HPX300 Prores 422 Camera Evaluation clips

D

Dave Nelson

Member
This is a request that I hope can be accomodated. Many of us are on the sidelines and are trying to determine whether the HPX300 is the way to go. Most of us are starving for video clips of the 300 in action. The problem with AVC-I is that the clips are diifficult to deal with for most, especially those that are new to P2, or haven't made the decision to go that way yet. Also, AVC-I clips seem to be unplayable on most MacBook Pros and are not helpful at all for those with notebooks and desktops from even last year... PC or Mac.

Yet, many of us including me would like to see what the HPX 300 is capable of.

Here is my idea. Unlike AVC-I which requires a large commitment for most, Prores 422 is easy to work with and the quality is high enough for a critical look at the footage.

I propose that files transcoded to Prores 422 are the best solution to the problem of viewing clips.

Anyone with a PC or Mac can view these files with a simple download of the Prores decoder from Apple.

I am able to play back Prores 422 files on my PC and my Mac. This is true for most people, and anyone can download the decoder from Apple for Windows or the Mac.

I think that Prores should be the way all clips should be uploaded, because all of us can view the files without the huge comittment of time and system resources (which it appears, many on this board do not possess).

It also appears that most individuals, although not all, on this board are Mac FCS users and are able to redily transcode these clips.

And, anyone using FCS has to transcode the files to Prores before they can be edited anyway, so most clips are probably already in this format.

In any case, I think that this would be better for everyone, and is a no brainer for me.

Just my 2 cents worth, Dave.
 
Last edited:
I'd argue against it, from four aspects:

1) it imposes extra work on the person uploading the footage
2) it rules out any footage from anyone who *doesn't* use FCP -- you can't author a prores clip on Windows
3) it makes the files bigger, thus taking up more storage space and more bandwidth
4) it modifies the footage. If the point is to see the footage, why not see it in its original format? And if Apple users need to convert the footage to prores, that's the workflow you'll have to go through when you get the camera anyway, right? So why not get used to it early on?
 
As much as i like prores.. Barry is 100% correct. Why upload a format that is only good for viewing when a lot of people really want to play with it in their NLE.
 
Hi,

Send me a PM. I have a 23.98 file you can download. Unzip and extract the file. Open FCP set up a ProRes timeline for HQ at 23.98, I think there is even an easy setup for this. Log and transfer pointing to the new Contents folder. By the time it is in the bin it will be ProRes.
It really is this simple.

Now you will still have to have the AVC-Intra Codec in you computer or it will not work. But that is pretty simple too. Go to www.panasonic.com/p2hd and look for the download area, its the AVC-Intra Decoderfile. Download and install. Not difficult. The guy that cut the central park did it on his Mac Laptop.

So send me the PM and I will send yu the link. You are 20 minutes away from seeing footage, and most of that time is downloading the zipped Contents Folder.

Best,

Jan
 
Dave Nelson said:
This is a request that I hope can be accomodated. Many of us are on the sidelines and are trying to determine whether the HPX300 is the way to go. Most of us are starving for video clips of the 300 in action. The problem with AVC-I is that the clips are diifficult to deal with for most, especially those that are new to P2, or haven't made the decision to go that way yet. Also, AVC-I clips seem to be unplayable on most MacBook Pros and are not helpful at all for those with notebooks and desktops from even last year... PC or Mac.

Yet, many of us including me would like to see what the HPX 300 is capable of.

Here is my idea. Unlike AVC-I which requires a large commitment for most, Prores 422 is easy to work with and the quality is high enough for a critical look at the footage.

I propose that files transcoded to Prores 422 are the best solution to the problem of viewing clips.

Anyone with a PC or Mac can view these files with a simple download of the Prores decoder from Apple.

I am able to play back Prores 422 files on my PC and my Mac. This is true for most people, and anyone can download the decoder from Apple for Windows or the Mac.

I think that Prores should be the way all clips should be uploaded, because all of us can view the files without the huge comittment of time and system resources (which it appears, many on this board do not possess).

It also appears that most individuals, although not all, on this board are Mac FCS users and are able to redily transcode these clips.

And, anyone using FCS has to transcode the files to Prores before they can be edited anyway, so most clips are probably already in this format.

In any case, I think that this would be better for everyone, and is a no brainer for me.

Just my 2 cents worth, Dave.
Click to expand...


