Yahoo Groups archive

Doepfer

Index last updated: 2026-04-29 00:15 UTC

Message

Re: any more ideas for exotic future A100 modules?

2006-05-22 by nicholas_kent

> >
> > Sorry, yet more random ideas, but would some (very) basic video 
> > processing modules be out of the question?
> > 
> > Although i'm not too fantastically hot on the subject of video 
> > processing, some kind of video mixing/filtering/switching/whatever 
> > modules might sell (or not, who knows). Its just interesting to see 
> > that no-one has ever developed a modular video system!
> > 

I once saw a for modular voltage controlled one back in the mid 80s that was built in the 
70s, individulal modules and patchcords. I didn't see it in operation though. I'm trying to 
remember the name.  Also for what it's worth MFB (Fricke) the drum machine and synth 
maker had something very simple for video processing shown as Musik Messe. 

The big problem though is unlike audio so much of a video signal has to stay unprocessed 
to just display an image. And the "good" part that contains the image is herterodyned 
together. You can't process the entire raw video signal and get much that isn't instantly 
totally scrambled or no image at all. For the most part just end up being able to modulate 
the kind of parameters you have on a TV, you know the hue, brightness, saturation after 
you've built special equipment to do it. If you've seen a 70s or 80s TV mixer and imagine 
voltage control on it's parameters then that's the range of voltage control processing that 
one can expect (wipes, luma key, etc.). Note how much the EMS Rehberg device resembles 
a video mixer.

 Some of the more radical early video art tended to be voltage control of electromagnets 
around a TV display rather than processing the signal itself. That let you bend the picture 
around. Of course that meant you had to re-phoptograph your monitor if you wanted to 
record the results. If you think about it, while there are a few artists still doing this sort of 
thing sometimes there are a few too many limitations that keep something from really 
catching on. (you spend a lot of time and money to get limited results)

Arguably to get into really synthesizing a picture you need a frame buffer, in other words 
to convert the whole image into a raster and then process a frame as a whole bitmap 
frames one at a time rather than linearly like audio.

Attachments

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.