Thanks for all the great info. Today the AE is in and low and behold when he made sure "Legacy XDCam support" was checked on he was able to decompose with handles. I had thought they tried that the other night when we were troubleshooting but I guess that wasn't the case.
As to the speed of the XDCam import back when it was new I was at an Editor's Lounge demo and the presenter specifically said that to selectively import XDCam clips was very slow compared to importing the entire clip. His method at the time was to import the entire clip to save time but sacrifice storage space. I'm pretty sure that was then and now that particular problem was resolved. At the time it wasn't about USB 2 being slow there was something in the process that made it time consuming. I can't imagine that wasn't resolved a long time ago but I want to make sure we test that too before committing to this workflow.
---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <kwikpasta@...> wrote :
"What you are saying makes sense about adding a tape name but that is not supposed to be needed in XD Direct's batch import workflow"
Yes, I have found the decompose problem to be more like a bug. Something that shouldn't need to be done but that has to be in order to get the correctly decomposed clips. The facility that uses this method is all on 6.5.4 so I have no way to test if a different version has solved this problem.
"does that mean I can AMA link to an XDCam disk then transcode to an offline SD resolution. Edit in the SD offline 23.976 project and then take the sequence into an HD project, modify the format to HD, and then decompose to end up with the shorter clips with handles?"
I have found that you have to do one or the other. Either you AMA to start with and then AMA to finish, or you use legacy mode to import your mxf's to start with and then use batch import to finish. I've seen Avid throw it's toys out of the pram when someone has AMA'd clips in and then we have tried to batch import them later after a decompose. I wouldn't decompose if I had AMA'd the clips in, I would just relink and consolidate as you would with any other file based conform.
"The one difference is that there is no tape name on the XD Cam clips right? And I've been under the impression that adding a tape name to the XDCam clips will defeat the ability to batch import later."
It doesn't. Adding a tape name destroys the source path info column which does suggest that Avid has just broken it's link to the import location but in reality you are still able to batch import from clips that have a tape name and indeed with this bug/whatever it is you need to add a tape name in order to get properly decomposed clips. After you have these clips you can batch import with no problems.
"Have I misunderstood about the ability of XDCam to selectively import just the sections used from an XD Cam with handles?"
No, you are correct, once decomposed, just the section of the clip you need can be imported.
"I remember early on with XDCam the selective clip import was painfully slow but I thought that was ironed out years ago. Am I wrong about that?"
If you are using a PDW-U2 to import then it has a USB 3.0 connection and the batch import is very fast. The U1's were only USB 2.0 and so the batch import process is slower.
Sorry I can't be more help with AI Direct, I only use it for non-proxy workflows so I've not had to deal with conforming from media generated by it, it's all full rez.
Andi
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 22:50:09 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
Yes, I have found the decompose problem to be more like a bug. Something that shouldn't need to be done but that has to be in order to get the correctly decomposed clips. The facility that uses this method is all on 6.5.4 so I have no way to test if a different version has solved this problem.
"does that mean I can AMA link to an XDCam disk then transcode to an offline SD resolution. Edit in the SD offline 23.976 project and then take the sequence into an HD project, modify the format to HD, and then decompose to end up with the shorter clips with handles?"
I have found that you have to do one or the other. Either you AMA to start with and then AMA to finish, or you use legacy mode to import your mxf's to start with and then use batch import to finish. I've seen Avid throw it's toys out of the pram when someone has AMA'd clips in and then we have tried to batch import them later after a decompose. I wouldn't decompose if I had AMA'd the clips in, I would just relink and consolidate as you would with any other file based conform.
"The one difference is that there is no tape name on the XD Cam clips right? And I've been under the impression that adding a tape name to the XDCam clips will defeat the ability to batch import later."
It doesn't. Adding a tape name destroys the source path info column which does suggest that Avid has just broken it's link to the import location but in reality you are still able to batch import from clips that have a tape name and indeed with this bug/whatever it is you need to add a tape name in order to get properly decomposed clips. After you have these clips you can batch import with no problems.
"Have I misunderstood about the ability of XDCam to selectively import just the sections used from an XD Cam with handles?"
No, you are correct, once decomposed, just the section of the clip you need can be imported.
"I remember early on with XDCam the selective clip import was painfully slow but I thought that was ironed out years ago. Am I wrong about that?"
If you are using a PDW-U2 to import then it has a USB 3.0 connection and the batch import is very fast. The U1's were only USB 2.0 and so the batch import process is slower.
Sorry I can't be more help with AI Direct, I only use it for non-proxy workflows so I've not had to deal with conforming from media generated by it, it's all full rez.
Andi
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 22:50:09 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
What you are saying makes sense about adding a tape name but that is not supposed to be needed in XD Direct's batch import workflow. They also have a "batch capture" mode which adds tape names to the material as part of the ingest automatically. But the "Batch Capture" workflow is for when you have one of the XD Cam decks and end up capturing with deck control like we would have with tape.
Clearly there is something we are doing wrong or there is some aspect of Ver. 6.5.4 that is problematic. I wonder if there is anything with the ama preference about legacy XDCam support being checked or not that might interfere with this process. I'm pretty sure the AEs tried working with both choices and still could not get a proper decompose.
When you say, "You can decompose xdcam clips fine. Avid treats it just like it would a tape." does that mean I can AMA link to an XDCam disk then transcode to an offline SD resolution. Edit in the SD offline 23.976 project and then take the sequence into an HD project, modify the format to HD, and then decompose to end up with the shorter clips with handles? Assuming all that is correct then for uprezzing I would think I could ama link to the original XDCam and relink the sequence and then transcode with handles. In this scenario it seems like I wouldn't even need to decompose first as I could transcode with handles. The fact that you say, "Avid treats it like tape." is what I've been under the impression of from all I've heard the past few years. The one difference is that there is no tape name on the XD Cam clips right? And I've been under the impression that adding a tape name to the XDCam clips will defeat the ability to batch import later.
Have I misunderstood about the ability of XDCam to selectively import just the sections used from an XD Cam with handles? Perhaps I've confused this with transcoding a relinked sequence with handles? I remember early on with XDCam the selective clip import was painfully slow but I thought that was ironed out years ago. Am I wrong about that?
Unfortunately I have not worked on many projects that shot XDCam and those I have the uprezzing was done by AEs and I didn't have any dealings with the exact uprezzing of the material.
---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <kwikpasta@...> wrote :
Clearly there is something we are doing wrong or there is some aspect of Ver. 6.5.4 that is problematic. I wonder if there is anything with the ama preference about legacy XDCam support being checked or not that might interfere with this process. I'm pretty sure the AEs tried working with both choices and still could not get a proper decompose.
When you say, "You can decompose xdcam clips fine. Avid treats it just like it would a tape." does that mean I can AMA link to an XDCam disk then transcode to an offline SD resolution. Edit in the SD offline 23.976 project and then take the sequence into an HD project, modify the format to HD, and then decompose to end up with the shorter clips with handles? Assuming all that is correct then for uprezzing I would think I could ama link to the original XDCam and relink the sequence and then transcode with handles. In this scenario it seems like I wouldn't even need to decompose first as I could transcode with handles. The fact that you say, "Avid treats it like tape." is what I've been under the impression of from all I've heard the past few years. The one difference is that there is no tape name on the XD Cam clips right? And I've been under the impression that adding a tape name to the XDCam clips will defeat the ability to batch import later.
Have I misunderstood about the ability of XDCam to selectively import just the sections used from an XD Cam with handles? Perhaps I've confused this with transcoding a relinked sequence with handles? I remember early on with XDCam the selective clip import was painfully slow but I thought that was ironed out years ago. Am I wrong about that?
Unfortunately I have not worked on many projects that shot XDCam and those I have the uprezzing was done by AEs and I didn't have any dealings with the exact uprezzing of the material.
---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <kwikpasta@...> wrote :
You can decompose xdcam clips fine. Avid treats it just like it would a tape. Decompose captured and imported or just imported and you will get clips that relate to your sequence and not the entire master clip. Like I said, I've seen this problem happen before (and coincidence or not, it was also in 6.5.4) and the way to fix it so you don't decompose and just get full length clips is to show reference clips on your sequence before decomposing and add a tape name. Then decompose and you should only get short clips which relate to the sequence.
Andi
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 12:01:11 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 12:01:11 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
Honestly I missed that part of your post or forgot about it because according to the rental house specialist you can decompose then using there "batch import" workflow. This was demonstrated to the AEs in a demo but now back at our production house they can't seem to get it to work.