I think what he is saying that everyone seems to be missing is that while everyone knows the P2 file viewing is the best, NOT EVERYONE has the ability to view this, nor have the system that can handle a 1080p play back of these files. Sure its not the exact same thing, but its damn close, and it allows people with older systems to view the footage. It seems that everyone on here is so Final Cut Pro happy, that they forget there are MANY PC editing suites out there that could be interested in viewing these clips but cant. And before you make the argument that most PC Editing programs can nativity edit the MXF files, you still need the newest version of the program which could be $$ OR they need a system more powerful to handle it then they have.

It really feels like you guys have this "Sh*t on the little guy" approach to your views of checking out footage... Not everyone has a computer system that can handle these files, and not everyone has FCP 6.0.... what If these people are interested in seeing footage because they might want to buy this camera AND THEN buy a new editing system that can handle it. No one is going to jump into buying extra programs or systems to just evaluate footage. Have we forgotten what kind of times we are at right now with money?? People are coming from the HDV world wanting to head into P2 territory, why knock them down just because they don't have systems to handle it YET? What if these people are coming from a DV world and now want to step it up to HD, and they have saved up money but dont know which way to go?

I am lucky enough to have both PC and Mac systems that can view the footage when we need to. And a lot of the people who seem to be telling everyone else its a bad idea to view footage in any way other than MXF, already have the FCP systems to view it, so its not very fair.

Everyone who is trying to view the MXF files I can give you this advice, If you are on a PC system but dont have one of the newer versions of editing software to view the files, please download the 30 day trial for Edius 5. It's a pretty simple setup and works great on both Win XP and Vista. We have tested it and its VERY smooth running on a Dell Quad Core 2.4 GHz with 2 gigs ram even when adding color correction. So we suspect that runing a dual core PC with 2gigs of ram should still play back enough for evaluation reasons.

As for what Barry said...

"I'd argue against it, from four aspects:

1) it imposes extra work on the person uploading the footage
2) it rules out any footage from anyone who *doesn't* use FCP -- you can't author a prores clip on Windows
3) it makes the files bigger, thus taking up more storage space and more bandwidth
4) it modifies the footage. If the point is to see the footage, why not see it in its original format? And if Apple users need to convert the footage to prores, that's the workflow you'll have to go through when you get the camera anyway, right? So why not get used to it early on?"

1) IF otheres are willing to help, what difference does it make?

2) who is to say you cant export out a similar quality high bit rate Quicktime file from any PC system?

3) have you seen our big post about our FREE FTP server allowing everyone to upload and download footage for evaluation? The file size is not an issue for our servers, especially if you zip them first. And we have unlimited bandwidth, so again not an issue.

4) It modifies the footage? So what you're saying is hey its ok for us to be working in FCP now and doing projects with the footage and color correction and finishing a product up with capturing in FCP in proress, but the second someone wants to see it in proress that's wrong?? how does that make sence, if the only way to work with the files on one of the 2 MAJOR editing systems, how is that any bad? this is 10 bit 422 codec we are talking about, not 8bit 420... You arent loosing enough information for it to be a problem for EVALUATION reasons.

Odd thing is, then you contradict yourself in the next sentence by saying "And if Apple users need to convert the footage to prores, that's the workflow you'll have to go through when you get the camera anyway, right? So why not get used to it early on?"

So then its not ok for him to view it in prores, but then he has to get used to seeing it in prores.... HU???? Am I missing something here?


People want to see HD files that aren't highly compressed of the footage, I honestly say who cares what it is, either Quicktime, or AVI, or whatever, as long as the bit rate is very high, who cares? It needs to hold enough information so that you can view it on a system that cant handle AVCI but can handle some decent size HD files.

One last argument, and this is a big one to me... All of you guys are saying check it out in its AVCI native way, yet Jan and some others have been posting this footage that is yes a P2 AVC-I file, but it was actually sent to a Final cut system, then captured BACK to a P2 card via a DIFFERENT frame rate then the original... I think that's even more damaging to footage than just a direct conversion to proress in FCP... Why are you guys so angry about viewing it in a second or 3rd ingest level, but yet all we are getting from you guys is exactly that?

I am very busy lately, but I will try my best to convert some files over from AVCI to something very usable for evaluation.

