flashlight for my work bag....
> All kinds of neat stuff....
> tho...
Uh oh.... you asked for it now! Ed is really gonna give it to you! Gee,
I said the same thing and had to read a long dissertation from him on
his opinions (which he is entitled to except when he has to constantly
be corrected on misinformation about the Amiga. And that is often. He
will acknowledge it briefly, and then on to putting down a system that
created the DTV revolution).
> shame...The fact of the matter is that there are MANY MANY LEVELs of
> work out there and there are MANY soapboxes that MANY people choose to
> stand on...
But only one soapbox counts... and you know who is standing on it.
And if you are standing on one that is different, look out! You will be
called a slew of negative names for standing on it.
Tony
> ... Ed, your lack of knowledge about the Flyer is showing here. Clip
> icons or "croutons" that contain audio are immediately evident because
> they display a small "headset" symbol which means audio is included.
You said that to the "all knowing" ED??? You are opening yourself up to
a salvo of name calling from the Amiga/Toaster/Flyer-phobic Ed.
Remember, he has extensively USED the Flyer. Not just read the Newtek
press (hahahaha hohohoho). He has extended knowledge of the Amiga and
what it can and cannot do. How does he know this? He has ACTUALLY read
about them!!!!
<<huge snip of Ed pontificating>>
and then... the putdowns start...
> >This is pure, fermented bovine fecal matter!
> >The problem with Toaster/Flyer fanatics (yourself included Myron) is
> >that they are completely unaware of what's happening in the "real
> >world" of video editing.
As if Ed determinds what is "real world" and what isnt. I guess this
Toaster isnt real. Neither are my Amiga's. But my PC must be real.
> AHEM... Ed, I teach Non-Linear Editing using ADOBE Premiere 4.2 on PCs
> at a Community College here in Calgary. It's an excellent NLE software
> package. But for outright editing productivity, the Flyer blows the PC
> away.
What I gather from this is that Myron ACTUALLY has used and taught the
use of Premiere, where Ed has not actually USED the Flyer. Now, who
would I tend to believe? Someone that reads press releases or someone
that actually has used the product.
Now, I really love this....
> OH YES, technology marches forward. That's why the Windows OS is still
> crippled by the 2 GB AVI filesize limitation. That's why MIRO still
> hasn't delivered NT drivers for its products. That's why REAL-TIME
> effects are unavailable unless you want to spend $10,000.00 plus for a
> TARGA RTX board. That's why PC configurations are so temperamental
> that if you don't have the right INTEL chip set, or the right graphics
> card, or the latest BIOS revision, or the latest ActiveX, or the right
> brand of PC, the you're shit-out-of-luck for NLE on the PC.
And that's a fact Jack... er.... Ed. I read it all the time in the
rec.video newsgroups. Also owning a PC has helped to further cement the
fact that a PC can be a real pain to set up. Don't get me wrong, the
Amiga has it's share of problems.
> Some day I really hope to be doing NLE on the PC platform. But today,
> the Toaster/Flyer is a system that works -- and works well. It's a
> mature system that allows highly productive editing sessions with
> minimal down time. When Microsoft gets rid of that 2 GB AVI filesize
> restriction, when the Windows OS is firmed up, when affordable
> REAL-TIME effects are possible, when NLE becomes fast and productive
> on the PC, I'll buy in. Until then, I'm Flying.
Thanks again Myron.
FX
A little over a year ago while healing up from cancer surgery, I singlehandedly
trounced Ed in this exact same arguments, in the Challenge Thread. (Where were
all you guys then????) I have been invited back to take him on again.
HE proved at that time that you could not buy an IBM or MAC system with the same
features as an A/T/F system for the same price or less. He also in an effort to
get me to leave him alone said that the A/T/F is a viable system.
I notice that he still has no support in his arguments, that is no one else is
jumping into the thread to help him, but as I remember the only other post we
got in our thread was a plea for Ed to shut up, as he was making a fool of
himself. And IMHO he is still doing the same thing.
I have glanced through this thread, and I thought I saw somewhere that Ed had
been flamed for name calling. Ed threatened to take me to court for name
calling.
Well Ed IMHO you are still a loud mouthed blow hard A**H***(apologies to the
rest of the group for language) and Ed if you want to take me to court and prove
that this is not my opinion, or that I am not allowed to have it, or express it,
you are welcome to try.
People all you will ever get from Ed is his opinions. He will argue with you
that he is entitled to voice his, which is in his mind being informative, and
you are not entitled to voice yours, which in his mind is SPAM. That is the
crux of his whole agrement.
Attack him there. Use logic, as that is his weak point. He will run off on
tangents, don't follow him except to maybe point out how pathetic he is for
going there. Ignore the tangents and bring him back on topic. He had over 30
post to my 6 or so, and the majority of them were questioning my intelligence,
or Composite vs Component to which I kept telling him Off Topic - Net etiquette
says you should start a new thread with a new topic. His CODEC vs our CODEC
which basically is an agrement of opinions as to which one looks best. You will
never win an agrement of Opinions.
Like A** H**** everyone has an opinion, and a lot of them stink. Ed is entitled
to his opinion. Offer other opinions, but not necessasarily as an answer to Ed's
post, but as a different branch to the same thread Ed hates to be ignored.
Point out though when he is arguing opinions vs logic, and refuse to argue the
opinions.
And no matter what he says DON'T LET HIM GET YOU ANGARY. If you have to wait a
day before answering his post do it, as you will look better with a cool head.
There is a group that Ed really should visit,
comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
In fact his Amiga bashing is off topic and IMHO doesn't belong in video groups.
If he wants to discuss A/T/F video software, that is on topic. If he want to
argue Amiga vs IBM / MAC send him to c.s.a.a.
But IMHO he hasn't got the guts to take on Amiga users who really know the
system. (Nerds who deal in computers not video[incidently the Challenge posting
started in c.s.a.a and I trounced them too.] )
Personally I put Ed in my Kill file, his post are imeditatly removed from my
News reader and I don't have to look at his name. And when I told him I did
that he accused me of threatening his life ;-), of course in Ed's case not
having us listen to him would be a threat to his life. IMHO he needs an
audience, and the only way he can feel good is by putting others down, in fact
that is probably the only way he can get people to talk to him.
As for me. In the last year, I have been tested clean of cancer (so far), and
gotten enough business that I don't have time to play childish games with Eddy.
ALL OF THE ABOVE IS ONLY MY OPINION, AND I COULD BE WRONG.
Good luck
FX
On Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:38:26 -0600, Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>Jim Davis wrote:
>>
>> ED should Get a Life.
>
YEP
<SNIP>
To return mail use pj...@stlnet.com
or remove the Anti SPAM dash(-)
-----------------------------------------
Those who would give up essential liberties
for a measure of security, deserve neither liberty nor
security. --Ben Franklin
-----------------------------------------
Ed Bennett
sent via email and posted to usenet
Every propaganda machine needs someone to revise history. Good thing
there's DejaNews!
FX wrote:
>
> A little over a year ago while healing up from cancer surgery, I singlehandedly
> trounced Ed in this exact same arguments, in the Challenge Thread. (Where were
> all you guys then????) I have been invited back to take him on again.
Well, first of all it wasn't even a year ago. Try September and October
of last year. Secondly, here's what Paul means when he says he
"trounced" me in his "challenge thread" (my comments in []'s):
Subject: Re: CHALLENGE TO ED AND FRIENDS - PART 6
From: pj...@stlnet.com (FX)
Date: 1996/10/12
Newsgroups: rec.video,rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production
This is my last posting in this thread also.
Ed has finally finished. And although he in one of his post
does beat the letter of the challenge ie:- he puts together a
system for less than $20,000. In another of his post he shows
he can't beat the challenge in the spirit of the post which is
to duplicate my system today at today's prices.
And...
Subject: CHALLENGE TO ED IS ENDED finally
From: pj...@stlnet.com (FX)
Date: 1996/10/17
Newsgroups: rec.video,rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production
...
OK then we have a loose/loose situation. I lost because in spite
of all my planning I did not write the challenge correctly and Ed
beat the $20,000 limit of the original system. Ed lost because
he couldn't put together a system for under the price of an
A/T/F system that has the same feature list.
And, in answer to my protest about the lewd names and threats he
directed toward me, and accusing me of screwing someone out of a piece
of equipment he said:
Subject: Re: CHALLENGE TO ED AND FRIENDS - PART 6
From: pj...@stlnet.com (FX)
Date: 1996/10/06
Newsgroups: rec.video,rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production
...
Ed has pointed out my poor spelling also So I will point out that
the word is Lewd. And once I figured out what he was saying I
figured it must be my reference to the fact that IBM users who
attack the Amiga as often as Ed does must be getting some sort of
satisfaction from it, and I sugested it was sexual, and not to
argue with him because it could become messy. Ed I apolagize for
saying that, I must have been wrong, The only other reason I can
see for this type of behavior is religious. but I am not makeing
any acusations here. (of course Ed did drive me to confessing
that I get pleasure from watching my IBM and Amiga interface)
I also apologize to you and your friend whom you bought the
video equipment from. For saying you might have screwed him.
...
I will repeat that this is out of context, and I said I would
like to "Kick Ed's Ass" I can't apologize for wanting to kick
your ass, but I Apologize for saying I wanted to. Ed for your
future reference I don't know where you live, I don't consider
it worth knowing. I promise I will not come knocking on you door
and do anything to you. The only thing I know is your Email
adress, and I would never consider using it the way someone is
using mine. [Oh, really!]
Oooooh, I feel so "trounced"!
> HE proved at that time that you could not buy an IBM or MAC system with the same
> features as an A/T/F system for the same price or less. He also in an effort to
> get me to leave him alone said that the A/T/F is a viable system.
Here Paul is demonstrating his expertise in revising history. I proved
nothing of the sort. The "challenge" that Paul proposed (and later
revised with this "spirit" nonsense because it was so easily beaten) was
to duplicate the functionality of his particular setup (an
Amiga/Toaster/Flyer system) using a PC or a Mac for under $20,000. I
did not prove that anything was "impossible". Quite the contrary, I
proved that the ////Fast Video Machine with Dual DPR was far superior to
the Amiga/Toaster/Flyer in virtually every way for a comparable price.
I even went so far as to include lots of stupid extras in the "challenge
system" to appease his constant whining.
> I notice that he still has no support in his arguments, that is no one else is
> jumping into the thread to help him, but as I remember the only other post we
> got in our thread was a plea for Ed to shut up, as he was making a fool of
> himself. And IMHO he is still doing the same thing.
What a desperate attempt to embarrass me. I suppose that's the only
thing that can be done when there are no facts to support your case.
Unfortunately, Paul didn't bother to discover that his fellow
Amiga/Toaster/Flyer fanatics have already tried to embarrass me into
giving up the issue. My reply to them is the same to Paul: Argue the
facts, bring in evidence to support your claims, or just plain shut up!
> I have glanced through this thread, and I thought I saw somewhere that Ed had
> been flamed for name calling. Ed threatened to take me to court for name
> calling.
Unfortunately for Paul DejaNews is quite a bit more accurate than his
memory. It wasn't a name you called me. You threatened violence:
Subject: Re: Targa 2000 Pro Disappointing
From: pj...@stlnet.com (FX)
Date: 1996/09/21
Newsgroups: rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production
...
[replying to my call for clear and concise specs on the NewTek
web site, Paul said:]
>> And I think many here would definitely appreciate a chance
>> for a clear and concise Kick at your A**.
[to which Anthony R Pierre replied, saying:]
> Wouldnt be worth it. You would wind up with an arguement on
> whether you really kicked it or not.
[and Paul's final word on the subject:]
Not if I got a clear and concise definition of which was front
and which was back first.
Paul Nordmann
He called me every lewd name in the book and goaded me for weeks but
when he expressed a desire to "kick at" my "A**" I informed him that I
could easily consider this a valid threat and file charges if I so
desired.
> Well Ed IMHO you are still a loud mouthed blow hard A**H***(apologies to the
> rest of the group for language) and Ed if you want to take me to court and prove
> that this is not my opinion, or that I am not allowed to have it, or express it,
> you are welcome to try.
I don't care what you think of me or what you call me. Threatening
violence is another issue altogether. Now, if you don't want to defend
Myron's position that the Toaster/Flyer is better than anything on a PC
or Mac in it's price class then just go away. That's what I'm
discussing.
> People all you will ever get from Ed is his opinions. He will argue with you
> that he is entitled to voice his, which is in his mind being informative, and
> you are not entitled to voice yours, which in his mind is SPAM. That is the
> crux of his whole agrement.
I never called anyone's opinion "SPAM". Based on Paul's usage of the
term here I can't help but wonder if he knows what it means. My
argument is with people who claim that the Toaster/Flyer is superior to
anything available on the PC or the Mac in the same price class.
Nothing more and nothing less. All I've done is to pose contradictory
arguments to these clearly false claims. Nobody has bothered to answer
these arguments. They'd rather worry about whether I get some stupid
detail about the Toaster/Flyer correct or criticize Microsoft and PCs.
