On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, Richard Ellis wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 08:45:45PM -0700, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> >
> > Is this for protection against a drive failure? DV (or MJPEG)
> > capture's data rate requirements are extremely modest (in the
> > ~3.5MB/s range - even a notebook drive can sustain that without
>
> On my system, running the newest DC10+ driver (0.9.something),
> capturing at 640x480 frame size, and a driver quality setting of 75,
640x480? Thought fullframe NTSC was 704x480 - or is the DC10
using square pixels instead of the Rec.601 10:11 pixels? DV's
weird - it gets an extra 8 pixels on each side for 720x480.
> results in a sustained average of 7.5MB/s of data being written to
> disk. I only see data rates in the sub 3.5MB/s range for 320x480
> frames, with a driver quality factor of 50, which gives about
> 2.5MB/s.
>
Ah, that's what I was curious about - thanks for the info!
I was under the impression that the MJPEG cards had similar
data rates/compression as DV did - and that's only 25Mb/s
(~3.5MB/s) for full quality (no choice in the matter ;)).
> Capturing full frame (well, a DC10+'s idea of full frame) and at a
> driver quality setting of 100 results in pretty much dead on a
> sustained average of 10-11MB/s of disk write bandwidth.
Yikes - and yes, I can see using a raid-0 setup for that.
Back when I was messing around with the Bt878 based capture
setup the fullframe IYUV (4:2:0) rate was around 12-13MB/s.
3 spliced 10k SCSI drives could handle it but it was a nuisance
(and the quality was adequate at best). DV's so much more
convenient :)
Thanks for the info.
Steven Schultz
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Mjpeg-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
