Michael Phillips
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
Not that Avid hasn’t been in other prosumer/consumer parts of the editing market over the past 15 years or so, starting with Diva, eCinema, Media Suite Pro, Pinnacle, etc. Apparently none of these generated enough revenue to continue as a product line on its own. Also the value of AVID as a brand leveraging the studio/Hollywood success never resonated in those other markets. So I wouldn’t say that AVID only cares about the “high end” however that is defined today, but certainly needs to keep that market as other solutions and offering from AVID should appeal to them as well beyond just an editing seat.
Perhaps this proves that a software only solution in the prosumer space is a difficult one without the additional halo effect of hardware, OS, and related revenue. I don’t know if it would ever happen, but I would not be surprised to see Apple requiring third party plug-ins for FCPX be only available as an in-app purchase via app store – getting a percentage from that as well. Part of the Apple ecosystem experience.
Michael
-
What are your system specs? OS, etc. What codec/data rate are you using? what kind of drives? What is the connection to the computer? How full are the drives? Do all clips play that way, or just those clips in that part of the timeline?
Michael
-
What I meant by subclip is that while clip is still linked under AMA, you can load it in the source monitor, play it and such. You can make a subclip of just the spans that you want to transcode should you have such a need – for example the best 2 minutes out of a 20 minute recording. When it comes time to transcode, you would just do the subclip.
Michael
-
I think when it really comes down to it, many people are looking for a powerful platform with latest, fastest, and multiple connections that runs OSX. I would think that everyone here would be fine running OSX on a sanctioned and supported HP Xbox if that were available.
Michael
-
Shane points out an important advantage with AMA is its ability to “conform” or relink a sequence. Imported sources need to have their entire source imported again, whereas AMA deals with subsets and spans and offset to be able to do that directly.
Michael
-
Depends on how it was captured/created as as ProRes is concerned, since it can support both:
https://images.apple.com/finalcutpro/docs/Apple_ProRes_White_Paper_October_2012.pdf
Michael
-
Remember that Apple is a brand with look and feel that is just as important to them as what it actually does. I don’t see Apple adding updated technology to an existing hardware platform design as that could have been done all along. It’s about the whole experience… now what their definition of high end professional workstation looks like will be interesting. There will be (needs to be) some sort of “look how clever we are, better than, factor to the offering. I think one thing it won’t have is CD/DVD support. 🙂
Michael
-
Depends on the processing being done and whether GPU can do it, or the process was written for GPU. I know in the transcode dailies world, both are still important. Color correction is done via GPU, but the actual transcode process from codec to codec is still CPU. Also, debayers such as RED, and most likely others do not use GPU.
Michael
-
While the end result may be the same, as in you have MXF/DNxHD version of the original camera sources, AMA brings more advantages to the workflow:
1. Link directly to AVCHD for review of footage
2. Optionally subclip just selects from the review process
3. Transcode just the required selects which is far more optimized that straight import as it uses all the processors – on average AMA is 2x faster than the same file being imported.The discussions around AMA mainly have to do with doing the full edit with direct linked media which is certainly possible, but performance and such may not be up to anyone’s satisfaction – especially with multicam type shoots.
Michael
-
So it seems that the conform will done in Avid? The process would be no different with FCP or Avid if you go with an offline proxy or look to avoid the conform process and edit at your final mastering resolution. You did not mentioned whether the camera would be shooting with a CineStyle LUT or not which might or might not change things in the process.
If you want to avoid a conform, you can certainly consider a transcode to a DNxHD 175x (10 bit) right off the bat and that becomes your offline/online all in one. Consideration here are storage. Keep in mind that the H.264 are long GOP so their file size to quality is different than an I frame format such as ProRes or DNxHD. For example, 1TB will hold 52 hours of H.264 whereas the equivalent in DNxHD 175x will be 13.5 hours. Roughly a factor of x4. You will still want to archive your camera originals, so the DNxHD would be in addition to.
You might get away with DNxHD 145 which is 20 hours per TB, but there have been stories of some banding issues and I would go to the 175x. The savings of 5 hours per TB is not worth it to me. The same goes for ProRes as the codec data rates are about the same.
In this scenario, it’s one time transcode unless there is a LUT as that might change how you approach the dailies process. I would consider doing them in the free Resolve, it removes the processing from your editing system freeing you up to edit and gives you LUT control if needed. Just make sure to use “use filname” in the REEL settings.
The process for offline would be the same, you are just choosing a lower bandwidth codec knowing it’s disposable. At DNxHD 36, you will get 65 hours per TB. If a LUT is required for editorial it can be applied. When I say LUT changes things, it is because editors, producers, and directors don’t like looking at washed out images. Certainly a color effect can be used on the timeline, but it is more of a pain to keep that going and does not apply to anything in the source monitor. Also once you get to final color correction, the LUT gets thrown out and the original full dynamic range of the image can now be controlled. So if doing 175 and a LUT on camera orignals, you may or may not still be doing a conform back to the un-LUT’d sources. I would have that conversation with the colorist. And where is color correction going to be done?
I am hot and cold on AMA – there is something nice about consistency in a workflow – if doing AMA, then start and finish AMA. With v6.5, you can start with one, and finish with another. You just want to be sure that the file names being tracked in either Source File or Tape are consistent. AMA conform can be done – there seems to be some trickery needed from time to time. In the scenario you describe, I believe you will need to remove or hid the Avid MediaFile folder with the transcode material. Bring your other files back online via AMA and go from there. I have seen some weird suggestions on forums with AMA – Once you transcode to MXF via AMA, you will be editing with the .new clips. I always keep my original AMA clips and links in that same bin and move the .new to my next level of media management – usually renaming the clips to scene-take and putting them in my scene bins. later once you hide the Avid media, open the AMA bins with the media attached and it should come back online.
I usually start in Resolve (or other type dailies program), create my offline with LUT. When done, I take my edited locked sequence (or pseudo locked) and decompose with handles. I create a new timeline of master clips from the decompose. Make EDL, send to Resolve, conform to original camera sources there, do not apply a LUT, create DNxHD 175x, transcode, bring new media into project, go to original timeline and do a “relink to selected” with the highlighted new material. Done.
Michael