Transcoding to ProRes 422 LT for Optimised Media

[David Eaks]

Unfortunately it is not an option, but be sure to send in feedback to apple (there is a send feedback button in the FCPX menu) and request the feature.

[Adam White]

Thanks both for info.

From what I’ve seen, I like the potential for easy Proxy workflows. Particularly for large multicam edits with many different angles, I can see this being very useful indeed.

As I understand it, the correct way to utilise a Proxy workflow would be;
* Import all media into the Event
* Create both Proxy and Optimised versions of all media
* Whilst working, set the preferences to “use proxy media”.
* Once edit is complete, and before beginning finishing tasks such as grading, set preferences back to “optimised or original media”.

Is that the correct way? Are there any major pitfalls/gotchas that I need to be aware?

Hopefully a 422LT transcode option will become available in the next update – still would certainly have a use for that. Though a Proxy workflow is also a very useful option to have.

Adam

[Gary Huff]

[Andy Branner] “Well, you have it for the timeline when working, so why insist on TRIPLE media.”

Because he wants to use LT for online, not proxy editing.

[Shane Ross]

OK…this is one aspect of FCX I think is completely wrong. It is limiting your options? Why? For your own good? “You don’t really need HQ…or LT. Don’t be silly…regular ProRes is fine, or ProRes Proxy…those are good enough options.” There’s too much “hand holding” going on, as a friend of mine puts it. Options are limited.

I see pro software as giving me more options, not less. And no, I’m not trying to say that FCX isn’t professional, and not used by professionals. I do believe that. It is very powerful and perfect for many professional workflows. But for me, if I was given limited options, I’d be skeptical.

This is one reason I don’t rely on Blackmagic design products much. Because when you install the drivers, they don’t give you the full list of codecs. You’ll see ProRes HQ, and Proxy…maybe 4444…but not LT and not plain old ProRes 422. WHy? According them, showing all the options tends to overwhelm the editor. And if they want ProRes 422, all they need to do is duplicate and modify a setting. AJA doesn’t do this. I see ALL the options, and yes, the list is long, but I am not intimidated or overwhelmed by it.

I guess in limiting options, they are simplifying things at Apple. By limiting options you aren’t slowed down by long lists?

Oh…sorry…I’m bitching about a software that I don’t use and don’t plan on using. Sorry…I’m trolling. Just what I liked about that rant a few threads down…why do people CARE what the others are using and how they work? I just found this curious….

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[John Young]

It is quite frustrating not to be able to choose what codecs you work with without resorting to external conversion. Even more frustrating? If you decide to give in and rough cut in the FCPX proxy mode, you lose the ability to work with quicktimes containing an alpha channel. Oops. I guess they weren’t planning for editors to receive motion graphics from AfterEffects artists! At least not while cutting in proxy mode.

[Bill Davis]

Look, the way I understand how X works under the hood, creating a parallel workflow pipeline to use ProRes LT makes no sense at all. You have three “pods” of source content the way X is structured right now. The first is whatever you import. That native Resolution A can be anything from iPhone to RED, whatever, Uf it’s a format that X “gets” then you’re fine. Done and done. The only “option” is to transcode to Proxy which downsizes the throughput overhead significantly.If the footage you’re working with does NOT work with X natively, then there’s a file type that FCP-X is optimized to work with. Apple’s ProRes 422. Full bandwidth not limited to 100Mbps like Prores LT. X “loves” this as it’s default data stream. It’s a fabulous “mezzanine” codec since it’s not too big nor too small to accommodate most user needs.

IF you want to use ProRes LT – the program can encode that from within for Export. But what’s the point of making it an alternate mezzanine (or for that matter allowing a bunch of other mezzanine codecs?) You’ve already got a really good one. It looks fabulous for both high end and low end origination streams.

Thie is the whole point of how X works IMO. Sequester input. Have an excellent quality and efficient workspace in the middle. Then let people output whatever they need – calculated from the mezzanine files if you’re seeking down res outputs – or from the original files if you elect to export an Uncompressed file that needs all the original resolution of the imported masters.

It makes PERFECT sense to me since all the internal processing is just metadata references to the original sequestered files.

I think they got this precisely right in X. It’s clean, flexible, and you don’t end up needing a dozen “pods” of transcoded footage clogging up your storage systems.

My 2 cents, (from my admittedly limited technical perspective) anyway.

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.

