Saturday, November 21, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

None of this is surprising to me. FFMpeg is only old in the sense that it's been around for a while, but there's a reason it continues to be viable - it's continuously updated by the community as an open repository. This is also (I believe) one of the reasons Netflix is probably using it. Netflix's main delivery requirements are mostly platform-agnostic: JPEG2000 IMF, OpenEXR, TIFF, DPX. They do require ProRes for certain things, so I'm sure their backend systems have incorporated ways to use ProRes without it being tied to Apple hardware. 

On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 11:20 AM Jef Huey <jlhueyc2@gmail.com> wrote:

[Edited Message Follows]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 01:19 PM, John Moore wrote:
I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.
I find it interesting that Netflix would use FFmpeg to create ProRes files.  If I understand things, ProRes created by FFmpeg is in violation of Apple's copyright.  Why would Netflix risk a battle?  Am I wrong about this?  I am no lawyer ......

EDIT:  Ok, a Saturday dive down google shows that it may not be strictly illegal.  But none the less, the lingering issues of potential incompatibility (the point of this thread) still makes me wonder why the behemoth that Netfix is "cheaps" out.

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134969) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] 2020 Version of Turducken

Can't unsee this!



On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 10:12 PM avid_curren via groups.io <tcurren=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

Introducing Turkraken
--
Terence Curren

Burbank, Ca
AlphaDogs: We Unleash Your Stories

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134968) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

We use it at Paramount.   That app is also old and I tried to steer them away from it

Paul Darrigo
CHULA - Citizens for a Humane Los Angeles
https://www.facebook.com/groups/773416409436730/
323-244-8020


On Saturday, November 21, 2020, 7:58:01 AM PST, Jef Huey <jlhueyc2@gmail.com> wrote:


[Edited Message Follows]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 01:19 PM, John Moore wrote:
I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.
I find it interesting that Netflix would use FFmpeg to create ProRes files.  If I understand things, ProRes created by FFmpeg is in violation of Apple's copyright.  Why would Netflix risk a battle?  Am I wrong about this?  I am no lawyer ......

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

[Edited Message Follows]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 01:19 PM, John Moore wrote:
I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.
I find it interesting that Netflix would use FFmpeg to create ProRes files.  If I understand things, ProRes created by FFmpeg is in violation of Apple's copyright.  Why would Netflix risk a battle?  Am I wrong about this?  I am no lawyer ......

EDIT:  Ok, a Saturday dive down google shows that it may not be strictly illegal.  But none the less, the lingering issues of potential incompatibility (the point of this thread) still makes me wonder why the behemoth that Netfix is "cheaps" out.
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134966) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

[Edited Message Follows]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 01:19 PM, John Moore wrote:
I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.
I find it interesting that Netflix would use FFmpeg to create ProRes files.  If I understand things, ProRes created by FFmpeg is in violation of Apple's copyright.  Why would Netflix risk a battle?  Am I wrong about this?  I am no lawyer ......
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134966) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 01:19 PM, John Moore wrote:
I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.
I find interesting that Netflix would use FFmpeg to create ProRes files.  If I understand things, ProRes created by FFmpeg is in violation of Apple's copyright.  Why would Netflix risk a battle?  Am I wrong about this?  I am no lawyer ......
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134966) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] 2020 Version of Turducken

LOL!

DQS


On Nov 20, 2020, at 10:12 PM, avid_curren via groups.io <tcurren=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:



<126608801_10157924752916033_6136754704612333323_n.jpg>

Introducing Turkraken
--
Terence Curren

Burbank, Ca
AlphaDogs: We Unleash Your Stories

Friday, November 20, 2020

[Avid-L2] 2020 Version of Turducken

Introducing Turkraken
--
Terence Curren

Burbank, Ca
AlphaDogs: We Unleash Your Stories
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134964) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

A thing I would say has come in handy for me and may in this instance:

Since Resolve v15 (I think), the Deliver page has a checkbox for "bypass encoding if possible". I do not know if washing your ProRes through here will make it more palatable for MC, but I do know it's very fast (faster than the encode in AME). Worth a try.


On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 3:05 PM David Zimmerly <djz@affinityproductions.tv> wrote:
You can also look under the hood via Activity Monitor to see which processes are running.  Pretty easy to spot any encoding threads.

David



_____________________________________________

David Zimmerly | Post Supervisor | Editor | Consultant

djz@affinityproductions.tv
2740-B Queensview Drive
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2B 2A2
t 613.820.4660 | c 613.277.9217 | f 613.820.5020
www.affinityproductions.tv



On Nov 20, 2020, at 2:46 PM, Michael Brockington <mbrock321@gmail.com> wrote:

How long does it take AME to spit out a new ProRes file, John?

