Rievaulx Abbey

[fh1805]

Dave,

I'm not saying that the quality is as good as an EXE. Of course it isn't. But, to my eyes on my system, it knocks the spots off the old NTSC/PAL/SECAM DVD-video for TV.

I'm doing these trials because a local museum, where I do one day a week volunteer guide duty, has enquired as to whether I could produce some sequences that could be run on their LCD TV in the museum reception/shop area. As I have no experience in this area, I'm having to acquire it fairly quickly. They have indicated a willingness to consider buying one of these "black boxes" that accepts SD and CF storage cards and/or USB sticks with video files on and connecting that to the TV. I have no real previous experience of 16:9 aspect ratio, full HD 1920x1080 resolution or of video streams from PTE. But I'm learning fast!

I don't want anyone to think that I am abandoning EXE files in favour of video files; or that I am suggesting that the quality on a HD video file is as good as that in an EXE file. I know what I will be continuing my own work in; but I have to learn about this new technology - without any means of checking any of the results properly myself.

And finally, a point that seems to be getting overlooked: if I use YouTube I stay compliant with my copyright clearance licences. If I share via any other online route I will be out of compliance.

regards,

Peter

[davegee]

Hi Peter,

I am in total agreement when you say: "it knocks the spots off the old NTSC/PAL/SECAM DVD-video for TV".

Some people have to be continually reminded, though, that it's no substitute for the EXE file.

If, as you say, you are going to use their LCD TV, is the no chance whatsoever that you could use a laptop connected to the TV?

A HDMI connection would give you the ULTIMATE quality wheras some would not quibble if you were forced to use a VGA lead. I wonder if there would be a possible alternative there?

They are likely to be able to provide a laptop wheras they might not want to purchase an extra bit of kit like the WD Box.

Just food for thought,

[Ken Cox]

Peter, people have to realize when viewing a stream that they sometimes will encounter problems. Instead of turning their nose up at shows on youtube etc they should be thankful that they are put up. I have tried your show with various players and the WMMC home cinema provided by Igor is by far the best on my system.

I have stated before of my experience documentating equipment failures -- we might have had people from all over the world that were on tight schedules on site -- i used 35mm cameras, polaroid instant print, and polaroid instant slide film -- i would supply them with picts in the format they had time for -- quite often it was polaroid that chosen due to the time constraints --- they were glad to get whatever was given -- when trying to describe a multi million dollar failure to head office, a picture is worth a thousand words!

When the Fax machine came along it sure speeded things up during outages!

Peter, i wish you much success in your "back to the books" quest

ken

[fh1805]

...If, as you say, you are going to use their LCD TV, is the no chance whatsoever that you could use a laptop connected to the TV?...

Dave,

None, I'm afraid. That decision has already been taken. It was never "in my hands".

regards,

Peter

[fh1805]

Now that I have invested in a 22" wide-screen PC monitor and can view both the EXE and the YouTube video in full 1920x1080 HD, I can see what you've all been saying. Streaming HD video just isn't a patch on the quality that the EXE can deliver. However, when the video was being "downsized" to fit my 1280x1024 monitor, much of the visual "interference", that I now can see, just was not noticeable.

regards,

Peter

[davegee]

Peter,

I'm pretty sure that your new monitor will have HDMI - if any of your computers has DVI or HDMI do try it.

It's another step up again!

DG

[fh1805]

Dave,

No, it doesn't have HDMI. One step at a time! It has DVI - which is a big step up from VGA.

regards,

Peter

[Barry Beckham]

Ken

Instead of turning their nose up at shows on youtube etc they should be thankful that they are put up

No I shouldn't, youtube is OK for those who don't know any better, but for those of us who do, its not good enough. How can anyone into AV, which is solely about presentation of images, then present them badly?

[Ken Cox]

well Barry, at least Peter is willing to try!

here is one for you - maybe you wont have enough bandwidth to play it

http://www.vimeo.com/11817894

but it plays fine up here

ken

[Guest Yachtsman1]

Played fine for me after allowing it to fully refresh before watching it. Some of the camera work was a bit dodgy but that was the cameraman. No more catfish for me!!!!

Regards Eric

Yachtsman1

[Ken Cox]

Forgot to mention that video integration seems to be one of Igor's future challenges -- guess you could have stills of fishermen in their boats - then fade to catchin' em in an avi:)

guess it wont be vimeo tho' - but youtube already goes to 1080 as Peter's show did!

ken

[Barry Beckham]

Ken

Its a video, how is that comparable to a stills slide show? The moving image hides a multitude of sins.

[coopernatural]

Hi Barry,

I have to agree with you on this. Video is a different kettle of fish.

The term acid test was used by the original poster.

This acid test was used to determine if material was in fact real gold, fools’ gold, or some other fake metal.

The lustre of this AV has been dulled by the Youtube experience.

Even an Iron Pyrites AV will brighten up a little when viewed as an exe presentation.

The AV itself was short, which was fine. Not sure is the 2nd image in has been stretched vertically.

Music was very good.

Overall though, a beautiful ruined Abbey in North Yorkshire...ruined.

