Hey All,
I am looking at the Matrox MXO2 For HD primarily monitoring EX1 footage from my MACBOOKPRO.
on the MATROX website it clarifies that to obtain Prores422 HD you need a larger system than the MACBOOKPRO, Does this mean i am missing out on full quality from the EX1 by not having the bigger system?
Confused.

Hey All,
I am looking at the Matrox MXO2 For HD primarily monitoring EX1 footage from my MACBOOKPRO.
on the MATROX website it clarifies that to obtain Prores422 HD you need a larger system than the MACBOOKPRO, Does this mean i am missing out on full quality from the EX1 by not having the bigger system?
Confused.

Mick it simply means that Matrox does not recommend MacBookPro because it does not have enough CPU horsepower and system bandwidth to re-render the EX-XDCAM MPEG2 signal to the ProRes format "as you import in realtime."

One difference between the AJA IO and MXO2 is the AJA box does it's own ProRes Encode (not relaying on the CPU). The MacBookPro can convert to ProRes but not in real time. The question is do you have a reason to have ProRes source rather than EX codec from SxS or 10 bit 422 from HD-SDI. MXO2 should be fine for monitoring and fine for inputing from whatever the camera spits out. I don't own the MXO2 but did see a demo of it recently and had a good took with folks from Matrox at a trade show.

(edit added)
I should also mention that there's the MXO which is just for monitoring (no inputs) for about 1/3 less than the MXO2.

Hey All,
I am looking at the Matrox MXO2 For HD primarily monitoring EX1 footage from my MACBOOKPRO.
on the MATROX website it clarifies that to obtain Prores422 HD you need a larger system than the MACBOOKPRO, Does this mean i am missing out on full quality from the EX1 by not having the bigger system?
Confused.

Mick, it#s no wonder you are confused...
Let me ask you two questions first:
- Which MBP do you own (plz state proc and frequency + amount of RAM + type of video card and amount of video RAM, type of hard drive (internal/external), kind of firewire port (400/800), speed of HD (4200/5400/7200?), QT and FCP version, using only internal LCD and/or external LCD (like Cinema Display? Size??).
- Why Prores422 HQ? Will you do green screen or heavy colour grading?


Two points for your peace of mind: Your MBP is by far powerful enough to trancode your raw material to Prores 422 (HQ). It takes a few seconds more then on a Mac Pro multi core, sure, but it works fluently. The power of your MBP determines, so to say, how many parallel video streams you can put into your time line before rendering is required prior to smooth running video on the screen. It also depends on the number and power-requirements of the effects chosen. But we'll go through that later, after I have your answers.

I have been using MXO2 since beta versions (I have one of the first units produced) and can tell you that you cannot encode ProRes or ProRes HQ in a real time capture. ProRes real time encoding requires a quad-core chip.

Now, there is no problem with editing ProRes on a MBPro or even taking the time to transcode and render. But you cannot capture in real time.

...But you cannot capture in real time.

Mick you are on the safe side of the street. See the Matrox website
for mxo and mxo2 - you will find the product pictured there with
a Macbook Pro and with a text that relates several time to the
benefit of using mxo(2) and MBP together.

Hi All and thank you for the help,
after reading all your advice and input it does'nt make a lot of sense to be spending this amount of money at present (AJA IoHD), seeing as though my priority is to firstly just to be able view my footage as close as native as possible and besides buying a broadcast HD monitor (dream about it) It looks as though the MXO might be enough....for now, thanks again for your help again, Mick

I have been using MXO2 since beta versions (I have one of the first units produced) and can tell you that you cannot encode ProRes or ProRes HQ in a real time capture. ProRes real time encoding requires a quad-core chip.

Now, there is no problem with editing ProRes on a MBPro or even taking the time to transcode and render. But you cannot capture in real time.


I'm thinking you would use the MXO2 to encode ProRes from the 10-bit 4:2:2 SDI out?
If so, why would you bother with ProRes and just not capture it all uncompressed? Unless recording a whole show, for green screen work storage shouldn't be a problem. Or do people use the MXO2 to encoded realtime to ProRes from the firewire out? Although that doesn't make any sense over the SDI.

MXO2 does not have firewire in and besides FW only streams SQ.

