This IS the Avid L2: RE: [Avid-L2] Uncompressed or Compressed That is the Question?

Thursday, August 2, 2012

RE: [Avid-L2] Uncompressed or Compressed That is the Question?

We had to put something in 10bit 1:1 HD once, the only storage that would do it was the fibre connected Unity with no one else working on it. The ISIS couldn't digitise it. If it's for telly why bother? it will end up 6Mb/s anyway

Andi

> To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
> From: namyrb@gmail.com
> Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:52:30 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Uncompressed or Compressed That is the Question?
>
> From my experience, the online guys don't want 1:1. They want either 175X
> or 220X. 1:1 won't even capture onto our ISIS (1Gb ethernet).
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Steve Hullfish <steve4lists@veralith.com>wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Sounds like someone who just wants to have a bigger d*ck than you. "I
> > never edit compressed and I drive a Porsche"
> >
> > With the exception of spot work and feature film DI, I can't see
> > uncompressed HD as being that critical. I mean, if someone wants to pay the
> > premium for it, that's awesome. Otherwise, why? Especially with a strong
> > codec at a decent bandwidth... and ESPECIALLY since most of the crap that
> > gets thrown at us is coming from highly compressed SOURCES to begin with.
> > What's the point of taking 35 MegsPerSecond XDCAM up to uncompressed? Or P2?
> >
> > Steve Hullfish
> > contributor: www.provideocoalition.com
> >
> >
> > On Aug 2, 2012, at 12:36 PM, John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Uncompressed or Compressed That is the Question?
> > > I was recently told by a Post Supervisor that he had always worked
> > uncompressed on his shows. My experience primarily in Avid is everyone
> > works in DNX in HD which is compressed but a strong codec. In FCP I thought
> > Prores was the codec of choice kinda the DNX of the Final Cut world. For
> > short pieces I can see how uncompressed would be viable. In SD I always do
> > 1:1 uncompressed but never in HD for my hour long projects and series.
> > Beside overall drive space doesn't uncompressed put a heavy tax on
> > bandwidth even if the actual processing of the data is more efficient the
> > amount of sheer data seems problematic on a large series scale. Curious
> > what others think.
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]