In SAKIs review of "Rocco Super Moto Hard" he made the following comment on the visual quality of the DVDI completely agree with SAKIs analysis on the matter, except I don't find it to be "acceptable for the genre". As a matter of fact I find completely unacceptably when companed with other DVD from a topnotch company like Evil Angel. Roccos camera equipment seem to have been stuck in the late 90. Just take a look at the visual quality made by Jules Jordan with sharp crisp pictures and with full saturated colors to see the difference. You are actually able to make almost perfect still-captures form a JJ DVD, and that probably why JJ is the one the most pirated directors on the net. Try to make a still capture form a Rocco DVD, and you end up with a blurry mess.
Unfortunately it is not getting any better. For instance take a look at the Animal Trainer 10 DVD at around 18min 30 sec, and you will see that camera lens is totally scratched, and the picture is blurry and seem constantly slightly out of focus. That camera should have been thrown out a long time a go! Maybe the final screw up happens in a analog and outdated editing suite? I don't know what kind of camera and editing equipment Rocco is using, but it is time to make an upgrade to a fully digital production setup.
Some would call it "visual style" and "artistic freedom", I would call it out of focus and below todays standards. I wonder what the DVD prodction guys at Evil Angel calls it?
Why do I care? Because I am a huge Rocco fan. I think he is still the best performer/director in the industry, and I want the best from the best.
I don't think all of Rocco's movies are as bad as you suggest - Rocco Live in Prague is pretty good as it goes. Regarding the "genre" issue, Rocco's stuff looks more genuinely gonzo, using ambient light, rather than in set-up scenes. And let's not forget post-production trickery. But I take your point. They could be better. But they could also be a lot, lot worse, believe me. I also don't agree with Saki's analysis at all...the Italian preference???
I think Tricia D has explained in the past that there are issues to do with transfer from PAL to NTSC too. There's also an issue with Rocco's camerawork - IMHO it's better when Gabriel Zero handles the camera. Rocco often seems to shoot stuff into the light.
Still, ultimately, I don't care about "acceptable for the genre" one way or the other, as long as Rocco and Gabriel give me the shots that I want and the action that I want, which I believe he does. I can accept pretty crummy production values, as in Nacho's movies too, when they so reliably deliver the kind of girls and sex that I want to see.
BTW they seem to have been using digital cameras for a long time.
But shooting gonzo style doesn't mean you have to handle the camera like a clown. And don't get me started on the issue of Rocco shooting into the light!
I take your point on "Rocco Live in Prague" but in was never close to being near the quality Jules Jordans delivers. Last week I got "Roccs TAS 18" and it is the same visual quality as always - muted and washed out - and all of the outdoor footage shifts between bad and catastrophic. Try taking a look at all the footage between 30min. and 40min. and compare it to outdoor scenes with Gauge in JJ "Ass worship 3". I mean what the hell is going on with Roccos camerawork?!
I don't think it's a conversion problem. If is was Christoph Clark movies would be prone to the same problems, but they aren't. Even his outdoor footage is perfect like in Hardball 15 "House of Ass".
CC obviously opgraded his camera equipment a couple of years ago. Is very clear something has happened to the visual if you compare the early "Euro Angels" and the stuff his making nowadays. Sadly it is also obvious that nothing has happened to the visual quality in Roccos movies in the same time frame.
Yes, obviously Clark has improved his gear, but his movies are edited at Evil Angel so they get the master tapes, so there is a difference in the production process.
I have got various versions of Rocco's movies from different countries and found that the Italian VHS tapes I got have got good picture quality, sharp and bright, so I must conclude that there is a conversion issue somewhere along the line.
I actually can't really be bothered discussing this anymore so anyone with more expertise or interest, feel free to pipe up. I'm fed up with getting into discussions that I don't care about, apologies Ingenmann, it's nothing personal.
Well, you're welcome not to post if you don't like the experience. I don't see how "getting into discussions that I don't care about" is anyone else's fault than your own. No one is forcing you post, read, or respond to topics, after all.
Gabriel, I find your last comment a bit strange, but that's OK - it's nothing personal.
I'm sorry but I can't help care about the subject of visual quality of Roccos DVD. The reason why I got myself a DVD player was to get better visual quality on my porn, and start buying DVD from the mothership of Evil Angel.
As I a said in my first posting - I care because I consider myself a fan. Not only of Rocco, but also of Evil Angel as a whole. I really think they are the best company out there.
I got Rocco movies in PAL-format from Shiva in Holland shi.nl (VHS and DVD), DVDs from Wild Video in France and VHS tapes and DVDs from the Swedish/Scandinavian distributor Bestseller. My conclusion is that Shiva deliver the best quality, and Wild Video is the worst. Wild Video DVD look like second generation VHS. Other than that I don't know what to conclude.
