The Blackmagic Ultrascope

	The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 10, 2009 at 2:55:05 am Yes, it's as revolutionary as you can imagine. For under $700, you get a scope that does everything you would want a Leader LV7700 to do for a tiny fraction of the price. There is no "education factor" - it just comes on and works. The resolution is amazing. The test unit I built used an old Apple 23" Cinema display (with DVI to ADC adaptor). This is nothing like the Magni rasterizers from years ago - the resolution is amazing. The accuracy is fantastic. On a 23" display (and 24" display) your images are the same size for each scope (waveform monitor, vectorscope, audio meters, picture monitor) that you would get from a Tektronix 5" CRT or LCD display. The only hassle is selecting a graphics card for your cheapo PC that will work with the Ultrascope, but it is well worth the aggrivation, as there is NOTHING on the market that can compete with this product - certainly not for the price (even on ebay). I have no idea of how Harris will continue to sell the VTM-2400. I have no idea of how Leader will continue to sell the LV7700. I have no idea of how Tektronix will continue to sell the WVR-5000. Every facility, every manufacturer will own this product. It's just too cheap, and too good. Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Margus Voll on Aug 10, 2009 at 6:55:55 am Hi Bob. It is simple, they just have to drop price or go under. I wonder what machine did you use for scope ? In ideal i would go with really small and passive cooled machine. -- Margus http://iconstudios.eu Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 10, 2009 at 12:31:49 pm Margus writes - I wonder what machine did you use for scope ? In ideal i would go with really small and passive cooled machine. REPLY - I used for this test a HP xw8400, which was the computer for an old AVID system. This PC is too expensive for someone building a new system. I intend to use the low end HP Z400 workstation with one of the suggested ATI cards. I used an ATI 4650 for this test system, and it worked well. The NVidia card that was used with the original AVID (an expensive one !) DID NOT WORK. You must have a PC with a PCI-e slot for the Ultrascope, and you must have one of the recommended graphics cards from the Blackmagic website for this to work. A complete new system, with HP Z400, ATI graphics card, 24" cheap LCD monitor and Ultrascope will cost under $2000 US complete for a new system. Not bad, compared to $7000 - $12,000 for anything else. bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by nick hasson on Aug 10, 2009 at 8:58:56 pm Mine will show up tomorrow. I have my fingers crossed that the system I have will work with it. Planing on using my HP xw4600 2.53GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Geforce 9400GT Graphics Card, PCI Express, 1GB Vista Ultimate 64 4 GB of Ram. Nick Hasson Editor/coloirist www.niceedits.com Smoke/FCP/Apple Color. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 10, 2009 at 11:15:57 pm Nick, the xw4600 is the perfect computer for the Ultrascope (too bad HP pulled the plug on it for the more expensive Z400), but I would not have high hopes for the NVidia GEForce 9400GT that you own. If you get an Open GL error message, you will be spending $100 more on a new graphics card for your xw4600. If it DOES wind up working PLEASE PLEASE post back on this forum, stating that you got a Geforce 9400GT to work. Bob zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by nick hasson on Aug 11, 2009 at 2:22:52 am will do. Nick Hasson Editor/coloirist www.niceedits.com Smoke/FCP/Apple Color. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by nick hasson on Aug 11, 2009 at 2:28:00 am oh and there is a few xw4600 left at pc connection. Open box for 500 bucks. Nick Hasson Editor/coloirist www.niceedits.com Smoke/FCP/Apple Color. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 11, 2009 at 3:36:41 am I know. The xw4600 was perfect for this application. Great "approved" computer, at a cheap price. I think the Z400 will drop in price soon (they always do - it's still too new). The HP workstation series is what everyone from Blackmagic to AJA to AVID to Adobe specify - so this is why I always stick with this series (and they have a 3 year warantee which they actually honor). Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 11, 2009 at 9:33:33 pm it's ok 1920x1080 is 1920x1200 (computer monitors are not 1080 resolution they are 1920x1200, so I don't know what specs you are looking at). the cheapos work just fine. We ARE talking about COMPUTER MONITORS and not TV monitors (like a HD TV at WalMart that shows 1920x1080 - this is not a computer monitor, and will not work with your Ultrascope). Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:43:34 pm I don't know exactly what your feeds are. The way to see true "in phase" and "out of phase" is to use audio tone. Play back two channels of tone, and you will get the single vertical line. As you play active audio, you will see an "oval" shape, but in the vertical position. If you reverse the phase of one signal (which is done in analog land by reversing the black and red wires of your audio cable), you get "out of phase" audio with one channel. A 180 degree out of phase signal (like tone) will completely cancel out, and you hear nothing. I can't answer what is going on with your audio. You can't "see" problems on web forums. Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:44:31 pm yes, Blackmagic wants you to use the SPECIFIED gear - cheap as it may be, you just can't use old crap you have lying around. Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:38:49 pm I ASSUME that this will work. In my current opinion, the best LCD computer is still the Dell 2408WFP, which is full 1920x1200, but I ASSUME that this monitor will work. Best Buy takes stuff back with no question, so try it. BUT make sure you have an APPROVED graphics card. Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:48:16 pm Chris writes - On a different note, I was able to borrow an Apple 23" Cinema display. It is 1929x1200 but it jitters vertically whenever I move the mouse. I presume you don't have this issue, Bob? REPLY - I don't know what graphics card you are using, but if you are not using one of the EXACT graphics cards that Blackmagic is specifying, you will have trouble. I suffered thru this with "good expensive NVidia" graphics cards that did not work at all when I got started. If you follow Blackmagic's instructions on what card to use, it will work, and yes, I am using an old 23" Cinema with an ADC connector and DVI to ADC converter. Without further information, I am going to blame your graphics card. If you get a graphics card for this application (even one that Blackmagic recommends) - these just don't work - you have to install the driver software, and reboot your PC. Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by nick hasson on Aug 12, 2009 at 4:50:01 am So I got everything working perfect. No Hassles, installed the drivers and it works great. Here is the setup. $680 Ultra Scope $509 HP xw4600 2.53GHz Intel Core 2 Duo $55 Geforce 9400GT Graphics Card, PCI Express, 1GB $350 Samsung 24'' LCD 1920x1200. Vista Ultimate 64 2 GB of Ram. Buying 2gb more. But 2GB works just fine. 1594 Total Nick Hasson Editor/coloirist www.niceedits.com Smoke/FCP/Apple Color. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 12, 2009 at 9:36:08 pm Nick - this is a great post. It shows everyone exactly what the bottom line cost is, for putting together a system to use the Ultrascope. Thanks for breaking it down like this ! Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by nick hasson on Aug 13, 2009 at 2:03:43 am My sources are 23.98 1920x1080 video and 59.94 1920x1080 video. I do notice a small lag on 59.94. Maybe a frame or two. But thats livable for me. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by nick hasson on Aug 13, 2009 at 7:22:52 am For 23.98 it works perfect. And in 59.94 it is great. You can barely notice the lag. It's maybe a frame. Very minor. It could also be i have 2GB of ram. I have 4GB coming, so i'll let everyone know what I find out. Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Bob Zelin on Aug 13, 2009 at 12:49:27 pm Hi - I will respond to the general questions first, and then to Craigs long post - 1) when you ask questions like "well, what about this computer - will it work" ? The key answer is ALWAYS the graphics card, not the computer. If you don't have the right graphics card, the Ultrascope WILL NOT WORK. When you ask questions like "but I found this really slim model from HP - will that work" - the answer is YOU TRY IT, and you tell us if it works, becuase I have suffered thru many HI END graphics card (that were AVID approved NVidia cards) and they DID NOT WORK with the Ultrascope. Get the right APPROVED graphics card (as you can see on the Blackmagic website) and you will have no problems. 2) the Ultrascope is an inexpensive HD-SDI/SD-SDI scope. It is designed as a general purpose waveform monitor/vectorscope. It does not offer error logging functions like $12,000 scopes, but neither do entry level HD-SDI scopes from Harris, Leader, Hamlet and Tektronix, all costing over $6000 - $7000. Response to Craig below - Craig writes - I realize this is a new product however, it simply cannot be compared to a Tektronix rasterizer, not yet. The way I can customize a WVR7100 almost reaches the infinite. REPLY - Compare the Ultrascope to the Tek WVR5000, which is an "entry level" HD-SDI scope from Tektronix, not the expensive WVR7100. The Ultrascope blows the doors off the WVR5000 (which costs over $6000, and won't let you display a waveform and vector on the same display at the same time). Craig writes - In my predominate job as a live tv multi-camera