Spot|DSE wrote on 2/8/2005, 2:48 PM
things are in flux, they may change and what "HD" means depends greatly on who you ask and in what context you pose the question.

No, BB, they are not in a state of flux, they are a fixed format. The ONLY thing that *might* change in the next few years for display, is that 1080p could potentially become a BROADCAST standard, and that won't affect display for those that already have an HD-capable box or television.

But I give up. I cry "uncle." There is no getting you to face facts and you have to once again resort to name calling and racial slurs because you can't admit you're not understanding the way this industry works. You win.
busterkeaton wrote on 2/8/2005, 2:57 PM
Your homework assignment for this evening is look up the meaning of humble.

How does HD deal with projection?
What's its transference rate?
p@mast3rs wrote on 2/8/2005, 3:09 PM
Look boys, if you cant play nice in the sandbox, then both of you will have to sit in a corner. Seriously guys, wouldnt this exchnage be better served through email where you both can be as nasty as you want to be but not subject everyone to it.

Note: I am not taking sides, just getting tired of waiting for my browser to load 45 seconds later so I can continue watching people bicker.
VOGuy wrote on 2/8/2005, 6:33 PM
My guess is that we are all felling a 'bit of pressure 'cause the times are a changin'. We have some very passionate folks in this forum - and that's a very good thing.

I do resent that those with strong opinions have called others lunatics, scum, arrogant and other terms which I would prefer to have directed exclusively at people like ME! (I make my living as TALENT, the tech side of things is mostly a hobby and a promotional tool.) Most of us in the performing side of media learn to accept such descriptions as compliments, even though they might not be intended as such.

The reality is that HDV, HD, etc. is just now arriving - It IS going to change things, I suspect more than any of us might imagine. But it will take time to truly realize where we're going. Passionate arguments, even about the number of pixels in a display are a good thing. And, yeah, we're all going to feel a bit insecure about all of this. I just hope we all remember this during the next couple of years.

Travis ( )

jazzvalve wrote on 2/9/2005, 9:33 PM
billyboy sez The reality here is outside this forum and perhaps some others Spot is just a common name for a dog. Nothing more. Aside from that hardly anyone has heard of you. That's offered not as a put-down, but as a reality check thats a laff a second. SPOT is a GRAMMY winner more than onces and is nominated again this year.
keep tha' faith SPOT! dont stress this dude. we're all x'n fingers for ya on sunday.
SweetPea wrote on 2/9/2005, 9:40 PM
yo jazz, it is time for your reality check. WHO ARE YOU? never heard of you. you need to watch what you say because spot knows his shit.

i will read you like a cliffnotes.

now to the post, uhdv is the newest and greatest thing too date.
nickle wrote on 2/9/2005, 9:50 PM
Relax Sweetpea jazzvalve was quoting billyboy.
SweetPea wrote on 2/9/2005, 9:54 PM
oh, sorry.

spot knows his shit though.
Spot|DSE wrote on 2/10/2005, 6:09 AM
The thread that would not die.
SweetPea/Jazz thanks for the props, but let this thread puke, will ya?

Few clarifications:
1. Travis, arguments about whether the number of pixels is standardized ISN'T a good thing, because it's a fixed format. we can argue all day about whether this was a good choice in numbers of pixels, but given that it IS the standard, contrary to anything anyone says, it's going to STAY the standard for a long time to come. You might as well argue about the color of the sky.

2. Jazz, I'm not personally nominated for a Grammy this year. I'm part of the engineering team of a nominated album/artist, but that's not the same thing. Yes, engineers also receive Grammys, but I didn't write the music, I didn't perform the music, I'm just a lowly engineer. Billyboy's right, no one has ever heard of me as an engineer.

Can this thread just go away? I've noticed the moderator has already edited BB's comments, so it's getting negative attention as it is. Just let it die a fast death? (even though I've just contributed. ;-)
BillyBoy wrote on 2/10/2005, 7:34 AM
Here we go again. The point is Spot can't stop promoting himself endlessly and shamelessly in this forum and for reasons only known to them Sony lets him get away with it. There is indeed a cozy relationship there and Spot exploits it to bully anyone that dares to disagree with him. If Spot truly wanted this thread to end, why does he keep posting to it? The bigger question is why Spot keeps attacking me. See below for the real reason.