[Shane Ross]

[Bill Davis] “But what’s the point of making it an alternate mezzanine (or for that matter allowing a bunch of other mezzanine codecs?) You’ve already got a really good one.”

It takes up less space. Looks as good as ProRes 422, but takes up less space. When you have limited space, or a LOT of footage…and you want to work in a reasonably high resolution (NOT Proxy), then why not go with that? I think this is Apple just saying “Oh, you really don’t need that,” acting like a babysitter. Why is this an option in the sequence and render settings then…if PR422 is a really good one, why offer LT and HQ as those settings? Sequence settings can be anything, but you can’t transcode to that? Seems very odd to me.

Why should I work at DNxHD 145 in Avid if DNxHD 220 looks great and suits the purpose? Because 145 takes up less space, and I don’t need the really high quality of 220 or 220x.

[Bill Davis] “Thie is the whole point of how X works IMO. Sequester input. Have an excellent quality and efficient workspace in the middle.”

But limit people’s choices as to what they want to encode to. I’ll give you that the amount of people who use LT is small…very small…but why deny people what they want? Good quality, less space. Worked in FCP 7.

Yes yes, you can either choose to work native (less space) or transcode to Proxy for space savings and decent quality, and then relink to masters and output ProRes 422, or LT, or HQ. But what if people don’t want that? They don’t want to waste time relinking and re-transcoding. They might not want to take up as much space as PR422 does. Simply transcode to LT from the start and be done.

Seems TOO simple to me. Limit options for the sake of simplicity. Many like that, some don’t. Can’t please everyone I guess…

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Bill Davis]

[Shane Ross] “t takes up less space. Looks as good as ProRes 422, but takes up less space.”

Noted, but storage space is a thing that’s getting cheaper and cheaper and faster and faster. So unless the program slows down working with a “heavier” codec, there’s no gain to be had using it – and it’s arguable that if you want drive space savings, Proxy functionally looks virtually as good in practical operation as native file editing. So why go half way?

[Shane Ross] “I’ll give you that the amount of people who use LT is small…very small…but why deny people what they want? Good quality, less space. Worked in FCP 7.”

Not the way the world works. Ask any retailer about “efficient assortment” – one path to failure has always been to offer too many choices.

[Shane Ross] “Seems TOO simple to me. Limit options for the sake of simplicity. Many like that, some don’t. Can’t please everyone I guess…
“

Very true, my friend. But the practice is much better than the theory suggests.
Next time I’m in LA I’ll buy you lunch. Maybe I can get you drunk enough so that I can get you thinking about (seriously) trying X for yourself beyond the tire kicking stage. Might just change your future, Shane!

Peace and best wishes to you and yours!

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.

[Walter Soyka]

[Bill Davis] “Noted, but storage space is a thing that’s getting cheaper and cheaper and faster and faster. So unless the program slows down working with a “heavier” codec, there’s no gain to be had using it – and it’s arguable that if you want drive space savings, Proxy functionally looks virtually as good in practical operation as native file editing. So why go half way?”

We’re at an interesting point where the price of storage is jumping up and capacity is dropping: the transition from spinning disks to solid state. Look at the PCIe flash storage in the new Mac Pro: insanely fast, but smaller and more expensive than mechanical hard drives.

A significant difference between ProRes and ProRes Proxy with FCPX is that the resolution of proxies is halved in both dimensions, so it’s not suitable for full-res output, whereas optimized full-res ProRes LT might be.

[Bill Davis] “Not the way the world works. Ask any retailer about “efficient assortment” – one path to failure has always been to offer too many choices. “

I think there’s a big difference between shelf space in a retail store (or supply chains if you look at it from the other side), and supporting all flavors of a single mezzanine codec. There are only five of them. I think design decisions like this form the basis of the “dumbed down” argument.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events

[Bill Davis]

[Walter Soyka] “I think design decisions like this form the basis of the “dumbed down” argument.
“

Fair.

But I suspect that while the original Legacy feature set might, in fact, have been “dumbed down” in enabling the initial X rebuild,- the way if does nearly everything else is leagues upon leagues smarter than it’s ancestor!

So while my latest haircut may have in fact, been dumbed down – that says very little about how well I dance!

(sorry, I hadn’t written a truly tortured metaphor in weeks, and have been feeling frisky as my silly Livestream AZFCPUG webcast pushes toward 1500 views this month – extremely modest, I know, by overall web standards, but still representing more than 10-fold growth show to show!)

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.