Fundamentally I want more information at once really. The 5000 is limited
as mentioned with a single DSP and most significantly a very small display.
Elsewhere I've used the Tek rasterizers which made it easy to have a larger
display and more detail, but unfortunately the WFM5000 has no video out,
and I didn't think it had Quad either (it does, but that makes the display
even smaller of course).
Perhaps both Tek and Ultrascope is the way to go. Just need to convince the
Line Producer I need more money ;)
Dylan Reeve
http://dylanreeve.com/
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Terence Curren <tcurren@aol.com> wrote:
> **
>
>
> Tek is hands down better than Ultrascope FOR color correction. As John
> already mentioned, you can't customize to get the displays you really want
> with the Ultrascope. Instead you are forced to look at audio meters and
> picture on the scope which is unnecessary and distracting.
>
> On the other hand, Blackmagic could put in just a little more work and
> make the Ultrascope a serious scope for CC.
>
> In the end it depends upon what you use your scope for. I have many Tek
> scopes and a few Ultrascopes, and each works well in certain areas.
>
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Steve Hullfish <steve4lists@...> wrote:
> >
> > What scope do you have? I have a Tek 5200 (the cheapest one) and it can
> display on as big a monitor as you could possibly want via a DVI-D on the
> back.
> >
> > I have used Ultrascopes at freelance places and I find them very
> limiting. They're great for the $2 or $3K that it costs to build one, but
> they don't allow a lot of customization. A Tek scope has almost a dozen
> different displays all reachable with a single button push.
> >
> > Disclaimer: I am often employed by Tek to talk about color correction
> and the importance of scopes.
> >
> > Steve Hullfish
> > contributor: www.provideocoalition.com
> > author: "The Art and Technique of Digital Color Correction"
> >
> > On Jul 24, 2012, at 3:43 AM, Dylan Reeve wrote:
> >
> > > FWIW I use the internal scopes usually to help gauge a shot when I
> first
> > > "land" on it, then tend to keep an eye on my external scope (a WFM5000)
> > > while I'm actually making the adjustment.
> > >
> > > I still want to get rid of my Tektronix and put a Ultrascope system
> in. I
> > > want a bigger display with more stuff.
> > >
> > > Dylan Reeve
> > > http://dylanreeve.com/
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 3:18 PM, johnrobmoore <bigfish@...> wrote:
> > >
> > >> **
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I know with tektronix audio on the scope was an option, has that
> changed?
> > >> I know many scopes like the ultra scope have audio as standard. What
> I like
> > >> about the extra screen area on a JVC and others is the audio meters
> don't
> > >> block any video and I don't have to look to another place to see the
> audio.
> > >> This helps me to not miss video issues while maintaining some level of
> > >> audio QC. I don't do critical audio QC bur I can see mix minus VO and
> M and
> > >> E this way.
> > >> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Terence Curren" <tcurren@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "johnrobmoore" <bigfish@> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> "As much as I love my Sony PVM OLED monitor I do miss the extra
> screen
> > >> space for audio meters I have on a JVC and others that at least
> allows me
> > >> some visual confirmation of audio out of avid and return audio from
> tape
> > >> machines without covering up the video."
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> An external scope would allow you to see that audioâˆ`.
>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment