Saturday, October 25, 2014

Re: [Avid-L2] UK Equivalent of Digital Service Station??

 

Thanks, Mike.

I probably wasn't clear when I made the request — these folks have files but the client insists on HDCAM tapes -- which is a little crazy since the files are 3.3K scans — and not files — so what's needed is a simple files-to-HDCM transfer.

Jeff

> On Oct 25, 2014, at 4:20 PM, 'Mike Parsons.tv@gmail.com' mikeparsons.tv@gmail.com [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> For file transfer look at airship.
>
> http://www.useairware.com/#!features/csnx
>
> Ive used on several features and its one fo those things that dont seem
> to make sense it works so well.
>
> best regards
>
> Mike
>
>
> ------------------------------------
> Posted by: "Mike Parsons.tv@gmail.com" <mikeparsons.tv@gmail.com>
> ------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo Groups Links
>
>
>

Jeff Kreines
Kinetta
jeff@kinetta.com
kinetta.com

__._,_.___

Posted by: Jeff Kreines <jeff@kinetta.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] UK Equivalent of Digital Service Station??

 

For file transfer look at airship.

http://www.useairware.com/#!features/csnx

Ive used on several features and its one fo those things that dont seem
to make sense it works so well.

best regards

Mike

__._,_.___

Posted by: "Mike Parsons.tv@gmail.com" <mikeparsons.tv@gmail.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (6)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] UK Equivalent of Digital Service Station??

 

Hey Jeff,
I'm always reluctant to recommend big corporate vendors, but in a pinch i have done the reverse- I have used Deluxe in London  to get tape to LA before. They had private (leased?) fiber between Los Angeles and London over which they ran Aspera so it's a very fast transport medium. I know that's not exactly what you're looking for, But maybe it's a lead. Not surprisingly, actually setting up the job through their bureaucracy was more difficult than executing the job.  This was a couple years ago of course so I'm not sure how they're set up now, but it seems like a reasonable possibility. Hopefully an L2-er has a better option to offer!  

Weakest referral ever, better than nothing.
________________________
Greg Huson
Secret Headquarters, Inc
Greg (at) SecretHQ.com

On Oct 25, 2014, at 05:58, Jeff Kreines jeff@kinetta.com [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

I am writing on behalf of friends in Herford, UK, who are looking for a UK based facility (location unimportant) that can accept either uncompressed QT or ProRes files by Dropbox (or a shipped hard drive) and output those files to HDCAM (plain old HDCAM) tape.

All recommendations appreciated, especially places with reasonable pricing and good service.

Thanks,

Jeff (currently in Hereford his own self) Kreines
Kinetta
jeff@kinetta.com
kinetta.com

__._,_.___

Posted by: Greg Huson <greg@secrethq.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] UK Equivalent of Digital Service Station??

 

Jeff


drop me a line offline and I can recommend a few of my customers. 

Rupert Watson
www.root6.com
+44 7787 554801

On 25 Oct 2014, at 13:58, Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com wrote:

I am writing on behalf of friends in Herford, UK, who are looking for a UK based facility (location unimportant) that can accept either uncompressed QT or ProRes files by Dropbox (or a shipped hard drive) and output those files to HDCAM (plain old HDCAM) tape. 

www.root6.com/blog

Visit this site for our latest news and views.

Registered in the UK at: 4 Wardour Mews, London W1F 8AJ

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7437 6052

Company No. 03433253

__._,_.___

Posted by: Rupert Watson <rupert@root6.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5)

.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: Avid website down

 

Actually, Adobe Anywhere runs on your own server also.

__._,_.___

Posted by: tcurren@aol.com
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Avid website down

 

Rupert, if you keep your eye out for all possibilities good and bad, you are less likely to experience unwelcome surprises. ;-)

__._,_.___

Posted by: tcurren@aol.com
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (6)

.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] UK Equivalent of Digital Service Station??

 

I am writing on behalf of friends in Herford, UK, who are looking for a UK based facility (location unimportant) that can accept either uncompressed QT or ProRes files by Dropbox (or a shipped hard drive) and output those files to HDCAM (plain old HDCAM) tape.

All recommendations appreciated, especially places with reasonable pricing and good service.

Thanks,

Jeff (currently in Hereford his own self) Kreines
Kinetta
jeff@kinetta.com
kinetta.com

__._,_.___

Posted by: Jeff Kreines <jeff@kinetta.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (3)

.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: Avid website down

 

But thats the point of Avid cloud over Adobes. Its not run by Avid!
Media composer Cloud is the ability to extend an interplay environment to remote suites via the internet. The cloud is actually the facility running the interplay.
So how you configure and protect that is completely controllable.  A missing critical job could even have two interplay environments set up an mirroring and have either available.
Avid has developed the tools for clients to implement.

Pat from his mobile.

__._,_.___

Posted by: pat@horridge.org.uk
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5)

.

__,_._,___

Friday, October 24, 2014

Re: [Avid-L2] Pluralized aaf import turned into subclip?

 

Good God.  A total mess and completely unnecessary.

Plural Eyes can easily make new media files with the "good" audio embedded in the Quicktime.  You AMA those and consolidate/transcode to whatever resolutions you need.    No need for stupid subclips and sync timelines.  No jumping through hoops to match frame.  

I think you need to get the AE who seems to have all the brilliant tricks to come in and make sense of this.
Sorry I don't have anything more helpful.  I can't make sense of the workflow that was taken.




On Friday, October 24, 2014, 'John Moore' bigfish@pacbell.net [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>  
>
> Got a sequence 59.94 where some 23.98 clips were synced to 2nd system audio with pluralize. I'm told one of the AEs had a trick so the editors could match back to the synced clip not the separate elements. Matching back video from the sequence matches to a sub clip which is listed as DNX 220 and the subclip is actually the stacked synced sequence that was imported from the pluralized aaf. If I match from the source side I get the video master clip that is 23.98. There appears to be major sync issues in the uprezzed online sequence. These clips are actually full resolution in the offline sequence and are in sync there. Somehow the uprez chaned these clips and they are also running at the wrong speed. They have 80 percent motion adapters but if I promote the motion adapter and set it to 100 percent they seem to run at the correct speed. The audio is also exhibiting sync issues and cut points are different when I cut the offline seq into the online seq.
>
> How can the sub clip actually be a sequence that was a pluralize aaf import? This was discribed as a trick the AE did but we can't get ahold of him. Also how can the sub clip show DNX 220 when the video clip is DNX 175? There seems to be some under the hood confusion about what's 23.98 and what's 29.97. Anybody got a clue what this cluster flop is that I've inherited?
> Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
>
>

__._,_.___

Posted by: John Pale <pale.edit@gmail.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (2)

.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Pluralized aaf import turned into subclip?

 

Got a sequence 59.94 where some 23.98 clips were synced to 2nd system audio with pluralize. I'm told one of the AEs had a trick so the editors could match back to the synced clip not the separate elements. Matching back video from the sequence matches to a sub clip which is listed as DNX 220 and the subclip is actually the stacked synced sequence that was imported from the pluralized aaf. If I match from the source side I get the video master clip that is 23.98. There appears to be major sync issues in the uprezzed online sequence. These clips are actually full resolution in the offline sequence and are in sync there. Somehow the uprez chaned these clips and they are also running at the wrong speed. They have 80 percent motion adapters but if I promote the motion adapter and set it to 100 percent they seem to run at the correct speed. The audio is also exhibiting sync issues and cut points are different when I cut the offline seq into the online seq.

How can the sub clip actually be a sequence that was a pluralize aaf import? This was discribed as a trick the AE did but we can't get ahold of him. Also how can the sub clip show DNX 220 when the video clip is DNX 175? There seems to be some under the hood confusion about what's 23.98 and what's 29.97. Anybody got a clue what this cluster flop is that I've inherited?
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

__._,_.___

Posted by: "John Moore" <bigfish@pacbell.net>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Avid website down

 

Always looking for the positives, Terry ;-)


Rupert Watson
www.root6.com
+44 7787 554801

On 24 Oct 2014, at 16:59, tcurren@aol.com [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Looks like IT issues. And if you were editing in their cloud based environment, would you be down too?

www.root6.com/blog

Visit this site for our latest news and views.

Registered in the UK at: 4 Wardour Mews, London W1F 8AJ

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7437 6052

Company No. 03433253

__._,_.___

Posted by: Rupert Watson <rupert@root6.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] iMac vs. Tower MacPro for upgrading Avid stations, CPU vs. cores?

 

I have an all Mac production house I work with... The big limiting factor in what systems you can use is if you are staying with UNITY for your shared storage.

There are no drivers/workarounds for AVID UNITY to run on anything past OS X 10.7.5 for Fiber and 10.6.8 for ethernet attached.  Thus you are stuck there until such time you replace your UNITY as a shared storage solution.

Newer iMacs (and Mac Mini's) cannot be back rev'd to Lion.  The newest machines you can work with and still us UNITY are 2011 models.  The 2011 iMacs with 3.4Ghz i7 processors are indeed often faster than our 12 core Mac pro towers.  However, in the case of fast local storage for finishing, the Mac Pro tower allows for simple, cheap and fast internal RAID0 arrays.

Once place where our iMacs with quad core i7 CPUs seem to go much faster is in AMA and AMA transcoding.  The graphics cards in the iMacs are more hefty as well, and in the newer 64 bit versions of AVID this seems to make a big difference.

Of course there is the added expense of either Thunderbolt to PCIe card cages (SonnetTech ones work well) for your ATTO fiber cards or the ATTO Thunderlink adapter which also works quite well.  In either scenario you are usually looking at 1,100 to 1,200 to connect to UNITY fiber via thunderbolt.

Hope this helps...

Dave Hogan
Burbank, CA


On Friday, October 24, 2014 2:09 AM, "Chris_Sporleder@hotmail.com [Avid-L2]" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


 
I'd just point out that it is quite possible to upgrade the CPUs in a 2009-2012 Mac Pro tower.  It is not difficult in a single processor 2009 or a 2010-12 dual processor, the dual 2009 is a little trickier and you can pay someone to do it for you if you like.

Xeon processors are available from server recyclers coming off lease after 3 years, and I've put dual 3.33ghz 6 cores in my 2009 for about $650.  There are six-core 3.47 ghz processors within reach as well.  This, plus GPU upgrades and internal RAID card/SATAIII cable upgrades can keep these beasts very sprightly.

Now, there is an adapter from China available for beer money that allows you to put an Apple Samsung flash SSD designed for the latest macbook pro/mac pro in a PCI-e slot with read/writes well over 1,000 mb/s and use this as your boot disc.

My 2009 Mac Pro benchmarks in multicore performance as high as a new high spec Mac Pro trashcan with these upgrades.  I admit this is the thrifty drive a 10 year old Volvo mindset, but for an independent/freelance it gets multiple additional years before having to make capital investments.

The new iMac looks like a great platform, but will have a shorter shelf life given the lack of upgrade options, thermal constraints, and the hobbled SSD read/write speeds  (700 v 1200+) (I even wonder if this 2 lane PCI-e SSD was a choice to make sure they didn't steal Mac Pro market share with this retina iMac)


---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <huipro@...> wrote :

John, 

Future qualification issues aside, apples brand new iMac with 27" 5K display makes a compelling argument as an alternative to the MacPro cookie jars.  

It'll cost you around $4K all tricked out, but this is where the MacPro starts. From there, you'll need to add the expansion hardware.  But that's a given now.  

If it can handle 4K media reasonably well, as they say, I think people will begin to warm up to the idea of all-in-one iMacs again. 

