CASABLANCA and also TAPE DROP OUTS

[Lee Prescott]

Hi Illustrious Fellows!

I've just been roaming through the tech sect of the Forum! OK this goes back to Willy V D
L's postings in December last re Casablanca, and also drop outs on tape etc.

I bought my first Casablanca machine when these first appeared on the market, (analogue), after a public demonstration and yeah, I was impressed with the simplicity and speed of it's operation including all "rendering". I have since replaced it with Kron and then Prestige, (digital), and the simplicity of operation remains and with all software upgrades.

** I well remember it only took me, on my own, one and a half hours to get fully into it
and with upgrades and new software, it doesn't even take any further time to learn that!

The reason I did this was to obviate the (still apparent) learning curves and traumas, from what I read and am told, associated with the various PC set ups required and those associated with the never ending changes of the software involved.

For any Casablanca owners interested there is an annual "Casablanca Fest" which circulates internationally by DVDs etc. There aren't any prizes or trophies but it does have a large audience. It is organised by a guy in Barrow in Furness and is open to anyone Editing / PPng using any Casablanca machine.

Trouble these days equipment -wise in my view is that by far the technicalities have taken over from the artistic element of film making and maybe "keeping up with the Jones'" as the saying goes!

TAPE DROP OUTS / ARTEFACTS:

This has only happened to me four times since all tape based operations started. (Lucky)?
The point I wish to make is that I have always found it, so far, cured by using, briefly, a
tape cleaning cassette.

The little square artefacts that Willy mentions which we even see on TV from time to time, is a digital "phenomenon" and I have found curable in the same way - so far! Of course, Tom's comments about out of line mechanisms is a further cause and is not curable in the same way as the former.

Lee.

[Willy]

Hi Illustrious Fellows!

I've just been roaming through the tech sect of the Forum! OK this goes back to Willy V D
L's postings in December last re Casablanca, and also drop outs on tape etc.
Lee.

Casablanca or Edius Neo Pro 3 (same price)
My dear friend Lee, What have you done now! (I'm exaggerating). I'm hesitating again between an Edius Neo Pro3 computer system and a casablanca S6000 (I'm not exaggerating). The Edius system has been recommended by one of our dearest friends. But !!! Yesterday I went to the shop to get my new camera : a sony HXR-NX5, the one recommended by Tom Hardwick in "Film and Video Maker". A very impressive camera! Very impressive, too! A very heavy one... Heavier than my "old" sony 2,100. I'm scared! In the shop I also asked information about the Edius Neo Pro3.

My casablanca prestige - like yours, Lee - is not the machine to edit films on cards. I know that you love tapes, Lee, and that you didn't have problems with drop-outs, but Sony doesn't make tape cameras anymore. It still sells them. That's what the shopkeeper told me. Repairing my "old" sony 2,100, that had a "drop attack" six or seven times while shooting for a feature film, would cost at least 300 euros and maybe they are not willing to repair it anymore. I also bought a 32 gig card.

Out of date
On a different forum I read : (I'm trying to translate it into English. My technical knowledge is very poor) "Microsystems (casablanca) has chosen a dual core processor. So Microsystems has missed a chance to compete with PC-systems. All standard PC-systems have quad core processors now. And then there is the awful casablanca title-editor ! It still works on 4:3 modus and has not been adapted to the present 16:9 format. In the viewfinder the 16:9 format has been compressed in a 4:3 screen. Conclusion : the newest casablanca-machines S3000 and S6000) have a fantastic design, but inside ... everything is out of date!

Reply casablanca
Now I was sure. I would buy an Edius Neo Pro 3 PC-system. Having read this I wrote a message to Microsystems (Casablanca). Their reply was : "A quad core or more cores are not really necessary. Knowing what hobbyists or semi-professionals are aiming at the core 2 duo is even faster than a quad core... Plenty of cores are only useful when using different applications at the same time. In a casablanca a 8,600 core 2 duo is even faster than the present quad cores because in a casablanca there is no multiasking."

