-
Michael Cioni + frame io
-
[Tony West] “You and Greg have been doing more flacking for the company that neither of you work for then they are.”
There’s no reason to get rude. We fully understand your workflow, but don’t necessarily use it ourselves. We’ve be offering suggestions that might be helpful. I’ve done testing in the past two days to verify what does and does not work. There are some issues that are likely easy to be resolved and others that will likely take more engineering effort. You seem to be copying and pasting the customer service chat feedback. While their customer support folks are friendly and helpful, I’m not sure that’s an indication of what they will or will not be able to do in the future. No slam against them. Just how the business works.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Tom Sefton] “You could easily do this and provide a separate .srt file to a producer along with a proxy for review”
Yes, like Simon Says but more powerful. It would be a completely streamlined scripting process where a text transcription is married to the media files and so making selects of the text would take those matching parts of the media file and create a rough a-roll. When you’re done making the text selects you then export an xml that would import into a NLE. Link the clips in the NLE and you have an a-roll.
You should check out Lumberjack builder. If it could be further developed for Premiere it could be a real game changer.
https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net -
[Oliver Peters] “Tony, I have those files if you want to take a look. Send an e-mail or ping me through the website.”
OK I just did thanks
-
Circling back to the point of this thread.
More about a lot of things directly from Cioni.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
Good to hear the thoughts of Cioni. The idea of cameras without media storage, just a modem to the cloud within 4-5 years is a bit fanciful I think. The idea of a centralised storage of camera originals at full res and therefore the need to buy hard drives becoming obsolete – maybe but the short time frame is rather optimistic.
I found his argument about ProResRAW versus BRAW a bit weird. He’s saying Apple don’t make cameras (ignoring the idea of using iPhones) and that makes their version of RAW more appealing. The fact that Apple didn’t release ProResRAW into the market place for a year and BM did it day one for free makes that seem false logic to me. Really it should be about the best codec and I’m unconvinced PRRAW is. Plus the argument that it’s Apple and we can trust them because they don’t make cameras is pretty much the reverse of what I see. BM have been open, fully disclosing and giving away their SDK, indeed encouraging others to use it. And who knows if PRRAW will survive the impending patent case. BRAW may also fall foul but I didn’t agree with his argument at all.
So overall I got the impression from this long ramble that Cioni is pushing for where Frame.io should be if and when world wide 5G makes it feasible to transfer massive files straight from the camera to the cloud. Worthy goal but I think his time frame is unrealistic.
-
[Michael Gissing] “The idea of a centralised storage of camera originals at full res and therefore the need to buy hard drives becoming obsolete – maybe but the short time frame is rather optimistic.”
I completely agree, but obviously that’s the goal for Michael and Frame. Ultimately a lot of manufacturers are pushing the idea of all media in the cloud. No on-camera media (other than as a buffer), no hard drives, no on-site NAS/SAN storage. Naturally your local capital expenses would go down, however, that locks you into a permanent subscription model far more objectionable than Adobe’s or Microsoft’s.
What happens 5 years down the road when you want to stop paying and you want your media back in your own hands? Will you get hit with a massive download or offload charge? What about liability? Is Frame willing to warrant the replacement value of your production in the event of a catastrophic failure (never say never – think Universal Studio fire)?
Obviously a lot of things to iron out.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters] “I completely agree, but obviously that’s the goal for Michael and Frame. Ultimately a lot of manufacturers are pushing the idea of all media in the cloud. No on-camera media (other than as a buffer), no hard drives, no on-site NAS/SAN storage. Naturally your local capital expenses would go down, however, that locks you into a permanent subscription model far more objectionable than Adobe’s or Microsoft’s.”
Not even the slightest chance this will happen in any meaningful way.
-
Oliver Peters: Ultimately a lot of manufacturers are pushing the idea of all media in the cloud. No on-camera media (other than as a buffer), no hard drives, no on-site NAS/SAN storage. Naturally, your local capital expenses would go down. However, that locks you into a permanent subscription model far more objectionable than Adobe’s or Microsoft’s.
Agreed. Working “in the Cloud” sounds really slick until you have tried it. And I did (-:
The “Cloud” is nothing but a physical hard drive that you rent at a separate facility than yours. Comfortably working together over the web requires very fast internet connections on every end of the workflow, so it costs you much more than the drive rent alone. Besides this, I would never trust my valuable media to anyone outside of my company. So you do need to also have all your media stored locally before you even can think of working “in the Cloud”. Forward-thinking is great, as long as you keep both feet on the ground and not in the clouds (-:
– Ronny
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up