Steve -
Another alternative is the Marshall monitors with video & audio measurement
built in - http://www.lcdracks.com/racks/DLW/
Dave Spraker
Western Rep | EditShare | Consulting | Sports Audio
dave@spraker.tv <mailto:dave@spraker.tv>
(503) 897-0250
www.westernrep.com
www.editshare.com <http://www.editshare.com/>
www.spraker.tv <http://www.spraker.tv/>
<https://www.vizify.com/es/50a32f618e76660002000521> See my vizify bio!
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Steve Hullfish
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 4:36 PM
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Re: Stuff I wish they'd fix
I am about to publish a review on Ultrascopes on PVC. (www.provideocoaltion
<http://www.provideocoaltion> ). I just checked out the SmartScope Duo that
actually has the scope packaged in a nice little rack-mountable pair of
LCDs. I agree with some of John's assessment. They are scopes. They are
accurate. They do work. They have no customizability. There's no zooming.
There's no gamut displays. I would definitely put them in the category of
"you get what you pay for" when compared to a better - and much more
expensive scope - like the Tektronix that I get paid to promote. If you have
$7000 to spend on a waveform monitor and you do color correction and
broadcast work that has to meet a certain level of QC, then you should not
buy the UltraScopes. But if you want some form of external waveform monitor,
you can only afford $1000 and you can make do with the basic RGB Parade and
Vectorscope, then the UltraScope will do you fine. It is WAY better than
internal scopes, especially on Avid, which has the worst internal scopes on
the market, mostly because they don't update while you're making
adjustments! What's the fricking point in having a waveform monitor if
they're basically just for STILLS? Anyway, my review should be up on PVC
shortly. I promise Philip that I won't use a provocative title. I'll stick
with something more in keeping with his marketing sensibilities like "A
theoretical evaluation of the Black Magic SmartScope Duo and their relevance
to the evaluation of high frequency video signals and the analysis of proper
gamut sensibilities within the confines of a broadcast environment in a
post-SMPTE neo-classical definition of luminance, hue and saturation."
Steve
On Jul 22, 2013, at 6:15 PM, "johnrobmoore" <bigfish@pacbell.net
<mailto:bigfish%40pacbell.net> > wrote:
> I've done shows with Ultrascopes. They are not my preference as they have
limited options and the lack of I and Q vectors is a pain regardless of what
the engineers might say. A simple addition that most other scopes have. The
lack of updating that feature request speaks volumes to me as to how
responsive Blackmagic is to user requests. I'm sure they listen but to not
implement this simple addition after Ultrascope has been out this long isn't
promising.
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com> ,
rusescu laurentiu <rusesculaurentiu@... <mailto:rusesculaurentiu@...> >
wrote:
> >
> > Is Ultrascope good enough to asist CC in Avid?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (63) |
No comments:
Post a Comment