FORUMS: list search recent posts

The Blackmagic Ultrascope

COW Forums : Blackmagic Design

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bob Zelin
The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

Margus Voll
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index


Derrick Abeyta
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 10, 2009 at 4:30:30 pm

I got my Ultrascope up and running yesterday. I had a little trouble finding a PC that met all the listed requirements. I ended up getting a Velocity Micro computer that had the recommended Intel Core 2 processor and Nvidia 9800GT graphics card.

Everything seems to be working great. I am using a 1920x1200 24" monitor and the screen resolution is pretty awesome. I spent $2,000 on the entire setup. A very nice addition to the edit suite!



Return to posts index

nick hasson
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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
http://www.niceedits.com
Smoke/FCP/Apple Color.


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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





Return to posts index


nick hasson
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 11, 2009 at 2:22:52 am

will do.

Nick Hasson
Editor/coloirist
http://www.niceedits.com
Smoke/FCP/Apple Color.


Return to posts index

nick hasson
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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
http://www.niceedits.com
Smoke/FCP/Apple Color.


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index


Chris Paul
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 11, 2009 at 8:33:56 pm

I am able to find several 24" monitors locally but they are 1920x1080 instead of 1920x1200. Does anyone know if that is OK? (Blackmagic specifies 1920x1200 so I have my doubts). I can always order one to spec but I like to buy locally when I can.

Chris Paul
POV


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

Derrick Abeyta
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 11, 2009 at 9:45:48 pm

I tried a 1280x1024 monitor just to see if it would work and the application wouldn't start. The message said that an 1920x1200 monitor was required and then the program closed out.






Return to posts index


Derrick Abeyta
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 11, 2009 at 10:01:10 pm

I am having an issue understanding and or viewing out of phase audio on the audio scope.

I have a interview clip that has audio on ch1 lav and ch2 boom. If you pan them both together mid you can hear everything get thin and echoey (classic out of phase sound) but the Ultrascope still shows a vertical in phase line. Shouldn't it be reading differently on the scope? I can clearly hear that the audio is out of phase.

I'm not trying to fix my audio, I already know how to do this and I wouldn't normally mix a lav and a boom together, I'm just trying to understand how the Ultrascope displays bad audio. The manual states it should show up as a horizontal line. Any thoughts??



Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

Derrick Abeyta
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 12, 2009 at 4:00:13 pm

[Bob Zelin] "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.
"


Thanks for the help Bob,

Let me clarify. I was going through the new Ultrascsope testing the different modes of the scope. I wanted to see how an out of phase clip would look like in the Ultrascope. I knew I had a bad interview clip on HDCAM from a project from a few weeks ago. The clip was mistakenly recorded out of phase (which is not uncommon when using two mics to record an interview). So I wanted to test just a source clip on the scope.

My system isn't out of phase and the test tone plays correctly on the scope, I capture HDCAM via HDSDI to an Avid Symphony DX and a HDSDI out of Avid to the Ultrascope. Everything works great.

I think I figured out where I went wrong in reading the bad audio clip on the scope though. When I originally played the clip I had panned both channels mid and they displayed a vertical straight line showing "in phase" on the scope (it sounded compressed tinny though). But when I panned the channels back to their original left right position the scope showed a horizontal oval which means it's out of phase. So fortunately the scope seems to be working as advertised.

Thanks again I appreciate the tips!



Return to posts index


Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

Chris Paul
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 11, 2009 at 10:55:03 pm

This is the kind of 1920x1080 monitor that I am seeing:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9047453&type=product&id=12180...

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?

Chris Paul
POV


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

nick hasson
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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
http://www.niceedits.com
Smoke/FCP/Apple Color.


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

Bruce Colgate
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Oct 28, 2009 at 1:22:06 am

Just in case anyone else needs info (I searched this thread recently to see what others were doing), here is a combo that is working well for us:

Intel BOXDG45ID LGA 775 Intel G45 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 Wolfdale 2.8GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor
EVGA 512-P3-N871-AR GeForce 9800 GTX+ 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0
CORSAIR 4GB (2 x 2GB)
Pioneer DVD drive (for installing)
Generic Sata HDD
XP

The case was a recycled rackmount computer we gutted. All from Newegg.com, total cost (not including XP, HDD or case) was about $520.

No dropped frames, looks great. We also use the same box as the server for BMD's Videohub. I think the 9800 was key.


Monitor we got from B&H - an ASUS 25" 1920x1200 for under $290 (Model number was something like 466H).

Ultrascope did NOT the smaller monitor (1650 x something) we tried (just because we could). Wouldn't even launch.

Hope this helps another user.

- Bruce Colgate


Return to posts index

Chris Paul
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 12, 2009 at 9:43:05 pm

I just installed my UltraScope into a Gateway DX-4300. The Gateway sells for $750 with 8 gigs of RAM and a Radeon HD4650 pre-installed. My leftover Apple 23" Cinema display jitters when using the mouse with other programs but is rock solid when running UltraScope- which is the whole point. I didn't buy the computer for playing games- I bought it to run amazing scopes at a fraction of what it would have cost to buy hardware scopes.