If significantly longer than it takes to just copy the file, then it's clearly transcoding, not re-wrapping.

Cheers,
--Michael
_________________________________  Michael Brockington, film editor  www.minusblue.ca  .oO=Oo.


On 2020-11-20 10:19 AM, John Moore wrote:
I did find that using a "Save As" in QT Pro7 carried whatever issue Avid has over to the newly saved file.  Same if I did export in QT7Pro instead of "Save As."  I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.


On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 09:01 AM, Mark Spano wrote:
Almost positive any transcode in AME is a transcode and not a rewrap. I only ever got rewraps from Apple Compressor, and that was in the FCS3 era. I don't think the newer Compressor can do that anymore. In the ffmpeg world, you can rewrap very easily, but then you are preserving the Lavc data and only rewrapping into a new container, so I would bet you'd still have the consolidate issue in MC.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:38 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
So given I took a ProResHQ file into Adobe Media Encoder to spit out an identical but properly branded or signed or whatever the proper term is that makes Avid not see this ProResHQ file not as foreign compression it is theoretically possible that it could be no loss, it sounds like this is unlikely to be the way AME is coded.  So basically I'm asking when going from ProResHQ to ProResHQ does AME rewrap or transcode.  Since there is no change in the codec other than whatever metadata makes it a "blessed" proreshq in the eyes of Avid I'm wondering is there a chance it's a lossless process?
 
 
_._,_._

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134963) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

You can also look under the hood via Activity Monitor to see which processes are running.  Pretty easy to spot any encoding threads.

David



_____________________________________________

David Zimmerly | Post Supervisor | Editor | Consultant

djz@affinityproductions.tv
2740-B Queensview Drive
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2B 2A2
t 613.820.4660 | c 613.277.9217 | f 613.820.5020
www.affinityproductions.tv



On Nov 20, 2020, at 2:46 PM, Michael Brockington <mbrock321@gmail.com> wrote:

How long does it take AME to spit out a new ProRes file, John?

If significantly longer than it takes to just copy the file, then it's clearly transcoding, not re-wrapping.

Cheers,
--Michael
_________________________________  Michael Brockington, film editor  www.minusblue.ca  .oO=Oo.


On 2020-11-20 10:19 AM, John Moore wrote:
I did find that using a "Save As" in QT Pro7 carried whatever issue Avid has over to the newly saved file.  Same if I did export in QT7Pro instead of "Save As."  I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.


On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 09:01 AM, Mark Spano wrote:
Almost positive any transcode in AME is a transcode and not a rewrap. I only ever got rewraps from Apple Compressor, and that was in the FCS3 era. I don't think the newer Compressor can do that anymore. In the ffmpeg world, you can rewrap very easily, but then you are preserving the Lavc data and only rewrapping into a new container, so I would bet you'd still have the consolidate issue in MC.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:38 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
So given I took a ProResHQ file into Adobe Media Encoder to spit out an identical but properly branded or signed or whatever the proper term is that makes Avid not see this ProResHQ file not as foreign compression it is theoretically possible that it could be no loss, it sounds like this is unlikely to be the way AME is coded.  So basically I'm asking when going from ProResHQ to ProResHQ does AME rewrap or transcode.  Since there is no change in the codec other than whatever metadata makes it a "blessed" proreshq in the eyes of Avid I'm wondering is there a chance it's a lossless process?
 
 
_._,_._

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

How long does it take AME to spit out a new ProRes file, John?

If significantly longer than it takes to just copy the file, then it's clearly transcoding, not re-wrapping.

Cheers,
--Michael
_________________________________  Michael Brockington, film editor  www.minusblue.ca  .oO=Oo.


On 2020-11-20 10:19 AM, John Moore wrote:
I did find that using a "Save As" in QT Pro7 carried whatever issue Avid has over to the newly saved file.  Same if I did export in QT7Pro instead of "Save As."  I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.


On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 09:01 AM, Mark Spano wrote:
Almost positive any transcode in AME is a transcode and not a rewrap. I only ever got rewraps from Apple Compressor, and that was in the FCS3 era. I don't think the newer Compressor can do that anymore. In the ffmpeg world, you can rewrap very easily, but then you are preserving the Lavc data and only rewrapping into a new container, so I would bet you'd still have the consolidate issue in MC.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:38 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
So given I took a ProResHQ file into Adobe Media Encoder to spit out an identical but properly branded or signed or whatever the proper term is that makes Avid not see this ProResHQ file not as foreign compression it is theoretically possible that it could be no loss, it sounds like this is unlikely to be the way AME is coded.  So basically I'm asking when going from ProResHQ to ProResHQ does AME rewrap or transcode.  Since there is no change in the codec other than whatever metadata makes it a "blessed" proreshq in the eyes of Avid I'm wondering is there a chance it's a lossless process?

