-
FCP settings similar to Media 100?
Our past system was Media 100 and we used to do basic programs at the 150 Mb/s setting (and sometimes the 300 Mb/s setting).
My question is: what would be the similar (quality) setting in FCP to 150 Mb/s or 300 Mb/s? Right now I’m going Betacam into an Aja IO at uncompressed 8 bit. It works great but uses up TONS of hard drive on the longer, or more involved projects.
I’m not real familiar with the DV settings of FCP, but I would guess that there’s a similar one to the Media 100.
Thanks in advance.
-
6 Replies
-
[jodyberry] ” Right now I’m going Betacam into an Aja IO at uncompressed 8 bit. It works great but uses up TONS of hard drive on the longer, or more involved projects.
I’m not real familiar with the DV settings of FCP, but I would guess that there’s a similar one to the Media 100. “
Use DV50. Its very high quality and will approximately triple your storage space. Many people use this for online quality. If thats still not reducing your file size enough, you can go to DV25 (known as DV/DVCPRO NTSC).
-
Thanks John! Is there anything else I need to be aware of while using DV50? – rendering, etc.?
Thanks again
.
-
No issues you need to be aware of. It’s a compressed format, but an excellent one. DV50 (aka DVCPRO 50) was designed as a competitor to Digital Betacam, and gives you similar performance. You should get lots of realtime effects with DV50.
Its much higher quality than DV25, as it uses 4:2:2 color space, unlike DV25 (Mini DV, DVCAM), which uses 4:1:1.
Not as good as uncompressed, but hard to tell the difference in many instances. -
> My question is: what would be the similar (quality) setting in FCP to 150 Mb/s or 300 Mb/s? Right now I’m going Betacam into an Aja IO at uncompressed 8 bit. It works great but uses up TONS of hard drive on the longer, or more involved projects. < I have no personal experience with John's suggestion, I'm just here to warn you about a couple of things. Get lots of practice time on your FCP system before attempting to work on a real project or on a deadline. It's a completely different paradigm and Apple made many, umm, questionable interface and workflow decisions that will confuse you. The keyboard shortcuts are all different, of course, and you are going to miss M100's elegantly clean interface. FCP is cluttered up with junk you don't need or may never use. Were you planning on working at lower rez and then recapturing at full? Recapturing can be a total nightmare in FCP. Not like redigitiizing in M100 at all. Not at all. There are many ex-m100 users here but many of us have been FCP-heads for so long we can't remember what we missed the most. bogiesan This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”
-
Thanks Bogiesan! We actually have both systems running and yes, it was quite a difference when we first got our FCP!!
FCP is better in a lot of creative ways, but M100 definitely is the winner for “quick & dirty” productions!
.
-
[bogiesan] “Were you planning on working at lower rez and then recapturing at full? Recapturing can be a total nightmare in FCP. Not like redigitiizing in M100 at all. Not at all.”
No, in fact I never did that with M100 either (although it had the capability). I just preferred to digitize what I needed at hig-res and not deal with re-digitizing!
I will definitely try the DV50 codec. In fact, I think Sony’s XDCam is coming out with 50 MB/s capability after NAB (I think it’s 35 MB/s now).
(Anybody correct me if I’m wrong).
Thanks again…
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up