Clubmates use Edius Neo Pro 3
On the other hand most clubmates in my Antwerp club use a Pinnacle system, but in the club nearby they use Edius Neo Pro 3. In Antwerp they are hobbyists "pur sang". In the club next door they are more professional filmmakers in the meaning of filmmakers with money-making intentions. No casablanca-users. I belong to the first group, but I am not against the second group. Not at all! We have already had numerous discussions about this problem here on this forum. I thought : it's good to have friends who use a computer-system like mine. I can always cry for help. Let's go for Edius Neo Pro 3! A system that is also independent from my internet computer.

Insomnia ...
However, it is also amazing that the shopkeeper of Format C, who also sells Edius Neo Pro 3 computer systems, told me yesterday that it takes some time to have mastered an Edius Neo Pro system... and knowing that using with my user-friendly casablanca is mere a child's play to me ...! Maybe the shopkeeper noticed the anxiety in my eyes and he looked at my white moustache and my grey hair.
Let's go for casablanca again. That's what I am thinking now. I'm suffering from insomnia.

[Lee Prescott]

Hi Willy (and other interested parties).

Casablanca:

I'm sorry if I have added to your confusions and interests. I have FWD'd two paragraphs from your posting to the Casablanca guy here whom I know reasonably well, (no names etc.) for his comments. Of course it might be considered that he'll be biased but I think not as I have always found him truthful and helpful. If he replies I will pass on his comments.
Personally I have never found any problem with converting 4:3 to 16:9 or vice versa on Casablanca and that includes all titling, plus the fact that none of our "eagle eyed" viewers have noticed anything, apparently!!!

Tape

The major blank media supplier's warehouse here is only 7 miles from my home so purchasing tape etc. isn't any problem. Anyway, in fact I have a stock of full sized professional tapes for my SonyVX9000 and also a stock of miniDV tapes for the Sony TRV950E which I bought from a very trusted source recently. No doubt these will "see me out"! *

In fact footage from the VX9000 is virtually indisernable from any HD (card) driven camera
to date. I do not make this comment as such, it comes from my public audiences, individuals and even from my club - where I have been asked on occasion, what my "new" camera is!!!

As Tom Harwick effectively states: * (There comes a time in life), when there's no point in being the richest corpse in the morgue!

I would finally add that the processing times, (rendering), on Casablanca is by far much, much faster than that experienced by my colleague on his PC, which at times takes hours, to his exasperation.

Anyway Willy and all --- keep smiling and to the artistic element of filming.

Lee.

[Lee Prescott]

Hi Willy and interested parties:

As I stated I contacted the Casablanca gentleman, even it being Sunday and there follows below his reply, which of course rings very true.

I always think it's better to stay with what one comprehensively knows if one is 50 or over rather than start in on unnecessarily attacking something completely new! For me, fiddling about with new PC software technicalities etc. just takes up more creative time.

My Correspondents reply

"It seems to be human nature to compare irrelevant things when considering a purchase. A little like checking the 0-60 time on a new car. Is it important? Quad core is the latest "must have" but is actually the equivalent of four smaller processors working at the same time. 1 fast single core processor could and often is even faster depending on what you are wanting it to do. Some processes are not speed hungry. For example DVD authoring is no faster on the new Dual core machines than it was on the relatively slower Prestige, but most other rendering processes are much faster. As the MS reply suggested, quad core is fine if you are wanting to do several smaller tasks at the same time, but when editing you usually are working on only one task at one time.

Not sure what is meant by the titling comment. The title is produced over whatever format the project is being made in. For the Bogart machines there is now also a new optional more sophisticated title program called Title Studio".

Cheers........Lee.

[Chrisbitz]

I'm afraid I have to disagree with your correspondent's analysis of the difference with dual and quad core processsors.

True, running basic software that hasn't been written with multi-threading in mind is actually slower on a multi-core processor than a single processor!

But, with software written with multicore in mind, it's is significantly more efficient. Imagine building a car without mass production.... The engine man can't start working untill the chassis man has finished his job. that's an example of inefficiency.

Equally, when rendering video, there are many many tasks going on it the background.
1.There will be a task to look at the overall frame, and decide what algorithm would be most efficient to compress that frame,
2.There'll be a task to identify the pixels in an area to be compressed,
3.there'll be another task compressing those pixels
4.there's a task to look at the next frame to see what's changed and if that area even needs to be recompressed if it's identical
5.There'll even be many more tasks managing the operating system itself too (Casablanca still has an operating system, it's just hidden from you)

That's just a miniscule list of possuible tasks off the top of my head, but I can guarantee that there will be literally hundreds more that are happening every second.

Looking at those tasks, they don't have to be done in a linear fashion, they can be done concurrently, saving another process from waiting for the results. So as I mentioned before, if the software is specifically written for multicore processors, then it is certainly more efficient than a single core processor.

Unfortunately, I expect Casablanca is a relatively small volume manufacturer, and I doubt they have teams of programmers re-writing all their software to take advantage and make it efficient with multicore processors and other new developments in processor design. So of course, they're not going to suggest that a modern multicore hardware PC system might be faster

If all you know is Casablanca, then YOU will be the weak link if you move to a different editing system. The 25% improvement in efficiency and performance will be completly negated by your speed trying to get to grips with a new way of doing things.

If you enjoy learning new stuff, then that's ok, as you'll still be having fun, but if you just want to edit, I'd say stick with Casablanca.

Incedentally, how much is a the casablanca system you're talking about nowadays?

[Willy]

I'm afraid I have to disagree with your correspondent's analysis of the difference with dual and quad core processsors.
If you enjoy learning new stuff, then that's ok, as you'll still be having fun, but if you just want to edit, I'd say stick with Casablanca.

Incidentally, how much is a the casablanca system you're talking about nowadays?

Many thanks for your information, Chris. I can already tell you that on the Continent a casablanca S6000 costs about 2,900 euros and it is possible that some extra expensive software cannot be missed. So, let's say about 3,200 euros (£2,800?). An Edius Neo Pro 3 system also costs about 2,800 euros.

[Lee Prescott]

HI Chris... and Willy,

Well, although Chris' somewhat in depth comments are no doubt true all it does for me is to confirm my hypothesis that 50 plus - forget it! There's far more things worthwhile to making / producing video / films than messing about with often confusing technicalities. Also, even in trying to read through the technical "explanations" of the "manual" - and maybe only when forced to, I have always found makes things more confusing (With my colleague who does actually work with a PC I once had the "temerity" to seek advice from the guys at Adobe....all I got was "R T F M" - I will not, dare not, translate)! This has never happened with Casablanca when I have asked for the odd explanation!

Chris mentions that maybe the manufacturers of Casablanca "are small" - Macro is part of the Siemens Group I understand and there isn't anything small about that. Also, the software for Casablanca is produced by a company called "Linux" I think it is. Again nothing "small" there! As a matter of interest Casablanca is well established here in UK, more so in the United States etc. Australia and so on.

It is a fact that we do not hear much about Casablanca as we do about other editing systems, software - that is no doubt because Casablanca does not give any trouble, certainly not on the scale I read about on certain (other) forums!

There's a certain Forum originating in S.A. and they are forever and almost exclusively reporting PC software troubles, seeking constant advice etc. One rarely sees anything about Video Film Making!

The main thing regarding Casablanca is that it's a dedicated computer soley for PP and Editing and so far for me has worked wonders without any wasted time or effort!

Finally I would add that, certainly some time back, what was HTV (ITV) Bristol used Casablanca machines I was told. Of course I don't know if they still do so - lost touch there.

Anyway guys.... keep smiling... Lee.

[Chrisbitz]

Well, although Chris' somewhat in depth comments are no doubt true all it does for me is to confirm my hypothesis that 50 plus - forget it! There's far more things worthwhile to making / producing video / films than messing about with often confusing technicalities.

You've totally hit the nail on the head for me. I'm a film maker, and I want to make films.

However I still maintain, Why bother with HD and all the fuss that comes with it?

If you're a good filmmaker, it won't make your film any more enjoyable or entertaining, and if you're a bad filmmaker, it wont make it any less dreadful!

It will make the pictures prettier, but is that worth buying an expensive computer system and projector to show it too?
If you want to edit an SD film, all you need to do is buy any off the shelf computer for about £600-800, give it plenty of memory and some nice editing software, and bingo! You can make films as well as your talent allows. Any modern computer can render SD standing on its head whilst surfing the internet and downloading service packs.. You simply don't need anything fancy anymore.

