[Todd Beabout]

I think you are right, Ed. I had to “squeeze” a spot this morning, and I tried out the uncompressed QT again. It would not work, but I don’t think the file had the .mov extension. Perhaps we should update the Squeeze version we are running and see if that was fixed. I will try again after adding the .mov.

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

I believe it is actually called a “component”, although on Apple’s own website they refer to it as “10-bit Uncompressed 4:2:2 codec”.

In MY experience, which is all that I can attest to, this type of file will not work with SORENSON 3 on a PC, which is what I mentioned that I use. (NOT Procoder…) There may be different components installed with different compression software, I don’t really know. My version of Sorenson, or the version of QT on that box, or many other variables could affect compatibility.

I also like to scale coming out of FCP because I like to see a “high-rez” version of the file at the size that it is ending up before I compress it for comparison. Looking at a 720×486 uncompressed QT file and comparing that to a 320×240 highly compressed file just doesn’t help me find the right compression settings. But hey, to each his own. I also do happen to trust FCP’s scaling (which was greatly improved in the latest version) over Sorenson Squeeze. I’ve heard the scaling compared negatively to high end compositing apps like After Effects, but not to desktop encoding applications. But again, to each his own.

To Travis I’d say take a file and export it both uncompressed and a few other ways and compare your results. That is the best way to learn, and you will feel solid about your knowledge.

Just my $.02

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

Sorenson Squeeze is a great program, and on the PC side it has lots of WMV options. I use it every day.

I usually export my video from FCP using Sorenson 3 codec with the settings maxed out on quality, and I go ahead and re-size the video to 320×240. I personally would rather let FCP do the scaling, and going uncompressed may also lead to problems if you need to further compress it on a computer that may not have your particular uncompressed codec. For example, I could NOT kick out an uncompressed QT and give that to my Squeeze box, because it is a PC and does not have the Apple Uncompressed codec obviously.

Good luck.

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

When adjusting the position of the clips, be sure to use whole, even numbers in your Motion tab. If you drag the image with the mouse it will not be exact, but you can then re-type the nearest whole, even number. (The even number thing applies mainly to the y-axis).

One way that I have done this it dragging my 4:3 sequence into a new sequence and applying the Widescreen filter to the nested sequence. Then I can go back in the 4:3 sequence and re-position the shots as needed.

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

Your MPEG-1 files are most likely muxed (audio and video are together on the same track). You should be able to de-mux them with a program like MPEG Streamclip and then pull that into FCP.

Here’s the link:

https://www.alfanet.it/squared5/mpegstreamclip.html

And it is a free program I believe.

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

Hi, thought I’d chime in here… I have gone with 10-bit everything since we setup this box, and everything looks great in 10-bit. We do high end regional/national commercials, so I want it as good as it can be. That said, let me give you a few reasons to look at 8-bit.

The main problem that I have with 10-bit is the lack of support for motion-blur as well as many other, random plug-ins that you might use all the time (e.g. Sapphire glows, etc.) If you try to apply these to a 10-bit clip (with YUV rendering, which is default, turned on) you will see some of that nasty green noise all over the place. I was glad to see that FCP finally improved their motion blur (it is actually usuable now) and I was all excited to throw it on some graphics that I wanted to slam down onto the screen (can you tell I do a lot of car spots??), but the 10-bit in FCP is still broke. So for me, I have this workaround: When applying an effect to a clip in a 10-bit sequence, I go ahead and open Sequence Settings/Video Processing and change it to “always render in RGB”. Then the effect will render, and look right. But then I get to enjoy the little message that FCP shows me when I go to output to tape, reminding me that the overall quality of what I am about to output has been compromised by rendering in RGB. Well, that’s just great!!

As stated above… the average joe isn’t going to notice if something was rendered in RGB or not obviously, but one could argue 8-bit YUV vs. 10-bit RGB, and since I’m not an engineer (and have no honest idea which would be preferable) I’ll go with which is easier for the editor… And to me, the 8-bit would be easier along with saving some drive space.

Just my $.02

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

Hi Dan,

First off, I agree with you regarding the new Mac/Intel hardware…. It scares me a bit, although here at our production house we may jump on board, at least by the 2nd gen boxes. We decided against upgrading to the Quad G5 because of the Intel version coming this summer (not to mention the lack of fibre card support on a PCIe bus at the time, rendering our XRAID useless on that box).

Some benchmarks are out now on the Intel iMac and I find them somewhat interesting:

https://www.macworld.com/2006/01/features/imaclabtest1/index.php

I am really assuming that they are currently ensuring that their Pro apps will be completely optimized for the new Intel chip, and that is probably what FCP6 is going to be about…. Here’s hoping anyways.

So you guys took the plunge on the Symphony Nitris? Was this primarily because of the Avid workflow at your facility, or was there something specific that attracted you to a product at that price point? I bet it’s nice anyways!

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

Just ask them if pre-computes can be loaded into the monitor.

lol

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

I would have to say that AVID is much slower to learn than FCP. If you have experience with linear editing, then AVID will make sense to you in that aspect, but if you have only edited on FCP you are probably going to be suprised at how slow it is to pick up. I’m just saying this in case you are thinking of accepting a position somewhere as an Avid editor, and you think you can fake it. Probably not.

That said… Avid is a great tool for cutting video, and it is an industry standard so you should definitely learn it. If the work you are doing requires more of a compositing setup (i.e. lots of graphics/keyframing, transfer modes, etc.) then FCP will probably work out better for you IMO. If you want to see more info/ranting about the comparison between the 2 programs, do a simple search in this forum and the FCP one “FCP vs. Avid” and you will be suprised at how much discussion there is on the topic. I say learn both and then decide what to use for each project. (I use both daily.)

Hope this helps… Good luck!

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios

[Todd Beabout]

I know what your are talking about! In previous versions of FCP, MPEG-2 was an option for any QuickTime export (most handy: Batch Export) and that has now disappeared, “forcing” you to use Compressor. I mean, I get it, the same engine is still there to encode… It just seems that a few options of how to get there have disappeared. I have already done what Oliver suggests, and it works out for me. Just create a new preset for CBR (constant bit rate, or “one pass” as Apple calls it) and I use about 6.5 for the bitrate. That will be MUCH quicker than Compressors “Fast Encode” preset. (go figure)

-Todd Beabout
Vazda Studios