Forum Replies Created

Page 40 of 52
  • Toke

    April 27, 2005 at 6:46 pm in reply to: 2.39:1 Frame Lines Would Be Great

    1.85 might be useful also.

  • Toke

    April 27, 2005 at 3:50 pm in reply to: Attn.: Jan C. – AJ-SPC700 Questions

    Limitations of quicktime always amazes me.
    So with qt you really have to decompress fields to one framme for combining two fields from different frames
    to be new one frame?
    Apple hasn’t cared a lot about picture quality past days…
    Their mp4 encoding is propably worst in a planet…
    So they never understood interlacing…

  • Toke

    April 27, 2005 at 3:25 pm in reply to: Attn.: Jan C. – AJ-SPC700 Questions

    [Graeme Nattress] “I don’t know if there’s a way to extract the raw data from one field and combine that with the raw data from the other field and create a new frame from them.”

    What’s there to combine?
    Dv-stream is field based. It’s just field after another. All you have to tell the software which field is upper or lower.
    When you drop fields away you don’t even have to change the order of remaining fields.

  • Toke

    April 27, 2005 at 3:15 pm in reply to: Attn.: Jan C. – AJ-SPC700 Questions

    Hmmm…

    I’ve been one decade in impression that dv has field based compression in its codec.
    In many NLEs you can even choose which field to preview or both.

    So these fields are compressed individually and separately.

    If the reverse-pull-down software coder understands this, I see now reason why to touch the compression inside a field. With reverse pull-down you are dropping fields away, not touching the content of a field.

    So if you have to decompress fields to change their order, that’s only a very bad programming.

  • Toke

    April 27, 2005 at 11:28 am in reply to: Attn.: Jan C. – AJ-SPC700 Questions

    [Graeme Nattress] “if it’s DV, you have to remove the pulldown frames, which means, in 3:2 doing a bit of reconstruction work, which implies a decompression and a recompression of those frames. “

    Really?
    Dv is field compressed, so I don’t see any reason to touch those fields when some of them are being replaced.

  • Toke

    April 27, 2005 at 12:01 am in reply to: Just heard Jan speak on DV guys abot the HVX-200

    Thanks for the knowledge, Barry!

  • Toke

    April 26, 2005 at 6:56 pm in reply to: Attn.: Jan C. – AJ-SPC700 Questions

    Yep,
    markets are very dualistic.
    I’d take cheaper 2/3″ 1-ccd or 1/2″ 3-ccd with progressive scanning…

  • Toke

    April 26, 2005 at 5:05 pm in reply to: Homemade P2 card?

    So when you are in hazardous conditions (nature/outdoor/bad wather/handheld), solid state is more reliable.
    By the camera ships, you can get about 5 16GB cf-cards with price of one 8GB p2.
    That’s 80GB!
    With less demanding enviroment (urban/indoor/studio/static) you could use firestore or bulk fw-disk with pc-card-fw-converter.

    Doesn’t sound so bad anymore!

    Maybe next HVX model could have those p2 slots changed to cf-slots. Cf takes less space…

  • Toke

    April 26, 2005 at 4:57 pm in reply to: Homemade P2 card?

    I think you are right.
    And my guess is that this “panny approved” reliability is gain by testing the card thoroughly before selling it.
    Same thing you can do with your cf-cards by yourself.

  • [toke lahti] “I don’t believe switching between different framereates would be a big problem, if it’s demanded from receivers to handle them. “

    Btw, just noticed that new lcd’s have 4ms response.
    So that’s 250fps!
    So different frame rates to these displays will really be only a software thing.

Page 40 of 52

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy