Converting my Canon 7D clips into ProRes increases the size x 3

[Brent Dunn]

Welcome to Final Cut! Yup, you need to convert everything to ProRes for a smooth workflow. Otherwise, go out and buy Adobe Premier and edit natively.

You need multiple hard drives, 1-2 TB ea. to handle a lot of media. I have 4 – 1 TB drives. I also use an external docking station to make back-up copies of my original files.

Brent Dunn
Owner / Director / Editor
DunnRight Films
DunnRight Video.com
Video Marketing Toolbox.net

Sony EX-1,
Canon 5D Mark II
Canon 7D
Mac Pro Tower, Quad Core,
with Final Cut Studio

HP i7 Quad laptop
Adobe CS-5 Production Suite

[Eric Strand]

You want to use ProRes like you’re already doing. You could also use ProRes LT if you have FCP 7. The larger file sizes are coming from the fact that ProRes has a much higher bit rate than the H.264’s that the 7D records to. The reason your transcoding the clips to ProRes is that ProRes is much easier to edit with. Additionally, it takes less work for the CPU to process and play your ProRes video than to play the H.264s.

[Glen Jennings]

RE: Otherwise, go out and buy Adobe Premier and edit natively.

So are you saying that if I edit in Adobe Premiere I would have this problem with h264 stuttering and chugging (and won’t have to make all these huge PRO RES files?

[Bret Williams]

Well, I would suggest FCP X over Premiere (spell it right people) for h264 on a mac. Especially if you’re on such a budget that ProRess 422 files are so big that you can’t up for a terabyte or two of external FW800 storage. It also has quite a bit of nice built in features and transitions and templates that CS6 just lacks.

But X has a learning curve. And it requires certain hardware. 2011 ivy bridge for it to shine. MacPros don’t do it justice oddly. X ties into OpenCL and sandy bridge. CS6 requires hefty processor cards too for much of its performance.