 

 

_._,_._

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

I did find that using a "Save As" in QT Pro7 carried whatever issue Avid has over to the newly saved file.  Same if I did export in QT7Pro instead of "Save As."  I'm thinking after hearing from my Netflix contact that they use FFmpeg and other in house custom apps to make their own kind of prores files.  Don't know what it facilitates but I'm sure it makes sense in their workflow.


On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 09:01 AM, Mark Spano wrote:
Almost positive any transcode in AME is a transcode and not a rewrap. I only ever got rewraps from Apple Compressor, and that was in the FCS3 era. I don't think the newer Compressor can do that anymore. In the ffmpeg world, you can rewrap very easily, but then you are preserving the Lavc data and only rewrapping into a new container, so I would bet you'd still have the consolidate issue in MC.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:38 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
So given I took a ProResHQ file into Adobe Media Encoder to spit out an identical but properly branded or signed or whatever the proper term is that makes Avid not see this ProResHQ file not as foreign compression it is theoretically possible that it could be no loss, it sounds like this is unlikely to be the way AME is coded.  So basically I'm asking when going from ProResHQ to ProResHQ does AME rewrap or transcode.  Since there is no change in the codec other than whatever metadata makes it a "blessed" proreshq in the eyes of Avid I'm wondering is there a chance it's a lossless process?

 

 

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134960) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

In a practical sense, any transcode will change the file.  The change
may be minuscule but it will almost never be for the better. In a
theoretical sense, if the file is decoded to an uncompressed state,
using the reverse of same math that was used to encode it originally,
and then that uncompressed file was re-encoded using the same math that
was used to encode it originally, the result should be identical to the
first encode.  The math that goes on in most codecs is scary complicated
so the odds of that happening in the real world are small.  On the plus
side, assuming that Prores is truly an intraframe codec, the math is
much simpler.
--J.B.

John Moore wrote:
> So given I took a ProResHQ file into Adobe Media Encoder to spit out
> an identical but properly branded or signed or whatever the proper
> term is that makes Avid not see this ProResHQ file not as foreign
> compression it is theoretically possible that it could be no loss, it
> sounds like this is unlikely to be the way AME is coded.  So basically
> I'm asking when going from ProResHQ to ProResHQ does AME rewrap or
> transcode.  Since there is no change in the codec other than whatever
> metadata makes it a "blessed" proreshq in the eyes of Avid I'm
> wondering is there a chance it's a lossless process?
>




-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#134959): https://groups.io/g/Avid-L2/message/134959
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/78347444/2971402
Group Owner: Avid-L2+owner@groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/Avid-L2/leave/5759084/1548653033/xyzzy [administrator242.death@blogger.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

Almost positive any transcode in AME is a transcode and not a rewrap. I only ever got rewraps from Apple Compressor, and that was in the FCS3 era. I don't think the newer Compressor can do that anymore. In the ffmpeg world, you can rewrap very easily, but then you are preserving the Lavc data and only rewrapping into a new container, so I would bet you'd still have the consolidate issue in MC.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 11:38 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
So given I took a ProResHQ file into Adobe Media Encoder to spit out an identical but properly branded or signed or whatever the proper term is that makes Avid not see this ProResHQ file not as foreign compression it is theoretically possible that it could be no loss, it sounds like this is unlikely to be the way AME is coded.  So basically I'm asking when going from ProResHQ to ProResHQ does AME rewrap or transcode.  Since there is no change in the codec other than whatever metadata makes it a "blessed" proreshq in the eyes of Avid I'm wondering is there a chance it's a lossless process?

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134958) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

So given I took a ProResHQ file into Adobe Media Encoder to spit out an identical but properly branded or signed or whatever the proper term is that makes Avid not see this ProResHQ file not as foreign compression it is theoretically possible that it could be no loss, it sounds like this is unlikely to be the way AME is coded.  So basically I'm asking when going from ProResHQ to ProResHQ does AME rewrap or transcode.  Since there is no change in the codec other than whatever metadata makes it a "blessed" proreshq in the eyes of Avid I'm wondering is there a chance it's a lossless process?
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134957) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

Please keep the Lingo correct.
Transcoding is transcoding, with 'generation loss', no matter how much that will hurt.
Re-wrapping (aka Avid consolidate old style) is 1 to 1
Re-wrapping on non I frame only codecs IS possible, but that means jump hoops. (Copy from I frame, set a new file start, not many apps can do this, but it IS possible.)

I'm behind, my Avid version is old, won't even run anymore, so I can't check, but in the past I've never had issues with FFmpeg generated  ProRes nor DNxHD.
(And I think my work has generated tons of clips for numerous studios.)

Paging Marianna, can I PLEASE have a developers licence?


Bouke

Edit 'B / VideoToolShed.com
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS  Nijmegen
+31 6 21817248

On 20 Nov 2020, at 14:07, pale.edit@gmail.com wrote:

If you re-encode, yes you are degrading..though with a good codec like ProRes HQ it might not be detectable for several generations.  It isn't a re-wrap, which just puts the video essence in a new container.  

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 7:26 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
Now my generic question is, "When I take the specialize Lavc57.24.102 netflix proreshq 3840_2160 file and transcode it to a new proresHQ file does AME degrade the proreshq video essence in the process or is it just passing the ones and zeros through and creating new compliant metadata.  In old linear terms am I doing a head wheel to head wheel dub or a composite video signal to get remodulated into a dub with a generation loss.  Given it's the same codec proreshq I'd hope it would be a non loss process.  Just curious.



Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

If you re-encode, yes you are degrading..though with a good codec like ProRes HQ it might not be detectable for several generations.  It isn't a re-wrap, which just puts the video essence in a new container.  

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 7:26 AM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
Now my generic question is, "When I take the specialize Lavc57.24.102 netflix proreshq 3840_2160 file and transcode it to a new proresHQ file does AME degrade the proreshq video essence in the process or is it just passing the ones and zeros through and creating new compliant metadata.  In old linear terms am I doing a head wheel to head wheel dub or a composite video signal to get remodulated into a dub with a generation loss.  Given it's the same codec proreshq I'd hope it would be a non loss process.  Just curious.

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134955) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

Now my generic question is, "When I take the specialize Lavc57.24.102 netflix proreshq 3840_2160 file and transcode it to a new proresHQ file does AME degrade the proreshq video essence in the process or is it just passing the ones and zeros through and creating new compliant metadata.  In old linear terms am I doing a head wheel to head wheel dub or a composite video signal to get remodulated into a dub with a generation loss.  Given it's the same codec proreshq I'd hope it would be a non loss process.  Just curious.
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134954) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 11:34 PM, John Moore wrote:
So I played around and a tried a "save as" and an export in QTPro 7 but neither worked.  The files still ended up with the Lavc... codec.  Running the files through Adobe Media Encoder seems to do the trick.  Then I just relink the ama master clips in the Avid bin to the new clips.  I tried consolidating one of the master clips and it worked so I figure now I can just relink all the ama clips to the AME washed files and then consolidate with handles the sequence.  What a silly pain.

 Here's a quirk I found.  After using AME to make compliant proreshq copies in a different folder and then relinking the ama clips to the new folder when I went to "consolidate only linked media" the first thing Avid did was relink back to the original files in the original folder.  I ejected the drive with the original files and then I could consolidate with out it relink to the original files.  I get that having both sets of files out there is dangerous but after manually relinking to the new files I didn't expect to have it automatically revert to the original files.  That's creepy on one level but I sort of see the logic.  It's like when changing soft metadata in a bin it doesn't necessarily stick to the clip until that clip get consolidated.
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134953) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Thursday, November 19, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

So I played around and a tried a "save as" and an export in QTPro 7 but neither worked.  The files still ended up with the Lavc... codec.  Running the files through Adobe Media Encoder seems to do the trick.  Then I just relink the ama master clips in the Avid bin to the new clips.  I tried consolidating one of the master clips and it worked so I figure now I can just relink all the ama clips to the AME washed files and then consolidate with handles the sequence.  What a silly pain.
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134952) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

These are some good suggestions.  I reached out to Marianna to see if any of the Avid folks might have an idea if it's the Netflix ProRes that is getting flagged as a foreign compression even though it will ama link through the QT Plug-in.  I tried both consolidate and transcode and got the same error.
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134951) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

ProMedia tools, amongst others.


