View Full Version : DO i need to sell my VT3 ?

07-26-2004, 09:52 PM
I am Toasting since 1992. Now that i am on VT3, i feel that something is happening. There is not a lot, if any other solutions at that price. But the small problems of the Toaster or the lack of features of the Toaster is against me. Here's why:
-Doing a lot of audio/video stuff. Need to compress, add reverb etc... Vegas 5.0 do the audio in the nicest way..
-Want to have a glow..a simple glow...Doing paranormal shows is always asking filters and glows. Don't want to learn AUra since i know AE 6.5, but a few filters can be VERY welcome..
Doing a lot of TV ads also and the logo industry is in MOntreal...With the Toaster, i can't take a simple 32 bit alpha graphic and use those nice transitions that comes with the Toaster...Again Vegas is doing it..But not realtime.

SO because of that, i am editing one day or 2 every 45 days on the Toaster and the others on Vegas and AE. For sure, the print to Betacam is only on the Toaster, but it's a bit pricey for that task only..no?

SO, is this a good idea to wait a few days, weeks, months , year to see the VT4 ? Does the features mentionned above have been asked by the Toaster community ? Am i the only one with those problems...

If you are a Newtek employee and know something about the VT4, or VT3 1/2 or whathever version could help me please let me know. If you know a few plug-ins that i can add in the Toaster to fix those problems, please let know..If nothing above is going to happen, i have a Toaster and a SX-8 for sale...Please let me know!!!:eek:

Have a great week, hope to read somebody's good news VERY soon.

Even if i sell it, i will always be a Newtek fan.

Eric Nolin
please excuse my english..French is easier for me

Paul Lara
07-27-2004, 08:48 AM
Thank you for your long-term support of NewTek, Eric.

I think you will be pleased with some of the pending features. ;)

07-27-2004, 09:45 AM
In brief, we use the VT nearly every day for post. We also use Photoshop, AE, LightWave and Saw Pro among others.

This day in age, fortunately, there are multiple programs that offer multiple benefits.
While the VT is behind in some maturity, it's rapidly catching up and in MANY cases is better to edit with then other systems.

I can compete against anything using my VT, (and we do successfully). Pick your tools and master them. VT is a GREAT tool, but there are many other tools available for doing specific things.
However, we DO need at least a simple EQ on a per clip basis.

07-27-2004, 11:23 AM
I do my audio in Sound Forge and then bring it back into the VT.

07-27-2004, 09:56 PM
Paul, Is there a more descriptive answer for those who do not have inside information on the next step you are taking with the Toaster? I don't know much but I do know that we feel pretty stagnated not hearing about any new developments from NewTek on the Toaster. If there is something coming up, You could save a few more followers by letting us in on what is happening. People tend to think the worst when not kept informed now days. If there is going to be a T4 at least give us an idea of whether it will be months or years. I am also getting badgered with clients wanting things like Reverb EQ for audio and lately they want to know if I will soon be able to handle their HD needs in the near future. I would hate to be pressured into buying another system and then learn that T4 was soon to be coming out with these same features after I bought some other system. I would have to get my moneys worth out of that system befor I could justify buying a new Toaster. So, If there is something coming up soon, please keep us loyal usere informed, so we can remain loyal users.

07-28-2004, 11:07 AM
I really think that the HDV standrard accepted by JVC, SOny, Panasonic and Phillips has to be in the next VT4. It is only a codec. And HDV files are as big as RTV so there is no problem. I can play an HD avi in the Toaster right now. I capture using the wonderful HD connect from Cineform ( www.cineform.com ) and i drag my HD clip on the timeline. My HD avi is automaticcaly resize by the toaster in the 4:3 format so my images are distort. But i feel that we may be able to work on HD and in VT4 someday. With 3 or 4 new cameras coming, i'm sure they will at least consider it..

Have a great day

Eric Nolin

07-28-2004, 01:29 PM
I've also experimented with HD in the VT[3], and it does currently work, as long as you only need SD as your output.

I took uncompressed 1080i HD created in LW and compressed with the PicVideo M-JPEG codec to about RTV size. I then had no problem playing back two streams of this with transitions in real-time in VT-Edit. VT-Edit simply scaled it all to SD.

