Tuesday, December 31, 2013

[Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 

From a quick google:

EVS adds XDCam codec to XT3 and XS broadcast servers

Leading broadcast production provider, EVS, goes native with industry standard Sony XDCam codec from the end of 2012

Liège, 11 April 2012 – EVS, a leading provider of broadcast and media production systems for sports, news and TV entertainment, has announced native support for Sony XDCAM 422 50Mbps HD codec in its flagship XT3 and XS suite of live and near-live broadcast production servers. The production technology specialist developed an integrated module to its XT3 and XS servers, offering native XDCAM encoding and decoding capabilities - the leading codec of choice for a range of studio productions. The new XDCam support capability will be available from the end of 2012.

Now the question is if this is a paid option module. My gut says they would charge for this extra feature but I don't know for sure. My impression is EVS isn't in the business of charity when it comes to adding new features so it would seem prudent to check with the TD or Truck EIC to see if this capability is implemented at a venue.

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "johnrobmoore" <bigfish@...> wrote:
>
> Good to know. I remember various options that would allow for ProRes and Avid .mxf that I saw a few years back at NAB. My impression at the time and what I've heard from a sports director friend is that it depends on what options a particular EVS unit has. Perhaps they all support the DNX and or ProRes now. I'll see what I can find out about EVS and XDCam support. I see some googling in my future while my last output is going to tape. Ahhhhh the comfort of Tape. Oh well back to reality.
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Bogdan Grigorescu <bogdan_grigorescu@> wrote:
> >
> > to my knowledge, all EVS products support the XDCAMHD 422 codec natively.
> >
> > BG
> > http://www.finale.tv
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: johnrobmoore <bigfish@>
> > To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:34 PM
> > Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> > Good suggestion unfortunately I don't think they could deal with it at the remote truck. I've had to send HDCam reels with fill and alpha on different tapes so they can sync roll and ingest simultaneously into the EVS. If is wasn't so close to air I'd offer that up as a suggestion. Now I have another tool in the box for next time. Of course if it wasn't for last minute changes we wouldn't have to ........... insert complaint of your choice here. ;-) It is fun to be close to live though.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Bogdan Grigorescu <bogdan_grigorescu@> wrote:
> > >
> > > send them an .mxf file of the show. XDCAM is probably the most efficient codec.
> > >
> > > BG
> > > http://www.finale.tv
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: John Moore <bigfish@>
> > > To: Avid L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:03 PM
> > > Subject: [Avid-L2] OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > > So I've been building roll in reels for a live show.  Of course the last minute changes required a satellite feed today.  Some of the segments had already been delivered on tape a day ago.  Now they are complaining about the feed video's quality compared to the tape.  This a major network doing the sat and then a fibre feed and I'm told it looked good in Burbank and in New York network but at the truck it's soft or some such complaint when compared to the tape.  We've made changes to the video so they don't want to use the tape version.
> > >
> > > I've never really dealt hands on with transmission stuff but I'm told they compress the video, an HDCam source, for transmission.  Can someone enlighten me on the pipe line.  I figured they sent baseband video over the fibre or Satellite but I keep hearing about compression.  What do they do to compress the signal.  Given the little bit of info I have on the problem it sounds like it's leaving Burbank OK, hitting NY main studios center OK but getting to the remote truck it's not good.  That sounds like the main studio to truck is the issue.  We are going to resend this afternoon but I'm surprised this is a major network that sends feeds back and forth all day long.  Any insight would be appreciated.
> > >
> > >  
> > > John Moore
> > > Barking Trout Productions
> > > Studio City,
> > > CA
> > > bigfish@
> > >
> >
>

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 

Good to know. I remember various options that would allow for ProRes and Avid .mxf that I saw a few years back at NAB. My impression at the time and what I've heard from a sports director friend is that it depends on what options a particular EVS unit has. Perhaps they all support the DNX and or ProRes now. I'll see what I can find out about EVS and XDCam support. I see some googling in my future while my last output is going to tape. Ahhhhh the comfort of Tape. Oh well back to reality.

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Bogdan Grigorescu <bogdan_grigorescu@...> wrote:
>
> to my knowledge, all EVS products support the XDCAMHD 422 codec natively.
>
> BG
> http://www.finale.tv
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: johnrobmoore <bigfish@...>
> To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:34 PM
> Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?
>
>
>
>  
> Good suggestion unfortunately I don't think they could deal with it at the remote truck. I've had to send HDCam reels with fill and alpha on different tapes so they can sync roll and ingest simultaneously into the EVS. If is wasn't so close to air I'd offer that up as a suggestion. Now I have another tool in the box for next time. Of course if it wasn't for last minute changes we wouldn't have to ........... insert complaint of your choice here. ;-) It is fun to be close to live though.
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Bogdan Grigorescu <bogdan_grigorescu@> wrote:
> >
> > send them an .mxf file of the show. XDCAM is probably the most efficient codec.
> >
> > BG
> > http://www.finale.tv
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: John Moore <bigfish@>
> > To: Avid L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:03 PM
> > Subject: [Avid-L2] OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> > So I've been building roll in reels for a live show.  Of course the last minute changes required a satellite feed today.  Some of the segments had already been delivered on tape a day ago.  Now they are complaining about the feed video's quality compared to the tape.  This a major network doing the sat and then a fibre feed and I'm told it looked good in Burbank and in New York network but at the truck it's soft or some such complaint when compared to the tape.  We've made changes to the video so they don't want to use the tape version.
> >
> > I've never really dealt hands on with transmission stuff but I'm told they compress the video, an HDCam source, for transmission.  Can someone enlighten me on the pipe line.  I figured they sent baseband video over the fibre or Satellite but I keep hearing about compression.  What do they do to compress the signal.  Given the little bit of info I have on the problem it sounds like it's leaving Burbank OK, hitting NY main studios center OK but getting to the remote truck it's not good.  That sounds like the main studio to truck is the issue.  We are going to resend this afternoon but I'm surprised this is a major network that sends feeds back and forth all day long.  Any insight would be appreciated.
> >
> >  
> > John Moore
> > Barking Trout Productions
> > Studio City,
> > CA
> > bigfish@
> >
>

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (6)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 

to my knowledge, all EVS products support the XDCAMHD 422 codec natively.

BG


From: johnrobmoore <bigfish@pacbell.net>
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:34 PM
Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 
Good suggestion unfortunately I don't think they could deal with it at the remote truck. I've had to send HDCam reels with fill and alpha on different tapes so they can sync roll and ingest simultaneously into the EVS. If is wasn't so close to air I'd offer that up as a suggestion. Now I have another tool in the box for next time. Of course if it wasn't for last minute changes we wouldn't have to ........... insert complaint of your choice here. ;-) It is fun to be close to live though.

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Bogdan Grigorescu <bogdan_grigorescu@...> wrote:
>
> send them an .mxf file of the show. XDCAM is probably the most efficient codec.
>
> BG
> http://www.finale.tv
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: John Moore <bigfish@...>
> To: Avid L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:03 PM
> Subject: [Avid-L2] OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?
>
>
>
>  
> So I've been building roll in reels for a live show.  Of course the last minute changes required a satellite feed today.  Some of the segments had already been delivered on tape a day ago.  Now they are complaining about the feed video's quality compared to the tape.  This a major network doing the sat and then a fibre feed and I'm told it looked good in Burbank and in New York network but at the truck it's soft or some such complaint when compared to the tape.  We've made changes to the video so they don't want to use the tape version.
>
> I've never really dealt hands on with transmission stuff but I'm told they compress the video, an HDCam source, for transmission.  Can someone enlighten me on the pipe line.  I figured they sent baseband video over the fibre or Satellite but I keep hearing about compression.  What do they do to compress the signal.  Given the little bit of info I have on the problem it sounds like it's leaving Burbank OK, hitting NY main studios center OK but getting to the remote truck it's not good.  That sounds like the main studio to truck is the issue.  We are going to resend this afternoon but I'm surprised this is a major network that sends feeds back and forth all day long.  Any insight would be appreciated.
>
>  
> John Moore
> Barking Trout Productions
> Studio City,
> CA
> bigfish@...
>



__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 

Good suggestion unfortunately I don't think they could deal with it at the remote truck. I've had to send HDCam reels with fill and alpha on different tapes so they can sync roll and ingest simultaneously into the EVS. If is wasn't so close to air I'd offer that up as a suggestion. Now I have another tool in the box for next time. Of course if it wasn't for last minute changes we wouldn't have to ........... insert complaint of your choice here. ;-) It is fun to be close to live though.

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Bogdan Grigorescu <bogdan_grigorescu@...> wrote:
>
> send them an .mxf file of the show. XDCAM is probably the most efficient codec.
>
> BG
> http://www.finale.tv
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: John Moore <bigfish@...>
> To: Avid L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:03 PM
> Subject: [Avid-L2] OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?
>
>
>
>  
> So I've been building roll in reels for a live show.  Of course the last minute changes required a satellite feed today.  Some of the segments had already been delivered on tape a day ago.  Now they are complaining about the feed video's quality compared to the tape.  This a major network doing the sat and then a fibre feed and I'm told it looked good in Burbank and in New York network but at the truck it's soft or some such complaint when compared to the tape.  We've made changes to the video so they don't want to use the tape version.
>
> I've never really dealt hands on with transmission stuff but I'm told they compress the video, an HDCam source, for transmission.  Can someone enlighten me on the pipe line.  I figured they sent baseband video over the fibre or Satellite but I keep hearing about compression.  What do they do to compress the signal.  Given the little bit of info I have on the problem it sounds like it's leaving Burbank OK, hitting NY main studios center OK but getting to the remote truck it's not good.  That sounds like the main studio to truck is the issue.  We are going to resend this afternoon but I'm surprised this is a major network that sends feeds back and forth all day long.  Any insight would be appreciated.
>
>  
> John Moore
> Barking Trout Productions
> Studio City,
> CA
> bigfish@...
>

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 

send them an .mxf file of the show. XDCAM is probably the most efficient codec.

BG


From: John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net>
To: Avid L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 2:03 PM
Subject: [Avid-L2] OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 
So I've been building roll in reels for a live show.  Of course the last minute changes required a satellite feed today.  Some of the segments had already been delivered on tape a day ago.  Now they are complaining about the feed video's quality compared to the tape.  This a major network doing the sat and then a fibre feed and I'm told it looked good in Burbank and in New York network but at the truck it's soft or some such complaint when compared to the tape.  We've made changes to the video so they don't want to use the tape version.

I've never really dealt hands on with transmission stuff but I'm told they compress the video, an HDCam source, for transmission.  Can someone enlighten me on the pipe line.  I figured they sent baseband video over the fibre or Satellite but I keep hearing about compression.  What do they do to compress the signal.  Given the little bit of info I have on the problem it sounds like it's leaving Burbank OK, hitting NY main studios center OK but getting to the remote truck it's not good.  That sounds like the main studio to truck is the issue.  We are going to resend this afternoon but I'm surprised this is a major network that sends feeds back and forth all day long.  Any insight would be appreciated.
 
John Moore
Barking Trout Productions
Studio City, CA
bigfish@pacbell.net


__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (3)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 

I should add that we are going to resend the video and also send a dnx file over their fat pipes and see if that solves this. Isn't this stuff done everyday without issue other than sun spots?