> Attack him there. Use logic, as that is his weak point. He will run off on
> tangents, don't follow him except to maybe point out how pathetic he is for
> going there. Ignore the tangents and bring him back on topic. He had over 30
> post to my 6 or so, and the majority of them were questioning my intelligence,
> or Composite vs Component to which I kept telling him Off Topic - Net etiquette
> says you should start a new thread with a new topic. His CODEC vs our CODEC
> which basically is an agrement of opinions as to which one looks best. You will
> never win an agrement of Opinions.
It would seem that Paul doesn't understand that arguing the merits of
one NLE system over another includes such aspects as video formats and
CODECs. Claiming that the Amiga was designed to efficiently handle
video data requires discussion about the Amiga and whether or not this
is true. The problem I've had all along with Toaster/Flyer fanatics is
keeping them on topic. They don't want to discuss specifics. They try
to avoid issues. They don't answer direct questions. They ignore whole
topics. It's just another set of tactics straight out of the
Toaster/Flyer propaganda handbook: Lie, avoid direct issues, revise
history, embarrass your opponent, and don't let me forget: call your
opponent names and then accuse him of doing it!
> Like A** H**** everyone has an opinion, and a lot of them stink. Ed is entitled
> to his opinion. Offer other opinions, but not necessasarily as an answer to Ed's
> post, but as a different branch to the same thread Ed hates to be ignored.
I don't think so. I have already said that if they ignore me I'll go
away. All of my posts are simply replies to Toaster/Flyer fanatical
claims (like this one). I still haven't started a single
anit-Toaster/Flyer Thread and have no intention to.
> Point out though when he is arguing opinions vs logic, and refuse to argue the
> opinions.
No, I much prefer facts and logic. I'm sick and tired of the stupid
opinions from Toaster/Flyer fanatics. I continue to call for facts and
evidence and get absolutely no replies. Paul must be forgetting that
one of the major rules of propaganda is to avoid logic. When that can't
be done, then twist it. That's why I can't get a single logical answer
out of the Toaster/Flyer cult.
> And no matter what he says DON'T LET HIM GET YOU ANGARY. If you have to wait a
> day before answering his post do it, as you will look better with a cool head.
Most definitely do not get "angary". At last, Paul says something I can
agree with! Definitely reply with a cool head, not like the idiot that
forged a malicious post earlier today. Right Paul?
> There is a group that Ed really should visit,
>
> comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
>
> In fact his Amiga bashing is off topic and IMHO doesn't belong in video groups.
> If he wants to discuss A/T/F video software, that is on topic. If he want to
> argue Amiga vs IBM / MAC send him to c.s.a.a.
No, I'm not interested in visiting csaa. My goal is to challenge the
lies that the A/T/F crowd are already posting in this group. I'm not
interested in picking any fights.
> But IMHO he hasn't got the guts to take on Amiga users who really know the
> system. (Nerds who deal in computers not video[incidently the Challenge posting
> started in c.s.a.a and I trounced them too.] )
Ya, they make me sick. Here's a bunch of guys that spend all their time
goofing around with computer junk that was designed in 1985. They
constantly pat themselves on the back and tell themselves "it's better
than wintel". Whenever someone from the current decade comes along they
all get excited about arguing why 12 year old computer technology means
a rats ass about anything. Geez, what a sick and sorry group. I don't
waste my time with 1985 technology computers and I don't waste my time
associating with those that are obsessed with it.
> Personally I put Ed in my Kill file, his post are imeditatly removed from my
> News reader and I don't have to look at his name. And when I told him I did
> that he accused me of threatening his life ;-), of course in Ed's case not
> having us listen to him would be a threat to his life.
Wow, this is a serious departure from reality. Hey Paul, why don't you
just find the quote from DejaNews to back up this completely wild and
absurd claim?
> IMHO he needs an
> audience, and the only way he can feel good is by putting others down, in fact
> that is probably the only way he can get people to talk to him.
On the contrary, I'm simply answering those that have already put down
PC and Mac users. If they stop spouting their stupid lies and
propaganda then I'll be quite happy to shut up.
> As for me. In the last year, I have been tested clean of cancer (so far), and
Well, good for you. I'm sorry you had to go through that. I know what
it's like...
> gotten enough business that I don't have time to play childish games with Eddy.
Good. I'd just as soon get to work myself as I have a huge backlog of
orders to fill.
> ALL OF THE ABOVE IS ONLY MY OPINION, AND I COULD BE WRONG.
>
Thank you Dennis Miller.
FX
On Tue, 01 Jul 1997 19:25:15 GMT, pjn...@stlnet.com (FX) wrote:
>A little over a year ago while healing up from cancer surgery, I singlehandedly
>trounced Ed in this exact same arguments, in the Challenge Thread. (Where were
>all you guys then????) I have been invited back to take him on again.
>
>HE proved at that time that you could not buy an IBM or MAC system with the same
>features as an A/T/F system for the same price or less. He also in an effort to
>get me to leave him alone said that the A/T/F is a viable system.
>
>I notice that he still has no support in his arguments, that is no one else is
>jumping into the thread to help him, but as I remember the only other post we
>got in our thread was a plea for Ed to shut up, as he was making a fool of
>himself. And IMHO he is still doing the same thing.
>
>I have glanced through this thread, and I thought I saw somewhere that Ed had
>been flamed for name calling. Ed threatened to take me to court for name
>calling.
>
>Well Ed IMHO you are still a loud mouthed blow hard A**H***(apologies to the
>rest of the group for language) and Ed if you want to take me to court and prove
>that this is not my opinion, or that I am not allowed to have it, or express it,
>you are welcome to try.
>
>People all you will ever get from Ed is his opinions. He will argue with you
>that he is entitled to voice his, which is in his mind being informative, and
>you are not entitled to voice yours, which in his mind is SPAM. That is the
>crux of his whole agrement.
>
>Attack him there. Use logic, as that is his weak point. He will run off on
>tangents, don't follow him except to maybe point out how pathetic he is for
>going there. Ignore the tangents and bring him back on topic. He had over 30
>post to my 6 or so, and the majority of them were questioning my intelligence,
>or Composite vs Component to which I kept telling him Off Topic - Net etiquette
>says you should start a new thread with a new topic. His CODEC vs our CODEC
>which basically is an agrement of opinions as to which one looks best. You will
>never win an agrement of Opinions.
>
>Like A** H**** everyone has an opinion, and a lot of them stink. Ed is entitled
>to his opinion. Offer other opinions, but not necessasarily as an answer to Ed's
>post, but as a different branch to the same thread Ed hates to be ignored.
>Point out though when he is arguing opinions vs logic, and refuse to argue the
>opinions.
>
>And no matter what he says DON'T LET HIM GET YOU ANGARY. If you have to wait a
>day before answering his post do it, as you will look better with a cool head.
>
>There is a group that Ed really should visit,
>
>comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
>
>In fact his Amiga bashing is off topic and IMHO doesn't belong in video groups.
>If he wants to discuss A/T/F video software, that is on topic. If he want to
>argue Amiga vs IBM / MAC send him to c.s.a.a.
>
>But IMHO he hasn't got the guts to take on Amiga users who really know the
>system. (Nerds who deal in computers not video[incidently the Challenge posting
>started in c.s.a.a and I trounced them too.] )
>
>Personally I put Ed in my Kill file, his post are imeditatly removed from my
>News reader and I don't have to look at his name. And when I told him I did
>that he accused me of threatening his life ;-), of course in Ed's case not
>having us listen to him would be a threat to his life. IMHO he needs an
>audience, and the only way he can feel good is by putting others down, in fact
>that is probably the only way he can get people to talk to him.
>
>As for me. In the last year, I have been tested clean of cancer (so far), and
>gotten enough business that I don't have time to play childish games with Eddy.
>
>ALL OF THE ABOVE IS ONLY MY OPINION, AND I COULD BE WRONG.
>
>Good luck
>
>FX
>
>On Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:38:26 -0600, Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>
>>Jim Davis wrote:
>>>
>>> ED should Get a Life.
>>
>YEP
>
><SNIP>
>
Now I hear Ed has been talking behind my back and makeing up stories.
>"When it comes to my memory, I have no trouble reconciling it with the
>record on DejaNews. I suggest you go out there and review it because
>your memory is showing signs of inaccuracy.
>Paul Nordman haunted and harrassed me for two weeks before I landed into
>him and gave him exactly what he deserved. He ended up regretting the
>whole thing and whimpering an apology to me.
I never apologized to Ed, or anyone. And my only regret was the time I had
wasted trying to get him to change his mind. My last mesage to Ed was the
single word "Pathetic"
This was in answer to Ed's posting which finally gave us the price on his system
at I believe $17K Which beat the Challenge system price of $20K. But when I
pointed out that my $20K system took 4 years to build, and the pricing had come
down since then, and that I could duplicate my system for $15K he still insisted
that my system cost more than his.
Everyone has problems, my self included, but at least I can do simple math.
But as I remember it Ed did apologize to the group for having taken up all their
time and bandwidth with 30+ postings which all basicly said Paul is an idiot.
> That's how he took me to
>task! In the end, I had Chuck from NewTek agreeing with my summary and
>making updates on their website to reflect THE TRUTH (for a change).
Yes that's the problem with Web Sites You can make them Fool proof, but you
can't make them Damn fool proof.
In the end he did have Chuck from NT make updates to the web site so that any
fool, such as Ed could understand what was being said.
I didn't run away with my tail between my legs, I just got tired talking to a
wall, I knew that everyone else, understood what I said, no one, including Ed,
contacted me to complain or correct my last or second from last postings. (In
fact the only posting I got from someone other than Ed on the subject said I
didn't have to prove my system to anyone)
Ed didn't understand that I wasn't putting this together for him, I was putting
it together for all the people he had mislead, and to show the rest of the group
just what kind of individual he is. Ed did a great job of makeing a fool of
himself. I knew that they understood what I had to say, and that was all that
was important to me.
Ever do something that is enjoyable to begin with, but after you do it over and
over again, it becomes boaring and finally sickening. Like the kid who likes
Pop Corn so he gets a job at a movie theater. All the pop corn he can eat, and
he does, 2 weeks later he can't stand the sight of popcorn. That's what happend
with Ed. Ed just got too easy to make a fool of, so much so that it was no
longer enjoyable. And I had nothing more to say unless I wanted to obnoxiously
repat myself like Ed was doing.
Plus as I mentioned above I realy do have better things to do with my time than
talk to a wall.
The Eds of the world are the price we pay for freedom of speach. He is not
realy worth the time to format a reply to, and I realy don't care what he thinks
of me, but I do have professional pride and don't like haveing stories made up
about me.
But I realy do not have time to repeat everything that was said over a year ago.
I know I got my point across, and You know I got it across. What Ed thinks is
realy unimportant, in fact anyone who checks will find that most of what Ed
thinks is unimportant
I have told you how I did it, and even though Ed will probably read this, it
will all work again, but someone else with more time to waste than I, will have
to do it this time.
Yes do look it up in DejaNews. Look for "CHALENGE CHALENGE CHALENGE" and for
later postings "CHALLENGE CHALLENGE CHALLENGE" (hey I'm a Graphic Technician. I
get paid to tell computers how to create video)
Now I apologize to the goup, because this whole posting is realy off topic. I
would have posted it to comp.sys.Ed-Bennit.advocay, but I couldn't find it in
any of the NG servers.
And of course again the disclaimer. Everything I have said here, about Ed, is
just my opinion, and being human, I could be wrong.
FX
Tony
> Now I apologize to the goup, because this whole posting is realy off
> topic. I would have posted it to comp.sys.Ed-Bennit.advocay, but I
> couldn't find it in any of the NG servers.
>
> And of course again the disclaimer. Everything I have said here, about
> Ed, is just my opinion, and being human, I could be wrong.
Thanks for the humor! The reason you could not find
comp.sys.Ed-Bennit.advocay is because of some misspellings. It is
Ed-Bennet with an "e" not an "i". Oh advocacy....
Maybe he could become a televangelist speaking on the evils of A/T/F.
Especially since he doesn't use one or has any experience with one.
Myron Achtman
It appears that the Video Toaster/Flyer is proving itself to be a far
more productive NLE system than Ed Bennett's PC-based PLUM system.
The recent postings about the AMIGA-based Flyer have totally enraged
Mr. Bennett. Now he is spending most of his time researching DejaNews
and responding with huge messages several times a day!
Of course, he might be multitasking -- working on editing with the
PLUM and responding to newsgroups simultaneously -- but I doubt it.
Tony
> The recent postings about the AMIGA-based Flyer have totally enraged
> Mr. Bennett. Now he is spending most of his time researching DejaNews
> and responding with huge messages several times a day!
>
> Of course, he might be multitasking -- working on editing with the
> PLUM and responding to newsgroups simultaneously -- but I doubt it.
First, if Ed is using Win95, he is going to have a hard time
multitasking if he is doing video work. I don't have that problem at all
with my Toaster. My problem with Ed is that he continues to give
"specs", which do have a place in video, but he has no actual working
knowledge of either the Amiga or the Toaster/Flyer. With video, it is
the final output that matters. We don't look at "specs" on a video
screen. At least I don't. My clients look at the finished product. They
don't care what it is done on. What equipment is used. Just the finished
product has to meet their requirements. Of course there are those that
believe in "specs" only. Ed refuses to acknowledge the lead of the Amiga
in DTV. If it weren't for the Amiga, Ed would be still using a
monochrome 640k ("that's all the ram you will ever need" says Bill
Gates) machine. The Amiga was FAR ahead of anything in the home PC
market. First with pre-emptive (you have that yet Ed??) in a home
computer. First with morphing, 3D software, animation, and of course the
REVOLUTIONARY Toaster. The Toaster put DTV in the hands of the masses
(even Ed).