My limited experience/knowledge with XDCam material is that it was one of the first formats that truly allowed for a proper workflow that would not import entire clips so I'm surprise Avid isn't decomposing those clips. I know Avid use to decompose with handles standard imports and that would screw them up. Now I'm not sure if Avid is protecting us from that kind of screw up that had been allowed in the past.
I'm pretty sure we've done something wrong in setting up the XD Direct settings or there is something about our Avid settings that can be fixed. I can't imagine the rental house would be unaware of this major problem. I do know they said to decompose the sequence before batch importing. I would have thought it would have been an ama linking to the master material and relinking the sequence to that and then a transcode with handles but more will be revealed and I'll post what the solution is.
---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <kwikpasta@...> wrote :
My limited experience/knowledge with XDCam material is that it was one of the first formats that truly allowed for a proper workflow that would not import entire clips so I'm surprise Avid isn't decomposing those clips. I know Avid use to decompose with handles standard imports and that would screw them up. Now I'm not sure if Avid is protecting us from that kind of screw up that had been allowed in the past.
I'm pretty sure we've done something wrong in setting up the XD Direct settings or there is something about our Avid settings that can be fixed. I can't imagine the rental house would be unaware of this major problem. I do know they said to decompose the sequence before batch importing. I would have thought it would have been an ama linking to the master material and relinking the sequence to that and then a transcode with handles but more will be revealed and I'll post what the solution is.
---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <kwikpasta@...> wrote :
John, did you read my previous email where I mentioned this problem? Adding a tape name to the reference clips will allow you to decompose without it trying to do the entire clip.
Andi
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 00:55:59 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 00:55:59 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
Another thing came up with our testing of XD direct. After ingesting some test XD Cams the AEs cut a small sequence and no matter what we've done Avid 6.5.4 wants to batch import the entire XD Cam clips not just the sections that were used with handles.
We tried decomposing the sequences, which scared me but was recommended by the rental house as the proper workflow, and when we tried to decompose Avid just created decompose clips that are the length of the entire original XD Cam clips.
We tried decomposing both captured and imported clips and got the above result. We tried decomposing only imported clips and got the same result and when we tried decomposing only captured clips no clips were created. So clearly Avid knows these clips are imports.
Traditionally decomposing imports is a no no but Avid would allow you to do it. Now I don't know if our inability to decompose these clips with handles is an Avid thing where is trying to protect us from screwing up or if there is something about the XD Direct that is prohibiting a traditional decompose of the XD Direct clips. I'm figuring it's something we are missing either in XD Direct settings or an Avid setting we haven't found yet.
I was thinking that the XD Direct SD 23.976 clips for offline would allow for an uprez that would just be ama linking to the XDCam master disk and the online sequence would just come online or perhaps require a relink to selected clips in open bins. Then we could do this for each disk needed and transcode with handles to make the online rez clips. I'm not sure if that will work as the suggestion is a batch import after decomposing the online sequence and that does not appear to be cooperating at this point. I'm sure with the proper guidance from the rental house we will sort it out.
We tried decomposing the sequences, which scared me but was recommended by the rental house as the proper workflow, and when we tried to decompose Avid just created decompose clips that are the length of the entire original XD Cam clips.
We tried decomposing both captured and imported clips and got the above result. We tried decomposing only imported clips and got the same result and when we tried decomposing only captured clips no clips were created. So clearly Avid knows these clips are imports.
Traditionally decomposing imports is a no no but Avid would allow you to do it. Now I don't know if our inability to decompose these clips with handles is an Avid thing where is trying to protect us from screwing up or if there is something about the XD Direct that is prohibiting a traditional decompose of the XD Direct clips. I'm figuring it's something we are missing either in XD Direct settings or an Avid setting we haven't found yet.
I was thinking that the XD Direct SD 23.976 clips for offline would allow for an uprez that would just be ama linking to the XDCam master disk and the online sequence would just come online or perhaps require a relink to selected clips in open bins. Then we could do this for each disk needed and transcode with handles to make the online rez clips. I'm not sure if that will work as the suggestion is a batch import after decomposing the online sequence and that does not appear to be cooperating at this point. I'm sure with the proper guidance from the rental house we will sort it out.
__._,_.___
Posted by: bigfish@pacbell.net
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (11) |
this is the Avid-L2
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment