ProRes Proxy creates a somewhat larger file than XDCAM35. And looking more closely at my fake interlaced DNxHD36 - you are right - horrible artifacts in areas with movement. As MacBook Pros - pretty much anything recent is OK. Max out the RAM and you'll be OK.
With Best Wishes, Roger Shufflebottom +44 7973 543 660
From: "'Edit B' bouke@editb.nl [Avid-L2]" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, 21 October 2015, 14:36
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs
Hmm.I'm on 8.3, windows. (Btw, want to buy a macbook pro, are there models that aren't compatible with MC?)17.5 is available on AMA transcode.You're right about SAS QT. But I normally export as XDcam anyways. (Instead of a mixdown)The beaty of exporing to XDcam is that the header is written first. So, you can start your transcode directly after starting the export from Avid.Condidering the Avid export is faster than the transcode to the desired output, there is no speedloss compared to a QT SAS routine.Bummer about the 17.5 though. (I take it this is a Mac issue.)Not sure about Prores Proxy, but as it is a 10 bit I frame only codec, i don't think it will be better than 17.5 xdcam, and very likely bigger.(But i don't have Prores in Avid.)BoukeVideoToolShed
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS NIJMEGEN, the Netherlands
+31 24 3553311----- Original Message -----Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 3:24 PMSubject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEsNo XDCAM 17.5 here (MC 8.4), just XDCAM EX 35. That's OK but it transcodes as Long-GOP and won't export as Same as Source without further transcoding. Comparing this with my my DNxHD36 transcode, there is more visible pixelation with the 36 than the 35. As you say, other choices are available (maybe ProRes Proxy).With Best Wishes, Roger Shufflebottom +44 7973 543 660
From: "'Edit B' bouke@editb.nl [Avid-L2]" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com; Roger Shufflebottom <rogershuff@yahoo.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, 21 October 2015, 13:57
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs
Nah, if you transcode non-interlace aware with interlaced footage, the compression will be horrible.So yes, it does work, but it will not be as good as possible with interlaced aware scaling.And why should you? Avid has a XDcam 17.5 Mbits and 35 Mbits flavour. That's long GOP, so it should give you a way better image.Even the 17.5 Mbits should totally outperform DNxHD 36, especially on interlaced material.(Read, way better image at half the datarate.)And there are the new H264 codecs. No idea if they are suitable for editing though, never tried anything with it.But for those who want to offline using low datarate transcodes, i've got something else. But better to put it in a new thread.BoukeVideoToolShed
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS NIJMEGEN, the Netherlands
+31 24 3553311----- Original Message -----Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 2:14 PMSubject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEsSeconded! Although someone did point out to me that if you temporarily switch your format from 1080i to 1080p, then trasnscode to DNxHD36, then switch back, the interlace is still there. I do this a lot. Neat (but as you say, why isn't it in the menu?).
With Best Wishes, Roger Shufflebottom +44 7973 543 660
From: "John Pale pale.edit@gmail.com [Avid-L2]" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
To: "Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com" <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>; David Dodson <davidadodson@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wednesday, 21 October 2015, 0:39
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs
Maybe someday we can get the unlock codes for 1080i use of DNXHD36
On Tuesday, October 20, 2015, David Dodson davidadodson@sbcglobal.net [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Hey, Avid and me, we go way back. In fact, I was the very 2nd person to ever use DNxHD 36 on a feature. In 2007 I cut a movie called OUTLANDER. A Viking/sci-fi thing with Jim Caviezel. I cut on location in Nova Scotia with the shoot, and was determined to cut in HD, mostly to impress my bosses. So I asked Avid what the deal was. Anyway, just a couple weeks before, Stephen Mirrione had been given the command lines to unlock DNxHD 36, at the moment a brand new codec, for OCEAN'S THIRTEEN. It wasn't officially available on MC at all!Damned Mirrione. If it weren't for him, I would've been the first man to use DNxHD 36 on a movie. Damned Mirrione.
On Oct 20, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Rupert Watson rupert@root6.com [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
David
I guess you will have to call yourself 'Walter' now you are getting specific responses from Avid.
Rupert Watson
+44 7787 554801
www.root6.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: 20 October 2015 22:50
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com; David Colantuoni <david.colantuoni@avid.com>
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs
When I get a chance, I'll make a video of the actual behavior and send it to you. Probably the best way to get a handle on it is to actually see it happening.
Thanks for your help!
DD
David Dodson
davidadodson@sbcglobal.net<mailto:davidadodson@sbcglobal.net>
On Oct 20, 2015, at 2:44 PM, David Colantuoni david.colantuoni@avid.com<mailto:david.colantuoni@avid.com> [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
Dave,
I asked around and this should not be an issue. I'll ask somebody on my team to look into it further.
Dave
From: <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>> on behalf of "David Dodson davidadodson@sbcglobal.net<mailto:davidadodson@sbcglobal.net> [Avid-L2]"
Reply-To: "Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>", David Dodson
Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 5:19 PM
To: Ricardo Ismach
Cc: "Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>"
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs
In my case, I use every one of the 24 available audio tracks. For features, I'll usually have production audio on tracks 1-8, Music on 9-12, and the rest is effects.
For some reason, I've done a lot of films with large casts, so I get all kinds of booms plus iso tracks, and I put them all on the timeline for easier turnover to the sound people at picture lock.
And since producers now seem to demand a high level of presentational value form the offline, you're obligated to tart it up with all kinds of sound effects and ambiences, anything to make it more polished. And again, I'm just talking about the offline here. Gone are the days when people knew how to watch an edit, knowing that later, down the line, the sound professionals would get their hands on it and do their excellent thing.
No. Now, everyone's got to come into the bay and watch something that could, but for some color grading and dialogue EQ, walk and talk like a damned near finished product.
In any case, I rant mildly only to illustrate why I have so many audio tracks going that need all that damnable wave form redraw. Because I would find it very difficult to do my job as efficiently without the wave forms. I like the wave forms. Hell, I love the wave forms. But for the love of god, why, in any complex sequence over five minutes long, does it become such a burden on the system?
David Dodson
davidadodson@sbcglobal.net<mailto:davidadodson@sbcglobal.net>
On Oct 20, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Ricardo Ismach <bad-dog@casualdog.org<mailto:bad-dog@casualdog.org>> wrote:
Rewrites (of audio waveforms) have been snappy for me for some time - probably a good couple of years. While I have an audio engineering background, I rarely have more than a dozen or so audio tracks (probably because I am failing to dedicate tracks to individual cues as some might).
R
On 10/20/15 1:23 PM, David Dodson davidadodson@sbcglobal.net<mailto:davidadodson@sbcglobal.net> [Avid-L2] wrote:
MC 8.4.2. Mac OS 10.10.5. 27" Retina iMac. 32 GB RAM. 4 Ghz Intel Core i7.
And you should see the funky "rewrite" effect, as it looks like it's "scanning" each audio track. I don't know how to even describe it. I was going to actually shoot a video of the timeline as it does this thing, and post it to see if I was the only one who was seeing this behavior.
David Dodson
davidadodson@sbcglobal.net<mailto:davidadodson@sbcglobal.net>
On Oct 20, 2015, at 1:18 PM, David Colantuoni david.colantuoni@avid.com<mailto:david.colantuoni@avid.com> [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
What version are you on, I swear we had fixed this years ago.
David Colantuoni
Senior Director PM Creative Tools & Storage | Products and Technology
From: <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>> on behalf of "David Dodson davidadodson@sbcglobal.net<mailto:davidadodson@sbcglobal.net> [Avid-L2]"
Reply-To: "Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>", David Dodson
Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 at 3:32 PM
To: "Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com<mailto:Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>", Marcel Brassard
Cc: David Colantuoni
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs
As long as we're doing this, I'll go ahead and say that I would sell my soul to perdition for audio waveforms (and redraws) that don't bog the system performance down to maddening degrees.
I'm on a decently powerful Mac, and even then there are times in which I'll merely change the zoom on the timeline, and then have to sit there and wait for the waveforms. I cut mainly features, so I'll have around eight layers of production audio, several music tracks, SFX, etc. Maddening and deflating.
David Dodson
davidadodson@sbcglobal.net<mailto:davidadodson@sbcglobal.net>
--
Ricardo Ismach
Casual Dog Productions, LLC
Portland, OR
http://www.root6.com/blog/
For all our latest news and info as it happens-
Registered in the UK at: 4 Wardour Mews, London W1F 8AJ
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7437 6052
Company No. 03433253
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
www.avast.com
www.avast.com
__._,_.___
Posted by: Roger Shufflebottom <rogershuff@yahoo.co.uk>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (76) |
this is the Avid-L2
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment