I''ve been an Avid Editor for about 17 years now, about 2 years ago I switched to Final Cut Pro (had a project that demanded it). I was okay with it, but still have Avid instincts and it's just more comfortable. I just purchased Media Composer 6.0 So now, I'm getting used to the changes in Media Composer over the last two years.

I'm editing a lot of DSLR projects and using PluralEyes 3 for synching. I like the potential of the AMA workflow, but am having issues getting to to synch in PluralEyes.

Okay the nitty gritty details. The media was shot on a Canon 7D. Originally the project was to be cut in FCP 6, so the video has been compressed to Apple Pro-Res 422 (HQ). Audio is the unaltered original WAV files recorded on a Zoom H4.

I used AMA to bring media into MC6.. When I export for PluralEyes, I get a message warning about multiple audio sample rates and and error message when I try to synch in PluralEyes.

My question, can I use Apple ProRes in MC6? Is it just a bad idea? If it will work, should I be compressing the audio before importing? If so to what? Or should I recompress the video to another format?

I know I could avoid all this by importing old-school-style, converting to MXF files, but I'd like to see if this workflow would work.

Thanks in advance.

Bring the material into Avid and transcode to DNXHD. Avid will work with this material much better. Another option is to upgrade to Avid 6.5.2 and Avid will handle the ProRes material in a better fashion. No experience with the Plural Eyes workflow.

You cannot import ProRes with the older import workflow, you need to use AMA.

I can't comment on PluralEyes but I have had experience with DualEyes and found it to be a lot easier to use.

The processing takes place before import into Avid. You feed the audio/video files into the program, and it spits out the synced files which you then import into your NLE.

Hope that helps.

Thanks for the feedback. I guess my next question would be if I have to transcode the video, what would be the advantage to doing that and using the AMA workflow instead of just importing it and converting everything to MXF files?

AMA + dSLR + direct editing = enough frustration to quit the business all together. The system performance with this approach is HORRIBLE!

There is no fast import with that footage. Even if you do a direct import it still gets transcoded.

AMA does sidestep the gamma issues that you will have if you import directly so the best workflow is to AMA link then transcode all the footage in the bin. It is also faster than a straight import.

Thanks, Chris. I guess my breakdown in logic hit awall. I never considered, well, maybe it just doesn't work.

AMA + dSLR + direct editing = enough frustration to quit the business all together. The system performance with this approach is HORRIBLE!

There is no fast import with that footage. Even if you do a direct import it still gets transcoded.

AMA does sidestep the gamma issues that you will have if you import directly so the best workflow is to AMA link then transcode all the footage in the bin. It is also faster than a straight import.

Just to add a contrasting opinion - I frequently use AMA to edit DSLR footage, and while it does effect Avid's performance slightly, I find it perfectly fine for smaller projects (on my Macbook Pro).

In larger projects though (10 mins+) I don't bother with AMA, as Avid usually grinds to a halt.

FYI, I'm using Media Composer 6.5.

The performance is much better on the MAC side. It is unusable for anything beyond logging of video on the PC side.