The only reasons to use the MXO2 for acquiring from EX is to stream uncompressed 4:2:2 live out of HD-SDI or to do a real time downconvert in the camera. The reason that one would use ProRes is for the very reason that Apple created ProRes-- to obtain a 10-bit compressed signal of comparable quality to 10-bit uncompressed but without the file sizes and storage requirements of uncompressed.

I see that but as I said, at least in my opinion, unless you are filming a whole show, using ProRes over uncompressed seems like an unneeded compromise. If you are just using ProRes for a 5 minutes green screen shot I would do it uncompressed instead. ProRes is only really lossless in name only.

ProRes is only really lossless in name only.
Michael, where did you get that from? Look one post above yours:
The reason that one would use ProRes is for the very reason that Apple created ProRes-- to obtain a 10-bit compressed signal of comparable quality to 10-bit uncompressed but without the file sizes and storage requirements of uncompressed.
You see? And have a look into the Prores White Paper @
http://images.apple.com/finalcutstudio/resources/white_papers/L342568A_ProRes_WP.pdf

If you're not doing green screen where the extra color is useful, is there an advantage to going 4.2.2 Pro Res via the camera's hdmi over using the native 35mb/sec mpeg 2 stream? Any perceptible improvement in image quality?

Michael,
the difference in your workflow (uncompressed vs prores) statement is you will still need a raid to capture uncompressed (even for 5 minutes) - where with prores you can use your standard harddrive setup in your Macpro.

Mick,
Are you sure you want MXO2 rather than the original MXO just to monitor from a Macbook Pro?
It will tie up your express card slot so you cannot use faster SATA drives and it does not have a DVI out to run many standard monitors.

MXO is generally more limited, but for monitoring, it will come out from your MacBookpro's DVI port and split that up so you still have DVI and also SD and HD monitoring.

I didn't like the configuration of the inputs/outputs on the MX02. Why didn't they put them ALL on the back? With the inputs on the front and out outputs on the back, you'll end up with a mess of cables.....at least with our current editing system (Beta SP, DV, DVD, VHS, Mixing Board.....that's a lot of in's and out's)

It's a great value though. We went with the AJA Io HD. But I think the MX02 is like $1000 less? We paid $2750 for our AJA Io HD.

Mitchell,
there was talk about AJA making a battery powered accessory for the IOHD, but I can't find any research on it. Did the literature that came with your IOHD allude to anything that a brick may be attached to in the field. The AC current restriction is a deal breaker for me - I'd rather spend almost twice as much and go the Flash XDR route to be more "mobile"...

Thanks in advance,
Lonnie

No, nothing. I think the Flash XDR would be a better route for field use.

We only plan to use the ProRes for studio (chroma key) work. We'll just run a long HD-SDI cable.

I recently did a whole bunch of Chroma Key tests with my EX3. I recorded 35Mbps HQ, ProRes HQ (via Decklink/HDSDi) and uncompressed. The test were all done with Progressive material as I really don't like the way interlace keys.

I could see very little difference between the 35Mbps EX footage and the ProRes HQ material and the resulting keyed material looked pretty much the same. The uncompressed material on the other hand was far cleaner with less noise and this gave a much better key. Overall I was surprised at how noisy the ProRes material was. It is far from loss-less.

Were you shooting 1080 or 720? So how did you capture uncompressed HD? Does the Decklink hardware allow you to do that?

I thought it was difficult to capture ProRes HQ. I can't imagine how difficult it is to capture Uncompressed HD.

Thanks for passing on your results. Great information.

Here's an old thread that compares the difference between ProRes 422 HQ and XDCAM-EX codec.

EX-1 (or EX-3) for Chroma Key? - DVXuser.com -- The online community for filmmaking (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=133019)

Alister,
Thank you very much for sharing your tests and info as you always do. However a follow up I think that would be invaluable would be:

When comparing a scene shot with Exdcam HQ vs the same scene captured via HDSDI to ProResHQ is how well do they "clean up" or can they be pushed in post. Because ProResHQ is 4:2:2 10 bit, are you able to manipulate and push the image in post in such a manner that the Xdcam HQ couldn't because it is 4:2:0 8bit?

And if it was NOT a keyed scene but, rather a narrative shot, could you more easily do a difficult color correction in post, with less/no noticeable degradation in quality (such as day for night, or removing the artifacts in the shadows by manipulating the blacks, noise removal)?

