[Ryan Holmes]

I may be reading your post wrong, but I’m not clear on your question.

So you have color graded footage in a timeline in FCP, and that footage is ProRes 4444? Why would export out an EDL? Are you sending this footage to another app? Or were you trying to EDL from your color grading session back into FCP?

If you’re looking to export out your color graded FCP timeline you’ll see no loss if you keep the codec the same as your timeline (ProRes 4444). You can always use Uncompressed or DPX if you’re worried. But ProRes 4444 is more than sufficient.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

Off the top of my head….create a 4:3 timeline and drop your footage into the new timeline, pan and scan accordingly.

Or do the center cut inside of After Effects.

Or use the search feature on the COW: https://forums.creativecow.net/search.php?q=16%3A9+to+4%3A3&f%5B%5D=8

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

Things to double check:
(1) Original audio is in fact 24-bit
(2) Your sequence settings are set to 24-bit (not 16)
(3) Then make sure your export settings are correctly set or you can always force the export to be 24-bit audio when you export it

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

[David Roscher] “Which of the 2 formats make the most sense? Quicktime ProRes or the Avid DNxHD?”

This is totally up to you. You’re on a Mac so ProRes will work pretty seamlessly on your system. However, if you have to interface with Windows machines then DNxHD plays better on a PC.

ProRes = Read/Write on Mac, Read only on PC
DNxHD = Read/Write on Mac, Read/Write on PC

The codecs are nearly identical in terms of compression quality. So either way you go you’re in good shape.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

Alex – everybody doubts my words! 😉 But that’s how you learn I suppose.

Your question seems to be more with Adobe’s rendering of color space, pixel mapping, etc. than with a video card. I’m only saying that today’s video cards have the capacity to accurately deal with these problems. If there’s something buggy in the software or code of the program then that’s a different story….one that your video card won’t fix since it would b a software-based issue (i.e. FCP, Adobe, Avid, Autodesk, etc. – same video card for all the above apps, but how the app handles/displays/renders your media is up to that software).

I haven’t had any problems with Adobe in this area. Your mileage may vary. If so, it’s probably worth opening a support ticket with Adobe. I’d be curious what they say provided you have a specific, reproducible problem.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

[Kevin Monahan] “Why transcode? Can’t you just drop the playback resolution to 1/4 and have at it?”

You don’t have to transcode the media for it to work in PPRo. However, the OP wanted to speed up render/export times and getting out of a long-GOP, CPU intensive codec like AVCHD or h.264 is a good way to do that. Plus if the OP gets into other areas of post-production – motion graphics, color correction – moving to a more universally accepted format like ProRes or DNxHD is a good idea as it plays well with other apps. Not to mention the superior file compression that these intermediate codecs have which stand up well to multiple generational compression.

Any footage I shoot receive from a DSLR or comparable camera gets converted to ProRes for all the above reasons. Not a waste of time, just a difference of opinion on how to approach the post workflow.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

[Alex Gerulaitis] “Am I way off thinking that with graphics-card-based-monitoring, there is no way to display 24p as smoothly as with video I/O and a broadcast monitor with native 24p, or at least a TV with a pull-down?”

Today’s video cards can accurately display footage (23.976, 29.97, 59.94, etc.) to a computer monitor. The caveat being that if what you’re editing is going to broadcast then you should have a broadcast monitor in your pipeline to check for things like proper interlacing, broadcast safe colors, action/title safe, etc.

The OP’s question centered more around “do I need an additional card for proper playback on my computer” – no, he doesn’t. If you’re intended delivery is broadcast, then my answer would be – no, you don’t need an additional card for proper playback, but yes, you will need an additional card for proper monitoring to an external broadcast-quality monitor.

Clear as mud?! 😉

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

For editing 5DIII footage and EX1 footage you will be fine as is. You don’t need another card.

However, I would recommend getting an Nvidia based graphics card instead of the ATI one you listed. Adobe built it’s Mercury Playback Engine for Nvidia graphics cards. ATI’s will work with Premiere but you won’t get the performance boost of the Mercury Playback Engine.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

Transcode to ProRes or DNxHD. Those are probably your best options. Prelude to AME will work fine. And any presets you create in AME will show in Prelude (and PPro).

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
@CutColorPost

[Ryan Holmes]

Choose “Quicktime” as your format option (same place where you select mp3, wav, jpeg, h.264, etc.) and then you can change the “codec” to DNxHD in a different drop down menu just below the format option.

Ryan Holmes
http://www.ryanholmes.me
vimeo.com/ryanholmes