did any computers existed for video editing in 70,80,90?? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: aqarwaen
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 01:18:42 pm
content: like how movies where made in 70,80,90?was there made any specially designed computers,what where used to edit movies and do other that kind stuff??how much theys kind computers costed approx??

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 02:00:20 pm
content: Not so much for movies, which were typically shot on film and edited with a film splicer and splicing tape, but by the 80's TV was being somewhat computerised in some areas.The Amega had an optional genlock box that made it a popular tool at the low end for overlays and character generation for example, and there was custom hardware from folk like Quantel, Snell & Wilcox and Probel for graphics overlays and the like (This all pre dates SDI digital video, so everything was component).By the mid 90's hard drive capacity had come on sufficiently to make non linear a seriously practical proposition with custom hardware, again Probel (Video playout servers) and Quantel (Paintbox and the like), big money but it was a workflow revolution for TV, and EVS became a thing, standard def SDI was deployed).On the movies side obviously the off line CGI and the like happened first but things really took off once digital imaging sensors got good enough for cinema resolutions (At least 2k pixels wide), then of course the digital cinema thing happened....Regards, Dan.

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 02:22:54 pm
content: Quote from: dmills on December 14, 2016, 02:00:20 pmNow that takes me back. We had one of those at school. It was stable enough to allow a luma-key over a VHS replay without using a timebase corrector. Prior to that we had to run everything to an old Ampex Quad to get a stable enough playback to key over for credits or graphics.

author: macboy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 02:26:41 pm
content: By video editing do you mean special effects or basic editing? Basic editing and effects like titles and other graphic overlays for broadcast was done on computers since the 70's probably.For CGI effects, examples off the top of my head:Dire Straits' "Money for Nothing" video was entirely CGI in 1985, but the graphics were cartoon-ish.Terminator 2, "T2", was one of the first movies to prominently feature "realistic" CGI graphics. The liquid-metal terminator was probably the first computer generated on-screen character in a major film. The movie was release in 1991 so the work would have been done between the late 80's to then.Jurassic Park came in 1993 and featured even more use of CGI, with all dinosaurs fully CGI generated.Not surprisingly, Lucasfilm's Industrial Light & Magic did the CGI for both T2 and Jurassic Park. You could research what computer hardware and software they used over the years to learn more.In 1995 I had a Apple PowerMac 8500 (~$7000 USD) which could do video editting. If equipped a very fast hard drive (10k RPM Ultra SCSI, costing >$1k for 4.5 GB!) it could capture half VGA resolution (320 wide x 480 tall) video. But with minimal real-time compression and only ~4 GB to work with, I was limited to just a few minutes at a time until rendered. I had a version of Adobe Premiere back than that would make you laugh/cry if you are only familiar with modern video editing suites. That was a great computer at the time, it was 120 MHz but I overclocked it to 168 MHz ... a real screamer (nothing intel based could touch it). You could, technically, install 1 GB of RAM (8 x 128 MB) but that would have cost as much as a luxury car; I added 16 MB (not GB, MB) to mine for $550 USD! It was "so fast" that it could preview most Photoshop filters in almost real time, and most of them only took a couple minutes to complete rather than an entire coffee break. That's what we had back then. Now I have a dual XEON with 16 cores at 3.3-3.8 GHz, and 64 GB of memory and it cost me about <$1k to put together.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 02:36:11 pm
content: Amiga Video Toaster.

author: albert22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 02:45:03 pm
content: I still have a Pinnacle DC10plus board that I used to do NLE back in the 90s. Ii used a PIII 700Mhz with the fastest IDE disks I could got at the moment. That came bundled with Adobe Premiere v5. I dont remember if it was W95 or W98,

author: Ian.M
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 02:48:37 pm
content: By the late '90's the capability was starting to trickle down to the consumer market. Matrox released a graphics card that supported PAL and NTSC capture and rendering and my boss wished to compare its performance with studio equipment of that era, so we built up a fast Pentium II box with maxed out RAM, an IDE drive for the Win98 OS and a SCSI (fast + wide) RAID-0 array for the video files. IIRC it required an overnight run to transcode half an hour of PAL broardcast video to NTSC with acceptable quality.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 04:17:24 pm
content: The first computer to do film editing was probably the Lucasfilm Edit Droid, which was used in the early 1980s. After that, from 1990 onward the biggest vendor was Avid. These systems used video proxies of the film elements, scanned using special equipment. When editing was completed, the output was a text file called an EDL (edit decision list). The negative elements could then be conformed to the EDL by a specialist negative cutter (a credit you still see on some movies), and projection prints struck and distributed.Before Avid took over, films were edited manually using mechanical machines such as Steenbecks.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 04:27:28 pm
content: One of the earliest turn-key systems was the Casablanca from MacroSystems. this was a dedicated machine with its own operating system and had hardware mpeg encoders/decoders. some versions could handle 4 camera streams , had full NLE capability and could encode DVD quality video in realtime.other hardware makers : Newtek , Dazzle, Pinnacle , matrox , Avid , Canopus