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, John Moore <bigfish@...> wrote:
>
> So I've been building roll in reels for a live show.  Of course the last minute changes required a satellite feed today.  Some of the segments had already been delivered on tape a day ago.  Now they are complaining about the feed video's quality compared to the tape.  This a major network doing the sat and then a fibre feed and I'm told it looked good in Burbank and in New York network but at the truck it's soft or some such complaint when compared to the tape.  We've made changes to the video so they don't want to use the tape version.
>
> I've never really dealt hands on with transmission stuff but I'm told they compress the video, an HDCam source, for transmission.  Can someone enlighten me on the pipe line.  I figured they sent baseband video over the fibre or Satellite but I keep hearing about compression.  What do they do to compress the signal.  Given the little bit of info I have on the problem it sounds like it's leaving Burbank OK, hitting NY main studios center OK but getting to the remote truck it's not good.  That sounds like the main studio to truck is the issue.  We are going to resend this afternoon but I'm surprised this is a major network that sends feeds back and forth all day long.  Any insight would be appreciated.
>
>  
> John Moore
> Barking Trout Productions
> Studio City, CA
> bigfish@...
>

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] OT: Do I finally get to blame it on transmission?

 

So I've been building roll in reels for a live show.  Of course the last minute changes required a satellite feed today.  Some of the segments had already been delivered on tape a day ago.  Now they are complaining about the feed video's quality compared to the tape.  This a major network doing the sat and then a fibre feed and I'm told it looked good in Burbank and in New York network but at the truck it's soft or some such complaint when compared to the tape.  We've made changes to the video so they don't want to use the tape version.

I've never really dealt hands on with transmission stuff but I'm told they compress the video, an HDCam source, for transmission.  Can someone enlighten me on the pipe line.  I figured they sent baseband video over the fibre or Satellite but I keep hearing about compression.  What do they do to compress the signal.  Given the little bit of info I have on the problem it sounds like it's leaving Burbank OK, hitting NY main studios center OK but getting to the remote truck it's not good.  That sounds like the main studio to truck is the issue.  We are going to resend this afternoon but I'm surprised this is a major network that sends feeds back and forth all day long.  Any insight would be appreciated.
 
John Moore
Barking Trout Productions
Studio City, CA
bigfish@pacbell.net

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: Wishing my fellow "L"ers a healthy and prosperous New Year

 

I will raise a ceremonial OKI Dog to the Avid L2 at midnight while rocking to The Tubes. Happy New Year all you WPOD's, (White Punks on Dope for the non Tubes fans ;-))

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <tcurren@...> wrote:
>
> Hey Mike,
>
>
> Since you are already in 2014, can you tell me what the winning lottery numbers are going to be?
>

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (7)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Wishing my fellow "L"ers a healthy and prosperous New Year

 

Hey Mike,


Since you are already in 2014, can you tell me what the winning lottery numbers are going to be?

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (6)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Wishing my fellow "L"ers a healthy and prosperous New Year

 

Happy new year from Bangkok where it's next year already ....

Mike

On 31 Dec, 2013, at 10:07 pm, Susan Perla <sueperla@att.net> wrote:

 

Right back at you Terry and to the rest of the List..Happy New Year to the collective wisdom..may we all have wonderful clients who pay on time..
very truly,
Susan

 
___________________________________________________________________


Susan Perla
T
mobile +1 917 817 6835


From: "tcurren@aol.com" <tcurren@aol.com>
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2013 6:49 AM
Subject: [Avid-L2] Wishing my fellow "L"ers a healthy and prosperous New Year

 
:-)


__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (5)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] RE: Update to Mavericks after MC 7.0.3 installed

 

I did that too (OS, then MC). But I have a current client where it may be the other way around. They have no prior MC installs on that machine. They can't go 10.9.1 yet, because of required SAN software updates. So, I'm just checking into the options.


- Oliver

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (3)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] RE: Update to Mavericks after MC 7.0.3 installed

 

I did it the other way - installed 10.9.1 first and, a day later, MC7.0.3. The only hiccup I found was that the MC 7.0.2 uninstaller didn't seem to run under 10.9.1. So I ran the one in the .dmg (Mac) that came with 7.0.3 first. The install went fine after that.

__._,_.___
Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] RE: Wishing my fellow "L"ers a healthy and prosperous New Year

 
__,_._,___