On Nov 19, 2020, at 8:02 AM, pale.edit@gmail.com wrote:


Seems like it would be possible to edit the QuickTime metadata to match a "genuine" ProRes file and everything would work, but I don't know of a tool that could do that.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 8:10 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
I did try the subclip approach for just V1 but still no go.  It's a super simple sequence but I'll try  just one clip later.  I did hear from Netflix support:

"Hi John,

Yes, Netflix uses a raft of custom ffmpeg recipes (and some proprietary plug-ins) to do many of the backend encodings. I can only guess that Avid may not be able to transcode because it can't reliably identify the source codec.
You might try using another product (like Resolve) or ffmpeg itself to create a transcode outside of Avid to a more familiar codec. I personally haven't seen any software behave this way, especially considering that it's still a ProRes file and still abides by the ProRes spec.

"Hi John,

Yes, Netflix uses a raft of custom ffmpeg recipes (and some proprietary plug-ins) to do many of the backend encodings. I can only guess that Avid may not be able to transcode because it can't reliably identify the source codec. You might try using another product (like Resolve) or ffmpeg itself to create a transcode outside of Avid to a more familiar codec. I personally haven't seen any software behave this way, especially considering that it's still a ProRes file and still abides by the ProRes spec."

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

Seems like it would be possible to edit the QuickTime metadata to match a "genuine" ProRes file and everything would work, but I don't know of a tool that could do that.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 8:10 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
I did try the subclip approach for just V1 but still no go.  It's a super simple sequence but I'll try  just one clip later.  I did hear from Netflix support:

"Hi John,

Yes, Netflix uses a raft of custom ffmpeg recipes (and some proprietary plug-ins) to do many of the backend encodings. I can only guess that Avid may not be able to transcode because it can't reliably identify the source codec.
You might try using another product (like Resolve) or ffmpeg itself to create a transcode outside of Avid to a more familiar codec. I personally haven't seen any software behave this way, especially considering that it's still a ProRes file and still abides by the ProRes spec.

"Hi John,

Yes, Netflix uses a raft of custom ffmpeg recipes (and some proprietary plug-ins) to do many of the backend encodings. I can only guess that Avid may not be able to transcode because it can't reliably identify the source codec. You might try using another product (like Resolve) or ffmpeg itself to create a transcode outside of Avid to a more familiar codec. I personally haven't seen any software behave this way, especially considering that it's still a ProRes file and still abides by the ProRes spec."

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134949) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Wednesday, November 18, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

I did try the subclip approach for just V1 but still no go.  It's a super simple sequence but I'll try  just one clip later.  I did hear from Netflix support:

"Hi John,

Yes, Netflix uses a raft of custom ffmpeg recipes (and some proprietary plug-ins) to do many of the backend encodings. I can only guess that Avid may not be able to transcode because it can't reliably identify the source codec.
You might try using another product (like Resolve) or ffmpeg itself to create a transcode outside of Avid to a more familiar codec. I personally haven't seen any software behave this way, especially considering that it's still a ProRes file and still abides by the ProRes spec.

"Hi John,

Yes, Netflix uses a raft of custom ffmpeg recipes (and some proprietary plug-ins) to do many of the backend encodings. I can only guess that Avid may not be able to transcode because it can't reliably identify the source codec. You might try using another product (like Resolve) or ffmpeg itself to create a transcode outside of Avid to a more familiar codec. I personally haven't seen any software behave this way, especially considering that it's still a ProRes file and still abides by the ProRes spec."
_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134948) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

Hello John,

Please place this post in the "purely speculative ideas" category, and see what works…

1) Did you isolate the recalcitrant clip by sub-clipping it into a timeline with just one clip?  Often I have found that AMA linked footage will balk on transcode because of a complex timeline.  I typically place all AMA clips on a separate track of my timeline, sub clip to a new timeline, transcode, and then try re-linking the original timeline to the newly transcoded clips…sometimes I have to re-cut in the transcoded clips from the sub-clipped timeline if relink balks.

2) On the subject of "proprietary ProRes codecs" I know that at the house I work at most higher than HD shows are completed in DaVinci Resolve, on Linux based systems.  IIRC they have custom code for generating ProRes files.  In addition, there are several custom packages for producing ProRes files on non Mac systems, any of those could be causing the Mac to see them as non-standard ProRes.

My own .02, YMMV

Dave Hogan
Burbank, CA

On Nov 18, 2020, at 2:02 PM, John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

It's a clip show so I think these files probably came from Netflix.  Maybe some part of their internal infrastructure creates a custom version for their mezzanine level stuff.  I'll check with the AEs and my Netflix contact.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:37 PM, Mark Spano wrote:
Whenever I see Lavc, I usually think it's from ffmpeg or some other (let's say not 100% Apple approved ©) flavor. I've never seen the 'netflixprores' in there, but I imagine many people are trying different methods to make ProRes without getting the elusive seal of approval from Apple. It's possible that Avid wants only to play with native Apple branded ProRes so won't consolidate it. I am surprised that it can't transcode. Might have to batch those through Media Encoder or Resolve.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 1:30 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
Working on a clip show where the sources are ProResHQ 3840_2160.  Some of the clips in the online timeline are ama linked.  They were supposed to be consolidate to ProResHQ not linked.  I went to consolidate only linked clips to ProResHQ but I get an error saying some of the clips contain foreigh compression types.  Well I can see them in the timeline and the clips say they are using the QuickTime Plug-in.
 