That's the thing, VT-Edit is already SOOO close to being able to work with HD (or HDV), I just can't imagine it wouldn't be a priority to add this support and stay ahead of the HD revolution in the next version of the VT.

Thing is, for me personally, HDV is where the future lies, not higher end HD. And that should be even easier, since as Eric correctly pointed out, it's "only a codec." This is totally true, and since HDV is only a DV data rate (not even RTV rate), it simply uses normal firewire for I/O. In other words, there would be NO new hardware needed to get HDV in or out of a VT[3] system.

BTW, Eric, I have some good news for you! The VT[3] already fully supports 16:9! You don't need to see any distortion in your HDV video in the VT[3]! :)

You just need to select the 16:9 size TVision monitor and be sure your aspect ratios are set right for the clips. The 1080i HD I worked with was all 16:9 and showed correctly.

Eric, I and probably others here would be very interested to hear some more details of how you are using HDV with the VT[3], could you please tell us some more about this? Does Cineform's program convert the HDV stream to a type of AVI codec that the VT[3] then reads?

Sounds to me that by adding the Cineform Connect HD program, anyone could edit HDV on a VT[3] right now, with the limit being SD output, is this correct?

That would be very useful, since for the next year at least, any HDV I shoot would really need SD as its final output format.

BTW, I love Montreal, awesome city! :)

07-28-2004, 02:16 PM

You should take a look at Bob Tasa's plugins, particularly Bob's SoftFX for basic 32-bit overlay work, and also his Glow filter:


(Ask Bob to send you his "one sheet.")

I use AE6.5 for at least 85% of the compositing done a daily basis, and render the output directly to an RTV file, drop it in the timeline and activate overlay. Basically, it's AE that let's us keep the "competitive" look in terms of compositing.

For audio sweetening, I also use Sound Forge, though this is extremely clumsy when you are trying to do a multichannel audio mix. E.g. I had to "wet" a voiceover to try and match a preexisting reverb on a mix that was already created on a source tape - a very clumsy trial and error process.

Vegas and Premiere Pro are no doubt superior for audio for video work, though there are some very basic audio VT plugins on the way, allegedly.

( Regarding HD, I'm just monitoring the market for now. According to Trendwatch, the bigger studios are using, in order, HD Cam, D5 HD and D7 HD.)

07-28-2004, 02:23 PM
Dear Eugene,
i've shot a 3 minute document in HDV for the Just For Laughs festival 2 months ago. I was supposed to edit it in Vegas 4 ( 5 was not out ) because it can handle HDV. But it was a one shot deal, presented and capture by National Network once. So, as our National TV is not HD, i've decided to go with the VT3 for the realtime. Cineform Connect HD will capture my HDV tapes in .AVI or in .M2T plus another extension that i forgot. You have the choice between those three, not at the same time. The quality was awesome on the Toaster output. The Betacam copy was clear and better than the old Betacam SP tapes that i had shot in the past. VT3 had some difficulty to make all the editing realtime, crashing a few times. It is probably hard to downsize a clip while doing some transitions or text in overlay. But overall, it was a mid-happy experience. If you want to stay native, i can only recommend Vegas 4 or 5, forget Ulead..Good software but not stable and slower than Vegas. For HDV editing, Vegas 4 or 5. For HDV editing to a SD ouptput, i still recommend Vegas for the stability, but the Toaster impressed me. For realtime DV or uncompress , please...use your VT3..

Best regards

Eric Nolin
sorry for the english, i am french ( don't want to offend with a bad english writing )

07-28-2004, 02:29 PM
ANd for HDV camera, i have a scoop directly from JVC..

In january or february 2005, they will offer a HDV camera ( 15,000$ ) that will do:

720p 60i
720p 30i
and frame rates:

The camera will be mounted in a ''kind of'' DV5000 body.

It's a secret, no site are talking about it...The camera they present at NAB will not be offered but replace by that one. For that price, throw way everything else.
3 ccd 2/3 with 2 million pixles each and their new way to treat color channel...Goodbye RGB...

Bye all!!

