[vico]

postman,

we use a resolution of 320x240, color set to millions, maybe this sound as too low bandwith/resolution but indeed is very usable, we use it to sync film sound (fx/dialogs, etc) and it is ok, as for the limit size i don't really know, our QT movies are about 1 MB in size. I am not aware of any problem with QT4.0x and the miro dc30+, also we always use the in-built data compression in the miro card.

As far as my experience goes you have to be aware of the fact that you 'll have to capture at least 10% more of the source material if your session is going to be with a sample rate of 48KHz (a protools known bug, up to now), all my experience has been at 29.97 ndf. The interpret footage command takes virtually nothing if you are coming from a 29.92 video image to a 29.97 "interpreted" frame rate. also no extra disk space.

Also it is mandatory that the movie window does NOT show the movie; you accomplish that moving the window to the bottom left (or right) of the screen, and, if the machine is old/slow that the movie track is hidden, you only need it there while syncing it to the PT time code rule; something that with moderate practice takes you about one minute, using the identity mark command.

now, for the usability of the 7600 and scrubing i'll tell you this: i remember when using PTd24 4.3.1 and system 8.6 it was completley useful, now (we recently moved things to PT5.0 and MacOS 9.0) i'd say it will depend on: the amount of zooming, the number of colors (i just moved the mac screen colors to 256), i just tested it and aaaarrrrggghhh yes there's some delay in the image, now if the options would be owrking with a vtr or with this set up, a million times i would prefer this, because i think i can get a zooming level pre-set which won't lie, and if i want to check it in real time i don't have to wait for the elecgtro-mechanical elements to spot-lock up.

greetings.

vico
sonido mambo
mexico