Workprinter-2 Review

[digvid]

Over the past week, I have been experimenting with my new Workprinter (model 2) from MovieStuff. Here are some of the observations I have made:

The positive:

1) Registration on the unit, both for Regular8 and Super8, is rock solid. I have transferred 200 and 400 foot reels and the frame seems to remain completely stationary. I have had several rolls of film ranked, only to find that they rolled in a number of places. I did not have this problem with the Workprinter.

2) It is easy to get a clean, sharp image with good colors. This is true even when using a single chip consumer-level camcorder. The images I have captured are the best "do-it-yourself" images I have achieved. Definitely better than the slurry-looking transfers I get with my Goko TC-20, better than anything I've seen from a local transfer house, and comparable (to my eyes) to rank.

3) Images are evenly lit due to the replacement bulb and diffuser mounted between the bulb and the film. Also, I found I could stop the projector and leave a single frame in the gate for hours (with the lamp on) and the film was never damaged.

This is by far the best do-it-yourself option available (in my opinion) and I will use it now instead of my Goko/Hope TC-20 machines.

The negative:

The only issue I had while using the workprinter was my hard drive speed. Believe it or not, 6fps stop-motion capture is actually more taxing on your system than is 29.97fps real-time capture. The reason for this is that stop-motion capture is triggered by a mouse clicking on a button in your capture software. For each frame that is captured, Windows has to process the mouse and button clicks--overhead that real-time capture software does not have to deal with. So your hard drive has to be faster in order to finish storing the frame to disc before you are ready to capture the next one. I know this not just from experimenting with the Workprinter, but because I have written software to perform both types of capture! Anyway, I had been using an IDE ATA/100 7200rpm 40GB hard drive for streaming capture, and this proved inadequate for stop-motion capture at 6fps. I had to order an IDE RAID controller and another 40GB hard drive. This cost $97 for the hard drive and $89 for the RAID controller (from CDW.com) which wasn't too bad at all. This solved the synchronization problems I had at first, where my computer would occasionally skip film frames or blend two frames together.

I think the only big suggestion I could make to Roger right now would be to slow the Workprinter down or include a variable speed control. This would allow users with fast hard drive setups (like me now!) to use higher transfer speeds, but still allow users with slow hard drives to use the unit.

Anyway, that's just my two cents worth!

- digvid

[MovieStuff]

Thanks for the review, Jeff!

Based on my conversations with you about your experiments, as well as feedback from other customers, I am now including a basic speed control on all WorkPrinter-2 units. This will allow the speed to drop from about 6.5 frames per second down to about 3 frames per second, which should accomodate those attempting video editing with a single drive system (though an IDE raid drive would be more effecient). For those with REALLY slow computers, there's always the WorkPrinter-3 which advances at one frame per second (and doubles as an optical printer!)

Anyway, thanks again for the review, Jeff. Now, I'll be spending MY Easter Sunday trying to knock out another batch of WorkPrinters for patiently waiting customers!

Fear not, ye faithful, your WorkPrinter is coming soon; new and improved! I'll be shipping out about a dozen this week. Wow. I'm beat.

Oh, well. Back to da' fields....

Roger

[Kurt]

Hello!

I'm glad some of these reviews are starting to come in. I'll be sure to do the same when my unit arrives. I think it would be great if people also included some info about their computer setup, i.e. processor speed, RAM and type of firewire/analog video card.

Roger, what exactly is a "really slow computer" in terms of compatability with your workprinter 2? I'm getting a bit worried that I'll now have to invest money in my computer to get the Workprinter to work. Can you give us a computer configuration at the low end of the spectrum so we have an idea what to expect?

Thanks!

Kurt

[digvid]

Just for reference, here is a run-down on my system:

1.0 GHz Pentium-3 processor
256 MB RAM
1 20GB IDE ATA/66 5400 RPM (O/S & programs)
1 80GB IDE ATA/100 7200 RPM (storage)
2 40GB IDE ATA/100 7200 RPM RAID-0 (capture)
Adaptec 1200A RAID controller card
Pinnacle StudioDV firewire capture card
Sony TRV-8 MiniDV video camera

I originally had just one 40GB drive that I used for capture, but I recently ordered an identical 40GB drive & RAID controller, so now the two drives together give me a blazingly fast 80GB A/V capture drive. I ordered the drive and card from CDW, but I probably could have saved about $25-30 if I had looked around.

- digvid

[crimsonson]

Digvid

Was your original vidoe drive connected to the same IDE channel as your CD/DVD Rom?
If it was - that might have caused the problem.

IDE has certain limitations. One of them as being if the Master is a DMA 33 (like a CD-ROm would be) and your Slave is a DMA 100, the SLOWEST speed becomes the Channel's speed, thus your DMA 100 is knocked down to DMA 33. It does not matter which drive is Master or Slave. The slowest one dictates the speed.

DVD/CD Rom should be slaved to the OS.
I do not think RAID is necessary for Workprinter 2.

I use to capture DV on a 20 GB UDMA 33 w/o ever dropping a frame.

With Workprinter (or stop frame animation capture), its not a question of HD data rate but more on CPU and Ram. Espcecially with DV CODECs, because they are all much more CPU intensive than MJPEGs. If you want a good peforming HD, look for the one with the smallest seek time. This will benefit you more since most modern IDE drives are fast enough for DV edit and capture (stop animation or not).

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ April 01, 2002 02:08 PM: Message edited by: crimsonson ]</font>

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by crimsonson:

I do not think RAID is necessary for Workprinter
I use to capture DV on a 20 GB UDMA 33 w/o ever dropping a frame.

