This IS the Avid L2: Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs

Sunday, October 18, 2015

Re: [Avid-L2] Walter Murch and NLEs

Saying what is and what is not a deal breaker for someone else is impossible. If it's a deal breaker for Murch not to have 100 tracks then that's what it is. 24 seems like a real limitation at points on a feature. I think there are feature editors that have a bunch of workarounds for it and that is never a good thing. Just because it's not a deal breaker for you means nothing to Murch. Should Murchs deal breaker issue mean anything to you? It could. Especially if others feel the pain and we lose even more productions to other NLEs. His happened with FCP5 and Murch and others like David Fincher.

And if free Resolve can do it, then Acid better think hard about what they look like if they don't.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 18, 2015, at 8:35 PM, bigfish@pacbell.net [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

---In avid-l2@yahoogroups.com, <edfuller@...> wrote :
"Why are we still limited to 24 audio tracks? Is it the deal breaker that Walter Murch thinks it is? I don't know."

I think you've brought up what bothers me about the overall nature of the comment/concern. There is no way in hell this is a "Deal Breaker" issue. Is it something that would be helpful, of course. Perhaps in certain situations it is a problematic shortcoming but not a deal breaker to me. Having just experienced just some of the issues with getting a Premiere AAF into ProTools and a similar edl into my Avid my gut tells me that using Premiere to get more audio tracks will create a lot of issues for the ProTools folks. Our mixer had to hand cut in most of the tracks for the cold open on our recent project. Fortunately for the brunt of the show which is a stage performance live show the main tracks worked but the more segment edited cold open sequence didn't work at all and the mixer was left to import the raw elements and manually sync them up.

I guess it just depends on which side of the fence I stand on. For me the inability to get a usable aaf to ProTools is more of a deal breaker. Maybe I'm just more comfortable with familiar pain and the devil I know. If this helps to push Avid to add more audio channels that's great but if it starts to effect the mentality of Post Supervisors and management towards Avid that's not so good. Unfortunately all to often the people who have to clean up the mess in Post aren't the ones that get to choose the tools they use. When I hear from management that we should be using Premiere because Walter Murch likes it now I won't be a happy camper.

---In avid-l2@yahoogroups.com, <edfuller@...> wrote :

Avid has been good about adding capabilities lately, from stereoscopic features (which maybe no one uses), to stereo and 5.1 audio tracks, to 4K video. Why are we still limited to 24 audio tracks? Is it the deal breaker that Walter Murch thinks it is? I don't know. But it sure is frustrating.

I'd like to do a lot of sound design and not have SFX creep into my dialogue tracks. I'd like to have named dialogue tracks with a separate track for each character -- in animation especially this is helpful. I'd like to be able to carry lots of stems from temp mixes plus all my original edits, without running out of voices / tracks. With only 24 tracks, it's a juggling act and often impossible.

I hear even DaVinci Resolve (the free version!) has unlimited audio tracks now... What's the hold up Avid?

Ed Fuller

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 2:43 PM, bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Interesting approach. Wow giving up a video track for one of the pesky low frequency video tracks, a.k.a. audio. Given other than the first few video tracks most are primarily filler unless you have a really effects intensive timeline I wonder how much eliminating tracks would free up processor power for additional audio? Then there's the nature of audio files to be smaller but strain the system with more frequent access calls compared to video.

This seems to spin back into the age old dilemma of limited resources for R&D. Does Avid spend time on audio or handling 4K and resolution independence etc... Or look for the bright star in the East and an improvement on the color correct, just forget I said that I was having a bad Acid flashback moment. ;-)

---In avid-l2@yahoogroups.com, <Steve@...> wrote :

Most film editors would be happy to cut the video tracks down to maybe 6 or 8 - or even 4 maybe - to get 64 or more audio tracks. The total throughout it the problem Id think so give us an option to limit video tracks in favor of audio tracks. What would the difference be in throughput? How many audio tracks would you get if you sacrificed a video track? 12? 24?

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 18, 2015, at 4:27 PM, bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

This would seem to be a big challenge for hardware software of full tilt video and audio processing at the same time. Wasn't it Greg G., and others, that complained about losing Audio Vision. Wasn't that a capable audio work station in its' day that had tight integration with Avid. I never worked near an audio vision but IIRC those that used it really liked it.

---In avid-l2@yahoogroups.com, <roberto@...> wrote :

Agreed, gents. Having an MC/PT union option, or at least a smooth affair between the two with at least 64 audio tracks on the MC side, would be a lock for me.

I understand... having a video and sound workstation performing well in the same box must be a serious challenge (we're told not to do it), not to mention dealing with 4K+ video, 5.1+ audio, and definitely not to mention a cloud or geographically distributed team workflow (with security). It may be a helluva lot to ask for, but there it is.

-Roberto

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

Yep that's my opinion... Put them together and have a tab, avid/protools.

Mike

On 18 Oct 2015, at 9:29 AM, Mark Spano cutandcover@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

I *am* oversimplifying because the workflow I want is dead simple. Its current roadblocks cause it to be difficult and un-achievable. It is funny you're describing to a former mixer how a mix works.

....

Or a revolutionary idea: Why does Avid even have Media Composer and Pro Tools as separate apps? Why not have them both in one? Build an inclusive application, and based on whatever licensing you have on your dongle, those features become active. It already works this way for Media Composer vs. Media Composer with Symphony Option. Why not a Media Composer with Pro Tools Option?

Then you could pass things back and forth without having to translate. Yes it's an ideal idea, but if you asked me how it should work, that's the real answer. Until then, give me unlimited tracks in MC, and I'll deal with AAF back and forth

....

This idea is important, because it's the same one I've had since I heard Avid bought Digidesign. The fact that these apps still can't talk to each other on a meaningful level is preposterous.