Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy How do you “hack” the RT enabler file to make PhotoJPEG @ 75% RT enabled? ( Graeme?)

  • How do you “hack” the RT enabler file to make PhotoJPEG @ 75% RT enabled? ( Graeme?)

    Posted by Mitchji on March 18, 2006 at 8:32 pm

    Hi,

    Re photojpeg at 75%:
    “Graeme: It’s not RT enabled (and why not, Apple) but you can “hack” the RT enabler file to make it so!”

    Hi,

    Will someone please provide instructions for the hack?

    Will the same hack work with Sheervideo?

    Thanks!

    Mitch

    Mastersepp replied 18 years, 11 months ago 5 Members · 12 Replies
  • 12 Replies
  • Guy

    March 18, 2006 at 11:40 pm

    Read this:

    https://forums.creativecow.net/cgi-bin/new_read_post.cgi?univpostid=855974&forumid=124&postid=855974&pview=t

    To get to the file you want to hack:

    control click the FCP icon and select “show package contents”

    go to contents/resources/english.lproj/FXScripts/Enablers

    back up “RT Software Enabler.txt” and then edit the original

  • Mitchji

    March 19, 2006 at 4:28 am

    Thanks Guy!

  • Sean Oneil

    March 19, 2006 at 6:58 pm

    Didn’t know people were actually using this. Glad to hear it.

    Sean

  • Mitchji

    March 20, 2006 at 12:36 am

    Thanks Sean!

    Do you know if this would work with SheerVideo?
    https://www.bitjazz.com/

    Thanks,

    Mitch

  • Sean Oneil

    March 20, 2006 at 8:10 am

    No, it won’t. I tried pretty hard and talked a bit with Andreas from BitJazz about it. Only QT components that Apple officially supports for RT in FCP will work.

    The reason why the P-JPEG “hack” works is because P-JPEG is already supported for RT with Final Cut Pro. Remember, Offline-RT is P-JPEG @35% quality and half res. FCP is designed so that P-JPEG is a real-time codec. But they use the RT Enabler script to prevent it from working at full quality. Why they chose to do this is anyone’s guess. I have theories but I won’t get into it.

    P-JPEG is the bomb. With standard-def, it takes up less disk space than DV25, and the quality is better than DV50. In fact, according to the technical tests I’ve read (onerivermedia.com), P-JPEG is virtually lossless and is pretty much equivalent to Digibeta. You can run it through many generations before any degradation, unlike DV50.

    I’ve even used it for a few HD projects (EPKs that didn’t require multiple layers or many effects). I captured and mastered back to 1080Psf D5. No dropped frames. It worked great and took up less space than DVCProHD.

    Another interesting thing with P-JPEG is that you can actually do full broadcast quality SD finish work on a PowerBook, a Mac Mini, or on the system disk of a PowerMac without the need for a RAID. Because the JPEG media is so small (again, smaller than DV), you don’t need a fast disk array. Obviously I wouldn’t reccomend anyone in a pro environment to rely on this, but it’s pretty darn interesting what you can get away with.

    Sean

  • Graeme Nattress

    March 20, 2006 at 2:05 pm

    PhotoJPEG75% is very good indeed, but it still lacks compared to uncompressed on “extreme” colour correction, where you’ll start to see compression artifacts. However, it’s still much better than the “DV” codecs at SD or HD.

    Graeme

    http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP

  • Mitchji

    March 22, 2006 at 7:09 am

    [Sean ONeil] “In fact, according to the technical tests I’ve read (onerivermedia.com), P-JPEG is virtually lossless and is pretty much equivalent to Digibeta. You can run it through many generations before any degradation, unlike DV50.”

    [Graeme Nattress] “PhotoJPEG75% is very good indeed, but it still lacks compared to uncompressed on “extreme” colour correction, where you’ll start to see compression artifacts.”

    Hi,

    So the consensus is that I can capture Digibeta to PhotoJPEG@75% and unless I was doing “extreme” color correction the results would be about the same as uncompressed?

    Would you clarify what you mean by “extreme” color correction? How about noise reduction in AE?

    Thanks,

    Mitch

  • Graeme Nattress

    March 22, 2006 at 1:07 pm

    You’re probably fine with PJP75%. However, as I’m investigating noise removal, I’m finding that when you remove noise, you make compression artfacts in the noisey source more visible. Noise can be good as it hides 8bit banding and compression artifacts.

    Graeme

    http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP

  • Mitchji

    March 23, 2006 at 2:04 am

    [Graeme Nattress] “However, as I’m investigating noise removal, I’m finding that when you remove noise, you make compression artfacts in the noisey source more visible. Noise can be good as it hides 8bit banding and compression artifacts.”

    Hi Graeme,

    Thanks again.

    Some of our Digibeta is very noisy. Do you have any discoveries or information to share as a result of your noise reduction investigation?

    Best Wishes,

    Mitch

  • Graeme Nattress

    March 23, 2006 at 2:08 am

    DigiBeta is very lightly compressed, so noise removal should work great. I was testing with some DVCproHD and when the noise is gone, you saw the DCT codec artifacts left behind.

    Graeme

    http://www.nattress.com – Film Effects and Standards Conversion for FCP

Page 1 of 2

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy