Paul Bruening

You are talking about running a network over USB3.0? I wasnt aware that was possible, I guess I imagined it is possible to do that over USB but IP networking certainly doesnt seem like what USB was designed for. I'm sure there would be cable length issues. Most USB uses I am familiar with use 1-to-1 host-device connections and I doubt standard USB drivers would support much else. I could be wrong though. Seems like if you really need extra speed for a renderfarm the old routes of trunked GigE or 10GigE or Infiniband, or maybe a Fibre SAN would be the way to go. It would be cool to be able to harness new superfast super cheap buses like USB3 to speed things up instead, though, but I think it could be more trouble than its worth since they were really meant for connecting one fast device 3ft away not 100 computers 100' away.

I only need it to move data from drive to drive between stations. I don't need all the chat/email/et al junk of a regular network. If I can make the stations act like a device on one end of any link, I'll be in good shape.

From what I can tell it wouldn't be worth it to make up all those wires only to find there is little to no boost in productivity. Or worse that it doesn't work at all.

I might could do a test run between two computers. It would only put me out $80 in cards. If it didn't work, I could just crimp 8P8C plugs and put it back to Gig LAN. The cards would still come in useful later as the 3.0 technology on devices starts coming out. The software driver would handle the mobo cross on one computer. Whether it can bridge two to move data between their HDDs is the part I don't know. The driver will be looking for a device on one end, won't it?

I just went to check my Cat 5e cables to see if they were shielded and discovered that they are actually Cat 6 cables. I recall that I bought them as shielded cables. This means that they are rated at 250MHz. They are not Cat 6a (augmented) that are rated at 500 MHz. Since they are well under the length limits for Cat 6 cable running 10GbE and are rated to handle loads twice that for USB 3.0 wouldn't I be within the cables' tolerances for a USB 3.0 application? This is assuming that I soldered and shielded the new ends and there was enough voltage to drive the 30 feet or less lengths. As well, they are patch cables and are made with stranded wires instead of solid core wires.

You see, a USB 3.0 card is only $40 at Tiger Direct. Whereas 10GbE NIC's seem to be insanely expensive and almost impossible to find on consumer sales sights. Does anyone know where 10GbE NIC's can be had for $100 or less? 10GbE is about twice as fast in specification as USB 3.0. But, the cost is what's bugging me.

Pretty much, out of the blue, I'm getting calls and feelers from rock and alternative bands for producing music videos. They seem to be attracted to my full, Techniscope process at my obscenely low rates. They seem to want the credibility that 35mm can bring to their band's image. Firstly, does this mean that the economy is picking up? Secondly, doesn't Tscope seem a bit overkill for a music video?

It started with a couple of locals. I guess these guys talk to each other a lot. I've now gotten inquiries from Cleveland, Kansas City and LA. What's happening, here?

Do you live in or near a major city? There's nothing like seeing great works in person. Pictures in books or online rarely do them justice.

C'mon fellas. Where's the love?

I loved the Amiga computer. There was this great image editing program called "Deluxe Paint", which seemed quite advanced compared to what was being offered on PCs/Dos at that time. I was so glad when finally Deluxe Paint was ported to PCs and used it extensively for my work.

I also had Sculpt 4D Animation. The output took weeks to render. You could actually watch each rendering line roll across the screen because it was so slow. I had a board that did the frame buffers and SVHS frame record control. Every time I needed to use the Video Toaster, I had to swap boards with the buffer/controller. Ah, the good ol' days.

The normal Nikon flange mounts on my Nikon board aren't keeping the lenses positively locked to the board. Since my heavier lenses hang off a solid camera instead of the still camera hanging off the lens, I'm having lens play. The problem is noticeable during focus pulling on all of the lenses. I'm guessing that I'll have to have a flange mount cut that fully fills up the lens flange locking spaces to know that I'm always getting a full and positive lock. What's your assessment of this problem?

I realize this is a cinematography forum but I was curious about what the going rates are for sound designers. The short film I'm making will require high quality sound design as it has no soundtrack and takes place in the wilderness with plenty of ambient sound throughout. Obviously I want it to sound completely natural and consistent and I don't have the sound design know how to achieve this.

There are some very competent sound folks that post here. Drop this thread down to the sound forum and we'll take some shots at it.

I was in the market for a red one for a short film im making and I was wondering what would need to be purchased in order to use the camera for any basic practical filmmaking needs (lenses, accessories, etc) beyond just the body itself and the price range I'd be looking at. What lenses would I need? Also how exactly does a red one operate? is there a hard drive built into the camera or would cables need to be run to an external computer to record the highest quality footage?

This sounds like a job for... ahh, never mind.

I had Turbo. More accurately, I let the Ole Miss Athletic Department Purchase it for my sub-department. We had a couple 286's and a 386 for the Lexicon editing system. The department was absolutely rad because it had a rack of professional SVHS machines that were computer controlled editors. Seems so clumsy and crude, now. More amazing to the geeks on campus was my Amiga 2000. It had 8 meg of direct access RAM... OOOOOOOOH!

There's a band name, "The Gimpy Satellites."

.

This is all your doing, isn't it?

http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2010/03/tec...eeds/index.html

Lucas wanted to do Apocalypse Now in 16mm.

.

I can say, "Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto." Can you use that?

Robert,

What's going on up there in your neck of the woods? Is CL on high ground?

Hello Dillon,

This sounds like a job for SUPER TECHNISCOPE MAAAAAAAAAN...

An excellent example of what happens when you don't cause transference between the viewer and the principle in the character development stage of a three act play. Scientology biases or differences aside, it wasn't any more idiotic a story than what the industry frequently grinds out.

I think you mean for all n>1. For instance, 4096/0.5 = 8192. 8192>4096.

 

As for Jim, I'd credit the guy with more depth and complexity than is superficially apparant. I think he honestly intends to make great cameras, and he's in the process of finding out what that means.

 

Have a look at an old Coppola movie, "Tucker". The problem is, too many people have caught his dreams.

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Oh, John. You went to a Tucker reference. You wouldn't believe what Tucker told my step-grandfather in the bar of the Vinoy Park Hotel in St. Pete one afternoon.

.

.

.

.

.