Bryson Jones
Forum Replies Created
-
Currently, if you can use a mezzanine file, that’s the best way to tackle it.
As more software natively edits RED footage we’re hoping to see updates from Squarebox to address this. They are currently evaluating it.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
Thanks Rolf, I’ve never done that one. That’s a good one to play with.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
I’ve never seen this but I can’t see as how it would be possible for this to happen. Check the clip in QT Player please.
Anyone see this?
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
This is not possible.
There is not an API into FCP that allows it to see that the clips delivered are the same, so it cant know whether or not to update.
If FCP could do this, we could have project sharing like Avid. (hm..)
In our workflows, once a clip is delivered to edit, we tend to consider them locked, just like editing with 2 editors in FCP on copies of clips. One cannot sync with the other.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
Hello there,
This sort of workflow is more common in more server based MAM systems. CatDV comes from a client/server methodology so there’s less direct connection to the server and more of a publish to model.
Assets are managed in the client app and then those changes are pushed up. Additionally, FCSvr was unique in that the company that sold it also controlled the NLE so they could be deeply integrated. This is harder with something like CatDV.
That said, with a solid workflow design there is a lot you can do inside CatDV to automate ingest.
Another consideration is the “permissiveness” of CatDV. Most editors like this although it follows a very different methodology than what you are talking about. FCSvr was very much from the “let us manage your files” way of working. Flexibility suffered, but it did impose a wonderfully ordered structure over the storage and workflow. This can be accomplished with CatDV and a shared storage system but it must be designed and implemented as it’s not built in “out of the box”.
In the plus column, CatDV is far faster and easier to program with and so you can quickly develop workflows and iterate them far easier than you could in FCSvr.
If you think of CatDV more as a media manager application that lives on your workstation and publishes info to the server, that’s a good way to get your head around it. The Worker Node can then automate those same actions and more, but you can start with a manual process, test it, and then deploy automation with the Worker.
In a more server-driven system you start with the server, and all media is delivered to and accessed from there. CatDV flips this and put more power in the hands of the user.
Make sure you have a solid reseller or integrator who’s familiar both systems going into this and it’ll ease your path.
Hope this info helps,
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
Ah, here I go eating my words…
There currently are some serious issues with the RED EPIC workflow. I spoke too soon about support for this. While we have been able to design a batch system for automation of the proxy, CatDV only views the R3D files while REDCINE and REDLINE make “proxy” of the entire clip, represented by the .RDC folder.
Squarebox is taking a look at this now, but if you notice, your proxy is likely named:
clip_name.mov
While your files are:
clip_name_001.R3D
clip_name_002.R3D
clip_name_003.R3D
etc…If you have a single R3D you can automate the rename so that your proxy matches the .R3D file and CatDV 10.0.1 will link them but spanned clips would end up with a full duration proxy for each segment of the R3D and I think this is not a great idea.
Also, by “fooling” the system, we move away from actually managing the files so archiving systems would fail to operate correctly.
Can you let us know the frame size and what camera you are using?
I can get 2K files in but 4K and 5K seem to not import correctly and Squarebox support is investigating this. Can you confirm?
Sorry to speak too soon on this but I feel like there is a solution forthcoming.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
Yes, this is commonly done. You can use multiple variables in the Worker Node and that will do it or you can use the command line as well.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
It’s a mixed bag. It goes from a GUID only approach (A432FDS.mov) to a full paragraph. I fall into the middle.
I’d love to hear if anyone has run into issues with long names. A larger issue I see all the time is bad characters. One of our recent docs we’ve developed for clients is our “bad characters” list to help get them clean up people’s naming schemes.
What are you guys seeing out there as far as limits?
We recently did a several day engagement with a network on filenaming for them. We’re about to deliver the schema but the basics are a prepended system that ID’s the global info and then we allow the editors to use the end of the name for anything they like.
Example:
ID_6654_HX_AT_the-end-of-the-road-epk-v4.mov
After my system sees “ID_6654_HX_AT” we don’t care beyond that. their system includes share web docs with all of the codes and their keys in a web system and a full doc package so that new hires can follow along or at least be blamed when they don’t. 😉
If this was just a MAM and we didn’t have to deal with you dang editors/humans we’d have it easy. Machines don’t care. 😉 But in the end I also like having a place for plain text in a filename, but we also had to make sure the automated processes could run and that a human could also quickly see that a file didn’t belong if a an ID_6657 ended up in a ID_6654 folder.
Obviously the specifics are confidential and the ID elements of each client get pretty specific but it’s one example of something that every shop should consider whether you have a MAM installed or not.
Tip: If you have CatDV and a worker node, you can get a unique filename into your workflow just by having the Worker append or prepend the ClipID onto the filename so that you have unique names.
I’ve rambled long enough. Back to work.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
It’s a bit beyond this forum to write it all, but there are several reasons that I prefer it. (Note that “better” is really up to you, this is my personal preference and others like watch folders.)
Mostly it’s for better control over the process. If I don’t want to make proxy of certain files, I can choose. If I want to do the jobs later or in a certain order (These go first!!) I can do that. I can even set up delayed jobs by choosing a script flag that will only run at night.
If you drop 1000 files into your watch, you’re going for a long ride until you can do another job.
It makes for easier recovery from errors/resubmission. Jobs never fail, ever, right? Why drag and drop again, just seach, reset the trigger flag and move on about your business.
In my opinion, moving files is a bad way to do anything in modern workflows. If you have shared storage, why would you bother moving a file other than to put it in place the first time? (This one is HARD for some folks to grasp but there are many ways to handle it.) Send a job or any process, a path and let it run in place.
Finally and this goes to reliability, If you want to “proxy everything” that’s fine, remember when you ingest you can have server queries run automatically based on rules of what data is missing, not just what data is there. (i.e. if proxy status is blank, send job to proxy.) so even if there’s a watch folder for initial ingest, often there are many actions that should be performed and by breaking them up, you can better troubleshoot and track status. A common first time mistake is to build an action with many many things happening. When that has a problem, or when you want to introduce a small change, you have to change the whole thing.
For example:
I want to make proxy of my files that I ingest from this drop folder.
Ok, so what does that mean really?
I want to ingest files. (1)
I want to find the video files in this batch (2) and make proxy. (3)
Do they stay in place in that drop folder? Hopefully not, let’s move them. (4)
What about stills? Ugh, I forgot, ok, figure out what’s a still and make a .jpg proxy of those. (5 &6)
Audio, dang! Ok, find those and only proxy .wav files. Move .mp3’s to a separate folder structure. (7,8, 9?)
I just wanted to make proxy.
This is just an example and you can totally make a drop folder, for video only, that leaves files in place and makes proxy. That works. But you may find that as you automate you want to do more or different things and so doing things by metadata (check format and if it contains “VIDEO” send to the proxy job etc.) might be better.
Again, I invite you to play and test, that’s the best way to learn but as things get deeper, know that workflows often need more “logic” than a simple watch can provide. But in the early days even the delaying of a job as I mention in the second paragraph, is enough to see the benefit of firing a job from a server query instead of moving a file into a watch folder.
Hope this helps more than it confuses. I see Rolf has replied as well, gotta go read his.
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com
-
We’re all still mostly transcoding out here.
ProRes is common on Final Cut workflows, I’ve heard all sorts of codecs used, depending on your final outputs and storage capabilities. I know DVCProHD is a popular edit format that’s nice because FCP, Premiere, Avid and others can use it.
Since I don’t do a ton of PC work, let’s hear from some of the other Premiere guys on here. What are you guys editing in?
bryson
bryson “at” northshoreautomation.com
northshoreautomation.com