-
Importance of MXF and Premiere Pro
I was just browsing Canon’s website when I came across a hard drive accessory that is to be used instead of tape that can record MXF. This is really a FOCUS Enhancements product that Canon Has adopted. It was introduced at NAB
https://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=StandardDisplayAct&fcategoryid=166&modelid=11733&keycode=camcorder_accessorythere are two versions
With the FS-4, you can record files to disk as:
RawDV
AVI Type 1
AVI Type 2 (for Adobe Premiere)
AVI Type 2 24p
Matrox AVI
Canopus AVI
QuickTime or QuickTime 24p (for Apple Final Cut)With the FS-4 Pro, you can also record files to disk as:
MXF
Pinnacle AVI
Avid DV-OMF (for Avid Xpress DV)
The pro version finally allows us to output an mxf file immediately. Will it be much longer before you can record high rez and low rez at the same time with MXF integrity?IMHO, this is the beginning of MXF-AAF becoming more important than timecode.
I wonder how long it will take Adobe to adopt MXF as a valid edit format? I hope it is part of 2.0, but I doubt it.
-
4 Replies
-
Richard,
[Richard Milner] “IMHO, this is the beginning of MXF-AAF becoming more important than timecode.
I wonder how long it will take Adobe to adopt MXF as a valid edit format? I hope it is part of 2.0, but I doubt it.”
I hope so too, but it’s not like everyone else is rushing to the MXF party, …unfortunately. So far only Canopus, but perhaps Adobe has decided that 2.0 is gonna be the version where they take some small leads rather than just playing catch-up to FCP and Avid. We can only hope.
Ron Shook
-
[Ron Shook] “I hope so too, but it’s not like everyone else is rushing to the MXF party”
You speak the truth, but things may be changing. The big issue stopping MXF is integration into applications. It’s a chicken or egg thing. You can’t use MXF cause it’s not in the application. It won’t be in the application because more people aren’t using it.
The standardization process has taken lots of time. For example, it’s taken over 10 years from the initial steps to try and create digital standards for video to arrive at where we are now.
One of the first efforts was DVision,Microsoft, Matrox, Truevision with the Open DML (Digital media language). That effort was too driven by Microsoft, so Apple wasn’t coming on board. This killed the effort.
It wasn’t until the late 90’s when SMPTE and the EBU came out with a joint report– about integrating TV production into traditional IT– that the pace of progress picked up. AAF showed up a couple of years later followed closely by son of AAF———-MXF.
A tremendous amout of time has gone into creating MXF/AAF. The structure is set up to allow new standards to be integrated into the data structure that’s been created. Example—right now AAF and others are working on an XML version of MXF/AAF.
The question is –“have we reached the tipping point with enough of the suppliers adopting MXF-AAF parts”? We will have to wait until NAB 2006(now less than 5 months away). It will be interesting to see how many of the “editing hardware and software” companies show support at the annual April meeting in LV. If the majority do, then it’s reasonable to think that the others won’t be too far behind.
If Adobe doesn’t have a way to blend MXF/AAF into their asset managementplans( they do belong to aaf), then the people that say that PP will not be an enterprise solution for video for some time to come may be right. I hope not, but as time goes by, it is difficult to hold on –hoping there will be a cost effective solution for more advanced editing concepts like proxy editing.
In the mean time, does anyone have a list of editing tools that support MXF now?
-
Richard, like Ron, I hope you’re right. OTHOH I wouldn’t expect a whole great deal from the development team that has shepherded the program to this point. I think we’ll see a lot of flash(y) integration and some scotch tape and bandaid solutions to some fundamental problems. Useability issues aside if the fundamental audio conform and memory management issues have not been addressed on a systemic level after 18 months then the development managers should be replaced, pure and simple. But let’s see where the chips fall.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
Richard,
[Richard Milner] “The big issue stopping MXF is integration into applications. It’s a chicken or egg thing. You can’t use MXF cause it’s not in the application. It won’t be in the application because more people aren’t using it.”
There are two things that may break PPro and the other other Adobe apps out the chicken or egg syndrome:
1. What looks to be the phonomenal success and rapid adoption of the Panasonic P2 HVX-200 camcorder throughout the industry, which needs full MXF functionality in the apps inorder to realize it’s best workflow characteristics.
2. I’m pretty certain that Matrox is working on the this full MXF functionality for Axio, which could eventually evolve into a 3rd party app for the Video Collection sans Axio or be incorporated by partner arrangement into the Video Collection. But…this could take another year for that filtering down to take effect. I’m expecting it for Axio at NAB.
Ron Shook
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up