matrox or not

T

thewheel

Member
i have the dvx100A for some two weaks now and would like to do my first commercial. which could well be a one off.
I have a 2GH pc, with a 7,200rpm hd and will invest in RAM. i know this is bare minimum for premiere.
If I will buy a matrox (rtx100) I know that I will need a new pc.
If I stay with my current pc will there be a lack in end quality as opposed to having a matrox? Does the fact that you are using the motherboard only to process video produce any bottleneck as opposed to using a matrox? (the architecture of a matrox is obviously more geared for editing) or will it only effect speed (to edit realtime) and the inclusion of some extra features? after all isn't it all digital data throughout?

I have asked different persons but they have given different answers.
could you please give me your opinion.
10x.
 
Re: matrox or not

i have the matrox rtx 100 extreme pro running on ppro 1.5 , i also run the matrox parhelia so i have a 3 monitor desktop, and a realtime ntsc monitor that works for AE, PPRO 1.5, ENCORE, PHOTOSHOP CS, and many other applications also use the monitor out. the rtx card only hleps in the fact that it gives you a monitor out, and also now allows you to run all the standard ppro effects on top of the matrox effects with no rendering. ..although it gets choppy with intensive effects when you cross the matrox with premiere effects. but is still nice. it DOES NOT support true 24p at all, but you can edit 24pn or 24pa in a 60i timeline on it without a hitch. there is no quality difference with or without it, but the matrox codec does offer chroma blending and smoothing which are discretely selectable on or off on redering the output which is nice for removing fine noise or jaggies. it also does realtime import and export.. even of high quality .m2v for DVDs. in the end it doesnt really do anything you couldnt do without it, but it comes in handy alot of times, and just helps speed up the workflow with its realtime abilities, and time saved for me is precious, but its really like an expensive turbo booster for editing at 60i. dont buy it thinking it will mae your stuff any better.. it wont, it just makes some processes fatser is all.
 
Re: matrox or not

i have seen some pc specs on other messages do you feel that the spec i have is too much of a lower end to do the business?
you said: even of high quality .m2v for DVDs
will i have limitations on output formats such as mpeg2...without the matrox.

what is a matrox codec?

10x.
 
Re: matrox or not

As iaml mentioned above, the RTX card won't improve your quality. It will improve the speed of editing, rendering, and also provide for some nice tools for analyzing your video (scopes, etc.). If you are doing a lot of that then the card makes sense. That was the biggest reason I purchased mine ( tired of waiting for renders/previews).

Also, if you decide to purchase an RTX then you will also need to be very careful putting together the recommended hardware. Matrox has a list of hardware that they recommend and have tested with the card. You can waste many hours not following that advice.
 
Re: matrox or not

I am also considering buying the matrox RT.x100 Extreme Pro and I really need to understand how to work with 24p with this product. Ok, I get that it doesn't support 24p and treats everything like 60i, and therefore probably doesn't support 30p either. Is there a way to go back to the Microsoft codec before you capture or to put two graphics cards into your computer to be able to work in 24p? And, does Matrox work in 24p with something captured in 24p, say before you put this card in will it recognize projects already captured in 24p? It is handy to use 24p for me because of the quality your effects can achieve without interlacing, especially bluescreen though Matrox claims their up sampling solves that. At DVExpo East Adobe was really pushing their relationship with Matrox, so it would surprise me if there isn't a way around this 24p mess.
Thanks!
Sue
 
Re: matrox or not

well. out of the box, the chroma keying of the RTX100 is better than the keying in premiere. but if you use AE keylight is superior or just the other tools for keying in AE.. most of which you can copy into premiere1.5 anyway though.

anyway the RTX will not work with 24p period. it will do 30p if you render with no fields. and will edit 24p as 60i as it comes off the tape from the DVX. but it will not edit true 24p at all. no way around it at all. it doesnt matter what codec you use for editing. .. anyway you dont HAVE to use th card if its in your machine.. when you tart a project you either start a matrox project or a regular one.. if you usethe card.. it runs the card.. if not.. it just runs ppro as regular so you can edit 24p to your hearts content.. and the RTX still gives a NTSC out for that too. it just doesnt process the video.
 
Re: matrox or not

I run Premiere Pro on a Dell 8500 Laptop with a 1.8ghz P4, 640K RAM, and an external 250GB 7200RPM External FireWire Drive. I find that 90% of the time everything runs in real time with very little problem. The biggest factor seems to be RAM, which I plan to upgade to at least 1 GIG or more in the very near future. If your pretty conservative with the effects, and stick mostly to cuts, dissolves, fades and CG, then you should be fine, and you'll find that maxing out your RAM will make the biggest difference.

All the best,

Michael
 
Re: matrox or not

.. this is true.. premire will run realtime stuff without the matrox card, but with the card, you can run things like heavy color correction - matting and keying- general compositing, and effects all at the same time in realtime.. up to 18 layers .  it also does realtime export and stuff, and gives you a full resolution  NTSC out for premiere, AE, Encore, Photoshop CS, and alot more apps.  

im not a big proponent of the card or anything.. again its just a nice addition to a system to really kick your editing and effects and compositing stuff into high gear. it just speeds up what the program does much slower on it own.  its really fluff .. not necessary, but certainly nice to have. like a supercharger in a car.. it still runs without it.. and dang it ... no 24p. yet

the new HD matrox cards do run HD in realtime though and ive heard they support 24p editing as well .. supposed to be out later this year.
 
Re: matrox or not

The RTX100 is good for 60i editing of two video layers, while simultaneously allowing scaling, rotation, color correction, panning, titling, simple transitions, and movement on both of those layers, In REALTIME! So this is a big timesaver if you do 60i standard definition broadcast quality work, and time is more valuable than money.

It will not, and will never, natively support true 24P editing, although it will not interfere with Premiere Pro 1.5's native editing if your project uses premiere presets instead of matrox presets.

My RTX100 saved me recently when I was under a three-day deadline to author a DVD with multiple slide shows, motion menus, and the like. Although my main movie was 24P, the menus and slideshows could be done in 60i, so RTX100 is what I used. I got the project done with two hours to spare before the premiere; this would not have been possible without the Matrox product.

Finally, warnings about following Matrox's hardware recommendations to the letter are absolutely true. If you try to deviate from supported platforms, you will cry.

Good luck.
 
Re: matrox or not

[quote author=speedbump link=board=Premier;num=1089115942;start=0#8 date=07/24/04 at 10:01:31]Finally, warnings about following Matrox's hardware recommendations to the letter are absolutely true. If you try to deviate from supported platforms, you will cry.[/quote]

:)

So true, so true!

Side topic: Found out I can put my system in standby if I disable the Matrox drivers. Nice for power saving when I'm not using the system for editing. Can disable manually or create a new hardware profile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top