Eric Nolin

07-28-2004, 03:57 PM
Some of Bob Tasa's filter plug-ins may be able to do exactly what you are looking for. As for audio, a separate audio processing program is currently the best way to do audio sweetening with the VT[3].

Now back to HDV:

The JVC you mention sounds exciting, but I have had bad experiences personally with JVC in the past, so I'm hoping Sony has a comparable solution. Based on talking with the Sony people at the DV Expo in New York City a couple of weeks ago, I'm confident Sony will have a comparable camcorder early next year as well.

What CPUs do you have in your VT[3] system, I'm just curious based on your results with HDV?

So the intermediate format that the Cineform Connect HD converts the MPEG-2 transport stream to is about the data rate of an RTV stream, right?

This really sounds cool to me, since my needs for HDV for the next year would involve SD as output, and since I do know and love my VT[3] very well, it would be great to be able to do HDV with it! :)

When you have a chance, please let me know if the 16:9 mode and aspect correction I mentioned solve your image distortion with HDV in VT[3].

Oh, one last question, will Cineform Connect HD support all of the different HDV formats, including 1080i?

07-28-2004, 06:50 PM
I have had NO problems with my JVC equipment! I swear by it. And, JVC always packs in the MOST quality and feature for the money. Sony always hobbles their lower priced items so they still have a reason to market their 45K cameras. I get much better looking picture with JVC than with Sony at the same price point.

07-28-2004, 07:09 PM

Sony is a very good brand. JVC either but less popular. I've been working with Broadcast JVC for years. Both has quality and default. But for a few years, JVC has always come woth products that rival the quality of Sony, sometimes better for less money. My HD monitor is a JVC. One of my friend who swaer by Sony came to my house. He's a top producer from MTV sweden. He saw a job that i made on my JVC monitor and said: '' Wow, i never seen some footage that clear and detailed.'' He fell on his knees when he saw the logo.

Newtek is a bit the JVC of editing. A lot of person will point you if you don't work with Avid. They will even avoid working with you. BUt the realtime features of the VT3 and the ease of use surpass the Avid. The BOB is unbelievable and i don't know how people can compare an Avid with the hardware VS the Toaster and the hardware. It's a question of standard. Either you go with what is good for you or you go by the brand.

Sorry that you had some troubles in the past with JVC. But let's bet that that HD camera will be the best on the market...

Éric Nolin
the french guy

07-28-2004, 10:22 PM
Well said. My sentiments exactly!

07-28-2004, 10:24 PM
By the way, Eric, how do you know this about the JVC camera?
I have been much anticipating it's release!

07-28-2004, 10:39 PM
OK, I will look at JVC when the new camcorder comes out, and definately consider it.

My experience was I had a JVC X2 as my main camcorder for the start of my business 10 years ago, and I had a number of problems with it, including having to replace the optical block at my cost, since the warranty was really bad back then. Then I had a number of problems with electrolyte capacitors drying out, and the JVC engineers even told me it was cause the original parts were cheap. So that's why I wasn't overly impressed with JVC.

Then when the full size DV/DVCAM/DVCPRO camcorders came out, only Sony seemed to care about the event video people and have full size cassette capability. Panasonic and JVC didn't at all in the beginning, so that's how I moved to Sony and stayed with Sony.

Back to HDV, I was looking at the Cineform website, and it says that Connect HD is ONLY compatible with 720/30p, so it looks like that won't really work with the new JVC camcorder in any of the other modes... Unless that's going to change?

07-28-2004, 10:57 PM
YAY! It is going to change, I just dug deeper in the Cineform website, and here's what I found:

"These resolutions are currently supported by Aspect HD and Connect HD for both capture and editing.

1280x720 30p

720x480 60p

720x576 50p

1440x1080 30i (Coming Soon: Currently no HDV cams create this resolution, but when it is available, we plan to support it)."

07-29-2004, 12:02 AM
I went on a few JVC showcase in Montreal and devellop some contacts. One of my favorite contact is a guy from the head office in Toronto that is in direct contact with the Japanese headquarter. His wife is Japanese, and speaking that language in that company is a BIG plus.

A HDV deck is on the way but not before march or april 2005.

Other questions...???

I am here :D

07-29-2004, 08:56 PM
Ok, so how would this HDV VT workflow go? Do you capture via firewire into the VT or through a 3rd party capture program?

I'm guessing that to work in VT Edit you need to capture as an avi rather than as a transport stream of MPEG2. Once captured do you just editing away or is there something else to it?

I'm as interested in an inexpensive HD solution as anyone but I haven't been all that impressed with HDV so far. Now admitedly part of that's because there aren't any good cameras yet. But I have to say, given my feelings about working with DV as a source, I can't get too excited about HDV. MPEG transport stream, blechhh!

07-29-2004, 11:19 PM
Well, Eric can correct any errors here, but here's how I understand it:

VT wouldn't understand the MPEG-2T stream. Connect HD would bring the HDV stream in from your camera via a normal firewire port, using no more bandwidth than DV.

Then Connect HD would convert the MPEG-2T stream to an intermediate edit format in the form of an AVI. Probably an M-JPEG clip at a data rate of a normal SD RTV clip. The only thing I'm not clear on is if Connect HD does this in real-time while you bring the HDV clips in, or if it is a second step after you bring the clip in. My experiements with uncompressed HD to PicVideo M-JPEG HD suggest this could be done in real-time, but when you're going from one compressed format to another compressed format, I think that would push current CPUs too far, but I could be wrong.

Once it's in the intermediate AVI, you just edit away normally in VT-Edit, within the limits of what you can normally do with RTVs. The only extra overhead being the scaling of all the clips, but luckily CPU isn't normally the limiting factor for number of RTV streams that VT-Edit can handle in real-time. The only special concerns are to set your aspect ratios and TVisions for 16:9.

But again, Eric did see some issues with real-time playback, so some of this is still a bit fuzzy. But at worst it could certainly be rendered to any SD format.

Well, so far the two JVC camcorders are rather limiting, and it will be interesting to see how much better CCD chips and optics can make this low data rate format. I'm still optimistic that there could be a 50Mb/s version coming, since it is possible with the HDV spec, but Sony seemed surprised when I suggested this at DV Expo, so I'm not too optimistic that's coming soon.

07-30-2004, 02:26 AM
ConnectHD, AspectHD and ProspectHD are all able to convert into the intermediate format on-the-fly. Just as you hoped Eugene.

ConnectHD acq mode is the closest equivalent of the 3rd party tool we had for VT 1.0 to capture DV as RTV (without quite as much file bloating).

Some NLEs can wade through transport streams or modified (but not recompressed) MPEG-2 extractions from the TRP. However it is typical for this to be like treacle - which shows you how marvellous ConnectHD is. The technology, although virtually-lossless on the already highly compressed format, is clearly worth exploiting in its current form or using a different cut of the same thinking (!).

PICVideo MJPEG seems unlikely to be able to convert HDV 720p on the fly with current systems. However my tests haven't been that smart and certainly not exhaustive and my system is constrained by its 2GHz PIV with "PC1000" RDRAM.

I've said this before after Eugene. HD MJPEG is fantastically editable on a few NLEs, whether resulting in an HDV final output, HD SDI or SD (D1/DV).

WMV9 red-laser DVD-ROMs could be more playable on component or RGB/DVI/HDMI widescreen computer monitors more quickly than we expect. Possibly before the 2nd gen of HDV cameras arrive (1st gen for Sony). Watch out for Kiss/V.Inc with Sigma Designs EM8620L DSP/GPU/codec and possibly AEON/Equator who currently pay as M$ licencees. Red laser HD playback is likely from these folks and even isn't impossible with the CPU power and HD capabilities of the existing Xbox.

WMV9 720p/1080i isn't all that hard a thing to do with el-cheapo electronics. If your project has an HD premium, an extra $150 for such a player may be viable. Or play from your PC and rent the large screen for showing what the customer will see one day soon (whilst they currently have the SD version to take away with them).

25, 50 or 100Mbit per second hard disc MJPEG based recordings from an larger chassis HD camera head seem to be within the realms of possibility in the sub $10k market. Hard discs are commonplace with between 8x and 24x this throughput. Should the technologists be willing to upset the tape / prosumer market.

07-30-2004, 05:45 AM

All that would be needed to do full blown HD production is to be
render the final out at res X using the codec recquired.

