Windows XP and MS Pro 6.5 needs MEMORY!

[Hulk]

I'm not sure I understand you're problem exactly, but it seems as though you don't need to store all of those numbers. Every second, or ten seconds, or hundred seconds you could save the time passed until you hit an event. Only the delta time and time increment to the event need be stored, then the counter could continue.

As far as video goes, why can't large files be broken up into 4GB chunks? They could appear as contiguous files but actually be segmented. It's not like you would have 100 of them.

Besides files larger than 4GB I still don't see the advantages of a 64 but OS. I guess more registers are always better since they are the fastest memory

[wkulecz]

Way off topic!

You aren't reading clearly. I only care about the delta-T. The counter is in a 32-bit register. Say at time N-1 the counter reads 4,000,000,000. At time N it reads 123. What is the delta at time N? Do you understand what results from 123-4,000,000,000 using 32 bit arithmetic? When you do, you will understand the problem.

For a N-bit counter (2^N-1) + 1 = 0.

This is clearest if you use hexadecimal numbers. For an eight bit counter 2^8-1 = 255 which is ff in hex. Adding 1 gives 256 which is 100 hexadecimal, note that the lower eight bits are zero. You can only detect the "carry" into the 9th bit (or overflow) if the CPU is testing everytime the register is incremented, in which case the CPU will be doing little else.

It was just a simple example to show where 32-bit registers (processors) can be a problem when the data structure is only a single integer, since you seem to doubt the need for 64-bit processors. The need has always been there, its only cost-effectiveness holding it back. 64-bit processors have been available for a good number of years, but not at prices useful to individuals. DV editing is one mass-market application that would clearly benefit.

8->16->32->64->128 bit processors don't solve the fundamental problem. Each transition just postpones the day of reckoning!

I think a 64-bit file pointer could span a single DV file started recording at birth and stopped at death with a good bit of room to spare assuming you had a place to store it, but I haven't done the math.

--wally.

[Hulk]

Now I see what you are saying. Give me a break, it's been a long time since I done arithmetic in base 16. So, once you exceed the resolution of the counter the CPU must "detect" the next bit. Interesting, but it still kind of seems like a "brute force" method of solving the problem. I can't help wondering if there isn't a more elegant way to do this? I'm just wondering, this isn't my area of expertise.

I'm not a programmer, actually I'm a ME, but this reminds me of solving nonlinear differential equations using numerical methods. You could use an inefficient method like an incremental search and a really fast computer, or something with some brains like Newton-Raphson and do it in many less iterations.

[Dr Mordrid]

Yes, I have indeed decided that the next update of this system will include at least 1 gig of RAM.

If possible I do want to hold out for a Hammer system though...

Dr. Mordrid

[Hulk]

Doc,

I just had to pick myself up off the ground after reading your message, "you may hold out for a Hammer system."

I thought you to be VERY suspicious of non-Intel chipsets.

I am very curious as to what about Hammer has you so interested as to consider it.

Also, while I have your ear. How difficult (or expensive rather) is it to do a two camera shoot and be able to easily switch between cameras while editing AND keep audio/video sync. I think I'm going to get a second camera and would love to be able to do this.

Yesterday I had a job where I have to create a video for a dedication of a Memorial. About an hour of speakers and then the unveiling. Taking note of the President's State of the Union speech, I had a friend, shoot the audience with a second camera. My idea is to cut to the audience for reaction shots every now and then. If I'm careful I can just use the primary cameras audio track. I'm thinking this will not make the speeches so boring.

Anyway, while shooting yesterday, I was thinking how nice it would be to sync the cameras so that when the speaker told a joke or something I could cut to that camera during editing without spending a lot of time syncing audio/video.

I have heard that you can just keep both cameras running and then clap or set off a flash to align the two camera. I guess if both tracks are running you can simply cut between the two tracks.

Any advice appreciated.

Mark

[IM_Riktar]

What we do for our 2 camera projects that are of the time length you are describing is to have both cameras films a common object (Digital stopwatch) at the begining and end of the session. Once both tracks are loaded in the timeline it is a simple matter of lining up the images of the stop watch to assure perfect audio sync. Then we just cut out what we don't want and put in the approriate transistions.

We do use only one camera's audio for the sake of simplicity as well as clarity. In a "speaker" shoot like yours we will mic the podium and feed that directly into the camera filming the speaker.

Of course all this is pointless if you don't remember to keep both cameras running for the entire shoot.

[Dr Mordrid]

1. I've been hostile to non-Intel systems based on the older VIA chipsets that had poor memory and pipeline performance. Current ones for the XP's seem to be much better.

2. <mantra> 64 bit...faster than s**t...64 bit....faster than s**t.... keep repeating....

3. with them AMD gets the full SSE2 instruction set. This will be a very big deal in updated plugins and such, especially when used with software the realtime solutions coming in the next few quarters.

Dr. Mordrid