It was his "friend" John Cline that called me scum and a lunantic.... and worse things in the past all for me simply voicing an opinion. It isn't the first time these two have gone out of their way to attack me.

The REAL REASON Spot keeps attacking me:

Well over a year ago when his book came out I voiced the harmless and perfectly innocent OPINION that like all how-to books much of what it contained was already in the manual. Anyone that's ever watched a TV show where a critic like Ebert says what's on his mind knows a "negative" review is just part of the business. Most professionals take their lumps and move on. Like many, I was waiting for Spot's book (the first) hoping he would share more "secrets", that was the basis for my comment... born out of disappointment that in my OPINION the book was mostly a rehash of what could be found in the manual. Nothing more. Spot imploded.

Spot is just a little boy that hasn't leaned how to gracefully accept a midly negative critic. The curious part is in the same post I said much of the material could be found in the manual (factual) I also said I still recommened it.

Instead of letting it pass Spot stewed and stewed and finally unable to control his rage any longer, two weeks later sent me a very nasty hate filled email where on top of the vicious personal attacks he threatened to sue me over it (laughable) even making the ludicrus statement his publisher wanted too as well.

Till this day he can't leave it alone. Spot being Spot even threatened I can't make the email public. I haven't, not because of Spot's bluster, rather it would only serve to further inflame the issue. However since Spot can't let go and more than a year later still has some need to attack me constantly in this forum everytime my opinion on something is different than his, I need to give my side of what happened which is the only reason I'm commenting.

Of course when anybody gets viciously attacked in a email you respond and of course I did telling Spot in a return email exactly what I thought of him, which only further enraged him as it does all that suffer from out of control giant egos. You think that would have been the end of it, but not for Spot. Even since Spot has been on the war path with me in this pubic forum and there are threads where Cline has said I'm topic A anytime Spot is out demonstrating, claiming the talk after frequently comes back to me.

I've had enough of this abuse! Spot without cause has called me a racist in this forum more than once. Sony does nothing about it. Why not? Just what is the cozy relationship between Sony and Spot?

Spot constantly attacks my professionalism and frequently makes fun of my opinions. A cheap, below the belt tatic Spot frequently uses to attempt to silence those that have differing views. No, I no longer have the high opinion I once did of Spot. The bottom line is I can't be bluffed, bullied and unlike Zippy that Spot bribbed by givnig him some Mac system, to get him to leave this forum, I can't be run off.
DavidMcKnight wrote on 2/10/2005, 7:47 AM
Even since Spot has been on the war path with me in this


BillyBoy....just stop....please........I"m laughing.........oh, it's all too much. <wipes tears of laughter from eyes>

John_Cline wrote on 2/10/2005, 8:18 AM
BB: "It was his "friend" John Cline that called me scum and a lunantic.... and worse things in the past "

OK Billy, now you can add "delusional" to the list.
John_Cline wrote on 2/11/2005, 10:55 AM
I've been in Las Vegas for the last week or so and I stopped by the Sony store at the Forum Shops at Caesars. Sony has a high-end line called "Qualia" and I spent quite a bit of time checking out their 6 or so products. Two of them were of relevance to this thread, the Qualia 004 and the 006. The 004 is a projector capable of 1920x1080P and the 006 is a 70" rear projection TV, also capable of 1920x1080P. While both were outrageously expensive, they were, without doubt, the finest looking projector and rear-projector TV's I have ever seen. They had a FX1 there and I shot some stuff with it and viewed the footage on both devices. STUNNING! More evidence that HDV IS ABSOLUTELY HD.

Sony's Qualia Web Site

FrigidNDEditing wrote on 2/11/2005, 3:37 PM
wow, this is the longest thread that my short forum life has seen, but my only concern about LCD's is that there is potential for dead pixels (I have one in my laptop that only shows up in certain situations noticeably) But I would hate to have that in a TV - ouch.

However I've heard that the Plasma screens can "burn out" if they get too much high refresh information put on them (could be incorrect).

Doesn't really matter too much though, I'm still traditional for now.

Jay Gladwell wrote on 2/11/2005, 3:52 PM
... both were outrageously expensive...

John, just how outrageous were they?

