March 28, 2024, 07:46:58 PM

Author Topic: Intellistar Renderer?  (Read 5420 times)

Offline weatherfan_2013

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 424
  • Gender: Male
  • TWC Fan 2005 - 2012
    • View Profile
  • Cable Provider: Verizon FiOS
  • WxStar Version: Satellite
Intellistar Renderer?
« on: August 21, 2016, 06:08:09 PM »
I seem to have trouble finding how the Intellistar 1 (2004-2015) rendered it's graphics? I am confident the IS2 and IS2jr use Viz Engine integrated with the custom TWC STAR software that was written in house. My guess is the IS2 hd and jr use the custom STAR software to collect data and playlist templates probably in xml format and the viz engine software is what overlays graphical elements, slides, transitions .etc. So the STAR software would collect data for the assigned locations by Satellite and would talk to the Viz Engine software as to what graphical or text elements would be displayed. Which is probably why it required two mother boards. Viz Engine needs a lot of computing power for the type of graphics TWC displays. Hence the $8000+ unit. Viz Engine and the motherboard were probably the majority of the cost. If I'm wrong about that please let me know.

Now as far as the IS1 is concerned, does anyone know what video/graphic renderer that was used to display graphics and text elements? Was that also written in house or bought by a 3rd party?
« Last Edit: August 21, 2016, 06:10:20 PM by weatherfan_2013 »

Offline Jaden

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cable Provider: COX
  • HD Channel #: 2002
  • HD WxStar ID #: 037343
  • SD Channel #: 2
  • SD WxStar ID #: 37343
  • WxStar Version: IntelliStar
Re: Intellistar Renderer?
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2016, 09:16:14 PM »
Im not sure either, but I have seen a few things on sale as Intellistar 2's and stuff. Not too sure about the IS1 stuff though.

Offline curtjr4

  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 650
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • My Youtube
  • Cable Provider: Xfinity
  • SD Channel #: 16
  • WxStar Version: Junior
Re: Intellistar Renderer?
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2016, 01:09:55 PM »
This is just based off of previous knowledge, which means I may be wrong. But I'll take a stab at it and share my ideas.

The IS1 and the I2 will render graphics in real time. Unlike the XL, there is no "pre-rendering" with the graphics. Technically, every STAR rendered in real time except for the XL due to TWC's in house presentation engine. Cool concept at the time, but the XL got a little messy and isn't the most efficient in a number of ways (although it still is one of my favorites). The IS1 used an in-house presentation engine from TWC.

You are correct with the I2 using the Viz Engine... absolutely no question about it, and it does use the XML format to process data. I have reason to suspect that the version of Viz Engine that TWC utilized on the I2 was customized explicitly for TWCs vision, and isn't exactly back compatible with your typical Viz ecosystem. This isn't proven, but it is a theory that I think is viable. If people are concerned about the costs of TWC getting customized software like this... it's likely chump change to them in my opinion.

As far as the satellite communication goes, there is no talking back to the transponder. What TWC beams up to their transponder is the only thing that is going through that transponder; there is no talking back, again. This is where I believe that Viz Engine is capable of running stand alone without any other equipment in the headen. This may only work if the STAR is authorized by TWC through the back channel (ethernet connection that talks back to TWCs servers). My disclaimer with this idea is that the STAR may be capable of running without calling TWC to activate it as long as data is properly flowing from the IRD/descrambler (which typically needs authorization from TWC). It should also be noted that data isn't transmitted to the STAR over the internet, except for SCMT (Star Configuration Management Tool) information. It should be noted that SCMT can't be accessed by anyone other than a headend tech as it is password protected.

I do have two questions, however.
  • How did you come up with the $8000 price tag? If you are talking about machines that Viz is dependent on, it will not cost a headend that much money as the headend doesn't need this equipment. As far as things at TWC HQ, I wouldn't know. I'm sure they've invested hundreds of thousands into development. As far as the headend goes... I'd be floored if it costs anything over $700 to be honest.
  • Two motherboards? The IS1, I2HD and I2Jr all have daughter boards that the software is dependent on. The I2XD is the exception with the complicated graphics processing as it appears to be using MPEG video streams that is sent down through the IRD/descrambler. What do you mean by two motherboards?