THAT should be something everyone who intrested editing in HD
using TED should be demanding :)

Then TED could become a full blown end to end HD
editor which can do the edit/preview in RT and produce the final
in render time. That is a perfectly acceptable for now and
would greatly improve and extend the life of TED.

So I suggest all you out there in TV land get off the dime and
write in, email, call, stick your head out the window and yell to Texas, do whatever is required for Newtek to make
this significant but worthy change. It would
be one of the things that would make a BIG difference.


Paul Lara
07-30-2004, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by Bobt
All that would be needed to do full blown HD production is to be render the final out at res X using the codec recquired.

Don't know if you've noticed, Bob, but our Render panel is size-agnostic. You can type in larger than video-res sizes in the panel.

07-30-2004, 11:13 AM
Paul ask if it takes 720x486/720x540 and up rez's or takes a look at the original res of the file. I have no idea what it does there but that would be FANTASTIC if it only scales when the need arises. If it only up scales as needed THEN PAUL, you need to add that as a BULLET point to why to buy a VT3 and you will make lots of folks happy (including me looking at a cheap JVC HD cam)


07-30-2004, 11:18 AM
if you can just make sure it doesnt need to scale to HD res
if the original is HD res then you have a realtime HD editor


07-30-2004, 12:37 PM

Never noticed that, Paul.

See, I told ya'll VT was already ready.

07-30-2004, 01:49 PM
Come on guys. You can't pass HD, being scaled down on the fly, through the timeline with all the editing, effects, etc. and then somehow magically output it at the higher rez with a codec (well you could get the higher rez but it would only be rescaled up from SD). All the manipulation is by it's very nature NTSC or PAL!

Now, if they (Newtek) open up the window for possibilities of larger canvas sizes these kind of things become somewhat possible, but all the DVE's, effects, etc. will have to re-written to handle specific resolutions or to be completely scalable at varing resolutions, they would have to be replaced with a whole new set of scalable tools.

07-30-2004, 01:52 PM
Why not...the networks do...

:D :D :cool:

07-30-2004, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by UnCommonGrafx
Why not...the networks do...

:D :D :cool: I'm with you on that sentiment, at least until all the stations start screaming about it. However I was repling specifically to Bob's thoughts:
Originally posted by Bobt
if you can just make sure it doesnt need to scale to HD res
if the original is HD res then you have a realtime HD editor


07-30-2004, 02:15 PM
The internals allows for resolution independant scaling.
So the effects should not require any alterations,
but the DVE's, since they are written in stone seem
to be a problem at the moment.


07-30-2004, 02:17 PM

07-30-2004, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by Bobt
but the DVE's, since they are written in stone seem
to be a problem at the moment.

well then, someone needs to get me at least a cut and a fade DVE at higher resolutions, then we are in business! Really, why if you rewrite the DVE engine to handle HD resolutions, why worry about converting all the old DVEs - Let the community and 3rd parties fill in the gaps as we slowly build up a library of new DVEs - Let the old DVE engine and old DVEs still work for D1 resolution.

We have talked in other threads about tighter integration with LightWave and other parts of the Newtek Suite, and since LightWave easily handles HD resolutions, seems to me this is all part of the same solution!

And to tie into another set of Threads, I would love to be able to output HD LIVE to my IMAG screens! See, even the Live side of VT needs HD :D

07-30-2004, 08:31 PM
I agree. This may be a way to drum some new life in this board
without it actually working up a sweat :)


07-30-2004, 09:25 PM
It's nice to be optimistic, but all I read from Paul's statement is that we may be able to use the VT[3] as an upconverter for SD to HD resolution.

This is a cool use of it, and I am intrigued to test if this is true. And if so, that should be a marketing bullet.

But remember, as it is now, the VT[3] itself is an SD pipe, period.

08-05-2004, 09:37 PM
Do we even need Cineform Connect HD to do HDV in VT[3]?

I was just exploring the specs of the Elecard programs.


It claims support for all the MPEG-2 transport stream profiles and levels that HDV needs.

Therefore, maybe one can play an HDV stream DIRECTLY in VT-Edit with this DirectShow filter installed???