Your information on Clark is quite interesting, but I guess the only persons who can bring more info on the subject is some person from Rocco Siffredi Production or Tricia Devereaux from Evil Angel.
I'm sorry Saki, you're right. I don't need to post at all. But I also fail to see the point of you stating the obvious, other than to patronise me. I was just in a bad mood after watching the news, so I apologise, but please, spare me the lectures, OK?
Anyway, I do like posting here despite this, so let's just get on with it, shall we?
Ingenmann, I think Shiva's products are pretty much equitable in quality with Evil Angel's but I posted before on the shocking quality of some Wild Video discs (some are OK though). I look forward to Tricia giving us some inside info on this, because I think we're agreed Rocco could do better.
Just to clarify to all ADT readers, my "disgruntled" remarks were not directed at Adult DVD Talk discussions, but forums eleswhere on the web, so apologies all round. I shall refrain from talking to myself in public in future. PS thanks to Ingenmann for your understanding. Goodnight!
My apologies. I carefully re-read what you wrote and misinterpreted you bowing out of the discussion as a dismissal of Ingenmann's point of view. I think the "can't be bothered" and "fed up" parts made my subconscious assume that you has some sort of superiority thing going on. I thought the exchange was going well all the way up to your last two sentences before my reply. There was no patronization intended -- those two sentences really just rubbed me the wrong way.
Sorry you're having a bad day -- sorry if I made it worse.
Thanks TriciaDoes it mean that Christoph is shooting his footage using NTSC DV cameras?I just wonder if Rocco original footage is send to you in digital format? Anyway I still think Rocoo needs to take a look at his camera equipment. The bad quality of the outdoor footage in TAS 18 is not explained by any conversion issues.
In a couple of week I will start to work with a digital editing tool (Avid DV Express) and a digital conversion tool (Canopus Procoder) who is able to convert between all kind of formats (DV-PAL and DV-NTSC, MPEG-2, quicktime, avi - you name it). I'll do some experiments myself just to get a better understanding of the issues involved in producing DVD's.
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Mar 24 2003 : 5:23PM
Christoph and Rocco use IDENTICAL Sony DV cameras.
Rocco's movies are sent to us on Betacam in PAL format.
Again, it's NOT ROCCO'S camera equipment. And it has nothing to do with DVD technology at all. The VHS for Christoph vs. Rocco look similar to the DVD for Christoph vs. Rocco.
I'm sorry, but this is my last post on this subject. Let me know when you come up with a solution for me.
Tricia. Perhaps the issue is the conversion from dv to betacam (digi or analogue betacam?). The answer would be for you to get a copy of his dv master and compare it to the betacam version of the same footage.
Talking of dvd technology, why can't you give european distributors the full authored dvd rather than hae them reinvent the wheel for each title? They invariably don't do as good a job as your good self and don't even bother including the extras - I just can't see why if you licence the film to them they can't just get the whole ready authored dvd (I'm thinking particularly about Harmony in the UK)
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Mar 24 2003 : 8:37PM
Sir Noel, since you're asking a different question, I'll try to answer for you. The don't want our full version. Part of the reason, IIRC, is that they have to re-edit most of our movies for content, so our authored version wouldn't be enough to help them. Aside from that, you should direct your question to them.
I don't know if this is a solution or not, but isn't there an editing system that would allow Rocco to create both a PAL and NTSC version at the same time?
If so, then the tape that Rocco would send you (NTSC Betacam) should be identical to what you are creating when editing Christoph's tape, shouldn't it? (This is assuming that the result of the Christoph edit an NTSC Betacam tape)
This would eliminate one generation from the chain and, theroetically, give you a better copy to work with.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Mar 24 2003 : 10:26PM
If they are digital, uncompressed tapes, why bother to look at the generational loss at all? There should't be any significant difference at all, should it? I believe the question may be if Clark and Siffredi are using the same format to shoot in to begin with: PAL or SECAM (which is used in France). There is a difference in color definition between PAL and SECAM and this may create a different quality when converted to NTSC. FWIW, I haven't noticed the "rotten visual quality of Rocco's DVDs". Maybe that is because I am not to keen on fully saturated colors. They tend to look very bad and cause all kinds of color bleeding on my TV. Vivid's films (and I do mean films) are horrible to watch because of this. Maybe in Vivid's case though, it is due to a bad NTSC-PAL conversion?
Betacam is an analog format. So when Evil Angel has to convert the PAL Betacam to NTSC (they end up with the slower refresh rate of PAL and the lower resoultion of NTSC, the worst of both worlds), not only are they losing quality due to the conversion, they are also creating a generational loss.
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Mar 25 2003 : 12:44AM
Bill - as always, wonderful replies!
We have thought of this possiblity, but so far that solution (outputting NTSC and PAL copies at the same time) is outrageously expensive. A slightly more plausible solution would be to buy Rocco an NTSC Beta deck, equip it to work on European systems (I'd have to get help in accomplishing this, as they don't come compatible), and ask his editor to output from scratch an extra movie for us in the US. If we could do this, I think we'd see a huge difference in quality.
We've been looking into it, with not a ton of luck so far.
For The Ass Collector, they output it on DigiBeta, in PAL format. We transfered this to NTSC before working on the DVD.
It's strange. I usually think of Europeans as being the least egocentric people in the world. However, when it comes to making their editing equipment, they make very little effort to making their technology compatible with American technology. And American's have been making their technology compatible with Asia, so it would seem that Europe is isolating themselves in the creative film/video fields.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Mar 25 2003 : 1:14AM
Oh, I didn't realize they were using Betacam. That doesn't make sense, though. If they shoot digitally and edit digitally, then why make an analog master, that has to be worked on before DVD mastering? Why not use DigiBeta as the output format of the master?
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Mar 25 2003 : 2:06PM
Walter, I wish we could on everything, but DigiBeta decks are REALLY expensive (about $100,000). If we didn't buy one, we'd have to rent one every time we output a movie, and they rent at $560/day and that's with our frequent customer discount from Wexler Video here in LA. Plus, the DVD authorer would have to have it rented on the day he encoded the movie for the DVD too. So that's a minimum of $1120 extra for every single movie, and we do at least 6 new movies every month. So the question is, is the quality difference between Betacam and Digibeta really worth $100,000. For now, we're just doing our main features on Digibeta, like The Ass Collector and Fashionistas.
Well, thanks to all the patient people for their replies here and making this a fascinating thread, which is what I'd hoped for - while I thought Ingenmann was exaggerating slightly, I felt he had a fair point at heart and that he deserved to get some input from people who actually know what they're talking about, rather than me speculating. I am shocked in particular at the cost of all this stuff!
It's intriguing Tricia should make the point about Rocco and Christoph using identical cameras, as I have just had first hand experience of this. I used an identical Canon camera to the one Alex Ladd uses on Double Parked 2, and naturally his results are infinitely superior to what I achieved. Am I casting aspersions on Rocco's camera-handling? Not exactly, but surely there's a case for Rocco taking a touch more care in producing the best possible source footage to start with. I just looked at True Anal Stories 16, and I can't deny that some of the indoor footage is pretty poor, very dull.
As I said before, the Italian PAL VHS copies are clear and sharp but I suppose they do have restrained colour. Obviously there's a loss of resolution in converting to NTSC (which could account for the loss of sharpness) and then us Europeans watching it back on PAL gear again (well, actually I watch it on a Trinitron computer monitor, so it usually looks OK anyway).
I actually feel like quite a lot of DVDs seem to have a certain lack of sharpness to the picture (even when conversion isn't the issue) - is there a reason for this?
PS Cheers Saki, forgot you're not a mind reader, apologies again!
Does this mean that you have the same problem (but going the other way) when distributing Buttman titles to Europe? Do you end up having to give NTSC Betacam tapes to the European companies who license these movies?
This tread has developed in way more interesting way , that I cloud have ever hoped for. Thanks again for your contribution, Tricia. OK Walter, I'll admit "rotten" was exaggerated, but I was just trying to make a headline. But I still think I've got a valid point, Saki just said it better.I would love to help you, but I'm no expert on the subject. I just find the subject of Porn, DVD and digital video technology very interesting! I'm sorry, if in all my excitement I ended up sounding patronizing - I wasn't out to lecture anyone.
Sitting behind a keyboard makes it bit hard to to get a full overview of all the issues involved at EA and Rocco in Europe. So this just me thinking out loud:
Camera work CC and Rocco are using the same cameras so that obviously not the source of "the problem". ? There maybe room for improvement in the way they are handled by the guys behind the camera (Just to repeat myself - take a look at the outdoor scenes in TAS 18). The only question are the cameras used PAL or NTSC versions? It doesn't really matter anyway, if you keep it digital in the whole post production process.
Avoid the analog Betacam as an interchange format The way I see it, the ideal way to produce a DVD form digital DV footage would go like this:
Use a digtial nonlinear Linear edition suite (NLE) like Avid Express or Apple Final Cut Pro. They are both able to handle DV in PAL or NTSC format, and so is just about every other NLE out the there. Import the footage directly from the DV camera or external DV deck using a IEEE 1394 cable (FireWire, i.LINK) . Everything is kept in the original digital format and there is no conversion of any kind during the editing.
Both Avid Express of Apple Final cut Pro has some really advanced color correcting, so maybe do some color correcting if nessesary.
When the edit is done you need to save it as as PAL-DV file to an external hard drive with a IEEE 1394 interface. Ship the hard drive to the DVD producer.
The DVD producer can open the finished movie as a simple computer file. The file can be opened it in a 700$ converter tool like Canonpus Procoder. Procoder is able to digitally convert the PAL-DV file to a NTSC-MPEG-2 file - needed for DVD's. The converted movie is now ready to be imported in to a DVD production tool. Here the chapter stops, menus and so on are added.