author: R_Gtx
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 05:08:59 pm
content: Two of the earliest uses of "computer" use in video production & editing were audio/video synchronisation following the introduction of SMPTE timecode in the late 1960s, and the use of programmable lighting consoles, such as theRank Q-Filein the early 1970s.The logic boards of the latter were built using discrete transistor circuitry, not a single IC was used, double sided pcbs with wire pin throughs, non of that pth stuff. These boards were very susceptible to dry joints, and if a lighting channel "stuck" there was an art to hitting the bays, not too hard, for that would be ineffective, and a little too hard, you would get the gentle tinkling sound of countless pin throughs falling through the racks.Another early use of Computer technology was character generation, introduced in the late 1960s such as theBBC Anchor system.

author: daqq
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 05:21:37 pm
content: Not exactly video, but related:

author: R_Gtx
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 05:54:44 pm
content: Digital Video Effects (going beyond simple linear wipes & fades) were being developed during the late 1970s, but after the introduction of monolithic 8-bit video speed flash adcs such as the TRW TDC1007J, their use became quite widespread, (in my opinion, these effects, being novel, were overused on many productions, especially music videos and sit-coms).One of the earliest, the NEC DVE, had the most ingenious (devilish?) board-motherboard interconnect system, the connectors required a special tool to literally unzip the contacts, and as with zips prone to jamming, necessitating the complete disassembly of the device to release a single board.

author: Dubbie
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 05:59:52 pm
content: When I started in the late 90's, I was doing film effects on an SGI machine. I remember I could fit 12 frames in RAM to play back at full resolution!Sent from my phone using Tapatalk

author: jonovid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 06:22:14 pm
content: video editing back in the day, 1980s was VCR to VCR. video cassette recorder to video cassette recorder. VHS or betamax. keeping the analog video in synchronization was key to it.so switching video was like, two passenger trains on parallel tracks, side by side going in the same direction. then jumping door to door at 100mph.known as the synchronization window.or finding the gap. would have the master tape 1 and master tape 2 editing mix to the sub-master tape. white level video overlay was with the same true & trusted 4066 Qd Bilateral Switch. so video editing was the basic Switch, or the basic fade to black then Switch.did not use wipes as did make the video look tacky or cheesy.text was white level threshold FX from a BW black & white camera with video input synchronization' the video editing electronics was for the must part DIY analog. with some digital logic Switching.in the 1980s with no internet to help you . so its DIY home brew analog video electronics.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 07:54:00 pm
content: Quote from: jonovid on December 14, 2016, 06:22:14 pmYou forget the PAL sequence, odd then even field, with colour burst phase reversal on each run of the odd or even field, so as to get a non tearing switch, and to get the switch in the equalisation pulses right so there would not be tearing of the playback image till the timebase on the VCR got back in lock.Got a Panasonic semi pro deck, which has this built in in the deck, and have the recorders as well and the player that was used in the edit decks. Yes, Panasonic made a video recorder, it did not have any way to play back the recorded tape on the machine, unless you put it in a service mode by plugging in a cable to connect the output of the chipset to a BNC socket. But then again a recorder will operate fine with badly worn heads, it is more worried about head gap on playback, as recording depends on the trailing edge of the head tip, while playback needs the gap to prevent ringing and poor transitions on edges. Could record Macrovision with supreme fidelity as well, with no problems at all, unlike the consumer decks which did not have a switch to turn off the video AGC.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 07:56:32 pm
content: Quote from: R_Gtx on December 14, 2016, 05:54:44 pmThe Quantel Paintbox pioneered the digital video effects business, and they used pipelined ADCs and DACs which they made themselves. They used those ADCs and DACs for their pioneering digital standards converters before the Paintbox.

