Floh Peters
Forum Replies Created
-
[Andy Stinton] “Once the bug is fixed enable the checkbox again. Logical?”
Yes, if the bug would have been discovered before shipping the version. But if nobody knows about it…
-
[Andy Stinton] “Arthur.. Thats ridiculous but I will give it a try:) “
No, that
-
The only real “Broadcast” Betacam SP decks were the BVW series. They have much better dropout compensation than the PVWs and UVWs, and they have better picture quality and less other problems. The UVWs never were able to record or play back the audio channels 3&4, but for the PVWs (at least for the 2800) there was a modification that allowed to record and play back the channels 3&4. For the first PVW we got we bought this modification; it added one additional HU on top of the deck with extra VU-meters and knobs, plus extra inputs on the back for the additional channels, plus some additional internal modifications to make the image more comparable with something a BVW would deliver.
Note that the channels 3&4 on Betacam SP are embedded into the video signal. This means that you cannot record on Ch3&4 without recording video, and it means that as soon as you record video you are recording audio channels 3&4 at the same time.
I would recommend either renting a BVW deck for mastering, or finding someone with a Media 100 and a BVW deck that can play out your material e.g. from a FireWire drive for you. For German TV stations it was never officially “allowed” to work with PVW or even UVW decks, and admitting not to have a BVW and doing broadcast work would never have been an option. These days they expect DigiBeta tapes and nothing else (okay, maybe HDCAM and HDCAM SR); and since we want to work in Broadcast we have to follow their rules. -
[marguu] “If I buy BitVice for one system, can I use the same program on my other system, or will I be forced to purchase a second program?”
As with most of the commercial software that is available, I think you only purchase the license for one computer. But I am not really sure about this; you probably need to read the EULA. Or contact the BitVice guys, they are very helpful.
-
Chris,
as far as I know the “realtime” encoders only do 1-pass encoding. If you need 2 pass they usually have to do 2 passes from tape to get better picture quality. E.g. the Optibase products work this way.
The question as usual is what you want to get. BitVice is an excellent MPEG encoder, but of course there are always options that are much more expensive and may produce slightly better results. But one thing that is important when comparing BitVice to Compressor or the MPEG2 option for QuickTime player is the fact that BitVice can handle the Media 100 (and Avid) RGB colorspace correctly.
Media 100 files are recorded in YUV, as most other video signals. QuickTime is an RGB format, so at a point there is a YUV->RGB conversion. Media 100 and Avid have a standard for this that sets 0% black to RGB 16,16,16 and 100% white to RGB 2335,235,235. This means that there is some headroom to reproduce superblack and superwhite (black and white values below 0% and over 100%). Apple does map 0% black to RGB0 and 100% white to RGB255. This means that when you encode a Media 100 file with Compressor you will get washed out blacks (RGB16, which is black for Media 100 is only dark grey for Apple) and too low whites, plus the chroma also will be reduced.
BitVice has the option to encode these files “correctly”, giving you results that are very close to the original. Many commercial DVDs have been produced with BitVice, and the quality is really good. We did several commercial titles for the German DVD market (mostly music and Comedy DVDs), and they all sell quite weil. And nobody did complain about the image quality 😉
I think BitVice is an excellent MPEG2 encoder. It is not the fastest option out there, but they have some great features to enhance image quality, and the results are really good. -
[helmut] “Is the image quality still any issue at all considering they both can use the same hardware i.e AJA? I know FCP has a more professional set up and does more but how is the software/hardware integration with AJA for example, which software can make better use of the board or is there a difference at all?”
The image quality for digitizing is more or less the same; this is not an issue that should be problematic. The hardware integration in Media 100 is “better” than in FCP, I would say. Problem in FCP is that your settings are in various different places, and it is quite easy to miss an important setting in the first place that will cause headaches later. Media 100 has the advantage that they sell it as a complete system with software and hardware, including the correct drivers for the hardware plus the hardware settings all integrated into the Media 100 software.
[helmut] “Is M100 just better for short projects while FCP is better for full length features? how many people are experiencing system melt downs when they are editing 2 hour projects?”
I would not say that. We do everything from 10″ commercials up to 3 hours primetime TV shows on Media 100, all without any problems. The systems are very stable, and what I have experienced is that it is much more convenient to edit long-form programs on Media 100 than on FCP since e.g. saving a timeline is MUCH quicker. In FCP you can only save your project, not individual bins or timelines
When we worked on a DVD-production for a German band some weeks back we had to re-edit a part of the show in FCP since a freelancer started it in FCP. Saving the project with a 80 minute timeline took around maybe 20-30 seconds in FCP each time, while a similar project in Media 100 would take maybe 2-3 seconds to save (on a QuadG5 system). While this may not sound like a long time it is quite annoying if you have to wait for 20 seconds each time you save your project.There are probably some areas where FCP is stronger, but there are also areas where Media 100 is stronger. But Media 100 is definitely not limited to a specific kind of projects.
-
[marguu] “”By reference”. Will that be as good a quality as a quicktime movie?”
Actually both by reference and “Self Contained” are the same quality as your digitized material. The by ref export relinks to your original media files, so it is only a reference pointing to those files. Therefore the file is very small, and exactly the same quality as your digitized material.
The “Self Contained” export does the same with integrating your media files. No recompression is applied, only the parts of your digitized source material that were used are copied bit by bit into a new file.
This 2 ways you will maintain the highest image quality.
If you want to go to DVD I would recommend using BitVice instead of Compressor for MPEG2 encoding. Plus (don -
The question regarding a system is always also a question of your workflow and needs.
But Media 100 is very good in exchange with AE (the AE exporter is bundled with Media 100, unlike e.g. FinalCut), and you have great realtime capabilities to integrate AE renders with Alpha channel into your Media 100 timelines.
If you are familiar with the Media 100 interface you will be up to speed with the new systems in nearly no time, and you will gain brilliant new features. Plus, you will stay compatible to your legacy projects and media files, so if you need to revise an old project you can do that on your new system without any problems.
If you tell us a little bit more about your needs I think you will get some more feedback. But I have read quite some posts in the last months from people who went to FCP and back to Media 100, because the new Media 100 systems are much more intuitive and easier to handle (e.g. setting up projects is much more critical in FCP; you can screw up a lot there) than any other system out there.But of course this is only my opinion 😉
-
You cannot export to Compressor directly. Instead you should use the “Export from Edit suite” as “By Reference”, which is very quick and creates small files without recompression. This “by ref” file can easily be transcoded via Compressor.
-
Save the file on your Office PC as a .txt file; this is a very basic text format. This should be readable by SimpleText, which is a part of the standard MacOS installation.