Does Netflix have some sort of proprietary prores codec that Avid 2018.12.12 can link to but not consolidate or even transcode?
 
John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net
 
 

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

It's a clip show so I think these files probably came from Netflix.  Maybe some part of their internal infrastructure creates a custom version for their mezzanine level stuff.  I'll check with the AEs and my Netflix contact.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:37 PM, Mark Spano wrote:
Whenever I see Lavc, I usually think it's from ffmpeg or some other (let's say not 100% Apple approved ©) flavor. I've never seen the 'netflixprores' in there, but I imagine many people are trying different methods to make ProRes without getting the elusive seal of approval from Apple. It's possible that Avid wants only to play with native Apple branded ProRes so won't consolidate it. I am surprised that it can't transcode. Might have to batch those through Media Encoder or Resolve.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 1:30 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
Working on a clip show where the sources are ProResHQ 3840_2160.  Some of the clips in the online timeline are ama linked.  They were supposed to be consolidate to ProResHQ not linked.  I went to consolidate only linked clips to ProResHQ but I get an error saying some of the clips contain foreigh compression types.  Well I can see them in the timeline and the clips say they are using the QuickTime Plug-in.
 
Does Netflix have some sort of proprietary prores codec that Avid 2018.12.12 can link to but not consolidate or even transcode?
 
John Moore Barking Trout Productions Studio City, CA bigfish@pacbell.net

 

 

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134946) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

Whenever I see Lavc, I usually think it's from ffmpeg or some other (let's say not 100% Apple approved ©) flavor. I've never seen the 'netflixprores' in there, but I imagine many people are trying different methods to make ProRes without getting the elusive seal of approval from Apple. It's possible that Avid wants only to play with native Apple branded ProRes so won't consolidate it. I am surprised that it can't transcode. Might have to batch those through Media Encoder or Resolve.

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 1:30 PM John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:
Working on a clip show where the sources are ProResHQ 3840_2160.  Some of the clips in the online timeline are ama linked.  They were supposed to be consolidate to ProResHQ not linked.  I went to consolidate only linked clips to ProResHQ but I get an error saying some of the clips contain foreigh compression types.  Well I can see them in the timeline and the clips say they are using the QuickTime Plug-in.

Does Netflix have some sort of proprietary prores codec that Avid 2018.12.12 can link to but not consolidate or even transcode?

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

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134945) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

[Avid-L2] Lavc57.24.102 netflixprores 3840_2160 What is this codec that I can ama but not transcode or consolidate?

Working on a clip show where the sources are ProResHQ 3840_2160.  Some of the clips in the online timeline are ama linked.  They were supposed to be consolidate to ProResHQ not linked.  I went to consolidate only linked clips to ProResHQ but I get an error saying some of the clips contain foreigh compression types.  Well I can see them in the timeline and the clips say they are using the QuickTime Plug-in.

Does Netflix have some sort of proprietary prores codec that Avid 2018.12.12 can link to but not consolidate or even transcode?

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

Monday, November 16, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Best Collaboration/Review/Notes Tool for MC?

You can also use NDI with Avid and the free set of NDI Tools from Newtek. Same steps but no need to spend $500 on BMD Web Presenter. Use Virtual Camera to select the Avid NDI Out and/or Scan Converter to also grab your screen. This will be available on the Zoom Call too....

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134943) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Sunday, November 15, 2020

Re: [Avid-L2] Best Collaboration/Review/Notes Tool for MC?

Job,

     Great info, thanks for sharing!

     Just FYI, I'm constantly using my .edu (paid) Zoom account, and on a good day (when the wind is blowing just right & I've remembered to sacrifice a goat) I get HD through their system.  But not always; I'm guessing it's dependent on network congestion though I don't really know.