RT

Sent via iPad NanoS

On Oct 23, 2014, at 3:00 AM, "'Carmichael, Scott A' sacarmic@... [Avid-L2]" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 
We went with the highest end iMacs of the latest model and couldn't be happier.  The BM thunderbolt IO has worked great.  We are using Thunderbolt > to PCIe chassis for our FC san interfaces.  My only regret is not going with SSD drives in the iMacs.  


On Oct 20, 2014, at 9:48 PM, John Moore bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:



I work at an all Mac Production company that is looking to upgrade it's fleet of older MacPro mc 5.5 systems.  The quandry is should they go iMac or Tower Mac Pros that they can still obtain.  They are seeing faster renders on a iMac that a producer station has.  The iMac has 3.4 GHz. processor and our older towers are all 2.66 GHz or less.  I feel this is why there is such a discrepancy in render time.  I was advised that when getting my 12core 2012 MacPro that going for the top end CPU speed wasn't worth it so I have 2.66 GHz but in my gut I've always felt clock speed is an important factor in Avid renders as it doesn't take advantage of GPUs or multi cores for most rendering tasks.  I regret not getting the 3.1 GHz., or whatever the max cpu clock speed was, but it's not a huge problem for my home system.

We are thinking for the upgrade to get iMacs for the edit stations and hang a BM or AJA thunderbolt I/O box and a thunderbolt to fibre adapter for our Unitys.  Hurdles will be having to spring for BCC upgrades, I assume our bundled BCC 4's and BCC 5's would qualify for an upgrade, and OS Compatibility with our existing Unity 5 medianets.  For our AE stations we are thinking of going with MacPro Towers so we can have the expansion slots for connectivity in the machine room.

Curious how others feel about cpu speed vs. cores when dealing with Avid and also the Tower vs. iMac quandry as it relates to connectivity etc...  The trash cans are not in our sights and I don't think they should be but I'd appreciate any and all experience and suggestions.


 
John Moore
Barking Trout Productions
Studio City, CA
bigfish@...





__._,_.___

Posted by: Dave Hogan <mactvman@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (10)

.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Video Noise/ RF interference? [2 Attachments]

 

I had a QC note of Video noise on a couple of shots.  The same camera had several other shots in the scene but only two were noted.  When I looked at the flagged shots I see a forward slash like banding that comes and goes in the shots much like RF interference.  I put a slight blur on the shot and an unsharp mask BCC on just the face which slightly softened the banding.  It was far from a perfect fix but it was on the source tapes so not much I could do.  When I talked to the QC engineer he asked if I'd used DNR.  I assume that's digital noise reduction and told him no but I didn't think this type RF like interference would benefit from noise reduction.  He agreed but I was kind of getting the impression he was trying to sell me on some form of noise reduction they may have at the QC house.  I'm haven't had a chance to work much with noise reduction plugins or play around with it in Resolve, I forget if the free version supports noise reduction.  I think initially it didn't but that had changed at some point along with the node limitations.  Curious what plugins others have found useful.  These shots aren't critical imagery so my fix passed QC after talking with them but I'd like to increase my tool set for future issues. 

Also 60 Hz. hum goes top to bottom and this RF like interference is more of a forward slash orientation of banding.  I would assume the approximate frequency of the interference can be deduce by the width of the banding and it's angle.  Anybody got any experience playing RF or other kind of interference detective?  I envision someone with an antenna mounted on their hat roaming the set searching for possible emf noise sources.  Kinda like the Ghost Hunters on looking for the ghost of video interference.  I'm attaching a jpeg ot the shot flagged with and without noise in case that gives someone a clue.
 
John Moore
Barking Trout Productions
Studio City, CA
bigfish@pacbell.net

__._,_.___
View attachments on the web

Posted by: John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net>
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)

Check out the automatic photo album with 2 photo(s) from this topic.
No Noise 1261917Blr.jpg With Noise 1262206 copyBlr.jpg


.

__,_._,___
There was an error in this gadget