-
Can Adobe believe its luck?
First Avid alienates many die hard supporters with the not-so-smart-tool then Apple causes apoplexy with FCP-X. Seems like lots of people are headed to Adobe!
-
14 Replies
-
-
Now all they have to do is make I/o work properly with all Aja, bmd and Matrox products.
I know, it should work already, but it doesnt work compared to fcp7
-
Yes, I know you can edit ProRes in Premiere, but because it’s apple’s codec, you cannot capture to it using Blackmagic or AJA. (well, not without FCP installed anyway)
FCP has ProRes, Avid has DNX… Adobe needs a real HD capture codec.
-
-
Its the one big thing thats keeping me from considering Adobe more seriously. I think people have not thought about this issue. They just assume they can keep using ProRes without FCP. Apple only lets you read it without FCP.
Uncompressed HD is out of the question for my work…if JPEG was an adequate substitute, Apple and Avid would not have developed their codecs. It is certainly within Adobe’s means to develop a good codec…they need to step up.
-
Do you mean capture codec as in digitizing from tape? Or do you mean an intermediate codec? I assume you mean the latter. As far as a capture from tape codec, Matrox provides a very good iframe codec but not as good as the last iteration of Prores. If you need to capture 10 bit all third parties parties provide uncompressed, which is better than prores.
As far as an intermediate codec it’s only needed when needing to render effects with a higher bit order. For those times that I need 10 bit I use uncompressed or AVCIntra 100. If I needed better I could always buy Cineform. But it’s true Adobe does not yet provide their own robust intermediate codec.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
[David Cherniack] “Do you mean capture codec as in digitizing from tape?”
Yes.
[David Cherniack] “If you need to capture 10 bit all third parties parties provide uncompressed, which is better than prores. “
That’s insane. Not only does it require massive amounts of storage, the drives must be extremely fast and expensive. Broadcasters generally do not work with uncompressed HD. Its all Pro Res or Avid DNX HD. This is the main reason why those codecs were developed.
-
[John Pale] “That’s insane. Not only does it require massive amounts of storage, the drives must be extremely fast and expensive. Broadcasters generally do not work with uncompressed HD. Its all Pro Res or Avid DNX HD. This is the main reason why those codecs were developed.”
At modern raid speeds and capacities it’s hardly insane. I used to do it all the time if I needed the extra quality for effects work. But you can capture to DnxHD in Premiere, and to Prores if you have FCP installed.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
Contact AJA. There is a beta for Adobe products that works.He a link to someone that is using it with PP, AE and PS.
https://forums.adobe.com/thread/869716?tstart=0
Tom Daigon
Avid DS / FCP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com -
[John Pale] “Uncompressed HD is out of the question for my work…if JPEG was an adequate substitute, Apple and Avid would not have developed their codecs. It is certainly within Adobe’s means to develop a good codec…they need to step up.”
I couldn’t believe it when they let CineForm go to GoPro. The only two explanations for that are 1) they’re already working on their own codec or 2) someone really, really screwed up.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up