Now, there are shortcomings in dealing with the Amiga. It went through 2
bankrupcies, but was bought by none other than GATEWAY. Now, unless
Gateway has money to throw away (and I don't think that they got as big
as they are by doing it), or they see something in the Amiga. Ed will
say something uninformed on the reasons why GW2k bought the Amiga, but
he really doesn't know. Yes, the Amiga technology is about 10yrs old.
Shows how good the original design was in the beginning to last that
long and still be viable (not to Ed of course). Ed will say why buy old
technology (ever hear of tube audio equipment Ed?? Guess not.). If it
works and suits your needs, then use it. Why use and old car when you
can spend money on a new one? Ed can and does. Last years auto isn't as
good as this years and won't serve you any purpose. Ed's reasoning is
seriously flawed here. He mentions about buying the Amiga. At one time,
he even said it wasn't being made. Then when corrected that it is still
being made, he mumbled something about the numbers being sold and the
profitability of it. Shows the calibre of person he is. You can buy the
Amiga mailorder everywhere. No, you can't go to the mall. And if you
have a service problem, the machine will have to be sent out. That CAN
be a major pain if you are in the middle of a project. BUT, if you Plum
card goes belly up, what will you do then? What about your harddrives?
As for software, everything that you want is available. I personally
don't need all the features of MS Word 7 (which I have and use). Nor do
I need the spreadsheet of Lotus. Remember, the Amiga is a HOME computer
that can do quite well in the small business environment.
Now, about speed. Yes, the accelerator boards are more expensive than I
wish them to be. But then, we also don't require the sheer "horsepower"
of Pents to run the programs either. Rendering... ah.. now THAT is where
the PC excels (and one of the things I use it for).
I could go on about what the Amiga can actually do. How do I know?? I
own 2 of them. Also own a PC clone. I don't speak on "specs". They
really mean very little to me. If something does what I want, I don't
ask for the "specs", I buy it (remember HiEnd Esoteric audio??).
The A/T/F is a viable NLE system that produces the results that many
people are more than satisfied with, despite what Ed would have others
to believe (even though, once again, Ed has NO real hands on experience
with the Flyer).
Now Myron, just to clear the air about the Flyer/Plum issue, please tell
us all again your impressions since you ACTUALLY used the Plum and
Flyer. Not like Ed just using the Plum.
Myron Achtman
Tony <APi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Now Myron, just to clear the air about the Flyer/Plum issue, please tell
>us all again your impressions since you ACTUALLY used the Plum and
>Flyer. Not like Ed just using the Plum.
I have done side-by-side comparisons of video quality with the Plum
and the Flyer. I used S-VHS source footage and fed both the Flyer and
the Plum with the same types of video clips and comparable data rates
(around 4.5 to 4.8 MB/sec). After digitizing, the footage was played
back on the two systems and output to S-VHS.
By using insert editing on my S-VHS deck, I was able to get a
continuous video that toggled back and forth from the Plum output to
the Flyer. In every case -- close up footage, medium footage - wide
angle footage -- the Plum's output was definitely sharper and clearer
than the Flyer's.
I want to add that all the output was recorded to my 8 year old
Panasonic AG-7500 S-VHS deck. This deck has older circuitry and its
video heads are somewhat worn (they have been replaced once).
More recently, I had the opportunity to work with a Betacam SP
recorder. It obviously has better heads and better circuitry than my
S-VHS deck. After playing back the Betacam tape (recorded from the
Flyer), I could not perceive any difference between the RAW source
material and the Flyer's output.
The digitizing algorithm used on the Flyer is VTASC, not MJPEG. VTASC
seems to "thrive" on clean video input. If I use Betacam SP, the
ultimate results are basically identical to the RAW footage. By
contrast, I just finished editing a client's project that was supplied
on VHS source footage. The final "master tape" from the Flyer has a
noticable soft "graininess" compared to the original raw footage.
In summary, if you're using Betacam SP or really new S-VHS decks with
clean Faroudja circuitry and high quality TBCs, the Flyer and its
VTASC software excels. However, if you're working with VHS or "noisy"
S-VHS/Hi-8, there will be an inherent graininess or fuzziness in the
final product. PC products like the Plum and miro DC30, with their
MJPEG digitizing schemes, seem to do a better job of "masking" the
"noise" associated with lower end formats. Therefore, the Flyer is
better suited for editing facilities equipped with high-end TBCs and
Betacam or MII decks.
Ed Bennett
Myron Achtman wrote:
>
> It appears that the Video Toaster/Flyer is proving itself to be a far
> more productive NLE system than Ed Bennett's PC-based PLUM system.
>
> Mr. Bennett. Now he is spending most of his time researching DejaNews
> and responding with huge messages several times a day!
"Enraged?" Really? Hmmm...I don't think so. What makes you think that
I'm enraged? Have I lost control? Certainly, from Calgary, Canada you
can't tell if I'm enraged. OH, I get it! You do this all the time
Myron. You just say things off the top of your head without thinking or
gathering evidence.
Now, perhaps typing a few messages for Usenet would fill most of your
day but it doesn't fill mine. As I've said before, it only fills the
gaps. Gosh, it takes all of you Toaster/Flyer fanatics to try to keep
just one preson down. Instead of all this speculative slander Myron,
why don't you just answer some more of my questions? What's wrong? Are
my questions too embarrassing?
> Of course, he might be multitasking -- working on editing with the
> PLUM and responding to newsgroups simultaneously -- but I doubt it.
Why do you doubt it? Quite often I read and reply to email, scan
newsgroups, and perform many other tasks while the Plum is rendering
something. Why would this be so important to you anyway? I'd think
that answering those embarrassing questions would be far more important
to you. Would you really rather put be down than defend the
Toaster/Flyer? Gee, how revealing...
Ed Bennett
email and usenet
FX wrote:
(Gee Paul, replying to your own articles these days? Well, this pack of
lies won't stand either.)
> Now I hear Ed has been talking behind my back and makeing up stories.
>
> >"When it comes to my memory, I have no trouble reconciling it with the
> >record on DejaNews. I suggest you go out there and review it because
> >your memory is showing signs of inaccuracy.
> >Paul Nordman haunted and harrassed me for two weeks before I landed into
> >him and gave him exactly what he deserved. He ended up regretting the
> >whole thing and whimpering an apology to me.
>
> I never apologized to Ed, or anyone. And my only regret was the time I had
> wasted trying to get him to change his mind. My last mesage to Ed was the
> single word "Pathetic"
Ahem...A little dose of truth won't hurt any, will it Paul? The *'s are
mine for emphasis.
Subject: Re: CHALLENGE TO ED AND FRIENDS - PART 6
From: pj...@stlnet.com (FX)
Date: 1996/10/06
Newsgroups: rec.video,rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production
...
Ed has pointed out my poor spelling also So I will point out that
the word is Lewd. And once I figured out what he was saying I
figured it must be my reference to the fact that IBM users who
attack the Amiga as often as Ed does must be getting some sort of
satisfaction from it, and I sugested it was sexual, and not to
argue with him because it could become messy. Ed I **apolagize**
for
saying that, I must have been wrong, The only other reason I can
see for this type of behavior is religious. but I am not makeing
any acusations here. (of course Ed did drive me to confessing
that I get pleasure from watching my IBM and Amiga interface)
I also **apologize** to you and your friend whom you bought the
video equipment from. For saying you might have screwed him.
...
I will repeat that this is out of context, and I said I would
like to "Kick Ed's Ass" I can't apologize for wanting to kick
your ass, but I **Apologize** for saying I wanted to. Ed for your
future reference I don't know where you live, I don't consider
it worth knowing. I promise I will not come knocking on you door
and do anything to you. The only thing I know is your Email
adress, and I would never consider using it the way someone is
using mine. [Oh, really!]
I wonder why Amiga/Toaster/Flyer fanatics are such chronic liars?
Perhaps, in order to maintain the illusion of superiority they have to
lie to themselves all the time. Perhaps they believe that if you
convince yourself to believe it then it really isn't a lie.
> This was in answer to Ed's posting which finally gave us the price on his system
> at I believe $17K Which beat the Challenge system price of $20K. But when I
> pointed out that my $20K system took 4 years to build, and the pricing had come
> down since then, and that I could duplicate my system for $15K he still insisted
> that my system cost more than his.
Oooooh, poor baby. You got beat at your own game so you tried to change
the rules. Too bad. When you buy a ////Fast VM with dual DPR, you get
much more of an NLE than you get with a Toaster/Flyer for virtually the
same price. Isn't that enough Paul?
> Everyone has problems, my self included, but at least I can do simple math.
>
> But as I remember it Ed did apologize to the group for having taken up all their
> time and bandwidth with 30+ postings which all basicly said Paul is an idiot.
Absolutely. I was very sorry to have to put everyone through that
nonsense. I regret having to do it again too. But, if I can prevent
anyone from getting suckered into buying a new Toaster/Flyer, then I'll
feel that it was worth it. If you want one (and I can understand why),
just buy it used. There's always several people in the newsgroups
trying to unload them for pennies on the dollar.
> > That's how he took me to
> >task! In the end, I had Chuck from NewTek agreeing with my summary and
> >making updates on their website to reflect THE TRUTH (for a change).
>
> Yes that's the problem with Web Sites You can make them Fool proof, but you
> can't make them Damn fool proof.
>
> In the end he did have Chuck from NT make updates to the web site so that any
> fool, such as Ed could understand what was being said.
It's too bad that Chuck didn't get all the changes made. These issues
weren't merely to clear up some confusing wording (although there was
some of that). NewTek claims that the Toaster/Flyer has a video
bandwidth of of 6 Mhz and a data rate of 8 MB/s. In actual fact, the
product that they sell has a bandwidth limiting filter at 4.2 Mhz and
starts throwing out data at 4.8 MB/s. The specifications are BALD FACED
LIES. The fact that they haven't changed them after being notified
makes it even worse!
> I didn't run away with my tail between my legs, I just got tired talking to a
> wall, I knew that everyone else, understood what I said, no one, including Ed,
> contacted me to complain or correct my last or second from last postings. (In
> fact the only posting I got from someone other than Ed on the subject said I
> didn't have to prove my system to anyone)
OK, whatever you say Paul. Really, it's OK now. Try to relax and take
it easy for a while. You don't have to prove anything to anybody.
You're going to be just fine. Here, take one of these, it will help you
to sleep better...
> Ed didn't understand that I wasn't putting this together for him, I was putting
> it together for all the people he had mislead, and to show the rest of the group
> just what kind of individual he is. Ed did a great job of makeing a fool of
> himself. I knew that they understood what I had to say, and that was all that
> was important to me.
When you start telling the truth, then you can look at others and judge
whether or not they mislead anyone. Why don't you start by replying to
this message with some truth, rather than these BALD FACED LIES. You
must think that everyone here is really really stupid.
> Ever do something that is enjoyable to begin with, but after you do it over and
> over again, it becomes boaring and finally sickening. Like the kid who likes
> Pop Corn so he gets a job at a movie theater. All the pop corn he can eat, and
> he does, 2 weeks later he can't stand the sight of popcorn. That's what happend
> with Ed. Ed just got too easy to make a fool of, so much so that it was no
> longer enjoyable. And I had nothing more to say unless I wanted to obnoxiously
> repat myself like Ed was doing.
>
> Plus as I mentioned above I realy do have better things to do with my time than
> talk to a wall.
>
> The Eds of the world are the price we pay for freedom of speach. He is not
> realy worth the time to format a reply to, and I realy don't care what he thinks
> of me, but I do have professional pride and don't like haveing stories made up
> about me.
Let's talk about freedom of speech, as opposed to propaganda and lies...
> But I realy do not have time to repeat everything that was said over a year ago.
> I know I got my point across, and You know I got it across. What Ed thinks is
> realy unimportant, in fact anyone who checks will find that most of what Ed
> thinks is unimportant
Gee, I'll bet that Kevin Elders wishes he had been warned not to waste
$7500 on his Toaster/Flyer. If he had bought a DPS PVR or a Targa 2000
or perhaps even a Plum he would be working on a very lucritive CBS
contract and saved $3500 in the process. I'll bet that there are others
out there that are in the very same boat, or are about to get in.
Perhaps this is also important to them too.
Now, don't even begin to tell another BALD FACED LIE about how this is
unimportant to you. After all, your very presence here, and the
messages you've posted over the last couple of days are evidence to the
contrary. Don't you see, you have a pathological lying problem.
> I have told you how I did it, and even though Ed will probably read this, it
> will all work again, but someone else with more time to waste than I, will have
> to do it this time.
>
> Yes do look it up in DejaNews. Look for "CHALENGE CHALENGE CHALENGE" and for
> later postings "CHALLENGE CHALLENGE CHALLENGE" (hey I'm a Graphic Technician. I
> get paid to tell computers how to create video)
Yes, look it up and learn. I've bothered to post portions of it because
it was needed to prove that Paul is lying. There's a lot more out
there.