With Workprinter (or stop frame animation capture), its not a question of HD data rate but more on CPU and Ram. </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi, Dom!

Thanks for the information but I think you misunderstand the problem. It is not a problem of dropping frames during streaming video. It is a synch issue related to WHEN the capture takes place for hundreds of individual mouse commands in a row.

I have several customers that have very fast 1 ghz, 500+ megs of ram, IDE single drive systems that can record streaming video just fine. However, when they use the WorkPrinter to capture stop motion at 6fps (by way of the auto-mouse commands), the slight differences in reaction time of their system can cause their computer to fall out of synch. This is not something that you can see with your eye while capture is taking place. It is, literally, thousandths of a second difference between the computer capturing during dwell time or during pulldown. If it captures during dwell time, then the frame is clear. If it captures during pulldown, then the frame is streaked and blurred. Therefore, rapidly tapping on a mouse as a test to see if it can keep up with a fast capture command will tell you nothing, since it isn't about dropping frames but, rather, about reaction time.

Up until recently, all my clients had raid drives. Suddenly, I started having clients that, to my surprise, I find have single system drives. What Jeff and other clients found was that capturing at 6fps (with a single IDE drive) was really only approachable if the computer was stripped down to just the capture program; no screen saver, no tool bar, no network card, etc. Basically, nothing that would take away from CPU time was active. Even then, a run of only about 300 frames or so was possible before accidentaly getting a blurred pulldown frame. Again, this is not streaming video. These are hundreds of individual mouse commands that have to be processed immediately and the frames written to the drive, so reaction time is critical.

As such, if the WorkPrinter were slowed down to about 4fps or so, then everthing is okay-fine. So, six frames per second seems to be outside the ability of a single drive system to keep up. However, all my clients that went over to an IDE raid set up could run their other applications like normal and never had any synch issues. Every frame would be crystal clear and in synch. Therefore, using a raid seems to be necessary if you are going to capture at a full 6fps.

I have a SCSI raid set up so I have no way to test your advice about increasing the effeciency of a single IDE drive for stop motion capture. However I will pass on the information you posted above to all my single drive customers and see if that lets them return to the higher 6fps capture rate. I hope you are correct!

Roger

[digvid]

crimsonson -

..................................
IDE has certain limitations. One of them as being if the Master is a DMA 33 (like a CD-ROm would be) and your Slave is a DMA 100, the SLOWEST speed becomes the Channel's speed, thus your DMA 100 is knocked down to DMA 33. It does not matter which drive is Master or Slave. The slowest one dictates the speed
..................................

In my particular case, I had two IDE hard drives connected to that particular channel. Both were ATA/100, although one was 5400rpm and the other was 7200rpm. I'm not sure if that matters or not...

Anyway, you have a good point about using a CD-ROM on the same channel as your hard drive. That is a good thing for anyone setting up a speed-sensitive capture system to keep in mind.

If anyone else has speed/performance tips to post, please do.

- digvid

[StopMoWorks]

As has been discussed here so far.... With a single hard drive system (like I have), I could possibly run into some synch/frame dropping issues with the workprinter 2 ? I have 1.5 gigs P4 processor, 512 megs ram and 7200rpm single HD.

Would the Workprinter 3, at 1 frame per sec overcome this possible bug using slower computers or those with single HD? I do not mind the slower transfer speed and I like the optical printer option, in which both features could serve my needs in animation work (shots/scenes not as lengthy, as in "live action").

Lionel

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ April 01, 2002 09:29 PM: Message edited by: StopMoWorks ]</font>

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by StopMoWorks:

Would the Workprinter 3, at 1 frame per sec overcome this possible bug using slower computers or those with single HD? </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. In fact, many Mac clients buy the WorkPrinter-3 for that very reason. However, the new speed control on the WorkPrinter-2 will bring the transfer rate down to 3-4 fps. That is REALLY slow, from a computer processing standpoint. People with single video drives should have no problem with the variable speed set up and can always go back to the higher speed if they get a raid later on. Of course, if you are wanting to do some optical printing or other high end applications that require longer cycle times, then the WP-3 would be a good fit, even if you had a raid set up.

Roger

[MovieStuff]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Kurt:

Roger, what exactly is a "really slow computer" in terms of compatability with your workprinter 2?
Kurt</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I've had people try and use the unit with nothing but a single drive in their entire computer; no system drive, just a single 7200 rpm drive for everything. That would be too slow, possibly even for the WorkPrinter-3 at one frame per second. As Jeff pointed out, capturing frame by frame is more CPU intensive than capturing streaming video since the computer has to process every single capture command.

I would say that a computer set up with a separate system drive and a single 7200 RPM IDE drive with about 300 megs of RAM and a PII processor would probably be the limit of feasibility for the WorkPrinter, even if you slow it down to about 3-4 fps with the new speed control. And that would be capturing firewire where the camera has already processed the signal. If you are using an analog capture board, then that could really bog things down with the computer I just described as the computer has to not only process the capture commands for each frame, it also has to process and compress the analog video coming in, as well.

I believe in your recent email to me, you said you were using two SCSI UW2 drives. I don't think you'll have a problem at all. In fact, even if people aren't using the WorkPrinter, going to an IDE video raid set up can sure make a difference in performance over a single IDE drive system. But, if you do use the raid set up, then you can easily operate at the top transfer speed of 6 frames per second.

Roger