|
|
Posted by Myraide on 09/26/60 11:38
Richard Crowley wrote:
> "AllisonWonderland" wrote ...
> > The problem that I'm trying to solve here is that when I try to use
> > Matrox
> > Media Tools, it tells me that it cannot control the 1394 devices. And
> > the
> > manual says that this is because the Device Manager has put them in
> > ImagingDevices, and MMT wants them in Audio/Video/Multimedia.
> >
> > Now I can still capture, and do all the stuff that Premiere does using
> > the
> > Generic 1394 mode, BUT there are all kinds of stuff (real-time
> > effects) that
> > the RT2500 makes available, with the precondition that it is done with
> > the
> > Matrox Video Tools, of which Matrox Media Tools is a part (this is all
> > the
> > "ProPack" that came with the RT2500).
>
> Sorry, this is where you need someone with first-hand
> working experience with the RT2500. I'll confess that
> this kind of thing is what got it the reputation for being
> "fiddly" and made dilettantes like me give up on it. I
> really don't see what this has to do with 1394 unless
> Matrox is somehow using 1394 internally for control
> of the various hardware functions. Bizzare, IMHO.
>
> Can we assume that you used a motherboard which
> was on Matrox's approved list? This is the kind of
> product that is VERY particular about its surroundings
> and will do weird things if it finds anything it doesn't
> like. ("finicky" as well as "fiddly") Newer generations
> of Matrox RT reputedly learned from these things and
> are better at playing with others, but lots of us moved
> on, having been burned once and twice shy.
>
> Have you tried any of the Matrox-specific forums, etc?
> There must be some die-hard users left even at this late
> date. Or you could ask this specific question in the
> rec.video.desktop newsgroup with a more suitable
> subject line (to let RT2500 people know what kind of
> question it is). Lots of people skim the various subject
> lines and automatically skip over the ones like this.
> (Hint: ALL CAPS is considered shouting and really
> annoys many people.)
hee hee....yeah james! ;) myraide
>
> Note that if you are going to ask the same question in
> more than one specifically-related newsgroups, it is
> better to cross-post the same message rather than post
> identical messages in several different newsgroups.
>
> > And you know something else... Much of the problems that I have
> > encountered
> > has come from this dual monitor setup. No video stuff on the second
> > monitor... Like I did a capture, and in the process of messing with
> > it, I
> > double clicked on the file name, and up came the "Windows Media
> > Player", and
> > started playing the .avi file. Well, I was delighted with that! BUT
> > when I
> > clicked on "full-screen" all the window frame graphics went away, and
> > the
> > image went "full screen", which with the dual monitors meant that the
> > left
> > side of the image was on the right side of the left monitor, and there
> > was
> > NOTHING on the right monitor. The center of the video image was at the
> > extreme right side of the left monitor.
> >
> > The only reason I got a dual monitor set up was that I got a great
> > deal on
> > the Matrox Millennium G450 when I bought the RT2500... But not having
> > it
> > would be no big deal.
>
> Oh, I would certainly NOT give up on the dual-monitor
> setup. It is very valuable for video editing where you
> have a lot of stuff on the desktop to keep track of. It is
> worth putting up with whatever annoyances to have all
> that extra space. The "full screen" thing with WMP is
> only a curiosity. No video stands up to the scrutiny of
> being displayed full-screen on a computer monitor, and
> I don't find that feature of much practical use.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|