Building HD work station around the HVX

Ok Bob Gruen, I agree 100% with you, my recommendation was based on the assumpiton that Adobe Production studio would be used. making it very specific.

and yes Software RAID is not the best, but for the budget conscious it will do the trick, I'm pretty sure a QUAD will handle it reasonably well (YES not as good as a Adaptec Card).

I've been building PC's now since 1995, and I'm not scared to admit I don't know it all.

You're post actually is a good answer to the question.

- Derrick
 
Save the money from a Quad CPU / board combo and put it toward an Adaptec card.

If you can't afford it and are insistent on the motherboard's RAID capability then test it before you depend on it. Remove a drive from your array and add a new one. This should be enough to scare you into a professional solution.

Bob
 
I do not believe that any popular NLE software is multi threaded
Click to expand...
Premiere has been multi-threaded since at least 6.0
Edius Broadcast recommends a dual-core setup
I'm not sure about the rest but it would surprise me if they weren't multithreaded.


Most of the other stuff from Adobe that we find ourselves using is multithreaded too, including After Effects.
 
ProfessorU said:
Premiere has been multi-threaded since at least 6.0
Edius Broadcast recommends a dual-core setup
I'm not sure about the rest but it would surprise me if they weren't multithreaded.


Most of the other stuff from Adobe that we find ourselves using is multithreaded too, including After Effects.
Click to expand...

True Multi threaded applications are rare. They involve the software engineer to fork off a separate process (thread) then execute a semaphore to return the result from the thread to the main application. I am doubtful that the apps you specified are truly multi-threaded, but I admit I never looked at them specifically. As an example, After Effects is it's own set of executables that do work separately from the Adobe executable. Multi-threading software is so difficult that there would be no way to work it in as an add on. I know it sounds easy, but the hard part is to actually derive a benefit from it due to other system limitations (like your video files being on a single hard drive).

Now that multi core CPUs are becoming prevalent I believe you will see multi-thread become more prevalent, but right now its still rare. If you really want to see this for yourself look into the performance monitor (on Windows), and you will see that you can add counters that pertain to threads. Or start a long render and simply look at the CPU graphs in your task manager. If one spikes to above 80% while the others float around 15% then you are not dealing with a multi threaded process within your app. If any process would be multi-threaded it would be a render.

A dual core CPU will help any computer that is doing a single intensive task because it gives all the other active processes somewhere else to run. Computers work off of a time slicing principle, so having a second core will reduce the interrupts that the 30+ other processes would cause on your main app. Because most of these apps are not really doing anything giving them a third and fourth core isn't really going to help much, they just need to claim a time slice and rotate out.


Jester,

There is no support for 1080 24P in DVCProHD (DV100), the 1080 spec is only interlaced. Panasonic did a trick and created an advanced pulldown that must be processed to get it to 1080 24P by first removing the flagged garbage frame then loading it into a CODEC that does have 1080 24P. For example, in my workflow DVRack removes the flagged frames and I then import the 'non spec' DV100 file into Avid's DNxHD CODEC. This is not true for 720, which has both interlaced and progressive specifications in the CODEC. This is why 720 is so flexible on the HVX-200 (native mode, overcranking, undercranking, etc).

A lot of Avid users are still upset that they cannot just drop the 1080 files into their system like they can the 720 files. This is not Avid's fault, rather it comes from an incomplete understanding by the user. Due to the streamig nature of video processing Avid would probably have to retool their entire processing engine to 'fake' a 24P workflow off of unconverted 1080i 24P.

Bob

(The reason I want to be a film maker is that I am sick of building computer systems)
 
The HVX records 1080 24p by using the same methods the DVX used. It is to 1080p. And, it would seem to be a shortcoming of Avid, considering the fact that there are several other NLE's out there that will allow you to work on a 24 frame timeline with your 1080 footage from the hvx. I don't have to do anything extra in my nle to work with 1080/24pa... I just put it on the timeline and go.

And, 720 does not have interlaced anything. It has always been progressive only. There is no 720i, nor has there ever been. 1080 was originally an interlaced format when introduced into the broadcast world. So, the HVX uses the same methods the DVX used to fit 24p into a purty little 60i basket. It is still true 24p, and it is recorded progressively. Period. But, yes it is correct that DVCPRO HD 1080 is an interlaced codec, but it doesn't mean that there is no progressive footage that can be recorded by a camera and carried around in a 1080/60i basket. And that doesn't mean that it isn't true 24p. It is. As are the films that you watch on standard def. 60i broadcast television...
 
I had Premiere 6.5 when I upgraded to a dualie. I did the same render with one processor and with two processors just to see the difference. It was 40% faster. In AfterEffects with the same configuration it was almost 50% faster. :) Of course Premiere was about as stable as the Titanic when I tried to edit with both cores going.

I do a lot of AfterEffects work so I love the extra cores.

You can fake Vegas into multithreading with the network rendering options.
 
Jason, Jester,

What I am saying is that there is no support for 1080 24P in the CODEC. You can get there but it may require additional steps in your workflow (I outlined how I do it for Avid). I was simply trying to convey this to the original poster. There are HD standards for true 1080 24P, but they were not implemented in the DVCProHD (DV100) CODEC.

I contrasted it against 720P which as you pointed out is the only supported format in the specification and is fully supported in the CODEC. (I don't use it so I'm not as well versed on it.)

Statements like 'it is recorded progressive in a 60i basket' are not accurate and add to the confusion. What does that mean? A 'basket' may be how you envision it but is not what is actually happening. The reality is that the progressive frame is split into interlaced fields and recorded as such - interlaced. Some of the fields are duped to fit within the interlaced timeline, this is unavoidable. Settings in the camera adjust the pattern of which fileds are duped. That is how the data appears in the files, period. I wish it weren't the case, I wish I could overcrank, undercrank and do stop action in true 1080 24P, but I can't. Instead I have to come up with other solutions, and the best way to find or create the right solution is to fully and accurately understand the problem.

The more specific and accurate we can be the more this grey area will clear up. It took me a few days worth of research to figure it all out and I would try to convey the true technicals as accurately as I can to other people.

Bob

P.S., As an example Stop Action is only available in 1080 30P. Understand what is actually going on and you will understand why and what must be done to get it into a 24P timeline.
 
We edit 1080 24p all day in FCP. You shoot 1080 24PA and import with remove advanced pulldown. Most of our shoots have been 29.97 lately (TV spots)
but I like the look of 24p (720 or 1080) if the show is headed for DVD.
We tried Edius for awhile but the UI was not to our liking.
And we have just started using Raylight for the MAC, it is even better than
Raylight for the PC.
 
Bob Gruen said:
Jason, Jester,

What I am saying is that there is no support for 1080 24P in the CODEC. You can get there but it may require additional steps in your workflow (I outlined how I do it for Avid).
Click to expand...

...on a Mac with FCP it "just works." There are no additional steps. It's no more difficult than working with 24p on the DVX. I think we both know how it works, we're just explaining and interpreting differently.
 
As far as output goes, what do you guys specifically recommend? Like I mentioned, I'm interested in getting the film to play digitally on a theater screen... Any specific equipment or even settings I should look out for before filming?
 
There are all kinds of opinions on how to do this; a good search on the forum will turn up a days worth of reading...

In my opinion:

If you want it to look like film you should look into a 35mm lens adapter. There are a lot of pros and cons involved, and it won't be cheap, but if you want that 'film look' it is the way to go.

The three major differences between film and HD 24P (digital capture) are depth of focus, grain, and latitude. A 35mm adapter will help you achieve the first two while the last is a limitation you must work around.

There is a lot written on 35mm adapters, in fact there is a specific forum on dvxuser for it, but in a nutshell a 35mm adapter allows the camera to record an image shown on a moving ground glass from a 35mm camera lens. This image will contain the depth of field that the 35mm lens can create and have grain from the spinning / vibrating ground glass. Most cameras will create noise that looks similar to grain, but a good lens adapter will smooth it out and make it look more like the real thing. My own approach is to minimize noise by using the Black Press Gamma and use the Cine Matrix to get the punchy colors. Without controlling the depth of focus your footage will not look like film, rather it will look like video on a big screen. I think a digital projector may actually make this worse.

On latitude you must understand that the less light the camera gets the more noise will appear in the darker areas. If you want to shoot the 'guy in the woods at night' you should shoot it at an exposure floor where the noise starts to appear and then 'crush' it is post by altering the gamma curve for that footage.

As always, test it before you depend on it...

In my opinion if you do these things well you can create footage that will be indistinguishable from film by the average movie-goer.

Bob
 
Last edited:
A 35mm adapter has been on my list now for some time. What I originally meant with my question (but many thanks for your insightful answer anyways), are there any specific technical precautions I should take before filming something with theatrical intent? Is there a specific piece of equipment I would need or would be highly recommended? Should I film or input the footage in a specific setting from within the camera or computer?

I've done my research on the bit but feel research takes you only so far and I should probably ask people with experience as I gain my own.
 
Nomorechecks,

You are correct in asserting that research only takes you so far. If I understand you correctly your INTENT is to finish with a theatrical release? As in a film out?

If so then the very first thing I will recommend is find the lab that is going to do this for you before you even think of shooting, explain the situation and ask them for advice.
There is no one more qualified to work with you than the lab tech that will be performing the film out, usually they are super friendly and very knowledgeable (if at any point you feel that they are neither run, do not walk, out. Find another lab even if you must pay a bit more. Your nerves will thank you)

The second step I would recommend is to always do tests. You can never test too much. New computer? Go shoot some tests. New workflow? go shoot some tests. New pair of sneakers? go shoot some tests! Testing is the only truly reliable way to know how something will turn out once finalized. It is invaluable to anyone who is going to enter a very chaotic environment where there is never enough time and tempers tend to run thin (aka production) to know the limitations and possible trouble spots of your workflow. When you find yourself in a stressful situation, being familiar with the equipment, and the workflow, allows you to make faster decisions and possibly save your whole film. I like to think of it as the difference between walking in the jungle at night and walking it during the day. Its still dangerous, there are still 1,000 ways to die, but at least during the day you have a chance to avoid some of them.

Now for some general HVX stuff: if you plan a 35mm film out the settings your lab will probably recommend are: 1080 24p and the Cinelike D gamma with a Cinelike Matrix.

I would guess that you'd want detail coring around +3ish, and probably the detail level at -2ish to try to get rid of some of that video sharpness. If shooting alot of reds maybe a -1 or -2 to chroma? Honestly I've never done a film out so I am speculating, your lab tech will probably know more, and this is exactly what tests are for!

Lastly remember that at the end it is all subjective, maybe I prefer -3 chroma and -5 detail level, but you prefer 0 chroma and -2 detail, do not be afraid to go with what you like more than what others recommend, it is your film after all.

Now if you're doing a digital theater release then I just typed all that for nothing! But some of the same principles apply, figure out what kind of input the projector can handle; does it prefer 720 footage or 1080? Do you have to print out to HDSR tape? Can you simply plug a laptop with an mov or avi of your footage and play it? all this can be found out through...you guessed it....testing!

Good luck, hope everything works out for your film.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top