author: Yansi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 07:58:08 pm
content: Love this one from 1996

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 08:13:41 pm
content: Aaah, how the young think they know everything!I agree with some of the comments above, but try researching these names -CDL, Convergence, Ampex, EECO, CMX, Sony and others that started the video editing 'controller' business.Most of the later 'big names' referred to, grew from these original timeline controllers with RAM or disk based video storage technology. Some used laserdisc, or low-res proxy video (to conserve storage), then the operator conformed the full-res later as a matter of process.Edit Droid, Video Toaster and early Mac based systems derived and grew from the foundations developed (and patented) by these guys!Life was a lot simpler!

author: R_Gtx
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 08:30:39 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on December 14, 2016, 07:56:32 pmThe Quantel was the far superior device, and tended to be used in post-production, the NEC was a merely an extension of the vision mixer and was used at the time of recording. It was best not to view colour bars on a vectorscope after passing through the DVE! They didn't even come close to broadcast specifications, and it was colloquially referred to as the Digital Picture Mangler, hence its limited use to the aforesaid sit-coms and music videos.

author: jonovid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 10:31:36 pm
content: Quotetrue!yes switching video was a problem if you did not have pro equipment.here is some of the video equipment I had at the time. images off the web!3kg 6lbs Panasonic NV8400 camera with canon zoom lens10kg 22lbs Panasonic NV8400 VCR - camera color control box right side & TV tuner bottom right - camera power unit on tophad to make do with second hand video equipment, the 10kg 22lbs Panasonic NV8400 VCR & 3kg 6lbs NV8400 camera was going cheap at the time.also had a second hand betamax toploader VCR it was the size of suitcase

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 10:47:02 pm
content: Quote from: jonovid on December 14, 2016, 10:31:36 pmYou callthata knife...When I started, we had three Marconi Mk7 heads with very expensive Angenieux zoom lenses - I guess they weighed around 150kg each, plus the lead weighted pedestals... !I suppose that's not too bad - the studio recorders weighed around 500kg+, and the portable (record only) was maybe 30kg... !

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 10:59:48 pm
content: In the early days, the CGI was not generated in real time. The animators would manipulate a very basic wire frame model, in the early design process. All the complex rendering would them be done later, often taking hours to render a second of video.

author: R_Gtx
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 11:31:39 pm
content: Quote from: SL4P on December 14, 2016, 10:47:02 pmYup, the MK 7 sure was an unwieldy beast, when I started, depending on Studio it was either EMI 2001 (Angenieux lenses) or Link 110 (Varotal or Schneider lenses).The pedestals were pneumatic gas balanced, as the studio heated up during the day, the camera would tend to rise, and the small lead weights were added to the pedestal ring to counteract this tendency.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 11:37:56 pm
content: Quote from: R_Gtx on December 14, 2016, 05:08:59 pmaah yes -PERCUSSIVEMAINTENANCE alongside preventive and corrective

author: R_Gtx
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 11:52:53 pm
content: SL 4P, you didn't mention the weight of the G101 camera cables, used on both the Marconi MK7 and the EMI 2001.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2016, 11:56:39 pm
content: Quote from: R_Gtx on December 14, 2016, 11:52:53 pmIndeed - about 2-inches diameter, i can't remember the number of conductors!The end caps were treated like royalty so that no pins were ever damaged...A couple of guys - per camera - to wrangle the cable!Thank heaven when triax arrived!

author: Dubbie
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 12:03:04 am
content: Quote from: Hero999 on December 14, 2016, 10:59:48 pmI can assure you that it still works this way to this very day! our frames take about an hour each to render..Hopefully the quality is vastly better these days!R

author: R_Gtx
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 12:14:42 am
content: Quote from: SL4P on December 14, 2016, 11:56:39 pm101 pins, 31 or 31.75mm diameter cables.The TV36 cable for the Link 110s was a great intermediate step (13mm dia.)

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 01:03:41 am
content: Quote from: R_Gtx on December 15, 2016, 12:14:42 amYou need a holiday!