BillyBoy wrote on 2/11/2005, 4:01 PM
Something about a fool and his money are soon parted comes to mind


Qualia 004 high-definition video projector
Display: 0.78", Silicon Crystal (X-tal) Reflective Display
Native resolution: 1920x1080 (2,073,600 pixels)
Lens: interchangeable Carl Zeiss wide-, mid-, or tele-zoom (optional), all glass elements, individually tested
Lamp: 700W xenon
Video inputs: Component (progressive or interlaced)/HD on RCA jacks, component (progressive or interlaced) or RGB/HD on BNC, composite video, S-video, DVI-D/HDCP, HDMI
Other inputs: Control S, RS-232C, RJ-45 (network), USB Type B
Output: 12VDC trigger
Power consumption: 980W maximum, 7.8W in standby mode
Dimensions: 23.625" x 8.125" x 29.75" (WxHxD)
Weight: 88 lbs
Prices: $26,999; lens, $2999
Sony Electronics Inc.
Consumer Integrated Systems
1 Sony Drive
Park Ridge, NJ 07656
tel. (201) 930-1000
fax (201) 930-4761

Oh, by the way the replacement lamp is "only" $3,000.

For those that still don't get it, this is a P R O J E C T O R. That means it projects the image, so throwing out terms like native resolution in this situation is meaningless. The distance the projector is from the screen and the size of the screen determines the relative sharpness of the image you're viewing.

Spot|DSE wrote on 2/11/2005, 4:10 PM
$27000.00 at retail, I don't know what street is. We've been using the Qualia's to display HDV on large projected screens, and as John mentioned, it's stunning. It's "reach out and touch the screen" good, and frighteningly so.

Dave, I could be wrong, but I think this is the longest thread there has ever been. Even if you strike the very contentious and nasty posts, it's still a doozy. But goes to show that a lot of folks either don't understand the format, or don't understand the delivery, or both. There is a chasm in the understanding of the shooting side, editing side, and delivery side that hopefully we'll see narrowing in the coming months.
John_Cline wrote on 2/11/2005, 4:33 PM
BB: "so throwing out terms like native resolution in this situation is meaningless.

NO, it's not.

BB: "Something about a fool and his money are soon parted comes to mind."

Hey, you bought a plasma, so I guess the fool and his money were indeed parted.

BillyBoy wrote on 2/11/2005, 4:52 PM
The irony... the two people that have made this thread contentious still trying to fan the flames. Did I mention your obvious ignorance and jealousy only make me laugh John. Well duh!

Yes I bought a large screen plasma after researching the topic for a couple months and I'm very pleased I did. Save up your pennies, maybe some day you can do more that play at trade shows.
mhbstevens wrote on 2/11/2005, 6:18 PM
Just did my first HDV shoot. It's storming again here in sunny southern California so they were limited to inside shots of Harriet - my dog - repose snd snug in bed. I could not monitor on the HD laptop as the DVRack trial page seems to be down. Tonight I will be able to play them back on the family TV and see how they compare to KCET and then I for one will know if I have "true" HDV. After just 30 mins with the FX1 I suspect I do.

I have a bottle of Champagne iced down for Spot if this thread makes 200!

nickle wrote on 2/11/2005, 6:33 PM
I'll help Spot get some Champagne.
Coursedesign wrote on 2/11/2005, 7:11 PM
It should be served at 6-8 Centigrade (the temperature of Champagne is measured in metric units, just like cocaine and hard liquor).

And don't get the flat "bird bath" shaped glasses. They were shaped after Marie Antoinette's, er, lungs. No wonder both she and the king got guillotined.
Tall tulip shaped glasses only.

And finally, contrary to what some people say, beer is not champagne! (not to denigrate beer, there is some really good stuff widely available).

I thought I heard that all who contribute towards the 200 postings from now on (nice postings only) get invited to taste the champagne with Spot?

Must be true. Please feel free to bring a case to NAB too!

PeterWright wrote on 2/11/2005, 7:22 PM
Is this going to be SD Champagne or HD? (measured in bubbles per cc)
BillyBoy wrote on 2/11/2005, 7:30 PM
No... no... instead of champagne lets have sparkling wine!

This should point out no one OPINION is right and much of what is posted to this thread and others is OPINION and not fact. Forums such as these are most useful when everyone can post their opinion without a couple trying to shove their opinion down everyone's throat pretending their opinion is fact.