Received: from tom.compulink.co.uk by netcom21.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id QAA15179; Fri, 17 Feb 1995 16:18:48 -0800
Received: from gonzales.compulink.co.uk (gonzales.compulink.co.uk [192.188.69.4]) by tom.compulink.co.uk (8.6.9/8.6.9) id AAA12754 for lightwave-l@netcom.com; Sat, 18 Feb 1995 00:26:12 GMT
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 95 00:18 GMT
From: garygfx@cix.compulink.co.uk (Gary Fenton)
Subject: Re: Vlab Motion questions
To: lightwave-l@netcom.com
Reply-To: garygfx@cix.compulink.co.uk
Message-Id: <memo.551104@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Sender: owner-lightwave-l@netcom.com
Precedence: bulk
>752 x 480 is an Amiga resolution. VLab Motion uses square pixels
>so its something like 640 x 480 (???), but this is full overscan.
^^^^^^^^^^
No! Vlab Motion goes up to 768x592 pixels (in PAL, subtract 100 pixels or
so for NTSC reolution) A brief comparison between this and PAR: If you need
real time playback of animation and you CAN afford PAR, then buy it! If
money is the problem then Vlab is excellent value. If you need real time
video grabbing and good editing facilities then Vlab Motion is the one for
you, but PAR is easier to use for LW animation recording and storing.