Having worked A LOT with XDCam footage - I also agree on all points. We
rough cut, or log using AMA, then transcode at the first opportunity.
Seems to be fairly rock solid.
I also do A LOT of cutting on Premier Pro at a client's location. There
are some things I will do first on Premier - namely anything that
involves moves on graphics or stills - but anything with large amounts
of footage or anything likely to be revised at a later date goes
straight to Avid.
Another point - Avid MC5 will run fine on my 6 or 7 year old Macbook
Pro.. Premier will too, but it's painful. FCP7? Forget it. The
render times slow editing to the point where you better be doing all
cuts, or you can't check your own work.
Mark
On 6/10/2012 6:34 PM, Job ter Burg (L2B) wrote:
>
>
> Mr Hullfish,
>
> Excellently put. Amen on all points you make.
>
> Job.
>
> On 10 jun. 2012, at 21:50, Steve Hullfish wrote:
>
> > I agree. I respect Walter and the things he tried, but he made some
> fundamental mistakes and made some poor assumptions that don't apply
> to everyone. I don't disagree with some of his Avid issues, but the
> answer is neither FCP7 or FCP8 or PPro or FCPX either.
> >
> > Terry Curren - and others - have pointed out that ALL NLEs have
> "payments" that MUST be made.
> >
> > You can pay at the beginning of the process - transcoding/importing.
> > You can pay in the middle of the process - (lack of transcoding
> means slow/sketchy performance while editing *THE WORST
> > You can pay at the end of the process - exporting/rendering/output.
> >
> > Personally, I think that the most professional "payment" is at the
> beginning, because under deadline, you don't want the LAST part to go
> wrong. Or worse, like Walter, you get to the end and find out that it
> doesn't really work.
> >
> > AMA isn't a bad option because you can actually kind of "rent to
> own." You don't pay until you figure out what you can completely
> dismiss - thereby saving time and storage - but you pay before you
> have to actually start editing. Use AMA to bring stuff in and look at
> it, then immediately transcode. That's the best current solution, I think.
> >
> > I always hated the way FCP dealt with rendering (pay later AND pay
> often), but the old Avid importing was INCREDIBLY slow. AMA kind of
> works to be both the best of both worlds and unfortunately also the
> lesser of two evils.
> >
> > The biggest indictment of Avid that I saw was IF they are indeed
> really pushing AMA as a solution that DOESN'T really require
> transcoding, then that's not wise on Avid's part. I have tried several
> times to edit pure AMA content. You don't get very far very fast.
> >
> > Steve Hullfish
> > contributor: www.provideocoalition.com
> > author: "The Art and Technique of Digital Color Correction"
> >
> > On Jun 10, 2012, at 2:11 PM, James Culbertson wrote:
> >>
> >> If he had chosen to go with FCPX he might have become a different
> sort of litmus test for this group.
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, in my experience, there are no easy answers. The
> only way to really know what works best for you is to do your own tests.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Owner/Director
SR Film & Video Productions
195 W Broad St
Salunga PA 17538
717-393-5333
www.SR-Pro.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
No comments:
Post a Comment