He's trying to tell you that I was trounced and lost the argument. Does
that really fit with having Chuck Baker of NewTek agree with me that
there were inaccuracies in the information on the NewTek web site?
Here, see for your self:
Subject: Re: Flyer = Beta
From: ch...@cb.newtek.com (Chuck Baker)
Date: 1996/09/24
Newsgroups: rec.video,rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production
...
Actually, our webmaster does not monitor this newsgroup, and
those of us who do have not discussed any of your messages with
him. I took a look, and I have to admit I cringed. The Flyer
spec page is not the one we had up, and if I am not mistaken it
is an earlier (rejected) revision of that particular file for
the current web site. The page mistakenly applies the record
quality levels currently in the software to the three main VTASC
operating modes. The correct page will be re-instated.
Actually your notion of differentiating between the hardware
capabilities, and the current software capabilities, which are
restricted to the drive capabilities which were available when
4.1B was released, is a good one, and I will work with our
webmaster on revising the page with that in mind.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention!
> Now I apologize to the goup, because this whole posting is realy off topic. I
> would have posted it to comp.sys.Ed-Bennit.advocay, but I couldn't find it in
> any of the NG servers.
Yes, having started the blatently slanderous off-topic thread, you ought
to apologize!
>
> And of course again the disclaimer. Everything I have said here, about Ed, is
> just my opinion, and being human, I could be wrong.
In other words, "I am not responsible for anything I say. If I'm wrong,
it's not my fault." Ya, people are really going to listen to someone
that doesn't even have any confidence in what they themselves say.
Ed Bennett
email and usenet
Myron Achtman wrote:
<snip the part about the Plum>
> More recently, I had the opportunity to work with a Betacam SP
> recorder. It obviously has better heads and better circuitry than my
> S-VHS deck. After playing back the Betacam tape (recorded from the
> Flyer), I could not perceive any difference between the RAW source
> material and the Flyer's output.
I'm a bit troubled by the Beta SP experiment you did originally, and
this one. In the previous experiment, you were comparing Plum to Flyer
using Beta SP as the source. You said, and I concur from the tape that
you sent me, that the Plum did better. If there is no difference
between Beta SP source and Flyer output, then how could the Plum have
done a better job? Please explain what was different here. Obviously,
only one of these results can be valid.
Let's just make sure that we understand the conditions of the
comparison. What sort of monitor were you using? Did you compare
composite output of the Beta SP deck to Flyer output? Did you compare
Y/C or component output from the deck with the Flyer output? What SP
deck was this? BVW? PVW? UVW? Did you use metal or oxide tape?
There's all sorts of way to do this, and many of them have predictable
outcomes.
>
> The digitizing algorithm used on the Flyer is VTASC, not MJPEG. VTASC
> seems to "thrive" on clean video input. If I use Betacam SP, the
> ultimate results are basically identical to the RAW footage. By
> contrast, I just finished editing a client's project that was supplied
> on VHS source footage. The final "master tape" from the Flyer has a
> noticable soft "graininess" compared to the original raw footage.
As I understand it, VTASC chokes on any high frequency material. Noise
appears to the NLE system as high frequency material. The Flyer
automaticly filters out any signal content that extends beyond 4.2 MHz.
Then, if the frame rate is still too high (over 4.8 MB/s) VTASC will
selectivly discard data.
>
> In summary, if you're using Betacam SP or really new S-VHS decks with
> clean Faroudja circuitry and high quality TBCs, the Flyer and its
> VTASC software excels. However, if you're working with VHS or "noisy"
> S-VHS/Hi-8, there will be an inherent graininess or fuzziness in the
> final product. PC products like the Plum and miro DC30, with their
> MJPEG digitizing schemes, seem to do a better job of "masking" the
> "noise" associated with lower end formats. Therefore, the Flyer is
> better suited for editing facilities equipped with high-end TBCs and
> Betacam or MII decks.
Well, there are a lot of unanswered questions, and many possible
uncontrolled variables in your experiment. Based on both experience and
scientific fact, I would not be willing to believe this conclusion. To
say that the Flyer is better suited for editing any component video
format is laughably absurd. Are you really certain, based on this
experiment and it's results, that the Flyer's 8 bit composite video
processing would be better suited to edit a component based format than
a MJPEG based NLE product with component I/O? Really? You're going to
toss out 2/3 of the chroma detail and still say that it's better suited?
--
Ed Bennett
ejb at host primenet.com
Home of the TS-Aligner
http://www.primenet.com/~ejb
Kevin
Never mind me but...Can't we all just get along :)
I'm no expert at all!!!!!! I have a question though.
I've been in several studios recently and I didn't see Plums or DC
30's or A/T/F's. I saw mostly MACs (1PC), all using AVID software. Not
sure about cards, but the PC was using Targa 2000 RTX or something. I
thought this type of equipment was for real broadcast stuff? Where
does A/T/F or Plum (with no component if I read correctly) fit into
this?
Although I'm new to this, my conversations with friends that make
videos and commercials have never mentioned either of these products.
Are they common?
I'm sure the A/T/F is a good product since I remember hearing about it
a long time ago and you still use it to this day, but why would anyone
buy a NEW one now? Certainly the landscape has changed and with DV the
whole process is different now. In my stack of junk mail and press
releases on new DV equipment, there's no mention of the A/T/F?
I guess I just want to now what all my options are when it comes to
NLE.
rippem
In Article<5pe0au$25...@elmo.cadvision.com>, <ad...@adita.com> writes:
> Path: news1.nassau.cv.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!165.113.100.74!nntp2.crl.com!nnrp1.crl.com!news.znet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!news.visi.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!News1.Vancouver.iSTAR.net!News1.Edmonton.iSTAR.net!news.istar.net!news.cadvision.com!usenet
> From: ad...@adita.com (Myron Achtman)
> Newsgroups: rec.video.desktop
> Subject: Re: Ed wants AMIGA / TOASTER Argurments
> Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 16:40:19 GMT
> Organization: ADITA Video Inc.
> Lines: 17
> Message-ID: <5pe0au$25...@elmo.cadvision.com>
> References: <19970528092...@ladder02.news.aol.com> <339096...@primenet.com> <3391b2ce...@news.pixi.com> <33936E...@hostname.com> <33957E...@ix.netcom.com> <3395D9...@hostname.com> <339A14...@ix.netcom.com> <339B4D...@primenet.com> <01bc756e$494f08e0$190a06d
0...@jed.penn.com> <339D9F...@hostname.com> <33bd42e8...@snews.zippo.com>
> Reply-To: ad...@adita.com
> NNTP-Posting-Host: ts31ip118.cadvision.com
> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
>
> It appears that the Video Toaster/Flyer is proving itself to be a far
> more productive NLE system than Ed Bennett's PC-based PLUM system.
>
> The recent postings about the AMIGA-based Flyer have totally enraged
> Mr. Bennett. Now he is spending most of his time researching DejaNews
> and responding with huge messages several times a day!
>
> Of course, he might be multitasking -- working on editing with the
> PLUM and responding to newsgroups simultaneously -- but I doubt it.
Myron, why do you doubt it? I'm sure he's got PLENTY of time to research
usenet while his Plum renders!
Tony
> In summary, if you're using Betacam SP or really new S-VHS decks with
> clean Faroudja circuitry and high quality TBCs, the Flyer and its
> VTASC software excels. However, if you're working with VHS or "noisy"
> S-VHS/Hi-8, there will be an inherent graininess or fuzziness in the
> final product. PC products like the Plum and miro DC30, with their
> MJPEG digitizing schemes, seem to do a better job of "masking" the
> "noise" associated with lower end formats. Therefore, the Flyer is
> better suited for editing facilities equipped with high-end TBCs and
> Betacam or MII decks.
Once again thank you Myron for clearing that up (and confusing Ed more).
Edward Weigel who uses BetaSP also agrees with your findings. Now, if
only Mr Ed (HEY Willllberrrrrr!) can understand that.
rippem
In Article<33BB02...@hostname.com>, <.@hostname.com> writes:
> From: Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com>
> Newsgroups: rec.video.desktop
> Subject: Re: Ed wants AMIGA / TOASTER Argurments
> Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 19:39:20 -0600
> Organization: .
> Lines: 41
> Message-ID: <33BB02...@hostname.com>
> References: <19970528092...@ladder02.news.aol.com> <339096...@primenet.com> <3391b2ce...@news.pixi.com> <33936E...@hostname.com> <33957E...@ix.netcom.com> <3395D9...@hostname.com> <339A14...@ix.netcom.com> <339B4D...@primenet.com> <01bc756e$494f08e0$190a06d
0...@jed.penn.com> <339D9F...@hostname.com> <33bd42e8...@snews.zippo.com> <5pe0au$25...@elmo.cadvision.com>
> Reply-To: .@hostname.com
> NNTP-Posting-Host: hpbs7892.boi.hp.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
> To: ad...@adita.com
> Path: news1.nassau.cv.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!192.215.247.55!news1.ni.net!feed2.newsfeed.com!news.ntl.net!news-feed.inet.com!gateway.cm.org!news.cm.org!bcarh189.bnr.ca!bcarh8ac.bnr.ca!nntp.mid-ga.com!news.oru.edu!news.IAEhv.nl!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!europa.clark.net!howland.erols.net!gat
ech!sdd.hp.com!hp-pcd.cv.hp.com!hplabs!hplntx!cello.hpl.hp.com!col.hp.com!news.dtc.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!ocean.cup.hp.com!hpbs1500.boi.hp.com!rwilson
>
> Myron Achtman wrote:
> >
> > It appears that the Video Toaster/Flyer is proving itself to be a far
> > more productive NLE system than Ed Bennett's PC-based PLUM system.
> >
> > The recent postings about the AMIGA-based Flyer have totally enraged
> > Mr. Bennett. Now he is spending most of his time researching DejaNews
> > and responding with huge messages several times a day!
>
> "Enraged?" Really? Hmmm...I don't think so. What makes you think that
> I'm enraged? Have I lost control? Certainly, from Calgary, Canada you
> can't tell if I'm enraged. OH, I get it! You do this all the time
> Myron. You just say things off the top of your head without thinking or
> gathering evidence.
>
> Now, perhaps typing a few messages for Usenet would fill most of your
> day but it doesn't fill mine. As I've said before, it only fills the
> gaps. Gosh, it takes all of you Toaster/Flyer fanatics to try to keep
> just one preson down. Instead of all this speculative slander Myron,
> why don't you just answer some more of my questions? What's wrong? Are
> my questions too embarrassing?
>
> > Of course, he might be multitasking -- working on editing with the
> > PLUM and responding to newsgroups simultaneously -- but I doubt it.
>
> Why do you doubt it? Quite often I read and reply to email, scan
> newsgroups, and perform many other tasks while the Plum is rendering
> something.
See Ed, that concept is foreign to us. We don't have time to peruse the
newsgroups while editing. I'm NEVER waiting for my NLE to catch up with me.
I can't wait till you realize that very soon everyone will be selling realtime
systems and your system will be very obsolete. Then maybe you'll junk it abd
buy a real time system. Why can't I wait? Because maybe then you'll have no
time to post your silly nonsense.
I'm also positive that you'll be the first person to rave about these new
"revolutionary" realtime systems.
Why would this be so important to you anyway? I'd think
> that answering those embarrassing questions would be far more important
> to you. Would you really rather put be down than defend the
> Toaster/Flyer? Gee, how revealing...
>
>
> --
> Ed Bennett
> ejb at host primenet.com
>
rippem
In Article<5pejbu$3g...@elmo.cadvision.com>, <ad...@adita.com> writes:
> Path: news1.nassau.cv.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!151.196.0.36!world2.bellatlantic.net!world6.bellatlantic.net!newsin.iconnet.net!news-xfer.netaxs.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!News1.Ottawa.iSTAR.net!News4.Toronto.iSTAR.net!News1.Vancouver.iSTAR.net!News1.Edmonton.iSTAR.net!news.is
tar.net!news.cadvision.com!usenet
> From: ad...@adita.com (Myron Achtman)
> Newsgroups: rec.video.desktop
> Subject: Re: Ed wants AMIGA / TOASTER Arguements
> Date: Wed, 02 Jul 1997 22:05:08 GMT
> Organization: ADITA Video Inc.
> Lines: 52
> Message-ID: <5pejbu$3g...@elmo.cadvision.com>
> References: <19970528092...@ladder02.news.aol.com> <339096...@primenet.com> <3391b2ce...@news.pixi.com> <33936E...@hostname.com> <33957E...@ix.netcom.com> <3395D9...@hostname.com> <339A14...@ix.netcom.com> <339B4D...@primenet.com> <01bc756e$494f08e0$190a06d
0...@jed.penn.com> <339D9F...@hostname.com> <33bd42e8...@snews.zippo.com> <5pe0au$25...@elmo.cadvision.com> <33BAA2...@ix.netcom.com>
> Reply-To: ad...@adita.com
> NNTP-Posting-Host: ts63ip233.cadvision.com
> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
>
> Tony <APi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Now Myron, just to clear the air about the Flyer/Plum issue, please tell
> >us all again your impressions since you ACTUALLY used the Plum and
> >Flyer. Not like Ed just using the Plum.
