Matrox Adds Tape Capture/Output, Monitoring Solutions for Final Cut Pro X & Compressor 4

[Herb Sevush]

Here’s a real advance for FCPX over FCP7 –

— Can’t capture within application
— Unknown if you can batch recapture missing media files, so proxy / on-line style editing in doubt.
— Have to export movie before exporting to tape.

Yes I can see clearly how FCPX is a huge advance in editing.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Mark Dobson]

According to Heath Knight this was sent to him last week. It unfortunately seems to confirm what everyone
has been thinking that external monitoring onto a calibrated monitor through the MXO2 range will not work.

I had hoped that they would connect to one of those elusive hooks I’ve read about. I’ve posted on the Matrox site but they have not responded with any clarification yet. I guess they are too busy to talk.

[David Jahns]

well, sort of… They say:

“FCP X does not support professional video monitoring.”

It does the same thing the AJA does – turns your pro video monitor into a computer desktop monitor. Obviously, this not ideal. It won’t show you accurate colors, and your external scopes won’t be reading the actual video signal – just an approximation of it.

So, if you’re good with guestimating the video output from FCP-X, exporting it, and then laying it off to tape from the Matrox software, where you’ll finally see the true video signal as it’s going down to tape… Let’s hope everything looks good, and is within legal, etc… And if changes need to be made?

Doesn’t sound like a “pro” workflow to me. Anyone who needs tape layoff and pro monitoring needs accurate monitoring.

Not good enough… yet?

David Jahns
Joint Editorial
Portland, OR

[Mark Dobson]

No, not good enough yet.

I have to say it’s the core issue that is stopping me totally migrating to a FCP X work flow.

I’ve bought a new desktop computer monitor 1920×1040 HD, another to follow, but that doesn’t fill me with total confidence.

I calibrate it with a Huey Pro calibrator.

I suppose I’m just used to a 3 monitor setup.

[David Roth weiss]

[David Jahns] “It does the same thing the AJA does – turns your pro video monitor into a computer desktop monitor. Obviously, this not ideal. It won’t show you accurate colors, and your external scopes won’t be reading the actual video signal – just an approximation of it.”

There more to it than just accurate color issues with external scopes. Don’t forget, monitoring a “true” video signal to a video monitor is really the only way editors can accurately determine whether there are issues with video fields, such as reversed fields.

I can’t tell you the number of projects (it’s too big a number) I’ve been hired to finish that were completely out of spec because they had been edited on a laptop and never viewed on a “real” monitor, and had glaring fields-related issues that simply never revealed themselves on a computer monitor.

With no way to accurately monitor video, FCP X makes it virtually impossible for editors to verify and deliver a video product that is within legal specs. It’s very scary…

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.com

Don’t miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™

Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.

[Mitch Ives]

[David Roth Weiss] “With no way to accurately monitor video, FCP X makes it virtually impossible for editors to verify and deliver a video product that is within legal specs. It’s very scary…”

Thank you. This notion that desktop Display will be fine for C.C. or any kind of monitoring is untrue. This IMO is the real deal killer. Multicam will come. XML/OMF is here kinda and will come. Opening old projects that have said is never coming… but not being able to monitor will keep a lot of people away. It really is a deal breaker…

Like you, I’ve made a second career out of fixing other peoples screwups… brought on mostly by the notion that your computer screen is all you need…

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com

[David Jahns]

Legal Schmegal!

Broadcast TV is dead, right? 😉

the funny thing is… I wish I we lived in the world that FCP-X will excel at. I hate dealing with interlacing, broadcast levels, format conversions, etc. (but that might put me out of job, I suppose!)

To me, it’s like if Adobe said today, “Print is dead. We see the iPad as the future of publishing, and our new products have dropped support for all print and CMYK workflows. Sorry.”

Sure – someday printing on dead trees won’t be the norm (and how many people other than print professionals need CMYK support anyway?), but look at the magazine industry? Is it going away anytime soon? So, yes – FCP-X is forward looking – just a bit too forward looking for those of us in “the film/video industry”.

Someday all moving images will be computer based h264 RGB… it is most definitely the future, but how far off? (My joke is that when I someday retire, that’s when we’ll never have to deal with “video” artifacts.) But in the here and now, some of us DO have to deal with broadcast video and all of its overhead and artifacts.

And until FCP-X can do that (which might happen soon, according to the London event) – it’s not the app for any pro video industry workflow. (and, of course, all of the other issues that have been flagged repeatedly…)

David Jahns
Joint Editorial
Portland, OR

[Mitch Ives]

[David Jahns] “And until FCP-X can do that (which might happen soon, according to the London event)”

It was the London event that uncovered this “no video out” thing…

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com

[David Jahns]

[Mitch Ives] “It was the London event that uncovered this “no video out” thing…”

????

Here’s what I read about London:

6. FCPX Broadcast video output via #Blackmagic & @AJAVideo coming soon…

https://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/notes-from-apples-london-pro-briefing-on-final-cut-pro-x/

David Jahns
Joint Editorial
Portland, OR

[Bret Williams]

Would you care to elaborate on what part is actually new or noteworthy? I think you’re misread FCP 7 as FCP X quite a few times. The do not offer a way to monitor in FCP X. And they’ve had a standalone Quicktime capture and playback app for some time.

There is nothing new announced from Matrox in this release. It’s just pointing out how to use their current stuff with FCP X. Matrox has always had a stand alone app for playing just about any 8 bit QT file out through it’s box. And Matrox added a little capture app quite awhile ago as well. It’s not a batch capture. It’s just a crash record. Same with the output app. Nothing special here.

And note it just says you can play the audio out the matrox box. Nothing special here either. You can use the matrox box to play out any audio. Although you usually have problems if you only play out audio and not video with FCP 7, so not sure this will even work well. But we don’t need audio monitoring. That’s not a problem with FCP X.

So to review, Matrox has nothing to say here. This was just a release saying how you can use their products sorta in conjunction with FCP X.