If someone needed to buy a computer for UltraScope and didn't want to install a different video card this one works.

Chris Paul
POV


Return to posts index

Richard Dee
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 12, 2009 at 10:52:22 pm

I am still interested in finding a small form factor PC that would take this card.

Is the card low profile?


The HP dc9700 ultra slim takes 1 mini pcie. I wonder if this would work?

The dc9700 small form factor takes 4 low profile pcie cards.


Here is a link to the series of PCs.

http://www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/12454-12454-64287-321860-3328898.htm...'>http://h10010.http://www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/12454-12454-64287-321860-3328898.htm...




Return to posts index

Leo Baker
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 12, 2009 at 11:01:31 pm

Hello,

Does the Blackmagic Ultrascope also provide Error Detection And Error Logging?

Thanks,

Leo


Return to posts index

Steve Harley
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 12, 2009 at 11:07:11 pm

I can relate to you wanting a SFF computer.
I'm toying with experimenting with a Shuttle Computer.
If I do -- I'll report back.


Return to posts index

Kristian Lam
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 12, 2009 at 11:49:43 pm

Hi Nick,

Thanks for posting your setup, it's really cool to see how low cost systems can be put together to run UltrasScope.

Are you monitoring HD or SD video? I'm surprised that the GeForce 9400GT is working fine for you. Although UltraScope will run with that particular card, I'm will not be expecting full frame rate performance when monitoring HD video at 1080i59.94 so it'll be interesting to know what kind of sources and frame rate you're monitoring.

regards

Kristian Lam
Blackmagic Design


Return to posts index

Leo Baker
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 12, 2009 at 11:57:16 pm

Hi Kristian,

What spec computer would you suggest for monitoring 1080i59.94 and 2k?

Thanks,

Leo


Return to posts index

Kristian Lam
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 13, 2009 at 12:12:30 am

Hi Leo,

UltraScope doesn't monitor 2K but for 1080i59.94, you would want a graphics card that we have verified on our list here:

http://blackmagic-design.com/support/detail.asp?techID=195



regards

Kristian Lam
Blackmagic Design


Return to posts index

Leo Baker
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 13, 2009 at 12:40:13 am

Hi Kristian,

Thanks, so the system specs like the cpu, and motherboard what do you suggest for monitoring the 1080i59.94 as well as the card yu suggest and 24" monitor?

Thanks,

Leo :D


Return to posts index

nick hasson
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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.


Return to posts index

Steve Harley
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 13, 2009 at 4:24:14 am

Nick,

Do you think that lag is a fundamental performance characteristic -- or a function of your host processor and graphics adapter?


Return to posts index

Kristian Lam
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 13, 2009 at 6:12:17 am

Hi Steve,

This is a result of using a graphics card that is underpowered.

regards

Kristian Lam
Blackmagic Design


Return to posts index

Kristian Lam
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 13, 2009 at 4:53:09 am

Hi Nick,

Thanks and that's what I would expect from your setup as well. Basically, the 9400GT is just on the threshold of the performance required by UltrasScope and what you're noticing with 1080i59.94 is a result of that. If you were to bump your graphics card up a notch to the 9600GT, this will go away.

regards

Kristian Lam
Blackmagic Design


Return to posts index

nick hasson
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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.


Return to posts index

Michael McGlone
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Feb 10, 2010 at 9:11:00 pm

Hi Bob

I know I should really be contacting BMD but I purchased a Gainward NVIDIA 9800 GT PysX (whatever that is), to use with the BMD UltraScope. Unfortunately I was getting GL errors using the latest drivers with Win 7 on a HP XW9300 (this may be an issue) and Dell Precession 380. Any clues would be appreciated - what are people recommending? I bought the NVIDIA because it was listed by BMD but perhaps its not a standard version, I tend to use macs these days so not familiar with the latest pc trends. The NVIDIA died after swapping between workstations and supplier has offered to swap it out for a replacement or alternative. Regards Mike


Return to posts index

Deborah Liekkio
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 23, 2009 at 12:10:29 am

I bought the velocity micro computer as well put the ultrascope hardware in, downloaded the software and get an error message "no ultrascope hardware detected". I tried reseating the card with no luck. I'm wondering if I got a bad piece of hardware? Did you have any issue's at all getting the ultrascope to run? Are you running vista home edition?
Thanks,
Debbie



Return to posts index

Marek Staszewski
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Jul 26, 2010 at 10:35:24 pm

Hi!

Did you find a solution for your problem?
I've assembled new computer for my Ultrascope, and I have this same message:
"No ultrascope hardware detected" after Ultrascope software instalation.