Just to let everyone know, I just found some great looking footage, hand held at 1080p 25p at AVCI 100, and I LIKE IT A LOT. So im not a hater of this camera, I just want to be proven wrong by seeing good footage. I am starting to see good footage finally, and I will try to pass it down to you guys as soon as I can. Some of the stuff is MUCH better than I've been seeing lately.
 
Giuseppe,

You are missing the point that is not a difficult thing to do. People do it on MACbooks all day. Log and transfer and it is in ProRes. I don't think anyone here has the attitude you seem to think that we do, it just simply isn't that difficult to make the MXF into ProRes.

Best,
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Giuseppe,

You are missing the point that is not a difficult thing to do. People do it on MACbooks all day. Log and transfer and it is in ProRes. I don't think anyone here has the attitude you seem to think that we do, it just simply isn't that difficult to make the MXF into ProRes.

Best,
Click to expand...


I think I am slightly lost, forgive my confusion... I think something is miss-read either on my end or someone elses... I'm simply trying to say that, some people can't play back the MXF files on their systems OR they don't have systems that can even read an MXF file... Yet they still want to see footage. There's got to be other ways to view it, other than just an MXF file for those people. Why shut out potential costumers just because they dont have a new system? Thats all I'm saying.
 
Giuseppe, they don't have to play back the MXFiles in order to view them on a MAC Log and Transfer into the bin of a ProRes timeline and then look at them. It isn't difficult. If they can run ProRes, they are good to go.

Even I can do it and I am not MAC centric.

Best,

Jan
 
Ah I see what you're saying now, and yes I understand that part now, do you happen to know what is the lowest version of FCP that can do that? or maybe someone else might know?

This still doesn't solve problems for people with PC systems, but I really think that EDIUS 5.0 30 day trial is a great free way to view the footage, its quite speedy, and NO I am not getting money from them, haha
 
Rant

Rant

Giuseppe Pugliese said:
... do you happen to know what is the lowest version of FCP that can do that? or maybe someone else might know?
Click to expand...

Great question.

Anyone?

Barry says that Intel Macbook Pro's can playback AVC-I with Calibrated MXF, the Panasonic Avc-I documentation says no Intra on a Macbook Pro ? What gives?

It bears repeating that in general, Panasonic's support for the Mac platform is really, really lacking. This is to put it mildly. Furthermore, basic documentation, manuals and the like are not Panasonic's strong point. Again, to put it mildly. ;-(. The other night I spent the better part of an hour trying to determine the filter and lens diameter of the HPX 300's lens so that I could ensure I had the correct parts for mounting my matte box. None of that info was available on the Panny Hpx 300 page, nor in the PDF brochure etc. .. Even finding the model number of the Fujinon lens was accomplished through third party website (if memory serves correctly). Even then, I had to go to the Fujinon website to get the info. It should not be this difficult.

What would be helpful is a workflow schematic for AVC-I playback. What computers does it run on? What version of OS is needed , what NLE's, software version, and what Panasonic plug-in's and software is needed to accomplish playback? All in one centralized( did I say centralized ?) place and written in a clear and concise manner. The Panasonic software download page should not be used in any shape or form as a template for this.... grrrr.

I love the Panasonic products (I just bought my fourth Panny camera yesterday), but the Mac support and documentation is really starting to frustrate me. It's just not acceptable anymore.

There, I feel better.
 
Jan's MXFGoKarts download is about 560 MB/s unzipped. Takes about six minutes in my cable modem.

The corresponding prores file is 1.0.6 GB/s -- about 50% larger.
 
Last edited:
You need the AVC-I decoder to be able to play back intra on an Intel based MacBookPro. I'm looking at HPX-300 footage right now that I shot and it's plaing back natively in HD Log with the codec. I have a 2.6 quad core macbookpro. AVC-I support was introduced in Final Cut 6.0.2. And it does also work in P2CMS and an of the Imagine Products line with an Intel Mac and the AVC-I decoder from Panasonic.

Hotchkiss - While bashing the mac support it bears noting that Panasonic values its 3rd party partners to help provide information and products that work with and enhance the Panasonic product line.
 
Barry_Green said:
I've seen it done. Kevin Railsback (n8ture) was doing it.
Click to expand...

Barry I don't doubt you for a minute, ... you are the last one I would doubt. So it's true, then I would think that Panasonic would reflect that in their documentation. That's more my point.