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 01:09:59 am
content: Remember in 80's played abit at a PC equipped with Truevision TARGA board, and the popular TGA files back in those days, that brings back nostalgic moment.

author: Alex Eisenhut
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 01:12:51 am
content: Depends what you mean by editing and video (or film), I suppose. Or computer...I mean, Ampex had the HS-100 for action replay video in the 1960s, it was used for sports because I guess the money was there.Then the next version wasAnd as for "CGI", the Scanimate was a real-time analog video manipulation computer.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ScanimateHere's an eye-popper from 1980The original Westworld movie had some pioneering stuff toohttp://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/how-michael-crichtons-westworld-pioneered-modern-special-effectsAnd TRON....I guess the answer is back then people cobbled together massive amounts of hardware "Ad-hoc" for a project and that was it.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foonly

author: Bicurico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 01:25:46 am
content: Commodore Amiga and Silicon Graphics.Regards,Vitor

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 03:10:54 am
content: Quote from: R_Gtx on December 15, 2016, 12:14:42 amI once terminated a TV-81 cable and did a perfect job. Except that I forgot to thread the 1-inch diameter cable through the connector shell and had to take everything apart and do it all over again.From a Norelco Philips LTK-33 camera with three 1-inch Plumbicon tubes.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 08:15:10 am
content: A lot of systems mentioned—used in TV studios—were only capable of "linear" editing (cutting from an A deck to a B deck, or between 3 cameras on a sitcom set, for example). This was adequate for TV programming, which was produced on a tight schedule, and very formulaic. But the OP asked about films, which can only be edited using "non-linear" techniques: there are many different takes of each shot, and the editor selects frames to achieve tempo and dramatic tension. This is called "montage" and was quite a bit more difficult to perform digitally.Many of the responses describe f/x systems; effects are a separate domain from editing. Apart from summer blockbusters, few films used visual f/x, and used it sparingly. On the contrary, the entire picture had to be edited. Computer generated imagery slowly advanced from the mid-1970s up to the 1990s, being used for more and longer shots in action pictures. But the awful Final Fantasy movies show how inadequate it remains when forced to render a whole film. For most of the '80s, CGI was more common in the titles before a film than in the feature itself.

author: dexters_lab
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 08:36:35 pm
content: having just been playing around with a Quantel Paintbox and learning about other quantel products there were options in the 1980s and 1990s, but they were eye wateringly expensive and available only to big broadcastersQuantel had non-linear editing in the 80s with the Henry and Harry machines coupled with the quantel paintbox.In later years (early 1990s) they had merged things into the Editbox, which was a Paintbox with big upgrades to allow non-linear editing. It was a 6U rack with 9 hard disks in as a base, then separate 'Dylan' disk arrays for more storage. Base cost was around £150,000I took apart an Editbox the other week, i need to decide if i should edit the video of the teardown, but i did take pics of all the cards... there was a lot:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/lots-of-silicon-broadcast-video-editing-1990sI posted hours of Editbox training videos up on youtube the other week if you want to know how they were used:

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2016, 10:21:58 pm
content: I have many fond memories of the Amiga Video Toaster. Also my beloved PowerMac 7500 from a bit later. (1995-96)

author: Alex Eisenhut
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2016, 02:15:12 am
content: Quote from: cdev on December 15, 2016, 10:21:58 pmI was never into video but I had an Amiga, and I too have great memories of the potential the Toaster represented for Amiga users. I liked the Newtek video with Ken Nordine narrating!Yeah....

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2016, 02:16:49 am
content: Oh My Gawd...I can't remember the number of hours spent on projects usingboththe HS-100 and Scanimate (with Russ Maehl) at VTC in Sydney AU in the late 70s and early 80ssigh, i'm getting old.

author: Alex Eisenhut
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2016, 02:18:57 am
content: Quote from: SL4P on December 16, 2016, 02:16:49 amSay, would you make a nice video about those experiences??

author: rx8pilot
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2016, 02:27:01 am
content: In 1993 I started editing on the first AVID systems. They were around $100k or so, had a massive stack of drives that added up to a handful of GB. The quality was only suitable for making editorial decisions. It generated an EDL (Edit Decision List) that we put into a CMX edit controller to do what is called on 'Online Conform'.The conform was done with tape machines, DVE (Digital Video Effects), a massive switcher, etc at a cost of around $1mil per edit bay. Amiga had no real traction in the pro arena.What a deal. Extremely expensive, complicated, slow, unreliable. Yet, somehow we had customers lined up to edit on the computer!

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2016, 02:34:11 am
content: The Video Toaster was an on-line, linear system. By 1994 NewTek had the Flyer, a compression card that could be used with the Toaster to make a non-linear editing system, but Commodore and the Amiga platform they relied on was dead.