My configuration is:
Intel Core2 Duo 3GHz BOX
Kingston DDR2 2x 2GB 800MHz CL5
desktop Antec NSK2480-EC HTPC (380W)
Radeon 4670 Asus 512MB DVI & HDMI (PCI-E)
Intel DG45ID BOX
WD Caviar Blue 250 GB WD2500AAJS 8MB cache Serial ATA-II
Microsoft Windows 7 OEM 64Bit PL downgraded to Vista Business 64Bit PL with all updates
Monitor Benq 24" 1920x1200.

Regards,

Marek Staszewski
ATM SYSTEM Sp. z o.o.
Bielany Wrocławskie


Return to posts index

Deborah Liekkio
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Jul 26, 2010 at 11:08:35 pm

Hi Marek,
After 2 ultra scopes and 2 computers I finally gave up, and returned it all. I spoke with tech support several times and they were unable to solve the problem. it was incredibly frustrating, so I went ahead and plunked down the 5 grand for a tektronix HD scope.

Good luck with yours.
Deborah Liekkio
What If pictures.


Return to posts index

Craig Sommerer
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 13, 2009 at 12:48:41 am

Bob,

Thanks for this post and also a big thank you to Nick for listing exactly what is needed. I've been playing email tag with BM tech support trying to find out exactly what was needed hardware wise, and it's not to be taken lightly. Upon even a cursory inspection, the ability to analyze full frame hdsdi is nothing to sneer at and BM's hardware suggestions need to be taken literally.

I've seen Ultrascope at NAB and I do hope it succeeds and it does make Leader, Tektronix and especially Harris take notice - I also agree with you that Harris has ruined every company they've bought. I've installed and used dozens of Videotek sdsdi scopes in the past, as well as Videotek throw down d/a's and signal generators and they used to be rock solid products.

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. 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. I also have picture displayed as confidence as many times, if I run into those blasted TV Logic monitors in a facility, they just decide to lose the router feed - poof! - for no reason.

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.

I have high hopes for Ultrascope and I'll most likely be installing in my house this winter.

Thanks again to Bob and Nick.






Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

Craig Sommerer
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 13, 2009 at 2:59:38 pm

The WVR5000 is a huge disappointment to put it mildly and you are correct. The Leader 7700 is a very fine product with a very fine price and I also agree with you about Harris products; waste of time and money.

As stated, I have very high hopes for Ultrascope and I want to see a flexible display as well as a small form factor pc to install it on.


Return to posts index

Michael Belanger
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Jun 10, 2010 at 11:59:36 pm

WOndering what Bob Zelin thinks about the Pocket UltraScope.. I know it is not out yet but surely he has an OPINION for sure.. What are your thoughts on the USB 3 connection?

Mike Belanger
http://www.dandelionediting.com



Return to posts index

Marco Solorio
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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



Return to posts index

Derrick Abeyta
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Aug 14, 2009 at 4:39:28 pm

I'm using Vista Home Premium with Ultrascope with no problems.

Here's my full specs:

Velocity Micro 2.8ghz Intel Core 2 Quad processor Q9550
8 gigs Ram
Vista Home Premium 64bit
Nvidia 9800GT
Samsung 24" 2443BWX




Return to posts index

Marco Solorio
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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



Return to posts index

Simon Blackledge
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
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




Return to posts index

David Glasgal
Re: The Blackmagic Ultrascope
on Dec 16, 2009 at 2:41:25 am

HI Bob,

1st- great hair.
2nd- thanks so much for reaching out and helping clarify all the details of the Blackmagic product line.

Can you tell me if this is possible?

I want to convert the Ultrascope video output coming out of the DVI into an HD-SDI signal and feed it into my Blackmagic Videohub so I can send it to any broadcast monitor in my facility. That way people can route signal into the Ultrascope from any bay and send the scopes to any bay. Thanks.

David


Return to posts index

Alex Geis
System Specs
on Mar 1, 2010 at 9:42:35 pm

This looks like the place for CPU spec questions for the Ultrascope, since I haven't been able to get too much detail for Blackmagic directly. Simple question for you guys:

After shopping around and looking at the prospect of building a case, etc... I found the Z400 has liquid cooling (as the most important thing here is that the machine is as quiet as can be under the desk), so I'm fairly sold on that model. Issue is: Some of the specs on the customize page don't line up with the ultrascope req's. So:

- What Xeon speed should I get, since it only has mentioned what core2/ix speeds are recommended
- What's the minimum graphics card I should pop into this beast... also, which would probably be the quietest - ie, no ridiculous fan
- Config mentions it uses a x58 express, although the ultrascope page says to stay away from x58?

Thanks guys,
-Alex


Return to posts index

Jay Moffat
Re: System Specs
on Sep 20, 2010 at 9:20:42 pm

Wondering if anyone has been able to build a Micro-Atx spec ultrascope...? I have one of those ProEdit desks where a flat micro-atx case would slip in nicely into a free slot I have... I understand that Black Magic had one running at NAB off a Shuttle PC, but I can't find a spec in their barebones models which matches the Ultrascope spec, also wondered how they fit the graphics card into one of those small enclosures?

You can tell I know nothing very little windows PCs..

J


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]