>
> I have done side-by-side comparisons of video quality with the Plum
> and the Flyer. I used S-VHS source footage and fed both the Flyer and
> the Plum with the same types of video clips and comparable data rates
> (around 4.5 to 4.8 MB/sec). After digitizing, the footage was played
> back on the two systems and output to S-VHS.
>
> By using insert editing on my S-VHS deck, I was able to get a
> continuous video that toggled back and forth from the Plum output to
> the Flyer. In every case -- close up footage, medium footage - wide
> angle footage -- the Plum's output was definitely sharper and clearer
> than the Flyer's.
>
> I want to add that all the output was recorded to my 8 year old
> Panasonic AG-7500 S-VHS deck. This deck has older circuitry and its
> video heads are somewhat worn (they have been replaced once).
>
> More recently, I had the opportunity to work with a Betacam SP
> recorder. It obviously has better heads and better circuitry than my
> S-VHS deck. After playing back the Betacam tape (recorded from the
> Flyer), I could not perceive any difference between the RAW source
> material and the Flyer's output.
>
> The digitizing algorithm used on the Flyer is VTASC, not MJPEG. VTASC
> seems to "thrive" on clean video input. If I use Betacam SP, the
> ultimate results are basically identical to the RAW footage. By
> contrast, I just finished editing a client's project that was supplied
> on VHS source footage. The final "master tape" from the Flyer has a
> noticable soft "graininess" compared to the original raw footage.
>
> In summary, if you're using Betacam SP or really new S-VHS decks with
> clean Faroudja circuitry and high quality TBCs, the Flyer and its
> VTASC software excels. However, if you're working with VHS or "noisy"
> S-VHS/Hi-8, there will be an inherent graininess or fuzziness in the
> final product. PC products like the Plum and miro DC30, with their
> MJPEG digitizing schemes, seem to do a better job of "masking" the
> "noise" associated with lower end formats. Therefore, the Flyer is
> better suited for editing facilities equipped with high-end TBCs and
> Betacam or MII decks.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Myron Achtman
> ADITA Video Inc.
>
So what you're syaing is that the Flyer is better suited to higher end
"Broadcast Quality" video? Boy that's not what Ed told me.
BTW, I've got to crack up at how Ed usually goes out of his way to make Myron
look like some kind of fool that knows nothing about video. Then if Myron
actually says something that sort of agrees with him, Ed says " Myron said. .
rippem
In Article<33bb2b59...@client.news.psi.net>, <kev...@hotmail.com>
writes:
> Path:
news1.nassau.cv.net!uunet!in3.uu.net!128.230.129.112!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu
!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!psinntp!pubxfer.news.psi.net!usenet
> From: kev...@hotmail.com (Kevin)
> Newsgroups: rec.video.desktop
> Subject: Re: Ed wants AMIGA / TOASTER Argurments
> Date: Thu, 03 Jul 1997 04:48:46 GMT
> Organization: PSINet
> Lines: 31
> Message-ID: <33bb2b59...@client.news.psi.net>
> References: <19970528092...@ladder02.news.aol.com>
<339096...@primenet.com> <3391b2ce...@news.pixi.com>
<33936E...@hostname.com> <33957E...@ix.netcom.com>
<3395D9...@hostname.com> <339A14...@ix.netcom.com>
<339B4D...@primenet.com> <01bc756e$494f08e0$190a...@jed.penn.com>
<339D9F...@hostname.com> <33bd42e8...@snews.zippo.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.5.122.14
> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230
>
> Never mind me but...Can't we all just get along :)
>
> I'm no expert at all!!!!!! I have a question though.
>
> I've been in several studios recently and I didn't see Plums or DC
> 30's or A/T/F's. I saw mostly MACs (1PC), all using AVID software. Not
> sure about cards, but the PC was using Targa 2000 RTX or something. I
> thought this type of equipment was for real broadcast stuff? Where
> does A/T/F or Plum (with no component if I read correctly) fit into
> this?
Avid's are certainly the most popular NLE. They really have the High End
pretty much to themselves. The Flyer while not component, can do broadcast
stuff. I've used mine to do lots of promos for the local PBS station. PBS
stations are notoriously finicky about video quality. They also are truely
brodcast, not cable so the video must meet certain technical specs. The Flyer
has always been sufficient for them. If I was cutting a National Commercial
for a major ad agency, then uncompressed D1 would be the only sufficient
format.
>
> Although I'm new to this, my conversations with friends that make
> videos and commercials have never mentioned either of these products.
> Are they common?
>
> I'm sure the A/T/F is a good product since I remember hearing about it
> a long time ago and you still use it to this day, but why would anyone
> buy a NEW one now?
For certain types of video, the Flyer is the best NLE in it's class. As with
any NLE it's a matter of which system is best suited to the type of video you
produce. For some people the answer is the Flyer, for others it's not.
In a nutshell the Flyer excells at "bread & butter" cuts and fades types of
edits. It's better suited to longer projects than most systems, because of the
file limit in Premiere and some sytems tendency to lose audio sync in projects
longer than a few minutes.
My suggestion would be, if at all possible, edit an actual project on the
system you're thinking of buying. Demos don't tell the whole story.
No one system is the best for everybody, that shouldn't matter, all you need
is the best system for you.
Good luck
Certainly the landscape has changed and with DV the
> whole process is different now. In my stack of junk mail and press
> releases on new DV equipment, there's no mention of the A/T/F?
Did you go to NAB? Newtek had a large booth with lots of Flyer demos. Also the
free copies of Post magazine had full page ads for the Toaster Flyer. Newtek
gave out thousands of copies of "Freedom", their new video edited on the
Flyer.
Roy
On Wed, 02 Jul 1997 22:05:08 GMT, ad...@adita.com (Myron Achtman)
wrote:
>Visit us at http://www.adita.com
>
Myron,
You're just showing everyone that you have a good sense of humor,
right?
The logic...
1. You compared the Plum and Flyer using S-VHS and found the Plum's
picture quality to be better.
2. You then used BetaSP with the Flyer and didn't make comparisons
(except between the source and Flyer).
3. From this, you conclude that the Flyer is superior to the Plum and
other MJPEG cards for use with higher-end formats and equipment, and
that cards like the DC 30 or Plum should be relegated to old "lower
end formats," where they are better at confusing the viewer into
seeing a better picture than the Flyer.
You missed an important step, but I think you knew that already ; )
Roy
Myron Achtman
>Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> asked about this claim:
> "For straightforward editing projects that involves cuts,
> dissolves, 2-D wipes, titles, and mixing two additional
> audio layers,any other NLE system in the Flyer's price
> class will take 200% - 400% longer to complete a project."
No question about it. The Flyer is much faster to edit with.
> Do you still have to click on a clip to know how long it is?
YES. Just like Premiere, you click on the clip to read the "STATS" in
the Information Window.
>Can you tell anything about audio levels from the "crouton"?
YES. A slider reveals audio levels from 0 to 100%.
>Can you tell if it's mono or stereo?
YES.
>Please let us know just how much detail is included at a glance.
Audio In Point
Audio Out Point
Audio Volume (0 to 100%)
Audio Pan Balance (L to R Slider)
Select Stereo, Mono, or L track or R track only
Audio Fade In Time Duration
Audio Fade Out Time Duration
> Can you scrub audio and video directly from the "crouton" view?
YES.
>Or, do you have to open the clip in this "control panel" first?
YES, this is another option.
>As you know, in Premiere (and other time line packages)
>you just drag the pointer along the time line and you're scrubbing audio
>and video (including rendered transitions).
Of course the playback speed of the rendered transitions and clips is
dependent on how fast or slow you drag the pointer. This makes it
really difficult to get a REAL-TIME sense for the work in progress.
Unless you feel like taking another break and re-rendering the new
transitions.
>Is it the same for the Flyer or is it more like moving a slider control?
You can scrub a Flyer clip simply by selecting it and then moving the
mouse left and right.
>In fact, your description doesn't make any reference to
>synchronizing the audio. I'm assuming that this AREXX script somehow
>does this "automatically"? Replacing the audio of one clip with that of
>another is understandably easy, but you're saying that this AREXX script
>guarantees perfect lip sync? How does it synchronize some seemingly
>arbitrary audio to the video clip?
Step 1 - Pick the desired audio point on Clip #1 (the good audio).
Step 2 - Pick the SAME audio point on Clip #2 (the bad audio).
Step 3 - Run "Add Audio" AREXX script.
RESULT: bad audio on Clip #2 will be replaced by identical good audio
from Clip #1.
>How about the other "ease of use" issue that I mentioned? You
>completely ignored it. What if your customer wants some layered
>effects? Isn't this going to be a real pain in the butt on the
>Toaster/Flyer? I know it can be done by building the layers one at a
>time, feeding the video back into the Flyer. I can't see how this isn't
>a real objective "ease of use" issue.
NO, layering IS possible with RenderFX from ProWave ($99.00). I don't
happen to like using this software because it's not REAL-TIME. As its
name implies, this program requires time to render the layering. I
like the Flyer because of its REAL-TIME output. I don't really want to
tie up my system rendering layers. By the way, please stop criticizing
3rd-Party Plug-Ins. Almost everyone using Premiere has purchased
Plug-Ins and "extra" 3rd-Party support software. Heck, your Plum
system even shipped with numerous 3rd-Party DEMO programs.
>What would
>happen if somebody came along and offered to do the spinning logo, lots
>of other sophisticated effects and higher quality video all for the same
>price as your mundane A/B roll job? Some customers might stick with you
>but I'd bet that the majority wouldn't think twice about switching.
I don't worry about the competition that wants to work for
baby-sitting money. They always fade away in a year or two. ADITA has
been in business since 1983.
>I'm trying to understand why you think that this would take 200-400%
>longer on a PC or Mac based timeline system. It's all A/B roll, 2D
>effects, no layering, no animation. Piece of cake!
In a word... the RENDERING time. Digitizing can also become an arduous
task as you constantly monitor file sizes so that you don't exceed the
2-GB filesize limit. I believe the Plum is further limited to 940 MB.
The Flyer has no such limitations.
Sorry, Ed, I can't address all the points in your 350 line message at
this time. I'll get back to you later.
J. Eric Chard
Myron Achtman wrote:
> <a lot of informative stuff about the flyer>
What I wonder is why Ed has such a jihad going? Can't he just sit back
and feel smug about how smart he is? Or does he get some kind of
commision from all NLE makers but Newtek?
Wierd.
***********************************************************************
**jeric@accessone - Synergy Productions/Synergy Graphix & Animation **
** Shooting, Gaffing, and Animation for the End of the Millenium **
************************* Seattle *************************************
Robert Pilat
WOW!
You guys still got nothin' better to do?
I have 3 PC's and 1 Amiga.
They have thier strong points.
Leave it at that.
-Rob
Roy
On Thu, 03 Jul 1997 20:51:14 -0400, Robert Pilat <ro...@netquest.com>
wrote:
So, how will this be interpreted?
1. "Rob has both, and says that it takes 3 PC's to equal 1 Amiga"
or
2. "Rob has both, but like the PC 3 times as much as the Amiga"
It will probably be left at one of those views, not what you actually
said ; )
Roy
Ed Bennett
I think the title of this thread is somewhat inaccurate. It should
read:
Ed wants accurate AMIGA / TOASTER Arguements, or:
Ed wants intelligent AMIGA / TOASTER Arguements, or even:
Ed wants honest AMIGA / TOASTER Arguments.
I'm really waiting for someone to sit and think about what they're going
to say before they just blurt it out. I'm also interested to see if any
of the Toaster/Flyer fanatics can read what their fellow fanatics say
and intelligently evaluate it before lining up behind it.
For example:
Myron posts information about some tests that he did between the Flyer
and the Plum, and the Flyer and a Beta SP deck. Not being familiar with
the scientific mehtod or experimental design, his procedure, data, and
especially his conclusions are quite obviously invalid. However, all
his fellow fanatics post mindless followup messages of their own and use
these bogus conclusions to direct personal smears against me. Here's a
good example of what I mean:
Once again thank you Myron for clearing that up (and
confusing Ed more). Edward Weigel who uses BetaSP also
agrees with your findings. Now, if only Mr Ed (HEY
Willllberrrrrr!) can understand that.
There's a reference in this slur to another example I'd like to point
out. This is the one in which Ed Weigel proclaims that a Toaster/Flyer,
with expensive Faroudja video signal processing equipment connected to
its inputs and outputs can perserve the quality of a Beta SP signal.
Unfortunately, Ed neglected to apply reason and logic to the situation
before he posted. If he had, he would have realized that the need for
all that signal processing equipment proves that the video quality of a
stock Toaster/Flyer is horribly inadequate for the task of Beta SP
reproduction. In essense, Ed spent more money on signal processing
equipment than a new Plum costs just so that he could have equivalent
video quality on his Toaster/Flyer. Ed went on to criticize MJPEG as a
CODEC for home hobby video and isn't used for making "commercials".
Yet, they line up behind him 100% without even a thought.
Most of the arguments that they pose don't even have anything to do with
video or the Toaster/Flyer at all. They're just attacks on my character
or my intelligence. Yet, they all line in agreement.
Is there anyone out there that can manage an intelligent, well thought
out set of arguments in favor of the Toaster/Flyer?
Are there any Toaster/Flyer users out there that would be honest enough
to agree that arguments like these, and the people that line up behind
them, make the Toaster/Flyer look worse than it really is?
