Pick an avi, any avi...
I wondered the exact same thing that you asked so well. I currently
have a DV500 but can't stand Premiere and now love VV. However, I
thought an .avi was an .avi. But here is what I experienced. VV
works great with all .avi files including those generated by the
DV500, UNTIL IT IS TIME TO RENDER. When I render a project with non
DV500 files I get beautiful, crisp full DV resolution avi's. But
when I try to render any DV scale movie using the DV500 files all I
end up with is crap, ugly, pixelated, discolored unacceptable
garbage. But again, when my project only contains non DV500 avi files
it is a thing of beauty. This is after trying approx 50 hours of
every single codec and render combination possible. I am going out
and getting a Pyro card today, and even though it may not say on the
box, it is indeed OHCI (lot's of surfing the net to find). I too
need S and analog also. Here is what I'm going to do: Capture S and
analog with DV500. Transport this back to camera with DV500 tools.
Then, switch to Pyro and VV to recapture back to VV. A lot of work
but worth it not to have to use Premiere which has the worst user
interface I have ever experienced.
SF: a) Am I correct in my findings that not all AVIs are the same
and VV doesn't like the DV500 files? b) OK, so you don't reccommend
cards. Would it kill you to publish a list of cards you have tried
with success? and c) if my (a) question is correct, I wish you could
have documented this better. I still love your product and it is
everything I wanted in NLE. Keep up the good work but just get a
little better at documenting and sharing what you already know.
Thanks

Palmer Pattison wrote:
>>Ok. It's down to the wire. Time to buy. But after weeks
>>of following capture card posts,on this site and elsewhere,
>>I'm still just a little fuzzy on the requirements.
>>
>>SF specifies OHCI-compliant cards, but not all decks are
>>compliant. And even the Pyro card--a DV favorite on this
>>site--does not specifically say 'OHCI' on its box. I guess
>>it just 'is'.
>>
>>One user says Matrox (or Pinnacle) was unusable, another
>>prefers it.
>>
>>The question boils down to:
>>
>>If a card, any card can input the required analog or
>>digital video format and capture it as a file recognized by
>>VV, what does it matter? If the card can output VV's
>>realtime playback or any supported, rendered file, what
>>does it matter? For example, if I buy Pinnacle's DV500 in
>>order to get my required composite, S-analog and 1394
>>digital, both in and out--and use their capture software to
>>grab the file, then open that file in VV for editing, what
>>have I lost? Machine control? I use a hardware controller
>>anyway. (OK that was more than one question.)
>>
>>I tried VV through most of the recent trial period. I
>>found it to be fast, intuitive, and I liked it a lot--
>>enough to specify it as the core of my system (with which I
>>make my living) The system I had temporarily available for
>>the test had a Fast-AV video card (which writes its own
>>flavor of M-JPEG file) and the VV demo worked well with
>>those files and with a variety of existing files which had
>>been captured by Miro cards or processed into .avi's by
>>Media Cleaner.
>>
>>At the NAB demonstrations (April 2K), the presenter told us
>>that VV would work with any card recognized by Windows--
>>anything from an Iomega 'Buz' to a high-end Matrox. If I
>>remember correctly, the demo output was displayed as a
>>computer screen overlay and simultaneously on a full screen
>>(NTSC?) monitor.
>>
>>OK, SF boys and girls, will the Pinnacle DV 500 do the job?
>>(keep in mind I need analog composite I/O, not just 1394
>>and my clients will start throwing rocks if I spend an hour
>>and a half copying their DigiBeta material to a DV deck so
>>I can spend another hour and a half capturing it into the
>>system.)
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>PSP
>>
>>