Although intuitively 4:2:2 10bit would seem to be the way to go - if real world results are not enough of an advantage gain over the additional HDSDI field tethering - this would be important info.

Would love to hear your thoughts or results on this...

Thanks,
Lonnie

Mitchell,
The Decklink gives your Desktop the In/Outs to connect your camera (HD-SDI) to. To capture uncompressed you would normally need a raid set up, because the data stream is way to large for a normal harddrive setup in your computer to capture without missing frames. This isn't a big deal for studio setup, but for the field as you can guess is an additional chore...

Lonnie

Mitchell,
thanks for the link above - I would have missed that. The codecs look indistinguishable to my untrained eye - I don't key much. And I can't tell if there might be more noticeable textures in the red pullover on the Uncompressed side or if the textures are just more noticeable because the keylight on this side seems to be less hot...

Great post from Jim Arthurs though!

Alister,
It´s interesting to hear that you didn´t experiencing any difference between 35Mbps HQ and ProRes HQ. Having done quite a few chroma key sessions shooting 35Mbps HQ myself, I´m not surprised you managed to pull a decent key from this codec. But from my experience when shooting 35Mbps HQ you need to be really careful when you light your object and green screen. I guess that the ProRes HQ will turn out more flexible in a less than perfect shooting situation? And as Mr. Bell mentions, in post I believe that a 4:2:2 color space would hold up better.

When it comes to chroma keying it´s usually done on a location (besides where a specialized chroma key studio is available). Even if uncompressed delivers the cleanest result, uncompressed recordings in the field is a challenge (if you don´t have the budget and the resources available). Alister, do you have any experiences to share when it comes to chroma key shooting on location? I guess Convergent Design´s products are the most practical solution so far? And in just a few weeks Panasonic will start shipping the HPG-20, which will record AVC-Intra 10-bit... Time will show how this solution will compare to uncompressed. At least it´ll be a very mobile solution. Until then I´ll stick to
35Mbps HQ codec for (simple) chroma keying.

Best,
-terje

The Decklink card gives me HDSDi input on my MacPro. I have a very fast 2Tb raid array so I can easily capture uncompressed, but this is very much a studio setup. The decklink card will also convert the HDSDi stream to ProRes on the fly.

In terms of both keying and grading in the first instance I don't find that there is much difference in working from the native XDCAM EX material or ProRes. Although ProRes is 10 bit the material you are starting out with is still 8 bit as the camera outputs 8 bits (in a 10 bit stream) over the HDSDi.

It all depends on your workflow and how you intend to output your project. For the vast majority of my projects I edit the native EX footage and do any grading in the timeline (FCP). Then I export to my final output codec. I always try to keep the project to one single pass of editing/grading/encoding. Many of my projects are being saved out as either EX (cuts only) or XDCAM HD 4:2:2 @ 50Mbps. For these there is nothing to be gained by using ProRes and I set the timeline to render to EX or XDCAM 50Mbps. Projects that are going to be output to HDCAM I set the timeline to render to uncompressed as there is less noise than ProRes, but these projects eat disk space! For projects where I am unsure of where they will end up I encode to ProRes HQ as they take up less disk space but can be re-edited if needed with little loss.

I find that with my single pass workflow I get the best results editing from the native EX material. Converting to ProRes before editing adds an extra encoding pass and although you are encoding to a 10 bit codec, unless you grade or otherwise manipulate the image during the encode you will still only have 256 levels of gray.

Now, if you are going to put your material through more than a single pass then encoding to ProRes makes much more sense as over multiple generations ProRes is much more robust. But you do need to remember that when you capture over HDSDi as the camera output is 8 bit you will still only start off with 8 bits of information in the 10 bit ProRes data. You will however have a colour space advantage but if you are shooting progressive the colour space difference is minimal. See the attached frame grabs, the left image is EX the right is uncompressed 10 bit 4:2:2.

If you then process your 8 bit data by grading etc and re-render to ProRes you will then start to use the extra data bits and at this stage start to gain some advantage.

I find that HDSDi captured uncompressed is cleaner and as a result grades and keys better than ProRes. ProRes and EX have similar amounts of noise and progressive material keys about the same. The mosquito noise in ProRes isn't bad, but it's there.

The secret to good chroma key with any format is good lighting, ProRes or uncompressed won't make up for bad lighting.

I am going to get a Convergent Nano Flash as this will give me a very flexible yet compact way of getting even better quality from my EX's. Although I'm not really expecting a huge difference just a small improvement as I have done tests at 35Mbps, 50Mbps and 100Mbps and the differences are often hard to see.

Projects that are going to be output to HDCAM I set the timeline to render to uncompressed as there is less noise than ProRes, but these projects eat disk space!

Alister - thanks for the details and your time. If you would clarify this quote for me please...

If your output is intended for HDCAM - is your FCP timeline sequence set to XDCAM EX and then under sequence settings you put the render codec to uncompressed? or is the timeline sequence and render codec, both set to uncompressed?

Thanks again my friend,
Lonnie

... Although ProRes is 10 bit the material you are starting out with is still 8 bit as the camera outputs 8 bits (in a 10 bit stream) over the HDSDi.

... But you do need to remember that when you capture over HDSDi as the camera output is 8 bit you will still only start off with 8 bits of information in the 10 bit ProRes data.

Alister, are you certain about the SDI bit depth on the EX1/3?

As you know, the topic has been vigorously debated several times in these forums. Cheers and Happy New Year!

Alister, I´m a bit puzzled by your statement: "Although ProRes is 10 bit the material you are starting out with is still 8 bit as the camera outputs 8 bits (in a 10 bit stream) over the HDSDi."

This issue has been dealt with in other threads on this forum, but are you suggesting that the EX-3/EX-1 only outputs 8-bit (disguissed as 10-bit) over it´s HD-SDI? Or do I misunderstand your wording? Technical discussions in a foreign language (for me) can be challenging sometimes.

FYI Mick Schell of Convergent Design writes in one of the threads:
"I can absolutely confirm that the EX1/EX3 HD-SDI output has a full 10-bit resolution, not just 8-bit with the lower 2-bits forced to zeroes. We tested the output of the EX1/EX3 on our $25K Tektronix WFM-700 HD-SDI monitor. It is unquestionably 10-bit resolution. All HD-SDI sources are 10-bit 4:2:2, but often it's only 8-bit effective, with the lower 2-bits set to zero. The EX1/EX3 is a full 10-bits, which is really amazing given the price of this camera."

And Juan Martinez (Senior Manager Technology) of Sony states:
"We added PsF to the EX3 and EX1 HDSDI EE output due to user requests.
This feature enables capturing the EX's clean, live camera10-bit 4:2:2 progressive signal directly by NLE. The NLE's capture utility recognizes the PsF payload as a true signal and stores it as such. PsF frees the user from having to apply reverse telecine such as Adobe After-Effects or Cinema Tools in post to remove pull down."

Do you have any other information that contradicts these statements? Thank you for your time and help.

Best,
-terje

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/sony-xdcam-ex-cinealta/136388-ex3-hd-sdi-not-psf-requires-pull-down.html

I'm not going to argue with Mike Schell, if he says it's 10 bit then I stand corrected. But no-one from Sony has ever claimed all 10 bits to be active and I would have thought that if this was the case they would be shouting it out loud. Many far more expensive cameras with 10 bit HDSDi outputs only have 8 active bits.

Mitchell, I´m not familiar with the pull down issue (being in PAL land). I´m just refering to the thread below, where the issue was addressed. The post is dated 26th of August 2008. It´s strange that contradictory info keeps creeping into these threads. It would be an idea to address certain aspects of the EX-series cameras in a Sticky thread, so we don´t have to discuss again and again the confirmed hardware and software facts?

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/sony-xdcam-ex-cinealta/128059-new-ex1-firmware-out-2.html#post924899

Best,
-terje

Alister,
Forgive me for reposting the same question, but it got lost in the great 8vs10 quandry...

Clarification if you will:
If your output is intended for HDCAM - is your FCP sequence set to XDCAM EX and then under sequence settings you set the render codec to uncompressed? or is the timeline sequence and render codec, both set to uncompressed?

Thanks again my friend,
Lonnie

Terje - I'm sorry to say that I can't provide you with any additional info. Honestly (kind of embarrassing) I didn't know what PsF was so I Googled it and found the link to the thread I posted. I thought it might help.

I shoot mainly for broadcast television so shooting in 24 fps doesn't interest me much. I plan to shoot mostly 30P (or maybe 60i....don't know yet)

Lonnie, I use the easy setups and choose the EX HQ preset then set the sequence setting to render blackmagic uncompressed.