Kevin Donnelly wrote: >>>> ... "[re]cord films" No [re] ... cord is classic film on celluloid.
>>>> > I merely pointed out that this is untrue - pro apps exist that can presumably > use SMPTE in some form. You might not like someone telling you that what you > said isn't true, but that doesn't make it any truer. > There were no links about any FLOSS audio app, am I wrong? > So in fact even your previous point is only half-true? There is indeed some > form of sync that can be used, just not with "common" equipment (as defined > by you, presumably)? > Sorry, no video or film studio I'm working for could do even a simple music video by using OEM. If I make music I need to be able to sync my sequencer, HD recorder to common Sony, Bosch and other equipment. > And if you had applied some self-restraint, as I keep asking you to do, and > said exactly this, I would likely not have disagreed with you. But instead > you made a wildly inaccurate generalisation, that Linux can't be used (and I > quote) "when trying to record a Wagner opera". Do you think it's really OK > to do things like this, tarring Linux with a dirty brush? You don't think it > insulting at all? > Not everybody is as perfect as you, doing "accurate generalisations". > Presumably, if these > pro apps do deal with SMPTE, they have libraries somewhere to allow this. This were video apps and no audio apps if I shouldn't have miss anything. Do they resample in real-time by using best audio quality? > If > those libraries were open-sourced, Linux developers could use them. But > they're not (so far as I know), so they can't. He? Closed source ... his isn't relevant for 64 Studio and the FLOSS community. > Filling posts with complaints about it, and using it to as a hook on > which to hang more wild generalisations that Linux is no good for audio don't > really help - they don't solve your problem, and they don't enlighten anyone > else; all they do is create smoke without a fire. > On LAD Fons shows interest in this SMPTE issue and you can bet he don't like me too, but this has nothing to do with the technical facts. You don't know much about audio and video, but I do, that's the point. You might know more about Linux, but this doesn't help people who like to evaluate audio and video Linux. > You're generalising off the top of your head again, Ralf - a large chunk of > Hollywood CGI stuff is now run on Linux, especially the renderfarms. I was working in this business, not only for Brauner and Nekes, don't teach me stuff I know much better than you do. I would like to sync stuff, not for Hollywood, even if I developed audio equipment for Hollywood, but I like to sync Qtractor etc. to local TV productions. > *Please* read up a bit before you say stuff like this - can't you exercise at > least a modicum of common-sense before you say something like this? > Why don't you make your homework? Do you have any knowledge about audio and video? >> Sorry, this sucks, I'll unsubscribe. >> > > There are many people here who will be sorry to hear that, so perhaps you > should reconsider. Is it really impossible for you to consider any changes > in the way you approach things? Is there really no 50 between your 0 and > 100? > Why should I stay? I'm not able to resist to justify myself, to write for whom I worked and nonsense like that, you're spreading lies about me and I make a spectacle of myself. I need to stop this. You won't go? Okay, then I'll go. _______________________________________________ 64studio-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users