Cheers from Boston,
Wilson Chao



On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 1:50 PM Job ter Burg (L2) <Job_L2@terburg.com> wrote:
P.S. Apparently, if you contact Zoom support, they might enable HD for your regular webcam signal, and that would prevent the need to do the screensharing trick.
J


On 15 Nov 2020, at 19:26, Job ter Burg (L2B) <Job_L2@terburg.com> wrote:

Many credits to Sofi Marshall, who had posted a blog on remote editing via Zoom, way before we were all forced to start WFH in Q1.

https://sofimarshall.com/real-time-remote-editing/

However, her setup had the Avid signal as a webcam, which prior to the pandemic, may have streamed HD video, but the folks at Zoom had to cut that datarate off at some point. Hence my advice to 'screenshare' the Avid as a 'second camera', which can do 720p30.

J

On 15 Nov 2020, at 17:01, David Dodson <davaldod@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you so much, Job, for taking the time to write all this out. This is a monumental help.

DD




David Dodson








On Nov 15, 2020, at 1:00 AM, Job ter Burg (L2) <Job_L2@terburg.com> wrote:

Hi David,

I've been using Zoom, and that works quite well.

To properly see the Avid's playback you need

EITHER:
- an Avid with an I/O device that sends out HDMI.
- an HDMI-to-USB device, such as the Magewell USB Capture (approved by Zoom), or a BMD WebPresenter or a BMD Atem Mini.

OR: 
- you can use the free Virtual NDI software and MC's built-in NDI playback feature (not sure this works on all systems/OS's).


So the HDMI from the MC system goes into the USB Capture device, which runs back into the MC system (over USB). Zook can see this USB Capture device as a camera and microphone. BUT: it is much better to select 'Share Screen', Advanced, Content from 2nd Camera, and tick the boxes 'Share computer sound' and 'Optimize Screen Share for Video Clip'. Because zoom will set the regular webcam resolution to something like 800x600, while screen share allows 720p in a quite decent quality. If you're using WebPresenter on Mac, you will then need to click 'Switch Camera' until you reach the desired resolution (as Webpresenter shows itself as 25 different webcams, one device for each resolution/framerate it supports) — this is not needed with the Magewell unit.

Also, in your Zoom profile, you need to allow the option to 'Turn on Original Sound', and in the meeting you need to click that option (top left of the screen). This will strip all 'sound enhancement' features, which generally kill all BG noise etc. as this is not something you want while reviewing footage or cuts.

Then it becomes a matter of how you like to work. Me, I use a _different_ computer for my own webcam/mic. You can do it on one system, but I found it cumbersome, and it required using tools like Loopback to route the different sound sources, and I definitely don't want to work with headphones on all friggin' day.

So I log into the same Zoom meeting twice. Once on my Avid system, once on my webcam/mic computer (iMac). So the Avid system is a participant, and so is my iMac. On this iMac I will now see exactly the same picture and sound as the remote client does. I can also chat with the other party while reviewing stuff.

You need a Zoom Pro account to be abe to host sessions longer than 40 mins (and perhaps even to have more than 2 people on a call).


Obviously, looking at an iMac screen all day and hearing just the iMac sound isn't great. So for my studio setup, I do it somewhat differently:
- Avid system runs HDMI into Magewell, is a participant on the call, sharing its screen.
- Webcam and microphone run into a Mac mini, which is attached to my large OLED client monitor and to my audio monitoring system.
This means that I actually look at the same screen and via the same speakers as I would when not Zooming. Obviously, with some delay, but it is manageable.


Other folks may prefer to use one system, and keep their own regular monitoring, without the delay. But then you will definitely need to work with unidirectional microphones and headphones, or headsets.


I personally never share the timeline/source/record monitors, but it is possible. I just never had the need to do so. 


In my experience, these Zoom sessions are way more tiring that the regular way of working. I hardly ever did more than 2x 3hrs of Zooming on a given day. Normally I would do half a working day editing alone, half a working day collaborating via Zoom.


In order for things to work nicely, all parties need to be on wired internet. You don't want any wifi issues ruin the connection. If the connection is not stable enough, using the higher quality screen share will quickly run out of sync.


Hope this helps.

Best
Job




On 9 Nov 2020, at 18:42, David Dodson <davaldod@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi, guys,

Shooting has ended on a feature I'm cutting, and now we've got a Covid-era situation in which the the director and producers who would nominally participate in the room are going to be in Iceland, Palm Springs, and here in L.A. during the process.

I need to know what people like for a kind of screen sharing app (even Zoom, maybe?) that allows everyone to see my Media Composer desktop and watch along as I hack and chop and everyone throws in their two cents or two króna.

Opinions, referrals appreciated.

DD




David Dodson




















































_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#134942) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_

Re: [Avid-L2] Best Collaboration/Review/Notes Tool for MC?

