Latest post Sat, Nov 3 2012 11:18 AM by Javier Valledor. 2 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (3 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • Sat, Nov 3 2012 2:09 AM

    Avid MC and Sony XDCam EX 35 Mbits vs DNxHD115

    Hello,

     

    I'm working in MC 5.3.3.4 on a Macbook Pro 10.7.3 and my media is coming from a Sony PMw-EX1 XDCam.

    Footage was shot HQ 24p. I am ingesting the material into my 1080p/23.976 1920x1080 project by connecting the camera to my laptop and then dragging the "BPAV" folder into a labled folder on my external G-RAID drive and then telling Avid to "load AMA volume" (pointing to the folder on the G-RAID) and then once the clips appear, I am consolidating them so that I can work with them in a non AMA environment as i've heard this is not ideal for large projects. I will have close to 4-6TB of total footage to import. Consolidating seems faster than transcoding them to DNxHD115 but is there any drawback to working with EX 35 MBits files rather than DNxHD115? I should then keep all other media, titles etc at EX 35 Mbits too?

    Thanks for all your help as I'm new to working with AMA and XDCam thanks!!

  • Sat, Nov 3 2012 8:23 AM In reply to

    Re: Avid MC and Sony XDCam EX 35 Mbits vs DNxHD115

    Hi Anthony,

    The biggest difference you'll see between consolidating your XDCAM rushes and transcoding to DNX is in responsiveness.  XDCAM decoding places a big load on the processors and consequently moving through rushes at speed becomes quite 'laggy'.  By which I mean that if you're used to any of the intra-frame codecs (DNX, 2:1, prores) where scrubbing through a source clip or timeline gives you almost instant response and smooth display of your footage at very high speed, XDCAM will be a much slower affair, scrubbing through will be steppy in much the same way as putting a DVD in fast forward is - you'll see a single frame, then it'll catch up with another single frame from where your CTI is now positioned as you drag along (skipping all the intermediate frames) and is even worse when you try to scrub backwards.  This I'm afraid is due to the nature of mpeg compression, instead of landing on a frame and having all the data to display it instantly, your avid is having to reference other frames and reconstruct it.  It means you have to slow down your workflow and if you're working with a large amount of footage can have a major impact as you're often having to go over the same material several times to find the few frames or seconds that you know are there but get missed because the scrubbing can't keep up.  Personally I find that the frustration impedes my creativity.

    Production companies love it because their storage requirements are lowered while working at 'full res'.  My advice would be that if you have enough storage then transcode, your edit will be so much more fluid, and if you were to add up all the time spent waiting for the machine to catch up with XDCAM media I think you'd find that it would make up for longer transcoding time.  And you'll be a happier person!

     

    If you do work in XDCAM, titles, effects and renders are best done (at least for the final master) at DNX resolution - better colour space.

     

    Hope this helps.

     

  • Sat, Nov 3 2012 11:18 AM In reply to

    Re: Avid MC and Sony XDCam EX 35 Mbits vs DNxHD115

    I'd go the other way consolidate the files don't transcode there's no difference in quality you'll just be wasting space also playback once you consolidate is perfect then simply finish your edit by mixing down to ur required DNX flavour I tend to go 185 8 bit in Pal land and definitely make up titles and effects in DNX 185 or higher...

    MC 7.0 Symphony 7.0 Win 7 64bit 1 x XW 8600 quad 16gig ram 480gig SSD FX 5400 4 1tb 32 mb cache drives Pro tools 10 Avid fx Avid 3d Matrox... [view my complete system specs]
Page 1 of 1 (3 items)

© Copyright 2011 Avid Technology, Inc.  Terms of Use |  Privacy Policy |  Site Map |  Find a Reseller