Offline weatherfan_2013

  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 424
  • Gender: Male
  • TWC Fan 2005 - 2012
    • View Profile
  • Cable Provider: Verizon FiOS
  • WxStar Version: Satellite
Re: Intellistar Renderer?
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2016, 04:26:15 PM »
This is just based off of previous knowledge, which means I may be wrong. But I'll take a stab at it and share my ideas.

The IS1 and the I2 will render graphics in real time. Unlike the XL, there is no "pre-rendering" with the graphics. Technically, every STAR rendered in real time except for the XL due to TWC's in house presentation engine. Cool concept at the time, but the XL got a little messy and isn't the most efficient in a number of ways (although it still is one of my favorites). The IS1 used an in-house presentation engine from TWC.

You are correct with the I2 using the Viz Engine... absolutely no question about it, and it does use the XML format to process data. I have reason to suspect that the version of Viz Engine that TWC utilized on the I2 was customized explicitly for TWCs vision, and isn't exactly back compatible with your typical Viz ecosystem. This isn't proven, but it is a theory that I think is viable. If people are concerned about the costs of TWC getting customized software like this... it's likely chump change to them in my opinion.

As far as the satellite communication goes, there is no talking back to the transponder. What TWC beams up to their transponder is the only thing that is going through that transponder; there is no talking back, again. This is where I believe that Viz Engine is capable of running stand alone without any other equipment in the headen. This may only work if the STAR is authorized by TWC through the back channel (ethernet connection that talks back to TWCs servers). My disclaimer with this idea is that the STAR may be capable of running without calling TWC to activate it as long as data is properly flowing from the IRD/descrambler (which typically needs authorization from TWC). It should also be noted that data isn't transmitted to the STAR over the internet, except for SCMT (Star Configuration Management Tool) information. It should be noted that SCMT can't be accessed by anyone other than a headend tech as it is password protected.

I do have two questions, however.
  • How did you come up with the $8000 price tag? If you are talking about machines that Viz is dependent on, it will not cost a headend that much money as the headend doesn't need this equipment. As far as things at TWC HQ, I wouldn't know. I'm sure they've invested hundreds of thousands into development. As far as the headend goes... I'd be floored if it costs anything over $700 to be honest.
  • Two motherboards? The IS1, I2HD and I2Jr all have daughter boards that the software is dependent on. The I2XD is the exception with the complicated graphics processing as it appears to be using MPEG video streams that is sent down through the IRD/descrambler. What do you mean by two motherboards?
The $8000 price tag was just a guess considering Viz Engine is a very expensive computer software. A GTX 470 graphics card with 6GB RAM, two boards and Viz Engine I think would be in the upper thousands. A GTX 470 graphics card, an Intel i7 quad core processor and 6GB RAM with an HD Tuner card I think would cost between 1k and $1500 dollars if you were to buy it at Dell, Best Buy, Amazon .etc. Plus god knows how much Viz Engine software costs? TruVu Max is around $15,000 hardware which is bulls**t because the software can easily run on my laptop which only costs $430 today. You don't need a NASA like computer to run a google earth like presentation system. Plus the HP computers that WSI puts the software on only costs around $600-800? That shouldn't cost me more than $3000 for the system MAX!! After Effects software only cost around $1200 to buy before they went to the CC versions which you pay monthly now. Any company that prices software $2000 and up
better have a real good damn reason for it. Even VIPIR costing $120,000+ is probably one of the biggest scams Baron could put out there. Anyway I assume TWC would include some portion of that in the price probably because of licensing.

The is2 utilizes two motherboards right? That's what I heard reading all the documents. I didn't know that the IS1 utilized two boards which is interesting.

Actually I think the standard VIZ Engine software could do what TWC is doing as long as it can read xml templates because VIZ constantly pushes you to use XML files to update information in real time like in Ticker and Multichannel. VIZ playlists are also in XML format. Viz Engine as far as I know is just basically a Character Generator. A CG usually has a renderer  and a client. The client just configures graphics and playlists in a user friendly format and the client converts it to a file that the renderer reads and displays. However TWC may have made changes but not too sure on that.


Offline hen7713

  • Blue Box
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 199
  • Gender: Male
  • I write code.
    • View Profile
  • SD Channel #: 64
  • SD WxStar ID #: 24688
  • WxStar Version: IntelliStar
Re: Intellistar Renderer?
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2016, 03:36:11 AM »