Paul Bruening

.

.

.

I don't know beans about FCP. I was under the understanding that cine speed in video was 23.976. Could that have anything to do with it?

.

That's only 120 or so in a month long shoot. Mighty sweet for your payroll master.

I forgot to mention, Maya has a free render farm utility as well.

Some of the runs are 30 ft. But, the power levels on USB 3.0 are really high. I'm hoping it can make the push. I could relocate the routing point and carve the lengths in about half if I have to. It's this way because Gig-LAN could handle the lengths and that let me distribute the stations to serve both as workstations and render farm. Yes, it's because of the massive data loads for my 4K TrueRAW scanning. It's not just that 24Mb per frame but the repetitions for each station including Maya and Adobe AE stations. Fortunately, Adobe doesn't license its render engine. You can put one copy on as many PCs as you want. That alone makes the render farm idea a rockin' prospect. I'm running 6, 2core boards at 32bit and 2, 2core boards at 64bit. I've got 2, 21" trueflat, 2K CRTs on each station with some backups on the shelf. I've got the DG5 for color timing. I'd rather be running those new Asus boards that I linked to in the "badass PC" thread. But drooling over technology never ceases. If I can pull off this USB 3.0 thing I'll smoke anything within 300 miles with my productivity. EDIT: ...and about 70% of the rest of the post production country.

C'mon, buddies. Hazard even a guess on the cables. If I can make this work it could be the greatest leap in my farm's productivity for the fewest bucks that I've ever come across.

As I understand it, you can cram 16 Gig of RAM on some of the newest boards running WOS 7. Vista is supposed to do it but has turned out to be a dubious OS. USB 3.0 is the latest thing in peripheral ports coming right out the back with the rest of the plug points. It runs 10 times faster than USB 2.0. Great thing is, it runs all the lesser USB systems on the same plug point. There's some buzz that a USB 3.1 running at 14 times speed is on the near horizon. I haven't done any research on this particular board and can't recommend it. But, it sure looks pretty bad-ass to me: http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/Se...p;Sku=A455-2869

.

What Adrian said. Also, the more mobo, SATA 3.0 plug points, the better. Think about getting a mobo with a direct USB 3.0 port.

Assuming the "state actually loses revenue through incentives" formula is correct (that's info that I am not directly privy to) it seems peculiar that my state, which offers an uncompetitive and, therefore, useless 25% package, refuses to back local producers who might find success and employ local labor on a continuing basis. Understandably, we locals don't have automatic "instant success" as a selling point. But, damn, come on. Our legislators are, in effect, so busy chasing traveling whores that they forget that they have wives at home ready to put out.

Very interesting post. I am looking forward to replies. A three act play can work with an unsympathetic principle if the viewer can see themselves in that character. Good ole' Freudian-like transference is the critical component. That can be achieved even without the viewer liking or caring about the principle.

Could John, Hal or any takers give me an idea if I could use my existing CAT 5e cables with adapters to push USB 3.0 data around my boiler room since they are both 8-wire systems? Could I chop the ends and solder in USB 3.0 ends?

Could any of our Japanese posters tell me if the Buffalo 4-port USB 3.0 hub has hit the shelves yet? If so, what's the price on it? Can the salesman tell you if it is stackable? Does it run multiple channels with no bandwidth loss?

I had heard buzz about the ultra-speed USB 3. It seems cards are coming out that allow my slightly older boards to run USB 3 ports. This is really good news since my render farm is severely choked by the Gig-LAN connections. What I can't find is if any USB 3 routers are out yet that can replace my LAN system. Any news or buzz?

I've thought of that for my big old Mitchell GC. Might give it a try. I'm running a Canon XL2 on it now as my video tap, sync-sound recorder. Is there any way to run a little cam like the Cybershot with an audio feed-in to get sync-sound dailies from your S8 cam rig? Might be handy.

Sorry for getting a little e.e. cummings, there. I would have been clearer saying: It is a concern for users of smaller sensors to gain FOV using shorter lenses at the cost of more normal perspective compared to the same FOV achieved by a somewhat longer lens used on a still film frame sized sensor.

He's stuck with the FOV/depth perspective trade-offs of still lenses. He can't really have the best of both unless he goes with the full size sensor. If he goes with an ultra-wide lens to get that wide FOV on the smaller sensor, then his images are going to look surreal in depth perception. No one, yet, has found a way around that. Or at least, I haven't seen a full solution here. It seems to me that living inside the limits of the lenses is about the only possibility regardless of the format.

PM Phil Rhodes. He's got a deep head-pool on Premiere.

I shoot short ends. They aren't exactly "fresh stock". But, eight years is pretty old. You may need as many as 3 stops open to compensate. Do you know how it was stored? Age will make its color reproduction difficult to guess. You'll get a lot of green light from the flos. Like Tony said, that has become fashionable. One thing is for certain, it will deliver unique results, a characteristic that some find desirable from an artistic standpoint.

Zooms are handy lenses. I despise a live zoom shot, though. I'm inclined towards Ben's position. Three primes: Wide for interiors, normal for most everything and something between 75 and 135 for facial close-ups will cover everything a dramatic shooter will ever really need. Fast lenses give the notion that you can reach into dark places. Yet, most still lenses tend to fall apart, image-wise, below f2.

You're in luck, Anthony. Your Teach' has only limited face as a device. Allow me to lay on you my "Communicants" schtick. There are only eight ways (categories) that people can physically communicate their inner states. (I haven't laid this bomb on anyone in so long, it will be an achievement if I can even remember them all): 1. Facial expressions. 2. Body language. 3. Line selection (what people say). 4. Vocal intonation (how they say it). 5. Timing (this lays in with all the rest. For example: A pregnant pause is one of the strongest devices in dramatic presentation). 6. Direct reads (like when you walk into a bar and take a read on the people. You spot the crazy chick at the bar and know instantly to avoid her). 7. Hand gestures (they are so important that they have to be classified separately from body language). 8. Body composition (in real life this one is the least accurate. BUT for an animator it is one of the strongest. From head to toe this will say more than anything else for you). Direct read is your weakest tool. But, if you combine the others adequately, the viewer will make direct read conclusions and depend on them throughout the presentation. Dang. I did it.