This IS the Avid L2: Re: [Avid-L2] DPX via AMA

Sunday, April 6, 2014

Re: [Avid-L2] DPX via AMA

It does make sense to use DPX, when you have shot some kind of uncompressed form.

But there is still a file amount limit per folder in most OS's (some 25000 on my box, about 16 minutes.)

And, it's huge. So it's good for inbetweens, before the final assembly.

Now for your stated situation:

Quicktime can be edited quite easilly. I recently made something that does exactly what you described,

insert a new piece in an existing QT.

(like a lineair 2 machine setup, pick source, pick target, based on TC the new clip gets spliced in, either save the original, or flatten (just copy to a new file)

DPX for archiving makes no sense, it's way too big, and hard to play back.

QT for archiving seems a bad idea also, since it's propiatary...

But the whole archiving discussion is something else, and i don't see what AMA link to DPX has to do with archiving...

Bouke

VideoToolShed
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS NIJMEGEN, the Netherlands
+31 24 3553311

----- Original Message -----

From: Mikeparsons.tv

To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Sunday, April 06, 2014 10:29 AM

Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] DPX via AMA

Still makes sense Jeff. Get a bad render lose one frame and reexport... Quicktime? Yeah let me just reexport the whole 90 minutes.

But yeah 172,000 files gets a bit annoying.

Mike

> On 6 Apr, 2014, at 8:51 am, Jeff Kreines <jeff@kinetta.com> wrote:
>
> DPX is the file format from hell.
>
> Made sense when it was invented in the 1990s for Hollywood effects work — where a shot might be 200 frames long. And fine for TV spots. But there are people who insist it's a good choice for film archiving — yeah, why not have 14,400 files when one will do!
>
>
>
> Jeff Kreines
> Kinetta
> jeff@kinetta.com
> kinetta.com
> kinettaarchival.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
>
>

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.