-
FCP-X plus new MacPro = 16 track Multicam of 4k footage? Really??.
-
[Bill Davis] “n both the FCP.CO story and the B-roll images from the Guardian (London Newspaper) story – appear to include image caps of Dean Devlin in LA working on what appears to be a high end multi-cam edit where they have 16 cameras of 4k content being served from the new MacPro for real time editing.”
Am I missing something here. Apple claims no more than 3 streams of 4K “a merger that delivers the breathtaking capability to run three streams of 4K video at once” – are you now claiming that the Tube can run 16 streams of 4K? Because running a multiclip requires the same bandwidth to run a stream, if not more. Running a 16 angle multiclip is very cool, but other computers can do that. Running 3 streams of 4K is way cool and I don’t know if any other current NLE can do that. Running 16 angles of 4K – even Apple isn’t claiming they can do that.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Andy Branner] “Especially since a “real pro” would nevah evah use Proxy either way to make his life easier. Oh wait… in which case the original, native format becomes utterly irrelevant.”
If you are going to be dogmatic about something, it usually helps to know what you’re talking about.
Format matters. It takes time to transcode proxies, and that may not be time that I want to spend. I want to know what the capabilities are with what formats so that I know what I am looking at when I have to make an educated guess as to how long a certain project will take.
FCP7 works great with ProRes, but not at all with REDCODE. So that project I used the ProRes 422 Standard straight off my Ninja-2 recorder on the C100 takes a lot less time to get going than the 6K Dragon RECODE footage.
If Apple’s claims about 4k playback are SOLELY for ProRes 4:2:2 4k footage and not at all for XAVC or REDCODE, then it’s not that useful, now is it?
-
We’re just in terminology confusion.
The Apple published specs as I understand them are as follows.
The new Pro will allow you to monitor and switch 16 sources of content. Those can be 4k original imported uncompessed clips – but the presumption is (due to simple math) that it requires that you let X do some form of conversions. Those “might” be ProRes of some type and may or may not be the built in Proxy type that X has employed from the beginning – but that’s unclear (at least to me) right now.
The way X is constructed around metadata references back to both your original, and proxy caches (a capability demonstrated by how rapid it is to switch back and forth from Original to Proxy mode) – suggests to me that it’s possible that while you work with proxy’s – X still maintains links back to your sequestered original media.
This is important because you can make your editing decisions simultaneously having access to multiple “resolutions” of viewer display. When you’re watching those 16 multi-cam clips – you’re undoubtedly watching compressed copies. But when you drop them on a Storyline, the references may change to full ProRes (the potential is there) and when you go to SHARE, the same metadata that houses all your editing decisions at all levels, just swaps to point at the original Uncompressed frames. The result is the resolution you need, when you need it – rather than a system that “sets” resolution at the start and forces you to work in it throughout your workflow.
This system (if I’m describing it technically accurately and not just trying to justify the way I’ve experienced it operating but getting something fundamentally wrong!) is one of the joys of working with X. It presents the resolution you need for the job you’re currently doing.
I mentioned the observed capability of the system to “re-rez” even the viewer display on the fly. When you first import footage, depending on it’s nature and codec – you might have some scenes that playback “fuzzy” at first. This is because the referenced file is a low rez thumbnail video “quick copy”. As X processes the original footage either to ProRes Transcodes or Proxy files, those original temporary files disappear and you no longer get any sort of fuzzy playback. But even when you have those thumbnails in play – parking your playhead on a frame typically “snaps” it into a full rez viewer display. Obviously, X is sourcing the higher rez sequestered original to help you see your work – even before it’s processed the stream for live playback use.
This system construction has massive implications (IMO) about how X might work with massive streams of high raster originals.
Essentially, it can display multiple resolution references in multiple parts of the interface – simultaneously.
I think that’s a pretty big deal as we see the data streams we have to process grow ever bigger.
And it also explains partly why, for example, X rocks on a laptop. Often you don’t NEED to be monitoring your full rez original streams in order to do effective editing. You just need to be able to reference the full quality immediately when you want to.
It’s a system thing.
: )
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Gary Huff] “If Apple’s claims about 4k playback are SOLELY for ProRes 4:2:2 4k footage and not at all for XAVC or REDCODE, then it’s not that useful, now is it?”
Lets be careful here.
That might make it “not that useful” for the subset of editors who have significant REDCODE worflows AND who never have time to let whatever background transcoding the dual GPUs on the new MacPro might allow.
Nobody can determine that, yet.
If the robust CPU plus Dual GPU plus Solid State drive plus Grand Central Dispatch and whatever throughput X allows, turns out it CAN transcode with great efficiency – it might make the whole question moot.
Or maybe moot for TV spot producers, but not for documentarians.
At this point, there’s no actual reason to presume it WON’T work – than to presume it will.
So we’re left with hope or disdain, depending entirely on how we see the waterline in the glass.
As it’s always been.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
Bill, if your correct, then that’s very impressive. I will say that for now I’ll list it as an interesting conjecture; we will have the answer when the first Tubes roll out.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
Herb, I think your confusing the Tube being able to support three 4k monitors, with, FCPX being able to edit 16 angles of 4k when running on a tube.
-
[Walter Soyka] “No, it’s not irrelevant at all. Format is where you trade bandwidth (disk speed) against decode complexity (CPU/GPU). If we’re looking at multiple channels of 4K playback on a given system, how the system is stressed and where the bottlenecks lie is germane to the conversation.”
Once again, it is Walter with timely posts filled with essential facts. The above is where the rubber meets the road.
-
This is the advantage of ProRes is that it can scale, easily, on the fly.
Along with the Dual GPUs we will get, I am sure there’s a lot going on in these, what seems to be, purpose built MacPro tubes.
Here’s some more musings on Tube pricing, by the way of GPU: https://architosh.com/2013/10/the-mac-pro-so-whats-a-d300-d500-and-d700-anyway-we-have-answers/
-
what a funny thread. Uncompressed 10 bit standard def can require more bandwidth than compressed 4k. It all depends on your codec.
Many of you should download the free AJA Data Calc, and take a look at bandwidth for each codec, 4K, 1080, etc.But someone will say “I want to do 16 streams of 4K dpx files, all at full resolution”. Sorry, but not even a Quantel Pablo or Clipster can do this (insanely expensive boxes).
Low res editing and conforming your job to hi res, has long been part of our industry – long before non linear editing even existed.
Only the innocent are unaware of this (and I meet plenty of innocent, that has no idea of what conforming is).Bob Zelin
Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
maxavid@cfl.rr.com -
[Bob Zelin] “Low res editing and conforming your job to hi res, has long been part of our industry – long before non linear editing even existed. “
Granted, Bob.
But my interest is that how we all define and implement “low rez editing” has changed a huge amount over the past decade.
Once upon a time I could always tell when I was working with down-rezzed or proxy files.
Today, I often can’t.
Essentially, the operator can be “hidden” from the type of stream you’re working with. Which is absolutely marvelous if it lets you do more work, on more systems, in more places, without being tied down to a “big desktop” environment. But makes it challenging when the editor simply chooses “Export a 4K master” and discovers that without thinking, he or she is trying to do that out of a system that only has Proxy source files available!
One more small trap in the modern era.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up