(hint: the first guy to argue that it is what it is, no more, no less
and isn't superior to all other systems on the PC or Mac wins!).
Ed Bennett
Kevin wrote:
>
> Never mind me but...Can't we all just get along :)
>
> I'm no expert at all!!!!!! I have a question though.
>
> I've been in several studios recently and I didn't see Plums or DC
> 30's or A/T/F's. I saw mostly MACs (1PC), all using AVID software. Not
> sure about cards, but the PC was using Targa 2000 RTX or something. I
> thought this type of equipment was for real broadcast stuff? Where
> does A/T/F or Plum (with no component if I read correctly) fit into
> this?
Good observations. For the most part, you'll see Avid equipped studios
everywhere. It's by far the most popular NLE suite around. The Plum is
a very recent introduction to the market. While it processes video in
component format, it doesn't yet have component I/O. This feature has
been promised but not yet delivered. It is considered to be a
"mid-range" ($4K) product and is not on the same level as the Avid
setups (high end, $20K+). It's hard to say if the Plum will ever be a
common item in a studio but it will certainly be used in lots of small
post houses. The A/T/F is also considered to be a mid-range product
($7.5K) and is considered by many to be one of the first desktop video
products (1990 time frame).
> Although I'm new to this, my conversations with friends that make
> videos and commercials have never mentioned either of these products.
> Are they common?
The Plum is new and comes from a small company. You probably won't find
too many people that have heard of it. Almost everyone has heard of the
A/T/F because it's been around forever. It is based on a computer
designed for home use (Amiga) that came out in 1985. It processes video
exclusivly in composite format and since the advent of component video
it has been mostly relagated to event videography (weddings, birthdays,
etc.) and industrial/instructional video. Still, you find many faithful
users that apply it to high end projects, editing component based video
using I/O converters.
> I'm sure the A/T/F is a good product since I remember hearing about it
> a long time ago and you still use it to this day, but why would anyone
> buy a NEW one now? Certainly the landscape has changed and with DV the
> whole process is different now. In my stack of junk mail and press
> releases on new DV equipment, there's no mention of the A/T/F?
You ask some very very good questions. These are questions that I've
been asking for quite some time. The market has several products that
produce superior video quality and better effects for lower prices.
Personally, I would not consider it a good investment but there are some
that disagree very strongly with me. I'm looking toward the future,
where virtually all formats (commercial and consumer) are becoming
component based digital. I just don't see the A/T/F fitting into that
future.
For simple video editing, the A/T/F can produce a finished result very
quickly because it performs simple transitions (fades, wipes, dissolves)
in "real time" with no waiting. Most of the other systems can perform
very complex transitions and effects but they take time to calculate the
new video sequence. They store the completed video data onto disk and
play it back after "rendering" the transitions and effects.
> I guess I just want to now what all my options are when it comes to
> NLE.
>
That is the wisest thing you can do. Do not listen to anyone that says
"this one system is better than anything else" and then tries to
convince you not to look at other options. You examine the in's and
out's of these systems yourself. The decision between the A/T/F and
something like the Plum can be a lot simpler than everyone's making it
out to be. If you don't need elaborate video effects, and composite
video quality is OK, then consider the A/T/F. It will cost you more
(about twice as much) but you'll get "real time" video processing. You
won't be set for the digital future, but perhaps that's not important to
you. On the other hand, if video quality and sophisticated/complex
effects are important to you, and you don't mind waiting for the effects
to grind out then perhaps something like the Plum or a number of other
systems would be a good choice. They'll save you a bunch of money as
well.
Hope these comments help. I've tried to be as even handed as possible.
--
Ed Bennett
ejb at host primenet.com
Home of the TS-Aligner
http://www.primenet.com/~ejb
Due to overwhelming spam email, you must
FX
On Wed, 02 Jul 1997 19:26:52 -0600, Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>email and usenet
>
>FX wrote:
>(Gee Paul, replying to your own articles these days? Well, this pack of
>lies won't stand either.)
>
>> Now I hear Ed has been talking behind my back and makings up stories.
>>
>> >"When it comes to my memory, I have no trouble reconciling it with the
>> >record on DejaNews. I suggest you go out there and review it because
>> >your memory is showing signs of inaccuracy.
>> >Paul Nordman haunted and harrassed me for two weeks before I landed into
>> >him and gave him exactly what he deserved. He ended up regretting the
>> >whole thing and whimpering an apology to me.
>>
>> I never apologized to Ed, or anyone. And my only regret was the time I had
>> wasted trying to get him to change his mind. My last message to Ed was the
>> single word "Pathetic"
>
>Ahem...A little dose of truth won't hurt any, will it Paul? The *'s are
>mine for emphasis.
>
> Subject: Re: CHALLENGE TO ED AND FRIENDS - PART 6
> From: pj...@stlnet.com (FX)
> Date: 1996/10/06
> Newsgroups: rec.video,rec.video.desktop,rec.video.production
> ...
> Ed has pointed out my poor spelling also So I will point out that
> the word is Lewd. And once I figured out what he was saying I
> figured it must be my reference to the fact that IBM users who
> attack the Amiga as often as Ed does must be getting some sort of
> satisfaction from it, and I suggested it was sexual, and not to
> argue with him because it could become messy. Ed I **apologize**
> for saying that, I must have been wrong, The only other reason I can
> see for this type of behavior is religious. but I am not makings
> any accusations here.
Still funny after all these months.
> (of course Ed did drive me to confessing
> that I get pleasure from watching my IBM and Amiga interface)
Everyone has their problems, this is mine. I confess, I know it's perverted,
but I really get off on watching my Amiga interface with my Clone.
>
> I also **apologize** to you and your friend whom you bought the
> video equipment from. For saying you might have screwed him.
> ...
> I will repeat that this is out of context, and I said I would
> like to "Kick Ed's Ass" I can't apologize for wanting to kick
> your ass, but I **Apologize** for saying I wanted to. Ed for your
> future reference I don't know where you live, I don't consider
> it worth knowing. I promise I will not come knocking on you door
> and do anything to you. The only thing I know is your Email
> address, and I would never consider using it the way someone is
> using mine. [Oh, really!]
Oh that apology. I don't sweat the little stuff, Yes I made that little apology
to Ed, and got in a few more jabs in the process. But you implied that I had to
apologize to the you and the group for making the challenge posts, misstating
facts, or wasting peoples time. And I never did that.... Now, Eddy on the other
hand......
>
>I wonder why Amiga/Toaster/Flyer fanatics are such chronic liars?
>Perhaps, in order to maintain the illusion of superiority they have to
>lie to themselves all the time. Perhaps they believe that if you
>convince yourself to believe it then it really isn't a lie.
No Eddy you really don't have to look up to us. I much prefer to speak to
someone as an equal, I prefer to look people straight in the eye, not down my
nose as some people do. And you know I could take all this "lie" talk very
personal and this is a public forum.
>
>> This was in answer to Ed's posting which finally gave us the price on his system
>> at I believe $17K Which beat the Challenge system price of $20K. But when I
>> pointed out that my $20K system took 4 years to build, and the pricing had come
>> down since then, and that I could duplicate my system for $15K he still insisted
>> that my system cost more than his.
>
>Oooooh, poor baby. You got beat at your own game so you tried to change
>the rules. Too bad. When you buy a ////Fast VM with dual DPR, you get
>much more of an NLE than you get with a Toaster/Flyer for virtually the
>same price. Isn't that enough Paul?
The point which everyone but you understood, was that at that time, (and maybe
still today, I don't know { Ohh he's going to really jump on those last 3 words
I just know he will} ) you could not duplicate the feature set of the A/T/F
system on any other system for the same or lower price. That was the spirit of
the agrement. That was what you were trying to disprove, as you stated in your
last posting in the thread. which I found so Pathetic.
>
>> Everyone has problems, my self included, but at least I can do simple math.
>>
>> But as I remember it Ed did apologize to the group for having taken up all their
>> time and bandwidth with 30+ posting which all basically said Paul is an idiot.
Loooong postings.
>
>Absolutely. I was very sorry to have to put everyone through that
>nonsense. I regret having to do it again too.
Now I DO remember that Big Apology to the whole group that Eddy had to make.
> But, if I can prevent
>anyone from getting suckered into buying a new Toaster/Flyer, then I'll
>feel that it was worth it.
Opinions,Opinions,Opinions.
>If you want one (and I can understand why),
>just buy it used. There's always several people in the newsgroups
>trying to unload them for pennies on the dollar.
Yes and I've seen several trying to buy them in the groups too.
>
>> > That's how he took me to
>> >task! In the end, I had Chuck from NewTek agreeing with my summary and
>> >making updates on their website to reflect THE TRUTH (for a change).
>>
>> Yes that's the problem with Web Sites You can make them Fool proof, but you
>> can't make them Damn fool proof.
>>
>> In the end he did have Chuck from NT make updates to the web site so that any
>> fool, such as Ed could understand what was being said.
>
>It's too bad that Chuck didn't get all the changes made. These issues
>weren't merely to clear up some confusing wording (although there was
>some of that). NewTek claims that the Toaster/Flyer has a video
>bandwidth of of 6 Mhz and a data rate of 8 MB/s. In actual fact, the
>product that they sell has a bandwidth limiting filter at 4.2 Mhz and
>starts throwing out data at 4.8 MB/s. The specifications are BALD FACED
>LIES. The fact that they haven't changed them after being notified
>makes it even worse!
But where did you get all these numbers. Wasn't if from a NewTek Advertisement
possibly even the Web site.
It was clear to me and everyone else, that the system has the potential of these
high band widths and data rates, but the external hardware of the time (Hard
Drives) didn't (Still doesn't? ???) allow the use of them YET. But when the
external hardware catches up we will still have a viable system. NewTek did not
Plan for the system to be come obsolete quickly as do some other computer
manufactures I will not mention, but of which I am a customer.
>> I didn't run away with my tail between my legs, I just got tired talking to a
>> wall, I knew that everyone else, understood what I said, no one, including Ed,
>> contacted me to complain or correct my last or second from last posting. (In
>> fact the only posting I got from someone other than Ed on the subject said I
>> didn't have to prove my system to anyone)
>
>OK, whatever you say Paul. Really, it's OK now. Try to relax and take
>it easy for a while. You don't have to prove anything to anybody.
>You're going to be just fine. Here, take one of these, it will help you
>to sleep better...
Hey I'm relaxed, I'm not the one sending Email with the Caps Lock key on, Eddy.
>
>> Ed didn't understand that I wasn't putting this together for him, I was putting
>> it together for all the people he had mislead, and to show the rest of the group
>> just what kind of individual he is. Ed did a great job of making a fool of
>> himself. I knew that they understood what I had to say, and that was all that
>> was important to me.
>
>When you start telling the truth, then you can look at others and judge
>whether or not they mislead anyone. Why don't you start by replying to
>this message with some truth, rather than these BALD FACED LIES. You
>must think that everyone here is really really stupid.
OK, whatever you say Eddy. Really, it's OK now. Try to relax and take it easy
for a while...
Actually what we have here are more of Eddy's Opinions. (Notice he had nothing
to say about making a fool of himself)
I have not, to the best of my knowledge, lied to anyone in this NG at this time
or in the past. I also have not, to the best of my knowledge, inflated the bad
points of any system, or ignored the good points. I have,made a special point
of not telling anyone to buy or not buy any system. Even back in the original
CHALLENGE..... thread, when you accused me of being a purveyor of SPAM for
NewTek.
>> Ever do something that is enjoyable to begin with, but after you do it over and
>> over again, it becomes boaring and finally sickening. Like the kid who likes
>> Pop Corn so he gets a job at a movie theater. All the pop corn he can eat, and
>> he does, 2 weeks later he can't stand the sight of popcorn. That's what happened
>> with Ed. Ed just got too easy to make a fool of, so much so that it was no
>> longer enjoyable. And I had nothing more to say unless I wanted to obnoxiously
>> repeat myself like Ed was doing.
>>
And really, this is still way tooo easy.
>> Plus as I mentioned above I really do have better things to do with my time than
>> talk to a wall.
And if anything the wall has gotten thicker.
>>
>> The Eds of the world are the price we pay for freedom of speech. He is not
>> really worth the time to format a reply to, and I ready don't care what he thinks
>> of me, but I do have professional pride and don't like having stories made up
>> about me.
>
>Let's talk about freedom of speech, as opposed to propaganda and lies...
Do you want to discuss Micro$oft's propaganda and lies, or just propaganda and
lies in general???? I would ready like to have a nice long discussion about
this but I feel it would be extremely off topic, for this group, and
particularly to the topic of this thread and the present discussion.
But feel free to send me Email on the topic, or if you want to find an
appropriate NG and we can discuss to your hearts content. On second thought
email me with the NG you want to duke it out on. I could suggest csaa.
>
>> But I ready do not have time to repeat everything that was said over a year ago.
>> I know I got my point across, and You know I got it across. What Ed thinks is
>> ready unimportant, in fact anyone who checks will find that most of what Ed
>> thinks is unimportant
>
>Gee, I'll bet that Kevin Elders wishes he had been warned not to waste
>$7500 on his Toaster/Flyer.
I don't know Kevin Elders, and am not familiar with his problems. So I can't
comment on them and again this is off topic to this discussion of the Challenge
thread.
>If he had bought a DPS PVR or a Targa 2000
>or perhaps even a Plum he would be working on a very lucritive CBS
>contract and saved $3500 in the process.
And how much work have you done for CBS Ed? I suspect that they would be more
impressed with some of the more High End systems with much bigger names than you
have mentioned. There are only so many CBS size jobs out there. And a lot more
of us who would like to have them.
> I'll bet that there are others
>out there that are in the very same boat, or are about to get in.
>Perhaps this is also important to them too.
Perhaps.... Perhaps not. We are, again, dealing in Opinions.
>
>Now, don't even begin to tell another BALD FACED LIE about how this is
>unimportant to you.
Your biased account of what happened in the Challenge... thread is what is
important here...
>After all, your very presence here, and the
>messages you've posted over the last couple of days are evidence to the
>contrary.
No I'm on my 4th of July holiday, and thought I would have some fun with Eddy,
but I must say Eddy you are still as boaring as ever.
>Don't you see, you have a pathological lying problem.
Defamation of Character. My lawyer is on the Web Eddy.
>
>> I have told you how I did it, and even though Ed will probably read this, it
>> will all work again, but someone else with more time to waste than I, will have
>> to do it this time.
What did I just tell you. He is still trying to change the subject with Off
Topic Tangents, and Arguing Opinions. After I told everyone how silly this is
He still went out and did it.
This is so easy it's boaring.
I'll bet your sorry you ever brought the Chalenge thread up.
>>
>> Yes do look it up in DejaNews. Look for "CHALENGE CHALENGE CHALENGE" and for
>> later postings "CHALLENGE CHALLENGE CHALLENGE" (hey I'm a Graphic Technician. I
>> get paid to tell computers how to create video)
And all I have to work with is this Clone Spell Checker.
This, of course, is between you and Chuck, It is OLD information, (I am
presently running V4.1D, and what did they call it V4.2? is shipping now) and I
believe the whole Web site has been Updated and rebuilt since this posting. It
does NOT have anything to do with the Challenge thread though. As it has
nothing to do with Pricing.
This of course is another Prime example of a completely Off Topic tangent. I'm
only commenting on this to show you how easy he is to deal with.
Net Etiquette Ed. Start a new thread. Ed you want everyone to follow the rules
except you.
>> Now I apologize to the group, because this whole posting is ready off topic. I
>> would have posted it to comp.sys.Ed-Bennit.advocay, but I couldn't find it in
>> any of the NG servers.
>
>Yes, having started the blatantly slanderous off-topic thread, you ought
>to apologize!
>
Let's not get in to who deserves an apology Eddy.
>>
>> And of course again the disclaimer. Everything I have said here, about Ed, is
>> just my opinion, and being human, I could be wrong.
>
>In other words, "I am not responsible for anything I say. If I'm wrong,
>it's not my fault." Ya, people are really going to listen to someone
>that doesn't even have any confidence in what they themselves say.
Yes Eddy I freely admit that these are my opinions. They are based on the best
information I have available to me at this time. And on occasion I have been
known to be wrong. I, unlike some other unnamed people I have to deal with, do
not have a God complex.
The best I can ever offer is my opinion, I do not tell other people what to do.
I refuse to take responsibility for other peoples actions. I have learned that
people go out and do what ever they damn well please, even after I have given
them all my sage advice .... and that is exactly as it should be.
AND people can't be sued for having, or stating their opinions, something you
haven't learned yet sonny, It's in the constitution.
And as I mentioned in the original Challenge. I do not mean in any way to put
down anyone's systems here, even Eddy's. There is no perfect system, There are
many different Users, many different Jobs, and many different systems. If you
like what you are using, and it is doing everything you want it to do, who am I
to tell you to replace it. I hope that everyone reading this gets as much
enjoyment out of creating Video with their system as I do.
IDIC
Enjoy
FX
>
>--
>Ed Bennett
>ejb at host primenet.com
>
>Due to overwhelming spam email, you must
>edit my "reply to" email address in order
>to send me email. My user name is ejb and
>my hostname is primenet.com
Glenn Saunders
The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
: You're being just a bit over sensitive Glenn. I have yet to go out of
: my way to harrass Toaster/Flyer owners and don't know of anyone else
: that has either.
Isn't that for me to decide and not for you?
CJ Wilson
Roy wrote:
Well, not to get too involved with the pissing match that may be
started( or is going on) I have played with the Amiga, PC, and Mac
areas. . .unfortunate ly there isnt a good UNIX or Linux system that
edits vidceo yet. . .I have a challange to any programmers out there. .
.and that is: Make a video driver that will work with the DPS PAR or DPS
PVR under Linux, that will work. . .and then lets compare ALL the
platforms (including the SGI's) to see what system could be put to
gether for what ever reason. . .BUT, lets not for get the main reason we
pick the platforms we use !!! ALL platforms have there plus and there
minus, I dont like Mac, but that doesnt mean I wont use them, I dont
really care for the PC platform, but I have three of them and do good
work with them. . . I do like the Amiga system, we will see what gateway
cooks up here in a bit . . .SGI ? Id use it if someone gave me one, Too
damned expensive just to push pixels INHO, but it does a good job, But
an Intel System on Linux running video. . .NOW THERES A WORTHY
CHALLENGE, now the deal between Ed and FX, if you guys are still reading
this thread, call some of your programming buddies and lets put this
industry on it's ear instead of showing your rear. . .if you want to
catch a smart mouse build a better mouse trap . . .just to set the
record straight I have crashed the best of systems, from a well designed
AVID system based on a powermac, and yes I do miss it EVEN if it was on
a Mac, to the Toaster system, EVEN if it was on a obsolete system , I
have even crashede an NT 4.0 system and watched a Linux system cry and
tuck tail and run, am I proud of it ? No. . I just have a nack for
finding breaking pionts in systems when I get good and busy. . .but just
becuse one person challenges another person to come up wioth a system
that cost less than system B and that one person has 3 of one platform
and one of another tells me that this person has done his/her homework
and is happy at the craft they are doing . . .accept my challenge on the
video driver and let the Pixels be push. . .
CJM
Covert Operations
Tbmpvideo
In article <33BC35...@hostname.com>, Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com>
writes:
>Most of the arguments that they pose don't even have anything to do with
>video or the Toaster/Flyer at all. They're just attacks on my character
>or my intelligence. Yet, they all line in agreement.
Now doesn't that tell you something!
Terry Barksdale Barksdale Media
1711 East Alder, Seattle, WA 98122
Issues In AIDS Education
tbmp...@aol.com
FX
On Fri, 04 Jul 1997 23:57:26 -0800, CJ Wilson <c...@micronet.net> wrote:
CJ
A great Challenge, and I noticed, unlike myself, you spelled it correctly the
first time. I too would love to see something like this created.
You sound like the exception to the rule that programmers Hate/Respect. You
push the envelope and beyond. You find the creative set of buttons that the
programmers never imagined any one would use, and never prepared for.
I learned Unix back in 83 or 84. It is the reason I fell in love with the
Amiga, in 85. Unfortunately I haven't done any computer programming, except
with Ray Tracing programs since 1990.
I personally was insulted back into this, and I wouldn't be here, except I have
the 4th of July weekend as free time. I really haven't got the time now to
repeat, yet again, what I already said once.
I am reminded of a job I once lost, because an Alcoholic Boss needed more
drinking money, and thought I should take a pay cut to finance it. She fired
me, "regretfully, for financial reason" then informed me I could have my job
back if I would take a substantial Pay Cut. I informed her that you only get one
chance to fire me, and that she had just used up her's. And that I would come
back for a substantial pay rase. I then packed my things, and wished everyone
else there Good Luck, as Unlike them, I was leaving, and they had to continue to
put up with Stuff like this.
I created my own business so I don't have to deal with situations like this. I
would be happy to post in this group again, but I haven't got time to deal with
the Eddies.
Good Luck.
FX
Glenn Saunders
The mortal Ed Bennett wrote:
: it's for me to decide. If I were really going out of my way, then you'd be
: much more upset than you are now.
No, you'd be killfiled. I don't let myself to get that upset with anyone
without erasing them from my sight. Right now you are at least still a
somewhat entertaining diversion for me.
: If you care to, you can go to Deja News and see that all of the messages that
Sorry, Ed, I have a life. I don't need to write an essay. Your posts
have spoken for themselves clearly enough that such research is
unnecessary.
: technology, you replied: "Don't write me personal e-mail." You hate people
I never asked for you to write me personal e-mail. I have no desire for
you to attempt to convert me or by switching to personal e-mail. This is
a public thread and I'd like everyone to hear what we say to eachother
(until I killfile you). I interpreted your e-mail as an invasion of my
privacy as bothersome as a crank call.
Your ability to make me listen to you is an option, Mr. Bennett, and I am
very grateful for that. I know that really gets you steamed, and I love
it :)
: like me and Lee Stranahan because we take an informed and objective look at
: the world around us and tell it like it is. You would rather not have your
: ignorance challenged. Well, I hate ignorance and all that it "stands for".
Lee at least tries to put out the fire of his flamewars because he has
some desire to maintain a good reputation. You, on the otherhand, are
simply ego unbridled.
There is also something called subjectivity. People use different
computer equipment for different reasons. We weigh things based on
different sets of criteria. It's something you fail to realize in your
universal damnation of the T/F suite and your attempt to make the
"ignorant see the light" as it were. As others have tried to tell you,
the T/F is earning them money and allowing them to be very productive as
videographers. You can spout all the rhetoric you want but you can't keep
people from continuing to be successful with their T/F systems, perhaps
even more successful than yourself? Hmm?
FX
You could almost call it SPAM
FX
Ed Bennett
Glenn Saunders wrote:
> No, you'd be killfiled. I don't let myself to get that upset with anyone
> without erasing them from my sight. Right now you are at least still a
> somewhat entertaining diversion for me.
Yup, that sounds like the standard Glenn Saunders way of dealing with anything
challenging. Just stick you head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.
> : If you care to, you can go to Deja News and see that all of the messages that
>
> Sorry, Ed, I have a life. I don't need to write an essay. Your posts
> have spoken for themselves clearly enough that such research is
> unnecessary.
Translated: "There is no evidence to support my arguments. I'm just trying to
twist the truth into matching what I would like to believe. The best I can do is
try to use these lies to make you look bad."
Well, Glenn, comparing your lack of evidence to the evidence that I presented
makes your claims false. We can now view them for what they are: more stupid
Toaster/Flyer lies and propaganda. If you can't back up your accusations against
me, then you're a fool for having presented them.
> : technology, you replied: "Don't write me personal e-mail." You hate people
>
> I never asked for you to write me personal e-mail. I have no desire for
> you to attempt to convert me or by switching to personal e-mail. This is
> a public thread and I'd like everyone to hear what we say to eachother
> (until I killfile you). I interpreted your e-mail as an invasion of my
> privacy as bothersome as a crank call.
So, in the world of Glenn Saunders, you're only allowed to send someone email if
they specifically request it. I wasn't attempting to convert you to anything.
Some people are wise enough to appreciate some privately offered correction when
they've made blatently false statements in a public forum. I attempted to do it
because I had some respect for you. I did it by simply asking you to view the
facts. Obviously, you resent correction, even when it's offered without malice.
I considered your reply to be rude, offensive, and uncalled for. I saw a side of
Glenn Saunders that I couldn't have imagined previously. It revealed to me that
you were no better than any of the other willfully ignorant Toaster/Flyer
fanatics.
> Your ability to make me listen to you is an option, Mr. Bennett, and I am
> very grateful for that. I know that really gets you steamed, and I love
> it :)
I could care less if you listen. Most of the Toaster/Flyer fanatics are a lost
cause. There are notable exceptions, I thought you were one of them. You can
ignore email just as easily as you ignore usenet messages.
> : like me and Lee Stranahan because we take an informed and objective look at
> : the world around us and tell it like it is. You would rather not have your
> : ignorance challenged. Well, I hate ignorance and all that it "stands for".
>
> Lee at least tries to put out the fire of his flamewars because he has
> some desire to maintain a good reputation. You, on the otherhand, are
> simply ego unbridled.
The difference between Lee and I is one of history. He's the author of many books
and tapes, without which the Toaster/Flyer would have died long ago. He was the
Toaster/Flyer's biggest evangelist, teaching you all how to make the thing
productive. He has earned a lot of respect, it is much deserved. So, instead of
treating him like an asshole, you all reason with him and make appeals to him as a
human being. If someone were to come into the Toaster newsgroup and start a
thread "Trinity is Superior to Flyer", you'd treat him like an asshole and use all
the lies, character assination, and propaganda against him just like you do to me.
Of course, I never started any such threads or launched any such attacks and look
how you treat me.
> There is also something called subjectivity. People use different
> computer equipment for different reasons. We weigh things based on
> different sets of criteria. It's something you fail to realize in your
> universal damnation of the T/F suite and your attempt to make the
> "ignorant see the light" as it were. As others have tried to tell you,
> the T/F is earning them money and allowing them to be very productive as
> videographers. You can spout all the rhetoric you want but you can't keep
> people from continuing to be successful with their T/F systems, perhaps
> even more successful than yourself? Hmm?