video operator (I am also a camera DIT and post colorist with FCP, Color and I am daVinci trained), with the Tektronix patented diamond trace, I can line up 5 to 20 cameras in my shows in no time what so ever. With the Tektronix rasterizers I can also view YRGB as well as an expanded vectorscope with the diamond display. Reply - I have been doing post production installations since 1978, and I have NEVER EVER actually seen anyone use the Tek Diamond or Lightning displays EVER. I fully understand what they do, and I commend you for learning how to use them correctly. To this day, 90% of the people I deal with still REFUSE to look at a parade mode display on a waveform monitor, and switch it to Y only. Videotek was wise to make a simulated "composite display" on the original HD scopes, and now Blackmagic "forces you" to have both parade mode and "composite mode" on the display monitor. It's great that you have learned to use these wonderful features developed by Tektronix, but you are probably one of 100 guys in the US that actually use them - even Tek owners. Craig writes - As of now there is a horrendous waste of screen real estate with Ultrascope. I don't want a 24 inch widescreen monitor for scopes, I've spent 20 years of live tv experience looking at crt scopes and they are 5 inches big and I can read them very very well. I want YRGB and I want and an expanded vectorscope, all the time on a 12 inch display. I want a customizable display so when I do work with audio, I can see those meters as well REPLY - this is a main feature request for me as well. 100% of my clients with machine rooms would put an Ultrascope rig in their machine room racks, but it's kind of hard to fit a 22 - 24" LCD in a 19" rack. I have tried smaller LCD monitors, and it's bizarre what happens. You would ASSUME that the image would just shrink down (scale down) in size, but it crops the image, and as you use your mouse to move over, the other displays come into view. You are correct - a 12, 15 or 17" display that fits into a rack is critical for many potential users, and the ability to select YPbPr parade and Vectorscope only (and hide the other displays) is a very important feature, that hopefully can be implemented in future firmware releases. Great feedback. Bob Zelin Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Marco Solorio on Aug 14, 2009 at 7:29:24 am Thanks to everyone's posts on this thread as it answered a few questions we had. We just received our UltraScope from UPS today and I have a couple of questions before settling on a dedicated computer to install the card and haven't found the answers anywhere. Firstly, why does Windows Vista Ultimate need to be installed instead of, say, Vista Home? As mentioned, this will be a dedicated computer solely for UltraScope. No other apps or PCIe cards will be installed in it, nor will it even live on our network. It'll run one app, UltraScope, and that's it. No BS anti-virus, email, nothing. Requirements say an Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.5GHz or more. What would an equivalent Dual Xeon be? Just thinking of a cost-saving alternative as there are some deals on used dual Xeon systems out there. Would really like to get a rackmount computer since this will be installed in the machine room... any recommends that can hold any of the approved PCIe graphics cards AND the UltraScope card itself? The one area we wont skimp is the PCIe graphics card as I clearly understand this is the heart of full frame-rate refresh. Lastly, the one major "fault" I see with the UltraScope is that I can't control it via a 1RU unit at my edit desk like my current rasterizers. What would be an AWESOME companion to the UlatrScope would be a 1RU remote control interface that can connect via USB or Ethernet for long runs to the machine room (like we're doing). Looking forward to getting this installed. Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Marco Solorio on Aug 14, 2009 at 6:23:12 pm Thanks for the confirmation, Derrick. I don't see why the "Home" version wouldn't work. Curious to know why it's listed as a recommend on the website. Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index

	Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope by Simon Blackledge on Aug 20, 2009 at 10:43:08 pm Loving the UltraScopes. My spec Antec Sonata Case ,Asus P5QProTurbo ,INTEL CPU CORE 2 DUO 2.8 .BFG 9800GT ,Corsair 4GB TWINX XMS2 6400 DDR2. DESKSTAR 500gig. £420 Dell monitor was spare.. :) PC took me 3 hours to build.. (never built one on my own before) 1 hour windows updates 2 mins install Scopes card 4 mins software install Done. No hiccups, nadda. (well missed the lan driver lol ) I now own scopes that do what I need and don't have to rent anymore and on top i have a machine I can use to render in the evenings. The monitor is run as a 2nd screen for the mac when required. Si Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index