DavyC

[Ken Cox]

With all the harping about video integration, i figgered the logical thing that would happen on a shoot would br to take some stills, then switch your camera to video record some action then revert back to still mode. Then make your show -- is this not the game plan?

there could be some real interesting shows if you were at the "ST. ANDREW'S OPEN" and made a show using the above method!

and you would not have to worry about the wind sound being copyrighted -- with some practice you could simulate the sound of the ball going into the cup

ken

[fh1805]

...Not sure if the 2nd image in has been stretched vertically...

Davy,

I can assure you that none of the images has been deliberately stretched 'per se'. Several of them have had their perspective distortion corrected (converging verticals straightened). Inevitably that will have altered the apparent relationships of things to one another.

The original images were 3008x2000 from my Nikon D70 - the images as used were 1920x1080. That alone posed some interesting compositional challenges. I'm slowly learning that, if the end result is going to be 16:9 aspect ratio, and the starting point is going to be 3:2 aspect ratio, then there is a need to "shoot wide" in order to leave more scope for the re-composing/cropping activity during the post-processing. Unfortunately I was brought up as a slide photographer who was taught to "get in close and fill the frame, it's your only chance". As a digital photographer who now shoots most of the time with AV in mind, I find that I have to ignore that old advice. At the taking time I mustn't fill the frame; and the digital image as captured by the camera is only the beginning, not the end. It is proving hard to shake off the habits of a lifetime.

regards,

Peter

[davegee]

Hi Peter,

DVI = HDMI (without the sound)

With DVI you need to connect audio seperately.

Image-wise there's no difference between HDMI and DVI.

On the subject of 16:9 vs 3:2 it would be fairly easy (for critical work) to make a mask which covers your LCD giving an idea of how much you will be cropping from the top and/or bottom of a 3:2 image to make it 16:9.

After a while it becomes second nature and the mask is not required.

On the video subject, I wouldn't put it as strongly as Barry, but for me using PTE to produce a video of any sort is two steps forward and one step back.

I'm an EXE man.

DG

[coopernatural]

Peter,

There have been many posts here,so I may have missed an earlier reply.

If you could post an exe version,maybe we could see the difference in quality.

I tried Youtube once,I think before the HD format,but it was pretty poor.

Video can be decent,but the fades on the photos are causing playback artifacts.

Some have had similar problems with projectors that are intended for video display.

I don't know if this can ever be resolved,but it is distracting and does not

show a photo AV in the best light.

Regards,

Davy

[trailertrash]

Well Peter with all the discussion re video, I would like to say that I enjoyed the show. I do love old buildings and Yorkshire has them in bucket loads. Whitby is a great fav place of mine as is Ripon.

I say well done.

[Barry Beckham]

With all the harping about video integration,

Its not harping Ken, streaming video is just not good enough yet. Have a dabble if you like, but don't expect those of us who work hard at providing quality images to welcome it with open arms, it has a way to go yet. It takes so long to see a streaming video, holding it back until enough comes down to play that you may as well download the exe file. I see no advantage to the likes of us.

i figgered the logical thing that would happen on a shoot would br to take some stills, then switch your camera to video record some action then revert back to still mode. Then make your show -- is this not the game plan?

Possibly, but only with HD video and only then if there is a seemless change from the quality of the stills and the quality of the video. If the video stands out like a sore thumb in a stills AV then No. Of course there are always going to be some instances when using youtube or streaming video has a use and I guess the same will be with video in a stills slide show. However, for general AV use (the stuff we see mostly) the last thing we need to do is drag down the V side of AV just because we can use video. The inclusion of video for stills AV enthusiasts has hardly been a must have has it, if I want to use video I will buy a decent video camera.

I just had a thought as I pressed the button to add this post. Am I out of step here?

Are you all in the starting blocks with your videos made ready for the day you can insert them into an AV.?

Are you not as concerned as me to make sure the V in your AV has good quality images?

I will make a prediction now, long before we get video.

If some of you think that adding video clips will add impact an appeal to your AV shows, you are going to be sadly mistaken. When we ARE able to add HD video it will need to be added delicately with thought and tatse, or it will do just the opposite, just as over animation does now.

[thedom]

Barry,

One of my friend make movies of our trips to see the eclipses. Generally, it's a two hours show.

He mix HD video clips, photographies, music and sounds (recorded during the trip) and the result is really great!

But I agree with you, even if he's not a professional, he really has a great sense of composition and taste.

That's what make the final result so good.

[Barry Beckham]

Yes, whatever we say or do in this fascinating hobby there will always be exceptions, my own son uses PSG to make slide shows (DVD's) mixed with video for his car club and for that they work pretty well too.

Generally we still have a way to go to see the quality we really must see in our AV on line. I am not against movies on line and in the fullness of time, I think the youtube thing will oust TV. Instead of TV moguls dishing up to us what they want when they want to show it, we will dial into anything we want on line and feed it to our TV

I just get disapointed when I see a show have the edge taken off it by the medium its displayed in. In fact I have the same views on many of the clubs and societies I visit, they just don't have any common sense. One buys the latest Photoshop for the clubs laptop with a view for members borrowing it. It never happens of course and all the while they are desparate for a decent screen and projector.

Perhaps I am too obsessed with end quality as there seems precious few people who want to join me