P.S. Apparently, if you contact Zoom support, they might enable HD for your regular webcam signal, and that would prevent the need to do the screensharing trick.
J

On 15 Nov 2020, at 19:26, Job ter Burg (L2B) <Job_L2@terburg.com> wrote:

Many credits to Sofi Marshall, who had posted a blog on remote editing via Zoom, way before we were all forced to start WFH in Q1.

https://sofimarshall.com/real-time-remote-editing/

However, her setup had the Avid signal as a webcam, which prior to the pandemic, may have streamed HD video, but the folks at Zoom had to cut that datarate off at some point. Hence my advice to 'screenshare' the Avid as a 'second camera', which can do 720p30.

J

On 15 Nov 2020, at 17:01, David Dodson <davaldod@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you so much, Job, for taking the time to write all this out. This is a monumental help.

DD


David Dodson




On Nov 15, 2020, at 1:00 AM, Job ter Burg (L2) <Job_L2@terburg.com> wrote:

Hi David,

I've been using Zoom, and that works quite well.

To properly see the Avid's playback you need

EITHER:
- an Avid with an I/O device that sends out HDMI.
- an HDMI-to-USB device, such as the Magewell USB Capture (approved by Zoom), or a BMD WebPresenter or a BMD Atem Mini.

OR: 
- you can use the free Virtual NDI software and MC's built-in NDI playback feature (not sure this works on all systems/OS's).


So the HDMI from the MC system goes into the USB Capture device, which runs back into the MC system (over USB). Zook can see this USB Capture device as a camera and microphone. BUT: it is much better to select 'Share Screen', Advanced, Content from 2nd Camera, and tick the boxes 'Share computer sound' and 'Optimize Screen Share for Video Clip'. Because zoom will set the regular webcam resolution to something like 800x600, while screen share allows 720p in a quite decent quality. If you're using WebPresenter on Mac, you will then need to click 'Switch Camera' until you reach the desired resolution (as Webpresenter shows itself as 25 different webcams, one device for each resolution/framerate it supports) — this is not needed with the Magewell unit.

Also, in your Zoom profile, you need to allow the option to 'Turn on Original Sound', and in the meeting you need to click that option (top left of the screen). This will strip all 'sound enhancement' features, which generally kill all BG noise etc. as this is not something you want while reviewing footage or cuts.

Then it becomes a matter of how you like to work. Me, I use a _different_ computer for my own webcam/mic. You can do it on one system, but I found it cumbersome, and it required using tools like Loopback to route the different sound sources, and I definitely don't want to work with headphones on all friggin' day.

So I log into the same Zoom meeting twice. Once on my Avid system, once on my webcam/mic computer (iMac). So the Avid system is a participant, and so is my iMac. On this iMac I will now see exactly the same picture and sound as the remote client does. I can also chat with the other party while reviewing stuff.

You need a Zoom Pro account to be abe to host sessions longer than 40 mins (and perhaps even to have more than 2 people on a call).


Obviously, looking at an iMac screen all day and hearing just the iMac sound isn't great. So for my studio setup, I do it somewhat differently:
- Avid system runs HDMI into Magewell, is a participant on the call, sharing its screen.
- Webcam and microphone run into a Mac mini, which is attached to my large OLED client monitor and to my audio monitoring system.
This means that I actually look at the same screen and via the same speakers as I would when not Zooming. Obviously, with some delay, but it is manageable.


Other folks may prefer to use one system, and keep their own regular monitoring, without the delay. But then you will definitely need to work with unidirectional microphones and headphones, or headsets.


I personally never share the timeline/source/record monitors, but it is possible. I just never had the need to do so. 


In my experience, these Zoom sessions are way more tiring that the regular way of working. I hardly ever did more than 2x 3hrs of Zooming on a given day. Normally I would do half a working day editing alone, half a working day collaborating via Zoom.


In order for things to work nicely, all parties need to be on wired internet. You don't want any wifi issues ruin the connection. If the connection is not stable enough, using the higher quality screen share will quickly run out of sync.


Hope this helps.

Best
Job




On 9 Nov 2020, at 18:42, David Dodson <davaldod@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi, guys,

Shooting has ended on a feature I'm cutting, and now we've got a Covid-era situation in which the the director and producers who would nominally participate in the room are going to be in Iceland, Palm Springs, and here in L.A. during the process.

I need to know what people like for a kind of screen sharing app (even Zoom, maybe?) that allows everyone to see my Media Composer desktop and watch along as I hack and chop and everyone throws in their two cents or two króna.

Opinions, referrals appreciated.

DD


David Dodson