American Cinematographer Article

turing

turing

Active member
hi all,

I think I have just read the first piece of B.S. ever in american cinematographer. The current June 2006 issue, page 112, 2nd column, paragraph 2:

Also, to import and convert the P2 clips into Final Cut Pro, it's necessary to have Final Cut Pro 5.0.4. Finally, when removing the MXF wrapper and transcoding the P2 footage files from MXF to QuickTime, it's best to do so on the G5, because it will create less visible compression than a G4. ..etc..
Click to expand...

WTF?

Ok, first of all, my understanding of the MXF->QT process is that the core DVCPRO HD data does not change, it is simply copied out of each MXF, has QT headers popped on, and that's that.

Second, what is this complete crap about "less visible compression" on a G5? Perhaps they mean playback?

Btw, this article also mentions that the DVX is an HD camera - sh*t, I guess I shouldn't have sold mine since it was HD all along and I just never knew it. :violent5:

Thoughts, anyone?
 
I remember hearing something about the MXF to QT on some G4s was bad. Maybe like on the iBooks or something.
 
sometimes magazines just have no idea what they are writing about....lol

its one of the universe's great mysteries
 
Drew599 said:
I remember hearing something about the MXF to QT on some G4s was bad. Maybe like on the iBooks or something.
Click to expand...
that sounds completely wrong to me....
the codec and files are all the same, regardless of the processor.
 
right - the only "closest explanation" I can come up with is they are talking about playback quality - that said, I frequently playback full res pixel for pixel 960x720 in my 1.3Ghz powerbook... so...
 
From what I understand this was true with the first pre-release software from Apple and was fixed with the official release.

I witnessed the G4 "effect" it wasn't pretty.

I.
 
They also tend to write these things a few weeks to a month in advance on either pre-production or early hardware/outdated software, plus, some of the writers don't know what they're doing or know that there is a simple fix to a complete solution if they looked on the internet messageboards like this one, don't be too harsh people! :)

I read plenty of the magazines and almost all the current reviews of the JVC HD100 had SSE issues, which we all know is fixed now, though not completely. This is just one of many examples.

American Cinematographer is one of my favorite magazines and one I trust very much, but remember, reviews are subjective unless they're reviewing dirt poor products.
 
ok: there's "we don't know because this is a prerelease camera" and there's "we are incompetent and we have no idea what we are talking about"

I'm picking the latter in this case.

Don't get me wrong, I have learned more from american cinematographer than any other magazine I read but the economist - but the people that wrote the article about the HVX obviously had no idea.

_a
 
True, no problem with that. Just thought I'd mention the facts before anybody gets the wrong idea about the magazine itself. :)

But yeah, there's always something like that in the review sections of magazines, especially when it comes to camera reviews. I wonder why they don't take as much care with those articles sometimes, there's also people who do really good reviews, like Adam Wilt for DV Magazine. Just depends on the person/people doing the reviewing I suppose.
 
Yeah, I enjoyed Mr. Wilt's review of the HVX a great deal - he's kick ass and he knows his s*it backwards and forwards.
 
Write to the magazine itself and point out the bad information, PLEASE. As a magazine columnist, I can tell you this will also make the magazine's editor sit up and take notice that they let something go to press without confirming it.

At Event DV magazine, I get grilled on my technical info all the time. I guess this guy was allowed to throw garbage in without it being questioned. Bad publishing practice.

Write the magazine and let them know!
 
Adam Wilt's review of the HVX is the only good camera review I have ever read: he's excited about the right things and annoyed about the right things ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top