I have P2CMS running on an old hot-rodded G4 1.67 mhz, but Panasonic says it's only supported on Intel machines- go figure.
 
shorelinedigital said:
You need the AVC-I decoder to be able to play back intra on an Intel based MacBookPro. I'm looking at HPX-300 footage right now that I shot and it's plaing back natively in HD Log with the codec. I have a 2.6 quad core macbookpro. AVC-I support was introduced in Final Cut 6.0.2. And it does also work in P2CMS and an of the Imagine Products line with an Intel Mac and the AVC-I decoder from Panasonic.

Hotchkiss - While bashing the mac support it bears noting that Panasonic values its 3rd party partners to help provide information and products that work with and enhance the Panasonic product line.
Click to expand...

Their partnership with third parties is great, their mac support still stinks. I've loaded the AVC-I decoder for use in P2CMS and I can't get it to work. Maybe I have it installed incorrectly I dunno. Maybe my Core 2 Duo machine is not adequate ? Their website says it's not supported , Barry says otherwise. I just feel like I'm wandering in the dark anytime I have to install their software, not to mention using the software download page. It should not involve as much trial and error as it typically does.

If anyone is inclined to run me through the AVC-I decoder install and use, I more than welcome the input.
 
Have you thought that perhaps we get guidance from the partners as to what is the appropriate product. And maybe, the relationship might be challenged if we said it would run on something less that what the partner told us it would run on. And the there would be the challenge that if indeed we stated something less, that someone on the very low end of that model who had more stuff on his MAC than appropriate, has a problem and we end up having to trouble shoot a MAC problem because we chose to post something less that what the partner told us.

It is always a bigger picture when you have to post what is the appropriate computer.

Best,

Jan
 
Last edited:
hotchkiss said:
If anyone is inclined to run me through the AVC-I decoder install and use, I more than welcome the input.
Click to expand...

Several things. What version of FCP are you running? After that, send me a PM and I will put you in touch with one of our engineers to walk you through this, but it really isn't that hard. It is a download and execute the install. So there must be something else going on. So send a PM with contact info and I will have someone get in touch next week. I think you also said in an earlier post you were having an issue with P2CMS. There is definitely something odd going on. It may be the G4, but I am not sure. That's why the good Lord makes engineers.

Best,

jan
 
Pro Res came in in version 6.0 of FCP in FCS 2.0.

I still run FCP 5.1.4 on my G5 and it does not convert files to Pro Res. My MBP which runs 6.05 does do Pro Res. You must have an Intel Mac to encode Pro Res files although you can playback and edit Pro Res on a non Intel Mac like my G5 but you need the Intel to transcode the files, at least with FCP, not sure about 3rd party software.

Dan
 
Jan_Crittenden said:
Several things. What version of FCP are you running? After that, send me a PM and I will put you in touch with one of our engineers to walk you through this, but it really isn't that hard. It is a download and execute the install. So there must be something else going on. So send a PM with contact info and I will have someone get in touch next week. I think you also said in an earlier post you were having an issue with P2CMS. There is definitely something odd going on. It may be the G4, but I am not sure. That's why the good Lord makes engineers.

Best,

jan
Click to expand...

Jan,

I'm not trying to view footage in FCP, I'm still on FCP 5.1.4 (G5 Quad) for my workstation . I've assumed that FCP 5 is a non starter. The G4 that I mentioned is an archiving raid machine, it's not the machine I'm concerned about or referring to either.

The machine in question is a Mac Book Pro Core Duo 2 (2.33 mhz) with 3 GBs ram. I want to be able to view and playback AVC-I footage in P2CMS- is this possible ? This is my download and field machine.

Thank you for your help.
 
Sorry mate but a "2.6 quad core macbookpro" does not excist yet, I wish it was there already but the word is at earliest in June !!


shorelinedigital said:
You need the AVC-I decoder to be able to play back intra on an Intel based MacBookPro. I'm looking at HPX-300 footage right now that I shot and it's plaing back natively in HD Log with the codec. I have a 2.6 quad core macbookpro. AVC-I support was introduced in Final Cut 6.0.2. And it does also work in P2CMS and an of the Imagine Products line with an Intel Mac and the AVC-I decoder from Panasonic.

Hotchkiss - While bashing the mac support it bears noting that Panasonic values its 3rd party partners to help provide information and products that work with and enhance the Panasonic product line.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top