When I built my quad-core machine a couple of years ago, I took out my matrox RTx100 card and now it lives in my bottom drawer as it was less trouble to let Premiere render the files with brute force processor power that it was to work around all of the Matrox quirks and "opposite to everyone else" field order.

Now I just make films, instead of work-arounds.

(and just for the record, I said Casablanca was relatively small. For every casablanca system sold, there will be probably 500 copies or more of windows-based editing software sold.... I thought it ran on amiga software, but if they've upgraded to Linux, then that's great, but Linux still only have less than 5% of the global computer operating system marketshare.)

[Lee Prescott]

Well yes, that should be the name of the game - making films.

Frankly, there are at my club three guys or so who from time to time give a presentation of this software and that software. Just sitting there watching that projected moggy arrow whizzing about just sends me up the wall! Half the time the stuff doesn't work properly!
Club kicks off at 19.30. On those occasions --- I'm home again by 20.35 after a 10 mile round trip!!!

Just another thought. We have a newish member. He has bought a big new Sony HD video camera, I forget the model number etc. but he tells me he paid £7,600 for it. Magnificent looking beast it is...(I saw one at the Morecambe Show on sale - last May - price there was £5,600). The guy has just made a 6 1/2 minute film covering the heavy snow here last December..a very good film from everyones point of view. However I noticed a couple of odd technical faults: 1) Red Holly Berries against the snow - a shadow of bleeding! 2) A couple of his shots involve a quick zoom backwards....the image throughout the zoom "vibrates"! - All tripod work too.
I suggested to him for the future where he involved similar shots to make the zoom a bit slower. I've tried exactly the same with my Sony VX9000 SD -- no problems!

Cheers.....Lee.

[Mike Shaw]

I don't think the (friendly) rivalry between Casablanca and PC users - or between specific PC editing programs for that matter - will ever cease. It is within our nature to firmly believe we have chosen the best system available (for us), and will defend that system to the bitter end. Indeed and I've said this before - some advertising, for cars for example, is often based on assuring a driver that he has made the right choice (so that he will 'stay with the marque in future) rather than actually persuading people to rush out to the showroom and buy a new and different marque.

It really does come down to what we personally are comfortable with, for the particular type of movie we wish to make, in the style we wish to make it. I love playing around with 'special effects' and so would look for a program capable of handling them. Thus, for me, a Casablanca would never fit the bill (not to say it can't handle them, but it just doesn't have the same capabilities in that direction in my own view). Yes it is a dedicated machine, and wouldn't suffer the vagaries of a PC with the possibility of viruses, conflicts and so on, which come with 'shared duties. On the other hand, it can be cheaper to upgrade an editing program - even a very expensive editing program - on a PC than it is to upgrade a Casablanca. Swings and roundabouts.

For years I used Liquid - first under the Pinnacle banner, then under the Avid banner, then back under the Pinnacle banner, and then dropped completely and discontinued. It was an amazing editor - there's talk here about rendering times for example. With Liquid - almost all of the rendering was done in the background while you simply got on with the edit (and yes - that's when dual and quad core processors, and the graphic card's on-board memory, really came into their own!). I've now moved 'up' to Avid's Media Composer (they made an offer to Liquid users that was extremely attractive, price wise). Probably one of the most powerful editors available and, for the most part, far too rich for my blood with features and capabilities I will never ever even think about using. But it was offered at the same price as the full Edius which I was considering following the demise of Liquid. I was out of my comfort zone for a long time, and even now only gradually getting to grips with it.

Point is, because that's what I now use, I think its the best thing since the proverbial sliced bread (what was the best thing before sliced bread?). I've had to buy a new computer to run the latest version - but that computer is specially built for and 'dedicated' only to that program, much like a Casablanca is dedicated to 'one software programme'.

So. The best editor is the one that does everything you want (with a bit up its sleeve perhaps for those odd occasions when you may want 'more'), with the minimum of trouble and effort, and that you feel comfortable using. That's it.

As for results - I've seen absolutely stunning films made on a Casablanca - far better than I could ever think of making. I've also seen stunning films made on Pinnacle Studio - again, better than I could ever do. It's not who made the tools. It's how you use them.