[Tod Hopkins]

[Lee Doucet] “Windows has a legacy DirectShow framework for CODECs, but since they didn’t let it languish as a 32-Bit component, they won’t have to worry about breaking every DirectShow Encoder/Decoder”

A couple of points. Microsoft’s entire business model is different. MS can’t take features away. They are all about conservative stability. The two models are antithetical. MS will always chose the conservative path and Apple will always choose to be more progressive.

DirectShow is significantly newer than Quicktime.

Windows (as you pointed out) will not stop running 32-bit code any time soon.

Apple OS still has a powerful video framework. They replaced the framework. They didn’t remove it.

DirectShow relies heavily on third-party codecs.

Cheers,
tod

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

[Shawn Miller] “What do you mean? Are you saying that MS doesn’t develop it’s own codecs, or that they don’t include third party codecs with Windows?”

Neither, really. I’m saying that Microsoft has not considered extensive video codec support a significant feature of Windows until very recently. Microsoft does write some codecs and does support some in the base OS, but this support has never been extensive. If you want broad codec support in Windows you add third party codecs, often bundled into collections. Also true of Linux distros for what it’s worth.

The point I was trying to make is simply that we Mac users have come to expect “broad” video codec support built into the OS, but Apple OS is the exception, not the rule. I’m not apologizing for Apple’s choice. I don’t like it. I’m merely making the case that it is not a crises. Third party codecs are routine everywhere else.

Cheers,
tod

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

First, Apple is removing the codec software from the OS itself. That doesn’t mean the codecs don’t still exist, nor that they cannot exist on modern Macs. The codecs still exist as math. If you have the math, you have the codec, and you can write an application to apply the codec. Apple has simply decided they don’t want to do this work anymore, but they are not stopping others from doing it. Avid, Adobe, Blackmagic, Sorenson, VLC, FFMPEG can all continue to support any codec worth their time, assuming the codec math is available.

Shane is right that a codec is not like a physical tape format, but the analogy works. Apple has stopped building the machines, but they are not stopping anyone else from building codec machines, and codec machines are relatively easy to build. Lot’s of people build codec machines. As software machines go, codec translators are fairly easy once the codec has been defined.

Remember that codecs were not historically part of any OS. Apple was the pioneer in including video codecs and a codec infrastructure (Quicktime) directly in the OS itself. Even then, there are many codecs Apple has never supported (WMV anyone?) or dropped long ago. Writing codec software represented a significant effort on Apple’s part and it is the central reason Macs became the system of choice for video professionals. Windows has never incorporated broad codec support in the OS. They rely on third parties, one of whom was Apple.

By the way, if VLC can play a codec, it can transcode it. Playing IS transcoding.

Cheers,
tod

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

You are correct that Mac Pros do not have CPU hardware acceleration, but some Xeon processors do. It’s not simply that Mac Pros use Xeon processors. It’s that Mac Pros are old.

Cheers,
tod

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

That’s very helpful. Very similar to my systems though I am still restricting to Sierra.

I presume you do not show CPU “hardware acceleration” for h.264 when exporting?

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

Sorry, sorry! Sloppy.

CC 2019 (Premiere 13) will run on Sierra, High Sierra, and Mojave. However, there are limits to the feature sets available in each OS. The actual system requirements are complex and tied to several other variables such as the lack of a CUDA driver for Mojave.

Arguably High Sierra is the most compatible OS, though when CC 2019 first came out, Adobe and Apple clearly suggested that Metal was only fully implemented in Mojave (the roots of my misstatement).

Anyone who has not upgraded should read Adobe’s requirements very carefully before making any changes. For instance, you may notice that according to Adobe “Hardware Acceleration” in Premiere 13 requires a 2016 or newer Mac.

https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/system-requirements.html

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

Regarding nVidia not working properly with Mojave, I am referring to the lack of OEM and CUDA drivers, but others are reporting (in this thread) that the Apple’s nVidia drivers are not the best. I can’t test this because I don’t have a system is compatible and has nVidia. Arguably, that is “not working,” right?

I would assume that the need for OEM drivers would be most significant for after-market nVidia cards, especially those not formally approved by Apple.

Since CUDA was my main motivation for having nVidia cards, the question for me became whether Metal made sense for me at all. Sierra is the only OS where CUDA and Metal run together properly, so I tested this before considering any further attempts at upgrading. I must admit that Metal has been more stable than CUDA in Premiere CC2018 (v12) and performs as well. OpenCL, as always, is significantly slower, but very stable. I’ve never had problems with CUDA in Encoder but CUDA was only slightly faster than Metal in my testing.

So I use Metal now with my nVidia cards on two systems running Sierra, and I replaced the card in my primary system with a Radeon instead of nVidia since I was switching to Metal in any case. I am not upgrading Adobe or the OS in any of my system because I prefer that they stay in sync. My issue with Mojave is why? If Adobe 2019 didn’t “require” Mojave, I would not have even tried.

And when upgrade time comes, we’ll see. I’ve never been as pessimistic about Mac as I am right now.

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

OS 10.14 Mojave does not work properly with nVidia cards. I have several perfectly good nVidia cards.
OS 10.13 High Sierra will not work with my old Mac Pros which are nicely upgrades and powerful machines.
The current version of Premiere (13) does not support hardware acceleration under OS 10.12, so I’m still using CC2018.

The good news is I can run CC2018 and everything else I need on Sierra without any noticeable sacrifice in performance.

The bad news is that after 26 years with Apple I can no longer make a rational argument for Mac hardware at the high end. Or for that matter, the new OS who’s sole new feature appears to be forced hardware obsolescence.

By the way, I like Windows 10. It’s fast.

Cheers,
tod

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

CBR 9 is a fine way to go in theory and if you have the room. It is effectively the maximum bitrate for DVD. The problems with CBR9 are that you may not have the room and in most compressors, the VBR compressor simply works better than the CBR compressor. As a result, 5/7.5/9 sometimes looks better than 9CBR. You might guess that I use 5/7.5/9 for DVDs.

I rarely use sharpness (or unsharp) except on a “bad” shot. Frankly, it’s as a photo filter that is generally inappropriate for motion.

There are many tricks people promote that have an immediate impact but are bad practice when used routinely — sharpness, over-cranked color, crushed blacks — these should be used sparingly if at all. The immediate impact, when compared to the original, and while you are focused on that particular characteristic, will appear to improve the picture. But the overall impact on quality and aesthetics, in the long run, is not worth it. Sharpness, for instance, is literally adding noise to your image that creates the illusion that the image is sharper. It “feels” sharper. But, you’ve added noise, and noise is hard to compress. You’ve also added a subtle “harshness” to your program which, overall, may be degrading the experience.

When going from HD to SD, everyone sees “soft,” but often, it’s just SD. We are so used to HD now we’ve forgotten how bad SD is by contrast. Frankly, even HD is not good enough for me anymore because I work with 4k. Of course, if the content is good enough, I don’t really care. ????

Most of your sharpness comes from (a) focus, and (b) contrast. Most people don’t realize that contrast is the biggest factor in perceived sharpness. Try this some time. Take a hazy shot, say dancers with smoke on the stage or a fog scenic. Now just ramp up the contrast and watch the haze vanish. Looks sharper, but you didn’t change focus at all.

Cheers,
tod

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC

[Tod Hopkins]

MPEG is not an appropriate mastering codec. Unfortunately, I don’t know CS6. I never used it. If you give me the list of Quicktime options I can suggest one.

The reason for the suggested workflow — Premiere > Encoder > Encore — is control. This is workflow in CS. Adobe is hiding it from you — automating it. Premiere is the editor. Encoder is the compression tool. Encore is the DVD authoring tool. When you output from Premiere, Premiere uses the Encoder engine to do this. When Encore compresses, it also uses the Encoder engine.

Skipping steps is convenient, but it hides the technical decision making from you. What’s important is not the particular software path, but how you control the technical parameters the software uses. The qualitative difference between using Roxio or Compressor or Squeeze or Encoder for your DVD compression is minimal. Optimizing the technical steps is the key. The biggest difference between these tools is the control they do or don’t provide.

It’s possible you can make your DVD elementary files directly from Premiere and skip the intermediate master, if you can control the settings and get a good result. You can try exporting directly to DVD video elementary files using Premiere’s export preset, assuming there is one in CS6. You can even try linking your sequence directly to Encore, if CS6 can do this.

cheers,
tod

Tod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
Washington, DC