[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A SCENARIA FOR VIDEO
I am delighted that the folks at the Sarnoff Research Center are working
"video super computer" capable of supporting "25 simultaneous D1's in
50 D1's out." The folks at Sarnoff are, obviously, a very smart bunch
applaud their design goals. However, when last I talked to them this
was still in the development stage and they could not actually
capability. If their machine is now capable of actually doing this I'd
take a look at it.
My comments were based on my real world experience with Silicon Graphics
computers. We currently have a tricked out Onyx - 8 200 MHz processors,
Megabytes of RAM, RM-5 graphics pipelines, a high speed disk array and a
video I/O system - which SGI claims is capable of multiple streams of
simultaneous CCIR-601 ("D-1") I/O. My experience with this machine is
simply getting one stream of real time CCIR-601 video in or out of it
machine to its limit.
As for posting "unsubstantiated statements on the forum," perhaps I
qualified my statement as being based on real world, practical machines
capable of reliably functioning in a professional post production
(Substitute the words "actually deliverable" for "currently exists" in
paragraph in question). In any case, I wrote the article as a reaction
I perceived as the incredible sales hype being spewed by manufactures at
convention. I would ask you to look at the entire article - not just
paragraph - when framing your response.
E-mail: Dean358 at aol.com
vox: (212) 972-3400
Subject: Reply Needed!
Date: 6/8/95 1:53 PM
Here's another one:
From: orton at earthlink.net (Mike Orton)
Subject: Re: A SCENARIA FOR VIDEO
At 10:24 AM 6/5/95, Herb Taylor wrote:
>On Jun 3, 7:15pm, Mike Orton wrote:
>> Subject: Re: A SCENARIA FOR VIDEO
>> At 1:57 PM 6/2/95, Basil_Pappas at avid.com wrote (for Dean Winkler):
>> First, the bandwidth required to simultaneously play back several
>> sources of uncompressed, real time component digital video and audio
>> too large for any single computer/disk system that currently exists.
The reply from Sarnoff Corp just goes to show that you cant get
away with unsubstantiated statements on the forum! This one was
easy to debunk!!!
> Sarnoff Real Time Corporation is a new 30 person commercial spin-off
>David Sarnoff Research Center. We are commercializing a "Video
>we have developed here since 1983. - that
>is sufficient for 25 simultaneous D1's in and about 50 D1's out. All
Thanks to Herb Taylor at Sarnoff for providing this information,
I for one had not heard of this development.
> At 1:57 PM 6/2/95, Basil_Pappas at avid.com wrote:
> > A SCENARIA FOR VIDEO
> > by
> > DEAN WINKLER
> > President, Post Perfect
> First, the bandwidth required to simultaneously play back several
> sources of uncompressed, real time component digital video and audio
> too large for any single computer/disk system that currently exists.
> Second, the computing power required to execute all of the real time
> functions of an on line editing system in software is far beyond the
> capabilities of even the fastest existing supercomputer.
> And third, pull down menus or similar CRT based controls will never
> be ergonomically fast enough. Some type of physical controls
> (e.g., switches, shaft encoders, lever arms, etc.) will continue to
> Sorry to disappoint you, Basil and Dean, but the SGI Challenge
> server fulfils at least one of these criteria by having a backplane
> bus bandwidth of around 2.2 Gbit/s. This is enough internal bandwidth
> you can get it out of the machine) for almost 10
> simultaneous D-1 channels. I suspect that this would be more
> than enough for the most hairy component edit session.
> The answer to your second problem will undoubtedly be solved
> by multiple processor arrays of the "Transputer" variety. Something
> along these lines already exists in the Quantel Henry/Hippo package,
> which makes a valiant attempt at executing those very functions
> you mention in something nearing real-time, right now. The
> third criterion is a given, especially to the readers of
> this forum, who are used to having color correction controls
> which can manipulate 6 different things at once (if you use both
> hands). This kind of interface will be a requirement for any
> workstation based color corrector, until the direct cranial interface
> is designed!
> To conclude, I beg to differ on your first two pessimistic points.
> This technology clearly already exists in many fragmentary areas.
> All that is needed is the vision to produce a whole which is
> greater than the sum of the parts.