The finished DVD project is saved to a high capacity media like like a external hard drive or DLT tape that is used at many DVD replication facilities.
Ship the stuff to the fans!
Digibeta is a waste of money for DV footage Is doesn't make any sense to use Digibeta as an interchange format for footage make by a DV camera. DV footage is file like any other file on your computer. You don't gain anything in quality by putting it on Digibeta tape.
If you are shooting a movie on 35 mm film like Ass Collector and Fashionistas it makes sense to make transfer to Digibeta . In this case you are able to exploit the quality potential of the high-end format.
I don't think there is a thing like Europe editing equipment. 95% of all equipment is made in Japan or the US anyway. The big issues involved are PAL/NTSC and Analog/digital conversion.
Ingenmann - somewhere i a PAL country eagerly awaiting Rocco Initiations 6 on a NTSC DVD.
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Mar 26 2003 : 1:06PM
Nice ideas, thank you. See how much fun it is to bat around actual ideas?
At any rate, other than Rocco's editor simply rejecting the idea, there are just a couple things that would make things harder on me and EA. 1) I'M the DVD producer. DVDemon is just the authorer. That means that someone in my department picks the chapter stops, titles the chapters (if it's a feature), compiles the fetish menu clips, goes through the extra footage... So the producer would have to go to DVDemon and do all this work there, on their computers, which would use up a lot of time on their computer. All this could probably be worked out and is not major, but I just wanted to point it out.
2) The other problem would be getting a NTSC output of the movie onto Beta for us here in the US. Our in-house duplication lab is set up for recording from Beta tape. Again, not major, but something else to work out.
3) We would need to get Rocco's editor to agree to all this. In my experience, editors are very opinionated creative people who like to do things the way they are comforable with. I'll feel Rocco out on this in the very near future, but at any rate, his next 3-5 US releases are already here, so there wouldn't be any changes until the releases after that.
There are some high-end format converters available from TenLab.com that are (I am told by a contact here in the DC area) the best in the business. Maybe something as simple as a 1-time investment in a top-of-the-line converter would help up the quality level.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Mar 26 2003 : 6:59PM
I agree some very interesting ideas have been developed here. I will try to add some.The question remains what DV camera they are using. Most 3 chip DV cameras I am familiar with don't leave much room for fooling around with manual settings. I agree it is very well possible to screw up an image, but when handled with only a limited amount of expertise, the results can be expected to be pretty good everytime. Hell, I am able to teach students who have no prior experience to use these camera's with fairly good results within two to three sessions of 1 hour each. I have noticed that Rocco is using more and more "gizmos", such as helmet cams and micro lenses. This makes me think that he is using different kind of lenses or filters than Christophe Clark. I also read that for instance John Leslie uses a lot of self made filters, to create a "film-like" quality.I hadn't thought of that, but this is indeed a relatively cheap way to do it, without losing much quality to conversions or different generations at all. I do have 1 remark. I am familiar with Final cut Pro and I do realize that the program offers advanced color correcting filters. However, my experience has taught me that a proper and consistent use of these filters is by no means easy to accomplish. I mainly use the color filters in two occasions: 1) when the colors are really screwed up badly, I use it to save as much of the footage as I can, to make at least somewhat "presentable" and 2) when I want to create a specific special effect, using outlandish color shemes. When there are only minor color problems, I tend to leave it alone, because filters tend to screw up other image qualities and often require time consuming manual key framed manipulated corrections over time, which in turn create consistency problems.
quote] Walter Burns wrote: The question remains what DV camera they are using. Most 3 chip DV cameras I am familiar with don't leave much room for fooling around with manual settings. I agree it is very well possible to screw up an image, but when handled with only a limited amount of expertise, the results can be expected to be pretty good everytime. Hell, I am able to teach students who have no prior experience to use these camera's with fairly good results within two to three sessions of 1 hour each. I have noticed that Rocco is using more and more "gizmos", such as helmet cams and micro lenses. This makes me think that he is using different kind of lenses or filters than Christophe Clark. I also read that for instance John Leslie uses a lot of self made filters, to create a "film-like" quality.
Click to expand
Yes the questions still remains what camera model CC and Rocco/Gabriel Zero is using. Maybe Tricia will fill us in. My point was that as long it a digital camera it is possible to keep the whole post-production proceess in the digital domain.
I wasn't making my self clear. Yes, the camera does matter! It matters a lot, it is most important piece of equipment in making any kind of movie. And it also matters a lot how it is handle by the cameraman. The point and shoot type of camera doesn't leave much room for tweaking, but still there are some rules to be followed and some basic settings to set. Really bad footage made by really bad camera work can't be fixed by any digital tool what whatsoever.
I would go so far to call i the cheapest way to do it. An 80GB external hard drive cost $200 and in able to hold almost 6 hours of DV footage. That no more than ten Betacam tapes and there is no need for a expensive betacam tape deck.I haven't tried it out my self so I fully belive you - i guess it's called "advanced" and not easy for a reason. Color correcting footage made by gonzo style camera work is probably even more complicated because of the long continues shots. Often these shot have VERY varying lightening conditions. But color correcting can be used to adjust a lot of things, like an incorrect white balance.
Take a look at this correction done on some Sony VX-1000 footage. It's done by a [ invalid url ] , but is shovs the huge potential of color correcting and a VX-1000 for that matter.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Mar 27 2003 : 5:06PM
Yes, but that is relative simple stuff, which falls under my first point: 'when the colors are really screwed up badly, I use it to save as much of the footage as I can, to make the image at least somewhat "presentable".' Even then, "long takes" with a moving camera cause problems due to ever changing lighting conditions while continuity editing demands consistency of image qualities over different shots. Good and consistent color corrections can be obtained, but it can be a difficult and time consuming process.
Edited: Even if the correction of color is simple, the color filter effects other image qualities. Look at the example posted by Ingenmann. Look at shadows and highlights being affected in a different way in the corrected image, causing the "dramatic" lighting of the first image to be somewhat deminished in power.
Thanks. I'll bat around some then (and ask a lot of questions - sorry)
My ideas might introduce to many changes at one time in your production process, so maybe you could settle for just this one.
I presume Rocco's editor is not some analog Betacam editing suite but a modern digital NLE setup- right? Making that assumption, he will able to output the finished movie to a DV-PAL file to a hard drive or some other back up media, and ship it to EA.
The Canopus Procoder tool is a real digital conversion wizard. It's converts from almost any digital video file format for to almost any other digital format. It can make a conversion like this: DV-PAL to DV-NTSC or visa versa. You need more than an off the shelf PC.
Back at EA the original DV-PAL file is converted to a DV-NTSC file using Procoder. The file can be imported into your own NLE suite. That way you plug in to the normal post-production process at EA.
I'm not quite sure I get all processes and issues involved here. In what kind of system do the guys at EA pick and mark-up the "chapter stops, titles the chapters, compiles the fetish menu clips, goes through the extra footage" - Do they watch the finish movies as betacam copy or is it done in the NLE suite. - Do you make some notes on paper with mark-in an out points and and ship the whole thing on Betacam to DVDemon? - Is the conversion to MPEG-2 files done from a Betacam copy at DVDemon? - Or is the converion to MPEG-2 done from a DV file?Is the output done directly from the NLE suite to a Betacam tape-deck? If so you could use the "plug-in" process described above.Opinionated people are fine as long as they don't slip in to sheer stubbornness. If Rocco's editor is using a digital NLE suite, all he have to do is to save the finished movie as a DV-file to a 200$ external hard drive. It's like using any other save menu in windows. It takes a couple of minutes to do, compared to the hours it takes to make a Betacam copy. Tell him he can now start to get home earlier.
Hi, if you guys read my posts on a regular basis, you know I'm fairly level headed and try not to slip into using hyperbole. I'm also a huge Evil Angel fan. So please take that into consideration. I sat down to watch Rocco & Kelly's Perversion in Paris last night and have to say that of the over 2,000 discs I own, it is one of the worst looking DVDs I have seen. Grainy & washed out, I've got some old second generation VHS dubs that may well look better. To say I was let down is an understatement. The feature itself is typical Rocco & Kelly, although it seems Kelly is getting nastier...if that can be possible and my God, did her boobs get b i g. I just wish I could have enjoyed it but I was constantly pulled out of it because of the image. I hope my comments are taken in the spirit in which they are intended and this is my first real negative experience with an Evil Angel disc. Thanks
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Mar 28 2003 : 2:37PM
1-usually on Beta. 2-yes 3-yes 4-noWe have a NLE suite here that Christoph's and Jules' movies are edited on. The authorer has his own different editing equipment.We would almost definitely opt for more expensive external drives, as the time involved of having to receive a new file on a drive if the first one had any glitch in it would throw off our entire production process of the DVD. Plus, we'd have to have probably 2 so that we could be working on extracting one movie while the editor in Italy was saving the next one.
Just wanted to make a few additions and corrections to my last posting . I think the idea of using external hard drives got bit excessive , if I may say so. It still a very doable idea, but not necessary a good idea in all the of stages post-production process.
The point I missed myself, is that DV tapes comes in two sizes. Mini DV tapes are used in DV camcorders and DV tape decks, and standard DV tapes are only used in tape decks (as far as i know). The big issue is that standard size DV tapes can hold up to 184 min.of footage, so it is possible to fit a finished movie one DV tape.
The use of DV tape is handy, because they fits in to the normal ways of doing things for the people involved. Using DV tapes, less people has to learn new tricks. Maybe not all the creative people feel comfortable thinking of footage as simple files on a computer.
There are several interesting DV tape deck solutions out there. They support both recording and playback in PAL and NTSC mode by the flick of a switch (no euro-egocentrism here, Tricia), and the drive mechanism supports miniDV and standard DV tapes. And of course they all got Firewire/IEEE1384/i.link interfaces for digital transfer. (Please note, that the decks described does not convert between PAL and NTSC)
- Sony DSR-11 - campact semi-portable and affordable. Basically, all your gonna need. $2000 - Sony DSR-25 - if like 'em with extra nobs and build in monitor. Auto detects PAL/NTSC. Looks like a pro. $3,300 - Sony DSR-45 - like DSR25, but with lots of extra analog outputs like a betacam deck. Could fit in a VHS replication setup. $4,400
That just some affordable examples that is sold in Europe and US. JVC got some really super cool looking black decks too.
The main objective is still to keep things in the digital domain at all times, and avoid using the analog betacam tapes as an interchange format.
Presuming that Rocco's editor is using a digital NLE system and just got a new SPny multi-standard DV deck, the setup could be like this:
1) Footage is made using a mini-DV PAL camera. 2) Using a DV tape deck the footage is digitally transfers to the NLE suite. 3) The edit is done (with color correction), and the finished movie is digitally transferred to a 180 min. standard DV tape in PAL format. 4) Tape is shipped to Tricia by UPS. 5) (Rocco' s editor is making transfor to betacam tape for the European market. But we don't care, anymore!)
Back at EA. Tricia recives the DV tape form Rocco. She puts in in her new multi-standard DV tape deck and flicks the switch to PAL and imports the movie file into the EA digital NLE suite via firewire. There are at least three options now:
1) Handle the rest of the post production process like the to with Christoph Clarke's PAL tapes. Or....
2-a ) Save the imported file as a DV file to the (external) hard drive. Fire up the digital video converter wizard Canopus Procoder. Using the predefined setting labeled "Rocco PAL setup" the DV PAL file is converted to a DV NTSC file. 2-b) Open the converted DV NTSC file in the NLE and save it to a standard DV NTSC tape. 2-c) The DVD at EA producer does her thing (using a betacam-tape, but just for reviewing ) and ships the movie DV NTSC tape to DVDemon. 2-d) A second DV tape copy is handed over to the VHS replication guys, who just got a new Sony multi-standard DV tape deck, that fits nicely in to the VHS replications facility setup. This is the only time a analog output is needed.
3-a) At the same time the DV PAL to NTSC was conversion done, a MPEG-2 file was made using a preset labeled "DVDdemon setup". One of the nice features of Procoder is it's ability to simultaneously convert to different digital video formats. 3-b) The MPEG-2 file is saved to an external hard drive that is shipped to DVDdemon. 3-c) The Demon does his stuff following the directions from the producer, using the EA made MPEG-2 files. Or....
Over at DVDdemon the Demon likes to do his own conversion to MEPG-2. And his just got is new multi-standard DV tapedeck, and inserts the tape from EA.
1) He transfers the DV file from tape into his preferred conversion tool and makes the MPEG-2 files. (He no longer captures analog output from betacam , and doesn't even try doing analog captures from the DV deck.) 2) The Demon does his stuff following the directions from the producer, using his own homemade MPEG-2 files.
Note to Demon - consider using the original PAL DV file from Rocco, and use a transcoder tool like Procoder. Using the original file would cut out the DV NTSC stage, and go directly from DV PAL to MEPG-2 NTSC. A stage saved, is quality gained and time saved!
I guess all this ended outlining an start-to-end digital production process with full support for both NTSC and PAL using DV tape or hard drives.
Today I kind of rediscovered www.promax.com. They are some of the pioneers in selling and promoting digital video, and they even make some hardware themselves. They sell everything needed to do a digital production process from camera to DVD. And -drum roll - they have a shop in Hollywood, CA . I guess that's in your hood Tricia. (No, I'm no affiliated with them in anyway). They might be able to give some real life inputs.
I don't think more expensive drives a more durable, but you might opt for some drives with durable cases. They all use the same normal drive mechanism inside. Just think of a notebook computer, its hard drive isn't especially prone to faults, even though it gets handled a lot. I think you should go for at least five drives or so. In that way several projects can be in progress at the same time.
I think I'll stop here for now, before I start repeating myself endlessly. Several of steps in the post-production could be done using external hard drives. DV tapes and hard drives has it strong and weak sides, so it it up to the people involved to make a decision.
I my research on the net i found this new article on the subject of format conversion. It covers NTSC <-> PAL conversion and Film <-> video conversion. The article is written by one of the real experts on the subject Ben Waggoner, who has written several articles the subject. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the subject. You need to register at the site DV.com, but it's free and really worth the hassle. There are numerous other articles and reviews covering every angle related to digital video production. Video Format Conversion February 2003 Tools and techniques for moving between NTSC, PAL, and film. By Ben Waggoner
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Apr 8 2003 : 3:51PM
Ingenmann- Hi. I've sent you a few emails with some questions, but maybe you'll see this...?
Anyway, I wanted to update you on what's going on with this situation.
Rocco's editor is concerned about files becoming too corrupt too often. If he was just bringing the files over from across town, it wouldn't be a problem, but with current airport security, the drives would have to be x-rayed, and there's no guarantee of how gentle a shipping company is with things.
Also, the authorer (DVDemon) does not want to use Procoder to convert to MPEG-2. He feels that his conversion HARDware will compress the media much more professionally than a relatively cheap SOFTware program. However, he has no problems with the possibility of me using the program to convert from PAL to NTSC and then outputting it onto Beta from him. (We actually don't like DVDcam all that much because it glitches too much.)
But we're still all in talks to see what we can do.
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Apr 8 2003 : 4:00PM
Here's the good news:
At the very least, starting with Rocco: Animal Trainer 12, the picture quality of Rocco's DVDs should improve pretty significantly.
Although we haven't worked out enough details to accomplish keeping everything digital yet, Rocco will be taking his finished movie to a much more professional lab in Europe that will be making the transfer to NTSC. Rocco has already seen the transfer of Rocco: Animal Trainer 12, and he says the picture quality is MUCH better. So the colors should be much more vibrant and the picture quite a bit sharper.
IAFD, supporters of beastiality. Just say no. 7564 Posts 11/02
Posted - Apr 8 2003 : 4:52PM
I have just seen True Anal Stories 18 . There were no problems with the colors, but in outdoor scenes, some shots were not as sharp as others. As far as I can tell, it had nothing to do with focus problems during shooting. It must have happened after shooting, during post-production. It happened almost exclusively during long shots, where there was a high contrast in light. Maybe Rocco is using a filter that creates problems when converting the DV signal to other types of signals?
Thanks for the update, Tricia. That is indeed great news, and I can't wait to check out the results. Is really great that Rocco is listening, and taking some quick action on it too. I think is a really good starting point for quality improvement, because it can be done without any investments or disruptions of already established working processes. If this brings the visual quality of Rocco's DVD up to the level of CC or Jules DVD, then a lot have been be achived without much work. I,m keeping my fingers crossed!I can see the point of data integrity on mobile hard drives, but i don't think it's a real issue. Hard drives are not sentive to x-rays. Thousands of laptop computer with hard drives gets X-rayed every days at airport check-in without any harm to the data.
On the issue of the handling by shipping company I don't any problems either. A hard drive is a very robust piece of hardware. Basically I believe that a Beta tape cassette is way more fragile than any external hard drive out there. A harddrive can run for hours every day in many years without failure. If you do that to a tape it will be warn down i a few weeks. External drives are very robust because they are enclosed in some kind of metal og hard plastic casing. Think of the Apple iPod MP3 player, it's actually build around a tiny hard drive. You could use it while jogging or playing ice hockey if you wanted, without any harm to the the drive.Well, they might be right, they might be wrong. But why don't DVDemon and EA make a test? Trying out procoder is not a big investment - the software costs $700. But the price of the software doesn't really tell anything about the quality of it. Take a piece of DV-footage and covert it the Procoder way, and the DVDmon way and compare the two results.
Procoder is not the only software transcoder that does the trick. You could also check out: http://www.ligos.com , http://www.heuris.com , http://www.discreet.com/products/cleaner/
I think the problem with some hardware decoder is that they rely on a analog input from tape that they digitize and convert in realtime to MPEG-2. That OK if the original footage was made on analog tape, but it's an unnecessary step if the original footage was digital. The way DVDemon works, you actually have to make an analog copy that will introduce the generational loss that all analog tape formats has.
MPEG-2 encoding is all about mathematics. Either you use a special piece of hardware to do the math or you use a standard computer to do it in a software program. But the math stays the same. Some encoder are better that other because of "better math", not because of better hardware. The thing about hardware MPEG-2 encoder is that is purpose build piece of hardware, and that stuff was pretty expensive especially 3-4 years ago. But today a normal computer has become so powerful that you no longer need specialized hardware to do the MPEG-2 encoding, hence the advent of programs like Procoder.
Last week both AVID and Apple introduced new versions of their digital NLE suites that incorporates software based DV to MPEG-2 conversion direcly from the timeline. There is no messing around with beta tapes here anymore.
I don't think they would compromise their high status in the video editing market if software based conversion delivered crappy results per se. It's this kind of development that puts a lot of specialized hardware manufactures (and people for that matter) under a lot of pressure, because it is simply not needed.
