Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttidcc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe
From: hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath)
Newsgroups: net.video
Subject: Re: Possibility of buying bulk video tape
Message-ID: <20@ttidcc.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Nov-85 19:02:40 EST
Article-I.D.: ttidcc.20
Posted: Thu Nov 14 19:02:40 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Nov-85 20:37:47 EST
References: <533@aero.ARPA> <760@bu-cs.UUCP> <425@nicmad.UUCP>
Reply-To: hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath)
Organization: The Cat Factory
Lines: 27
Summary: 

In article <425@nicmad.UUCP> brown@nicmad.UUCP (Mr. Video) writes:
>In article <760@bu-cs.UUCP> rem@bu-cs.UUCP (Robert E. Mee) writes:
>>Has anyone out in the net thought of (or implemented) using computer 
>>magtape in 2400' reels and placing it in empty video cassette shells?
>
>DO NOT DO WHAT YOU ARE THINKING.  YOU WILL BE IN TROUBLE.
>
>Computer tape is NOT formulated to work with video equipment.  Without
>going into details of tape formulation, just believe that you would be in
>trouble.

Just to confirm Mr.  Video's opinion.  I first heard a question  like  this
years  ago.  Then  it  was  in regard of using computer tape as audio tape.
The question was asked in a popular industry magazine (Pop'  'Tronics?  I'm
not  sure).  The  answer  was  that computer tape coatings are much coarser
than audio tape coatings and will damage the heads on an audio recorder.

Consider that video heads are much more sensitive and delicate  than  audio
heads.

-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe)
Citicorp(+)TTI                    Common Sense is what tells you that a ten
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.             pound weight falls ten times as fast as a
Santa Monica, CA  90405           one pound weight.
(213) 450-9111, ext. 2483
{philabs,randvax,trwrb,vortex}!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe