Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!INGRES.BERKELEY.EDU!hatcher
From: hatcher@INGRES.BERKELEY.EDU.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: The LIVE Digitizer from A-Squared...
Message-ID: <8706030829.AA06168@ingres.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Wed, 3-Jun-87 04:29:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: ingres.8706030829.AA06168
Posted: Wed Jun  3 04:29:56 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 5-Jun-87 03:37:18 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 56
Summary: (versus DigiView? A buying guide)

In article <1574@cadovax.UUCP> keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle) writes:
In article <8705290639.AA04316@ingres.Berkeley.EDU> hatcher@INGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Doug Merritt) writes:
>>There is no competition to speak of between LIVE and DigiView; 

>Except possibly in software.  The DigiView software is excellent, [...]
>The only thing I've heard from A-Squared is they don't want to get into
>the software business, sounded like an excuse to deliver hardware with
>minimum software.

Good point...the DigiView software is more flexible. I don't fault A-Squared,
however, because they *cannot* do in real time what DigiView does at leisure.
And although you might wish for post-pass image processing for the LIVE,
DigiView would *also* benefit. You see, although it is pretty nice as a
sort of "camera control" software package (i.e. making various global changes
to the image), it is definitely *not* what I would call a full fledged
image processor. With DigiView I am constantly wanting to say "up the
brightness and decrease the saturation right *here* in this region only",
but you can't do that. It's full screen or nothing.

So I am interested in some reasonable image processing tools that
are currently unavailable from any source whatever (e.g. Dpaint
lacks the controls that DigiView has, otherwise I could use it to
process regions; *everything* lacks HAM mode editing, specifically
including PRISM, which is a piece of junk, and that public domain
package would be nice for certain things if it did more than just
black and white; haven't tried Butcher but it got bad reviews). Of
course, I'm still waiting for a good sound processing package, too (hint,
hint!).

>I've seen reasonable quality frame-capture with DigiView from still
>framed video, though *my* VCR isn't very good at it.  A new version is
>supposed to be even better.  Unless Amiga-Live! has software of the
>quality of DPaint II and DigiView, I wouldn't even begin to consider
>buying it instead of OR in addition to DigiView.

Good point. I've done this with DigiView 2, and results *can* be excellent.
But it is far more tedious than one might think for a long series of
frames, and even my excellent-consumer-quality VHS VCR will sometimes glitch
up, making it necessary to stop and restart the process, losing
synchronization. I suspect that 8 millimeter decks or Super VHS might avoid
this altogether (or even tuning mine more carefully), but still it says that
it becomes difficult to do what LIVE does with ease (although at lower
quality, as you point out). Also, what looks good on TV often looks really
bad on the Amiga, which is what makes postprocessing so important. I wish
DigiPaint were out...

Bottom line is that although I agree with everything you said, I want
to let everyone know that it is a question of what is important for your
particular needs. If quality is paramount, then DigiView is best. If ease
in recording a long series of frames is important, then LIVE is best.
If all you care about is functionality, and you don't mind buying the
best consumer VCR available, and don't mind considerable inconvenience
and associated "wasted" time, then DigiView *does* win. And I'm happy with
mine. But I'm still considering LIVE (if and when budget permits!)
	Doug Merritt		ucbvax!ingres!hatcher
				hatcher@ingres.berkeley.EDU