What Work Flow!!! help.

i think I'm done with FCP...although a nice little program, it seems that it is far more important to apple to create a huge piece of crap (iPad) than to actually spend time and polish professional applications.
Click to expand...

A nice little program?

It's your media drive. An eSATA to USB will send data at USB speeds, and is not a good practice.

This isn't a FCP problem in my view; it's a workflow and hardware problem. It doesn't have anything do with the iPad.

I don't believe that AE is going play well with raw footage or play it all.

My suggestion is to get a fast FW800 drive and transcode to AIC or pro res, and get into intra frame as quickly as possible especially if you intend to use AE.

Because AE isn't build to handle native mts.
 
i am so sorry guys, i didn't mean to bash on FCP
let's not get this into a NLE war.

anyways, yes...i do agree with you 110%
most of my problems seem to be related to media read/write speeds.
ovbiously, a no-name-brand usb-to-sata adaptor is not gonna be too highend.
FW800 is where is at! but they seem to be costly.
since i am not really making any money on this and it is 100% a hobby, i think i can live with this. hehehehe...
i'm lenaing more towards buying gear...for now, but a FW800 drive is on my list of things to buy (why can't i just use the DVD drive as a second drive! damn you, apple...and your ever so beautiful products!)
 
i thought i had agreed with you on that.

so, yes. FW800 will be the next step...
any recommendations?
something that will allow me to continue making my car payments? (lol)
 
I edit on a Macbook Pro, base model, 2.4 with 4 gigs of me Ram. I convert to ProRes 422 (standard not HQ) and I've had no problems. Running FCP 6. I run a 9600GT, better than the 9400 but you've got a quicker drive so I don't know why you're having problems - strange. Perhaps you've got a multi cam shoot or lots of layers of video ????
 
it is a single layer of video.
i think we agreed that my problem was the USB to Sata device not delivering data fast enough therefore Premiere was dropping frames in order to try and play the file.
when i get my FW drive, i'll circle back and report.
for now, i'll have to live with it since this is not my main source of income (or source of income at all), it is not a priority.
 
ha, i found my workflow..

i might be wrong, but it is working for me!

shooting: 720p60
importing: ProRes422 LT

quarter frame playback
safe RT
medium quality.

footage jumps around a little bit, but it is bearable.
also, i'm editing this vid for a car show, and if they end up paying for it, my next purchase is a firewire drive.

another thing tho, i was doing some benchmarking tests ont he hard drive and i get 35MB/s
ProRess is 11MB/s-17MB/s (i guess i fast action videos it can jump to 17), so my quetsion is, why would the drive still be a concern?


thnx
 
Robert M Wright said:
Cineform's codec uses wavelet image compression. As I understand it, using wavelet image compression allows Cineform to be a lot less taxing on CPUs than more conventional codecs using DCT (or DCT like) image compression. That translates into faster performance.
Click to expand...

No, it's not the wavelets that make Cineform faster, it's the fast that it's intraframe-only compression... like DV or MPEG-2 I-Frame only formats. This is also why 1080/60i runs at around 60GB per hour.

The advantage of wavelet is, well, it's not DCT. Nothing wrong with DCT, but when you layer one DCT type on another, you can basically reinforce the bad aspects of the format, like DCT block boundaries that can occasionally become visible. Going to wavelet, there's the potential for distortions due to lossy compression, just as in any compression type, but they're very different in their nature and, IMHO, more organic, less distracting than DCT distortions. Then again, I've been staring at DCT stuff since the 80s....
 
The wavelet compression is very interesting, I've played with too much compression on wavelet and the result is a softer image. It's all a mater of taste, but IMHO, wavelet does produce nice results.

I should add, that if there's not too much compression in the process, it will all look the same to the viewer.


Bob Diaz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top