[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Transfer suite Switchers


It appears that my joking attempt to welcome a new subscriber was not well
recieved. While my remark was provocative it must be understood that I am proud
of what Digital Vision produces because I know how hard my companions here try
to make it work. I am also equally convinced that both Accom and BTS try very
hard as well. In fact, BTS try very very hard and at times it is in all honesty
a draw. But this is a draw for that particular customer and his type of job.
However all noise reducers, particularly those mentioned noise reducers are VERY
close in performance. I have been through cases with customers, with and without
competitors present where we have been staring at monitors until our eyes bled
and still could not make out which manufacturers product  was best for that
particular type of material. Hence it is not possible to quantify what you
percieve as quality or performance.  There is no discussion of whose horse runs
faster. Making a long story shorter, the intrinsic technology we all use for
noise reduction (recursive and spatial filtering) is not fundamentally the way
to deal with filmgrain. Filmgrain is NOT noise. We just happen to be very lucky
that a sideeffect of current technology offers some degree of satisfaction to
you. Ok we have different tricks in our bags to improve on the visual acceptance
of noise reduction. Then again are we not all in the business of illusions?

My personal point of view is that real intelligent film grain processing will
evolve on open platform systems, already interesting things are shaping. However
it will be a long time before the real time criteria is fulfilled. 

Having said all the above I can safely say that the DIE 125-(M or not) used to
be a very appreciated product and sometime ago a landmark for us here at DV.
Sure, there are situations where one generally require very little
noisereduction to begin with and there the DIE will work fine as will the
previous BTS models, the DNR-7. In fact I know a customer or two that refuse to
let go of his DNR-7's.
Also we have Snell & Wilcoxes little box as well as the FOR.A. The only thing I
can say is if you have any doubts whatsoever try them out and do it with all
present under the same conditions.

I'll dig around someold  files and see if I can find an piece on noisereduction.

 Now,  dirt and scratch concealment is another story altogether but I will not
bore you with that.

Product evolution
I think it is safe to say that both a dilemma and an asset for  "us"
manufacturers is that we want the product out there yesterday but not before it
has what you guys wanted and  will not annoy the one that just bought the
preceeding model.

Sure, Rank had to address the EC emissions and they threw most of their options
into the unit including 4X4. It is probably quite a task  to get a box like a
Rank to meet emission requirements. Yes, many improvements have been stepwise
but I would be very surprised if Rank do not listen to what you have to tell
them. The reply might be a bit hm,hm,hm but if enough of you out there have a
similar story to tell I would be very surprised if you did not find it on the
next model. 

Have you forgotten that there is a conceptually very challenging alternative to
Ranks? The FLH1000 (forget the price for a while) was recently aquired by  UK's
Channel 4 " it puts out so good images in 625".

Maybe it is time  we invite both Rank and BTS to join the discussion?

I herewith step off  the soapbox