FCS"3" install on MBP experience

Hi Graeme,

Taking notes. How does it feel to be one the 'Cutting Edge'?

--ken

Ken,
thats one small step for man.....

well it feels like it's beer time!

I only have 1 set of 3rd party filters CHV's 'repair collection' they were automatically loaded into FCP7 form FCP6 in the install.

Graeme

first test is the blueray export i guess!

I thiught you were going to say 'That's one smll beer for Man".

Te he.

I really do want to know if the Blu-ray feature works and what you think about it. Have the prices of Blu-ray blanks come down at all, can this FCP setup burn dual layer Blu-ra?

Questions, questions.

--ken

I have an 2 x LG external blue-ray burners 1x official LG USB2 and one a cobbled together esata device.

Think the LG USB2 device was around UK £200- i buy Verbatim Disks in pods of 25- ill need to check on the price think they work out around UK £5 each for the 25GB.

But as yet have only burned data discs for backup using Toast 8- yet to burn a video blueray- but i have a beer in hand and have no fear- so ill give it a go!

I don't have a standalone blueray player but hopefully will be able to playback on computer as a semi test.

Standing by, beer in hand.

It is Friday.

--ken

wow! description to follow

Okay, good news Graeme.

Now for the second part of the test. Will it play on a Blu-ray player to a TV.

Inquiring minds want to know.

--ken

hmmmm thats now the problem / embarrassing bit- i can't test the dam thing actually plays- not inclined to buy a stand alone player yet-

Happy to Post a test disc to someone in the UK who has a player and will give feedback here?

Hi ken
just tested the disc in a shop- yes it does play on a standalone set up with tv!
Graeme

You beauty!

So, Graeme, the burning is done bu Compressor only, no need for any Toast or other stuff?

Mio

Mio- thanks

the only test i have done so far is an export directly off the FCP timeline- I didn't even come out of FCP- Compressor didn't launch.

Toast wasn't needed either- FCP saw my Burner and did everything from transcode- add simple menu- consolidate and burn.

(although i assume FCP is using Compreeor resources in the background- i.e if i didn't have compressor installed it might not work- just guessing here)


Will try out some exports/burning directly from compressor later

Graeme

Hi Graeme,

Good news, I love good news.

So, how did the video look?

--ken

Hi Ken
the footage looked good- it was up-resed sd- and it looked very good.

Went on a hunt for a bluray player to test the disk- I'm in the countryside at the moment- local video renal store had blueray disks to rent but no in-store player. so went to an out of town computer shop and tested it there without consent! no one even noticed me!

Ended up buying a cheap and cheerfull player- UK £99 and a couple of movies.
Where i am it the moment there is only a SD widescreen CRT TV - but the picture is noticble better than DVD.

Will try some higher res stuff this weekend- ill take some photos on my nikon- and do a 1080p montage- and try some exports from directly from compressor.

But without a good hi-def tv to hand i can only test the discs work- and only make an educated guess at picture quality.

Graeme

Hi Graeme,

Upres SD, Yikes. (g)

Can't wait to hear about some, XDCAM EX, DVCPRO HD, ProRes 422, footage. That will be an important test.

This is starting to sound exciting. Thanks for posting this for us.

--ken

hi Ken
Well the the Beta SD was converted to ProRes- if leaves you feeling less spooked ; )

Next test is under way- filmed some footage in a garden this afternoon- mixture of Photos and Video- all done on a Nikon D90 with a few different lenses- under the right conditions (bright natural light- no panning) it produces some great looking video.

Shots are all shallow DOP of plants/flowers and camera was static but there was plenty of breeze moving the flowers.

D90 Native Clips are 1280/720p 24fps data rate variable by clip up to 25Mbit/s all video -no audio as have turned this off. (have found data rate get to the higher end when using a shallow dop)

Used the D90 for an electronics project recently that needed a lot of macro shots- mixed with hdv for the non macro stuff.

Previously i transcoded to normal ProRes- which i felt was overkill- so this time i thought id try out the new Apple ProRes 422(LT) at 41Mbps and see what happens!?

Just going to do a simple montage- with the shots.

Graeme

Hi Graeme,

Wondering about the ProRes LT data rate. The attached chart shows LT at 102 and Proxy at 45

--ken

Hi Ronny and Graeme,

Okay guys, I just want you to know that you are both making me very envious. I don't even have the upgrade package yet and you guys are burning Blu-rays.

Of course I still don't have a burner yet or a playback machine. Guess all this will have to change. Just wish that the price of blanks was a bit lower.

--ken

Hi Ronny
I can see a slight difference too even with my D90 Footage- feel the LT is taking something away and there is an obvious difference between LT and Proxy of course. (nice to have an offline Prores codec)

For me and the resolution we film at, LT could be a good thing to fall back to.

I need to test it with some other codecs (eg HDV) & types of content (eg presenter to camera) before i make my mind up.

It's good to read about your thought on ProRes too- thanks good to hear it performs well at the high end too!

Graeme

double post

I was going by the spec on from the ripple training video - 1280 x 720 at 23.98fps they state 41Mbps
you pic has reference to 1920 x 1080 at 29.97fps

im getting varying data rates with LT between 32MBits/s and 49MBits/s most around 34MBits/s for all my clips.

I took just over 100 short video clips 15 to 40 secs most around 20 sec, ran the same clips through ProRes 422(standard) + (LT) and (Proxy)


original clips- 4.48GB
ProRes 422- 12.40GB (24 mins compression time)
ProRes 422(LT) 7.94GB (26 mins compression time)
ProRes 422(proxy) 4.44GB (21 mins compression time)

Graeme

From the sounds of it I think that most people will stay with ProRes regular for XDCAM EX, DVCPRO HD, and the like.

I'm wondering if ProRes LT would be good for DV and HDV. This is something that needs to be tested.

--ken

Thanks Ronny, It's a music to my ears... Finally they delivered BD on Mac.

The fact that you can bun BD directly from FCP is fantastic.
It's easy to wait for "BD Studio Pro" when you've got something. Great!

Thanks Graeme, great work, fast too!

Mio

Hi Ken,

You may have hit the nail right on the head. Following your reply I have transcoded some DV, HDV and EX footage to ProRes and ProRes LT. The visual quality of the encodes look quite similar on my monitor, but the LT files are some 30% smaller in size than the regular ProRes files. I think this can make a real difference for people editing HDV, XDCAM or EX on the road, on laptops or on systems with smaller drive capacity. Not only do you get smaller file sizes at a simular visual quality but you also get some more RT on "slower" systems.

It seems the difference in quality between regular ProRes and LT only becomes more appearant once you deal with higher quality (and higher bitrate) sources. Interesting...

Best wishes,

Ronny

I'll have to do some tests here when I get my FCP 7. I guess the real question would be, 'can you see any difference' between LT and Reg with HDV, XDCAM EX, AVCHD.

--ken

Hi Graeme,

Thanks for the screen shots. Lot's to explore.

When I get FCP7 I'll test several different codecs with several ProRes. I'll then push it out to my MXO and see what i can 'see'.

--ken

Thanks Graeme,

I like the look of those templets and I can see some happy clients getting their programmes on Blu-Ray.

Now what would anyone recommend instead of capturing in 10 Bit HD uncompressed Prores HQ, Prores, Prores (LT) ?

Dave

Hi David,
I did reply to your msg.- first time i've used the PM feature on this site assume you got it? as my reply has not shown up under my sent items tab- i might have messed up?

regarding which ProRes i think that will be clarified over the next few weeks when a few more people have run tests- To hazard a guess if your using HD-Cam & SR broadcast masters as your source- then by the look of things you would still want to aim higher than the LT- unless you had a really good reason. (see earlier post from Ronny)

Not sure what your end use is regarding BluRay who will viewing them? assume it is some sort of internal viewing or international sales type thing?

Graeme


ronny courtens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Ken,
>
> We are doing some tests on ProRes right now. From
> my first experience I don't think I will use LT at
> this moment because I can see a slight difference
> in quality with regular ProRes and the data rate
> gain is not very significant. 444 on the other
> hand is a marvel. It plays smoothly on my system
> and it has a real 12-bit alpha channel. This is a
> significant step forward in high-quality output at
> significantly lower data rates than Uncompressed.

HI Graeme all received -

Blu-Ray Disc will be for 'PR reasons' to keep the client sweet with 'look what they have had done with us' gift.

Knowing how picky they can be I suspect, we'll just give em a SR deck and masters !!! - LOL

Prores totally new to me never used it even in SD domain, so will be giving it close scrutiny once back in work.

Thanks Ronny,

That was just the info I needed,

Well UPS has arrived and I'm busy installing on my MacPro.

Once again a beautifully designed & constucted box I see.

Thanks Ronny from me too- thats a good list to have.

Enjoy your install Dave!

Can an Intel Processor be installed in a Mac G5 so we can use FCP7 with it?

Tom

Hi Tom

It would be great if you could- but the motherboard is completely wrong for an Intel chip.

You could put an 'Intel Inside' sticker on the external case and pretend.

I have a G5 with a burned out power supply- which i need to get fixed soon- shame it will never see FCP7- but still a very good machine plenty can be done with them still.
Graeme

double post

It's very Quiet on the forum today-

Can I hear the sound of numerous super-drives being fed installation discs and the rustle of manuals?!

Graeme

Graeme,

LOL.

--ken

I'm not sure if I should post my question in this thread, but since there's a lot of talk about the new ProRes in FCP7, I was wondering what the purpose is to use the lower ProRes codecs? Is it primarily a size issue? I have a hard disc based Sony AVCHD camera and I assume I would want to log and transfer using the highest possible ProRes codec (4444) for archival purposes (since I'll eventually need to delete the footage off of the hard disc once full).

I'm just trying to wrap my head around the benefits of usung the lower ProRes codecs.

More importantly, I don't know how I'm supposed to actually work today when all I'm doing is waiting and watching for the upgrade to be delivered via FedEx.

-Steve

Hi Steve,

Hope you get your box soon, many goodies inside.

No, for archiving AVCHD you won't need 4x4 at all. First of all you won't even see this codec as an option for importing AVCHD in the Log & Transfer window, and second using the 4444 codec would give you very large files without any benefit in quality at all.

If it's just a matter of archiving your AVCHD footage there are two things you can do:

1. Import the AVCHD footage via L&T in FCP7, then choose the ProRes LT codec as your working format. ProRes LT requires about 30% less drive space than regular ProRes. Of course there is some sort of trade-off in quality versus the regular ProRes format, but it is my experience (and in the meantime also the experience of others) that this trade-off is negligable when working with lower data-rate footage. The advantage is smaller file sizes and (depending on your system) some more RT. When you are finished editing you can archive your ProRes clips for later re-use.

2. First make a backup of your AVCHD folders on a separate archiving drive via USB, then do the L&T import in FCP7 using the ProRes LT cdec (or regular ProRes if you still would prefer this), and work with the ProRes footage for editing. When your edit is done and locked you can then remove the ProRes files from your Scratch drive. Should you need to work on this project again you can just re-import the AVCHD files from your archiving drive. This will take some more time because you will have to Log&Transfer again, but the benefits are:

a. You will use less drive space for archiving because AVCHD has smaller data rates than ProRes.
b. You will always have your archive in its native format, and nothing can beat this.

Just my 2 Eurocents

Best wishes,

Ronny

Regarding Ronny's advice for user of the AVCHD camcorder:

>2. First make a backup of your AVCHD folders on a separate archiving drive via USB

YES! As old film guys like me prefer to think, the AVCHD and INFO folders on your camera HD or Memory Stick are the "camera originals" -- the "negative" in film terms.

You MUST keep a copy of those folders somewhere, they are your "RAW" files. I create a New Folder for each copy of the Memory Stick, "August 1, 2009 - Quaker Village" etc. Then archive it away.

Then you have no fear of working in ProRes LT or any other format, because you can always go back to the original and re-transfer via another codec, including new codecs not yet invented.

It became very easy for all of us shooting on tape to feel comfortable that we had an "original" in a vault somewhere. But now that everything is shot on HardDrive, SxS, P2, CompactFlash, SDCard, Memory Stick...you really have to think about time & expense to protect original footage. Either TWO copies on separate drives, or one on a drive and one on a Blu-Ray ROM, or as some larger companies do it, onto DLT Tape.

Hi Steve
have a look at Ronny's post (from above) (quoted below)

It's about finding the right version to retain all the quality of the original footage while not going overboard.
I.e. not having a higher data rate than you really need or is effective.

If you where working with footage that requires a very high data rate e.g.. Red- you might return to an offline/online approach using 444 for final online whilst using Proxy, LT or Prores (standard) version as an off-line codec.

For HDV/AVCHD and similar formats you would want to stick with Prores (LT) or perhaps Prores (standard) from start to finish.

Ronny C explains it better and with more authority than i can.

Graeme





ronny courtens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Dave,
>
> This used to be our workflow before ProRes:
>
> HDCAM
> Capture to Uncompressed 8-bit or DVCPRO HD
> (HDCAM is 8-bit only, so absolutely no need or
> benefit in capturing to 10-bit)
>
> HDCAM SR
> Capture to Uncompressed 10-bit for cine-conform
> and SR tape
> Capture to DVCPRO HD for other work
>
> When ProRes came out we changed our workflow:
>
> HDCAM
> capture to ProRes
>
> HDCAM SR
> capture to ProRes (HQ)
>
> With FCP7 this will change as follows:
>
> HDCAM
> capture to ProRes for delivery in true HD and
> higher
> capture to ProRes LT for delivery in other
> formats
>
> HDCAM SR
> capture to ProRes 4x4 for high-end output (SFX
> work, DPX files, Digital Cinema)
> capture to ProRes (HQ) for delivery in HDCAM SR
> capture to ProRes for delivery in any other
> format
>
> DVCPRO HD
> Native editing
>
> AVC-Intra
> Native editing
>
> RED
> Native (re-wrapped) Redcode for short-form work
> ProRes 4x4 for long-form work and high-end output
> ProRes for long-form work and broadcast output
>
> Popular HD formats (HDV, EX, XDCAM, AVCHD...)
> ProRes LT
>
> I am not a big fan of off-line editing anymore
> since editing systems have grown much faster, but
> I certainly will have a look at ProRes Proxy for
> dealing with long-form high-end source material
> that needs to be edited by multiple editors.

Thank you both for clearing that up for me (I also PM'd you Ronny). Have I mentioned how much I love this forum?! Oh, and how much I love FedEx...they just arrived.

Yes, with all these tapeless formats around we easily forget that we can just archive the folders to maintain the highest original quality.

As to ProRes LT, I can"t wait until Ken jumps in with his quality comparison test between ProRes regular and LT for HDV and EX footage. I am sure it will be thorough, so I hold my final decision until then.

Best wishes,

Ronny

Hi Guys,

Been very busy here, running around. I'll be picking up my copy of FCP 7 tomorrow. Once installed I'll start to test ProRes 422 reg and LT.

As they say. "I'll be back".

--ken

Hi Ken,

As I said before I'm in favor of using LT instead of regular ProRes for lower data rate codecs because I have found little visual quality difference between the two codecs. But it was late when I tested and my eyes may have cheated on me. So I will send you a big box of real Belgian chocolate chip cookies if you can prove me wrong!

Best wishes,

Ronny

Ron - Ken

I'm not sure which would excite me more -getting a new version of FCP or a box of Real Belgian choc chip cookies!?

Good luck- look forward to hearing about your tests.

PS
I have found a way of recalling a Previous Bluray Burning session- i think i said that you had to burn all your discs in one session or else re-encode if you wanted copies at a later date - but i have found a semi workaround that is not evident from the manuals(unless i have missed something).

will write it up tomorrow

Graeme

I'll take the Real Belgian choc chip cookies anyday.

--ken

But can you see any difference, if so, not good.

And what happens when we star compositing and applying CC, will it hold up. So much to test, so little time (read so few cookies).

--ken