In pursuing a fully digital production process I think is makes sense to try out the PAL to NTSC conversion, if you can make Rocco editor to deliver original PAL footage in digital format on disk or DV tape.
I wonder what the reason is for the glitches you see on DVcam tapes? Bad tapes or same bad tapedecks, or some ghost in the maschine ? I don't think DVcam is normally considered a "glitchy format". I would bere were surprised (and angry) to see glitches from a $9000 tape deck like Sony DSR 1800.
I find your analyses quite interesting, and I do agree that colors is not a big issue in TAS 18.
But all of Rocco movies has this strange feel of a slight blurriness or ghostlike fell to them. Let's hope is a conversion issue that will disappears with his new conversion lab.
I do think Rocco has some kind of lens or filter problem going on. Often I get the feeling of "seeing then lens" or "seeing the filter" when the camera moves. I don't why that is, but at least sometimes it simple a dirty or scratched lens as you can sometimes see in the outdoor footage in TAS 18 and other Rocco movies for that matter.
So my advise to Rocco would be: 1) if your using a filer take i off and throw it away. 2) Get a new lens with out scratches and 3) Clean the lens before shooting.
Ingenmann, I just thought I might mention that hard drives at airport security can be at risk.
Passing a laptop or similar through a standard conveyor belt type x-ray machine at a gate is fine. It is rare anything would happen to them.
However, the xray gear that is used for baggage and cargo is much more powerful and a lot of them these days use a type of technology used in CAT scans in hospitals. In some cases this can damage magnetic media, it might not erase the drive but could corrupt files.
Apparently UPS is also using gear that irradiates parcels in order to sanitise them from anthrax and other agents. This has caused some concerns from professional photography organisations because they can ruin compact flash cards and similar devices.
There are all kind of Nuke-a-Trons being used at airport and at shipping companies these days. Some of them might have a microscopic chance of damaging a hard drive. But I think the main point here is that if a hard drive is at risk, a tape cassette will be at risk too. At a basic level they both used magnetic particles to store information, and are therefore sensitive to the same risks.
Sony and Kodak has made some interesting guidelines and comments on the issues.
Form Sony: AIRPORT X-RAY SECURITY GUIDELINES FOR MAGNETIC TAPE RECORDINGS:
"X-ray systems used at airport check-in have long been found to have no effect on magnetic tape media. But, customer uncertainty regarding what effect the new sophisticated Explosive Detection Systems (EDS) might have, prompted Sony to conduct a preliminary test to determine if more extensive testing was warranted. Based on a controlled test using a variety of Sony magnetic tapes with varying degrees of susceptibility to erasure (i.e. values of coercivity), it was found that the EDS in use at one airport did not impact the magnetic recording on the tapes tested."
"4. Avoid mailing magnetic tape through the United States Postal Service, or the like, unless it can be arranged for these mailings to be exempted from being x-rayed."
From Kodak: Airport X-Ray Security, US Mail Sterilization and Motion Picture Film
"2. US MAIL STERILIZATION The United States Postal Service is installing new equipment to sterilize items sent through the mail. For security reasons, they are not disclosing whether this process will be limited to letters, or if parcels and other packages will also be included. Until further tests are conducted, it would be wise to assume that the high energy beams used in the sterilization equipment will fog or damage all film - processed or unprocessed, exposed or unexposed, negative or print. In addition, photographic prints, slides, DVDs, picture CDs, CD-ROMs, video tapes and even the CCD sensors in video cameras and other products may be affected. Because those materials often contain valuable - and sometimes, irreplaceable, images - Kodak recommends that you err on the side of caution until more information is available. All imaging materials should be sent via a courier or an express air shipping company that does not use the US postal system. Local laboratories may have additional information and/or offer alternative shipping arrangements. "
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Apr 13 2003 : 1:48PM
Well, you must be using hard drives that I haven't tried yet, because at EA, several of the hard drives that we use to transport media and files have had files go corrupt from moving them back and forth.
It doesn't seem to matter how much we use the drives. It seems to be the bumping around from moving them. It doesn't happen often, I'm just saying that it's happened.
Well, no - I don't have access to any special drives. There is only a handful of drive manufactures out there, and external drives are just a way of putting a cover on some standard drive. I not able to explain why you are experiencing these kind of problems, but you shouldn't be experiencing these kind of problems at all. Personally I would take the drives back to dealer and make complain about it. Maybe it's combination of a fragmented drive and/or bad drivers on the computer. Maybe it' will help to update the driver and reformat the drives. But I'm just guessing here....
- What kind of interface do the drives have? SCSI, Firewire/IEEE-1394 or USB? - Are you experiencing the problems on all kinds of file types or is it just big video files?
I'll still stick to my claim, that a hard drive is robust piece of hardware. If drives would be as faulty as your a lot of laptop owners would be in big trouble every day. Any computer companies selling computers on-line would de drowniong in customers complaints because of the handeling by shipping companies.