Do you think that if your twist of the truth is subtle that nobody will notice? I
have always (repeat: ALWAYS) respected a persons opinion when they express that
they like the Toaster/Flyer and that it works well for them. The only things that
I have challenged are the lies and propaganda about the Toaster/Flyer being
superior to anything available on the PC or Mac. It's the PC and Mac based NLE
bashing that I have opposed. If you don't think so, then produce the evidence or
shut up.
When someone says that one thing is better than another, and I don't agree, I'll
challenge them with questions and ask them to examine evidence to the contrary.
Unfortunately, you call this "universal damnation" and "attack". Is that being
very subjective Glenn? I'm hated by the Toaster/Flyer fanatics because I
challenge their false claims and propaganda. They never use evidence, they never
propose counter arguments. All they do is try to assinate my character, just like
you're doing here.
--
Ed Bennett
e...@primenet.com
Tony
>: like me and Lee Stranahan because we take an informed and objective
>: look at the world around us and tell it like it is. You would rather
>: not have your ignorance challenged. Well, I hate ignorance and all
>: that it "stands for".
Glenn... looks like someone has been lurking in r.v.d.t. And Mr.
Stranahan did "apologize" for the way things went in that group. But
then again, he is a Trinity (read... not PLUM) advocate for his own
reasons that were stated in the newsgroup. He did clearly state how he
felt about Newtek and the Flyer. And he did make a lot of money being an
advocate of the Toaster (Ed... ever watch any of his vidoes?? No. You
don't own a Toaster so you really don't know what Lee thought about it
as a video tool).
Ed Bennett
Sorry Paul. I'm not going to answer this one. I'll acknowledge that it
exists and that I've read through it. That's about it. If you want a
response then re-write it. Eliminate the cute quips and drivel,
including the comments on your own comments. Answer the issues that I
raised against your claims with substantial evidence of your own. If my
evidence is flawed, then point out why instead of just calling it
stupid. Then maybe I'll find it interesting enough to respond to.
Otherwise, I'm not going to waste my time formulating intelligent
arguments for someone that cannot appreciate them with equivalent
arguments.
FX wrote:
<all snipped>
Ed Bennett
Myron,
Thank you very much for answering these questions and getting back to
the issues. I very much appreciate the effort.
Myron Achtman wrote:
>
> >Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> asked about this claim:
>
> > "For straightforward editing projects that involves cuts,
> > dissolves, 2-D wipes, titles, and mixing two additional
> > audio layers,any other NLE system in the Flyer's price
> > class will take 200% - 400% longer to complete a project."
>
> No question about it. The Flyer is much faster to edit with.
How about we just agree to say that it's faster than PC or Mac NLE
systems that must render transitions. If you were operating a
comparably priced Video Machine with DPR on a PC then the Flyer wouldn't
be 200% - 400% faster because it is also a real time system.
>
> > Do you still have to click on a clip to know how long it is?
> YES. Just like Premiere, you click on the clip to read the "STATS" in
> the Information Window.
>
> >Can you tell anything about audio levels from the "crouton"?
> YES. A slider reveals audio levels from 0 to 100%.
>
> >Can you tell if it's mono or stereo?
> YES.
>
> >Please let us know just how much detail is included at a glance.
> Audio In Point
> Audio Out Point
> Audio Volume (0 to 100%)
> Audio Pan Balance (L to R Slider)
> Select Stereo, Mono, or L track or R track only
> Audio Fade In Time Duration
> Audio Fade Out Time Duration
>
> > Can you scrub audio and video directly from the "crouton" view?
> YES.
>
> >Or, do you have to open the clip in this "control panel" first?
> YES, this is another option.
As I get to know more of the details about the user interface, I can see
that it really does provide much of the information that I am accustomed
to in Premiere. My impressions have always been from a demo I saw a few
years back. I'm still not sure how well I'd adapt to the crouton
interface but it would seem that both interfaces can be used with
relativly equal efficiency.
>
> >As you know, in Premiere (and other time line packages)
> >you just drag the pointer along the time line and you're scrubbing audio
> >and video (including rendered transitions).
> Of course the playback speed of the rendered transitions and clips is
> dependent on how fast or slow you drag the pointer. This makes it
> really difficult to get a REAL-TIME sense for the work in progress.
> Unless you feel like taking another break and re-rendering the new
> transitions.
Very true, but the purpose of doing the scrub is to locate an exact
spot, not to see things in real-time (preview is for that). So, for
example, if you're layering a bunch of dissolves on top of eachother for
a montage, you'll need to scrub each one to determine the exact point at
which you want to initiate the next dissolve. I can think of all kinds
of other uses as I'm sure you can too.
>
> >Is it the same for the Flyer or is it more like moving a slider control?
> You can scrub a Flyer clip simply by selecting it and then moving the
> mouse left and right.
So you can scrub the clip but can you scrub the transition between clips
as well?
>
> >In fact, your description doesn't make any reference to
> >synchronizing the audio. I'm assuming that this AREXX script somehow
> >does this "automatically"? Replacing the audio of one clip with that of
> >another is understandably easy, but you're saying that this AREXX script
> >guarantees perfect lip sync? How does it synchronize some seemingly
> >arbitrary audio to the video clip?
> Step 1 - Pick the desired audio point on Clip #1 (the good audio).
> Step 2 - Pick the SAME audio point on Clip #2 (the bad audio).
> Step 3 - Run "Add Audio" AREXX script.
> RESULT: bad audio on Clip #2 will be replaced by identical good audio
> from Clip #1.
OK, I understand now. Your accuracy depends on picking these two
points. So, if you used a clapper or some other audio sync sound then
you'd have no problem (so long as there isn't much difference in
distance between the audio source and either of the two cameras). If
you goof and pick points that aren't perfectly syncronized is there any
way to fine adjust the relationship between audio and video? What would
you do in this case?
>
> >How about the other "ease of use" issue that I mentioned? You
> >completely ignored it. What if your customer wants some layered
> >effects? Isn't this going to be a real pain in the butt on the
> >Toaster/Flyer? I know it can be done by building the layers one at a
> >time, feeding the video back into the Flyer. I can't see how this isn't
> >a real objective "ease of use" issue.
> NO, layering IS possible with RenderFX from ProWave ($99.00). I don't
> happen to like using this software because it's not REAL-TIME. As its
> name implies, this program requires time to render the layering. I
> like the Flyer because of its REAL-TIME output. I don't really want to
> tie up my system rendering layers.
I understand that version 4.2 of the Flyer software has improved the
data transfer rate between Flyer disks and the Amiga (from a few KB/s to
a few hundred KB/s) but even so isn't this an incredibly slow process
(like many times slower than the slowest PC or Mac based solution)?
> By the way, please stop criticizing
> 3rd-Party Plug-Ins. Almost everyone using Premiere has purchased
> Plug-Ins and "extra" 3rd-Party support software. Heck, your Plum
> system even shipped with numerous 3rd-Party DEMO programs.
I'm not being specifically critical of the 3rd party add-ons
themselves. I'm basicly looking at a rather pricy ($7500) NLE system
that comes with virtually no professional features. While these
professional features are available from third parties, they add cost to
an already high priced system. For example, when you say the Flyer can
render layered sequences, you're now talking about a $7600 system. If
you're going to say that the Flyer has Y/C I/O, then you're talking
about an $8400 (or so) system. If the Flyer came with this stuff for
the base price (like LightWave does, for example) then it's not an
issue. The Plum, for example, comes with Adobe Premiere (full version,
not demo) and Crystal Graphics 3D Vortex (full version, not demo) and
the machine control plug-in for the basic list price of $4000.
> >What would
> >happen if somebody came along and offered to do the spinning logo, lots
> >of other sophisticated effects and higher quality video all for the same
> >price as your mundane A/B roll job? Some customers might stick with you
> >but I'd bet that the majority wouldn't think twice about switching.
> I don't worry about the competition that wants to work for
> baby-sitting money. They always fade away in a year or two. ADITA has
> been in business since 1983.
I understand what you're saying but this wouldn't be for "baby-sitting
money", it would be equal to your price. Considering that their initial
capital outlay would be substantially lower than yours, they could
afford to have two editing suites, charge the same prices and still have
the same margins you do. The advanced video effects and higher video
quality would give them a competitive advantage because they wouldn't
need to charge extra for them. In other words, I can offer a customized
3D logo transition with very high video quality at little or no
additional cost. If I charged for rendering time, at 20 minutes (for a
5 second effect) this would cost the customer less than $17 (assuming
$50/hr). Same would be true for any layered effects. You've already
said that you would need to charge the customer more than the price of
the whole project for this effect.
> >I'm trying to understand why you think that this would take 200-400%
> >longer on a PC or Mac based timeline system. It's all A/B roll, 2D
> >effects, no layering, no animation. Piece of cake!
> In a word... the RENDERING time. Digitizing can also become an arduous
> task as you constantly monitor file sizes so that you don't exceed the
> 2-GB filesize limit. I believe the Plum is further limited to 940 MB.
> The Flyer has no such limitations.
True, I've got to wait about 13 seconds to render a 2D effect and you
don't have to wait at all. That translates to about 18 cents if you
charge $50/hour. Say there's 30 2D transitions in a project, that
translates to about $5.42 in rendering time. Not much to consider,
especially when the whole NLE system cost $3500 less. It would take
about 645 such projects before my rendering time would make up the
difference in cost between the Toaster/Flyer and the Plum. If you could
manage one such project per day then it would take about 3 years to make
up the difference (5 days a week, 42 weeks per year). This is mostly
why I consider rendering time to be pretty insignificant and the cost of
a real time system to be unjustified.
I can see how a real time sysetm would pay off in a really high
volume/high cost operation (much more than $50/hr) but not what we're
talking about.
Digitizing is actually quite easy when you have machine control.
Whenever I digitize I pay virtually no attention to the length of the
clip. In actual practice (real editing, not experimenting) I have never
bumped up against the 2 GB limit. I've recorded and played back 2GB
files on the Plum and haven't noticed any problem. The 2 GB filesize
limit is a real one for the Plum but not so with the DPS and other
proprietary file format systems. It limits the length of a high quality
clip (5 MB/s) to about 6.6 minutes. Of course, it's pretty amazing when
you have a clip that's so interesting that it can keep the audience's
attention for that long. I'd be interested to know what kind of subject
matter could do that.
> Sorry, Ed, I can't address all the points in your 350 line message at
> this time. I'll get back to you later.
>
I understand and appreciate the effort so far.
Myron Achtman
Ed Bennett <.@hostname.com> wrote:
>Myron,
>Thank you very much for answering these questions and getting back to
>the issues. I very much appreciate the effort.
More questions...
Scrubbing Transitions:
>So you can scrub the clip but can you scrub the transition between clips
>as well?
To examine a transition between clips, you simply click on the ICON
(or crouton) for the transition and click the PLAY button on the
interface screen. Immediately, the Flyer will play the last 3 seconds
of the preceeding clip, show the transition, and continue playing the
next clip. You cannot "scrub the transition" because you're actually
seeing it fully in REAL TIME. Incidentally, if you want to see more
than 3 seconds of the clip preceeding the transition, you can use the
CO-PILOT software to select how much clip time to play before the
transition occurs. This really lets you "feel the edit".
Synchronizing Audio:
>OK, I understand now. Your accuracy depends on picking these two
>points. So, if you used a clapper or some other audio sync sound then
>you'd have no problem (so long as there isn't much difference in
>distance between the audio source and either of the two cameras). If
>you goof and pick points that aren't perfectly synchronized is there any
>way to fine adjust the relationship between audio and video? What would
>you do in this case?
As with linear editing, I use the ECHO method to detect when two audio
sources are out of sync. I simply get both sources playing on the
Flyer. If I hear an ECHO, I'm not yet in sync. So I adjust the "delay
clip start time" by a few frames and try again. After a few tries,
both audio sources will play back with no apparent ECHO effect. this
means sync has been achieved. The AREXX script will then transfer the
good audio to the other clip with the "bad" audio.
Video Layering:
>I understand that version 4.2 of the Flyer software has improved the
>data transfer rate between Flyer disks and the Amiga (from a few KB/s to
>a few hundred KB/s) but even so isn't this an incredibly slow process
>(like many times slower than the slowest PC or Mac based solution)?
I've just started playing with a newer, faster version of RenderFX.
It's not too bad to work with. I did a split screen that consisted of
3 different vertical slices of video on the screen all playing at
once. It took about 14 minutes to render the first 15 seconds (screens
A and B) and then another 14 minutes to render the next 15 seconds
(screens A and B and also C). I was pleased to see that the second
pass through RenderFX did not degrade the quality of the images put
through the first pass. It appears that multiple layers of rendering
does not affect video quality.
Long Video Clips:
>Digitizing ... limits the length of a high quality
>clip (5 MB/s) to about 6.6 minutes. Of course, it's pretty amazing when
>you have a clip that's so interesting that it can keep the audience's
>attention for that long. I'd be interested to know what kind of subject
>matter could do that.
A perfect example is the Professional Speakers we shoot giving live
presentations. We can literally digitize an entire 30 minute segment
as 1 clip on the Flyer, because we're not limited to 2 GB file sizes.
This prime clip would then be given numerous insert edits to show
audience reactions, a second or third camera angle insert, or
on-screen graphics to supplement the presentation. The same technique
can be used for any multi-camera shoot, even a wedding.