[Bill Rogers]

Revisiting this with my new Sony AX100 4K. I had a workflow in HD with XDCam HD and DSLR footage, but now want to cut 4K today at 1920×1080 but want to be able to create 4K versions when they will be needed. Would “optimized media” be 1920 or 4K? I have not used proxy up to now, as I try to minimize hoops in my workflow, but will this make more sense with double the trouble of 4K XAVC files?

My first shoots are with XAVC at 1920, not being confident with my understanding of 4K workflow. But need to get up to speed in the newly arriving 4K world.

Thoughts? New thread?

-Bill Rogers

[Bill Rogers]

Did some testing to see about FCP 7 under Lion. All was okay – Matrox MXO2 mini delivered the same good video to my monitor, projects saving fine, also reopening in Snow Leopard– until I couldn’t get the VO tool to work in the Lion partition. Anybody found a similar problem and solution?

Coruway
Quad 2.8, eSATA RAID, 16 gig RAM, Matrox Mini Max

[Bill Rogers]

Have had a hard time getting my EX3 to work with wirecast 4.0.1 and MXO2 mini. Should it work with component in and 59.94 8-bit? No luck so far.

But kudos on 4.0.1 in general; seeming very stable and straightforward setup as compared to wirecast 3.

Bill

Mac Quad 2.8 16 gig

[Bill Rogers]

And in each of those threads – as has sometimes happened, sometimes not – the Q should be asked why and when to transcode to ProRes?

I certainly do go to ProRes for broadcast spots, but what of the huge day by day little and quick stuff shot with cheap cameras in our pockets? I want to know and I want to properly advise my clients thinking of the same. I’d like to respond with something other than, as M responded, READ OTHER STUFF, DON’T ASK QUESTIONS.

M’s arrogant response to my query sounds like those who said that DV is an amateur format and anyone professional must choose beta or… Okay fine, but why? Sure it’s true that DV WAS good for editing and 264 is not, but let’s get under the hood.

I’ve got a hunch that many, many people are doing as I am, editing their quick and dirty work in 264 on the timeline. There are real savings as well as losses in doing so.

Is there a GOOD reason to edit in 264 when the output is 264 for the web (IN HD) with no broadcast or higher format immediately considered? When I’m considering prudent workflow I look at likely and usual usage and not wished for usage. I’ve been editing 264 for about a year when the use (incidentally paid, though it is also fun) is for web HD. There’s always a tradeoff in our work. Editing 264 the tradeoff is render, render, render, render, versus drive space. An advantage of staying in 264 is the backups and archives are in the same format – highly compressed, but just as the “original.”

I’d love to hear more from others who can talk of the relative merits of staying in 264 on workflow versus transcoding to ProRes and the inherent advantages to a more robust editing codec. Feel free to refer to other threads assuming, as M did, amateur ignorance, or engage, as these boards seem to be intended, in a productive conversation. I’ve got a hunch that those of us who do make a living doing this stuff need to know about 264 on the timeline, because we’re going to get more and more of it.