Hallo

is possible to help my with a file 4K in Dropbox an unedited file direct from FS5,I want to see how it goes and the ISO 6400 - 8000 ..most important to test and my computer if work with FS5 file :-)

Thanks

nobody can put a 4k file filmed FS5 at iso 6400 ?? in dropbox..or google drive..
tx

If you're trying to evaluate the camera the best thing to do is just rent one and try to shoot exactly the way you want to shoot because everybody needs to shoot in a different way so you should just rent one and do the tests yourself .

Here ya go. Hope my dark living room, agitated wife and sleeping dogs do the trick. Process was to set the iris on auto and let the camera adjust to proper exposure after changing ISO to the requested settings.

DOWNLOAD LINK:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/euthqilsfje8rvf/FS5_TESTS.zip?dl=0

First 3 clips are 3200, 6400, 10000 using PP6 with Cine4/Pro Color.
Custom push white balance, iris on auto, and 0EV

Last 3 clips are 3200, 6400, 10000 using PP7 with S-Log2/S-Gamut3.cine Color.
3200 S-Gamut white balance, iris on auto, and +1.5EV

Nate, it was very cool of you to share those files. Dvinfo is a great community.

I dowloaded your files and opened them up in Catalyst browse.

What can I say? The Noise, Color Fringing, and Artifacts are really bad. And you are not moving the camera. (that's when all hell breaks lose)

I own the FS5 and I am thinking about returning it.

I absolutely love the camera but it's 4K video compared to my FS7 is horrible not crippled.

I know it looks much better with an external recorder. I have a Shogun but I did not buy this camera to use with it. I bought it for a run and gun filming.

In my opinion it's the XAVC-L codec implemented on this camera.

Thanks and Best Regards

You're right. It's rough at the higher gain settings. I really try not to use it higher than ISO3200, there are better tools out there for the high-gain situations. For the file sizes, convenience and compactness, this is the price we pay. That being said, the scene in my dark living room WAS especially terrible...

However, at a normal ISO1000 or ISO3200 in S-Log, and when using reasonable lighting or when outdoor shooting, I've been happy with it.

Want to reveal the noise better? Strip the color and look at the luma in black and white. The noise and blocking pop out for a better inspection of what is really going on.

Ouch. Is the the best that sensor can do in 8bit? I'm sure it's a good Super35 sensor with a good signal to noise ratio. As a huge Sony fan that has owned MANY Sony cameras in my life...this sensor just seems to me to be under achieving to me. Or the noise reduction process is not tuned right???

The noise looks more like something from a smaller sensor camera and not a large, Sony super35 image sensor.

If this was a BlackMagic camera, I'd say it's "OK" and normal but this isn't a CMOSIS made sensor, it's a "Sony" image sensor.

I dont know. I'm still holding final judgement until I get my own.

Not sure if everyone is aware but different pictures profiles have different gain even though the "ISO" readout stays constant . pp5 at those ISO settings would be +15 to +21 of gain. I think I am finally understanding the wildly different reviews I have read.

The Sony cameras I am coming from are the FS100 and FS700 so I am actually pretty thrilled with the high ISO performance, not that I would ever use it. I figure many people must be coming from A7 type cameras or other similar ISO performing systems (either really better or just more aggressive noise reduction)

21db of gain is really high

Thanks Nate Haustein

you are the first in the world to put a file 4k from FS5...thank you very much


Here ya go. Hope my dark living room, agitated wife and sleeping dogs do the trick. Process was to set the iris on auto and let the camera adjust to proper exposure after changing ISO to the requested settings.

DOWNLOAD LINK:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/euthqilsfje8rvf/FS5_TESTS.zip?dl=0

First 3 clips are 3200, 6400, 10000 using PP6 with Cine4/Pro Color.
Custom push white balance, iris on auto, and 0EV

Last 3 clips are 3200, 6400, 10000 using PP7 with S-Log2/S-Gamut3.cine Color.
3200 S-Gamut white balance, iris on auto, and +1.5EV

Hallo Olof Ekbergh

you are right,but unfortunately, here in Romania I have no place to rent this camcorder.I want to buy FS5,but watch Canon C100 Mark II and I have not found comparativ test C100 M2 vs FS5..


If you're trying to evaluate the camera the best thing to do is just rent one and try to shoot exactly the way you want to shoot because everybody needs to shoot in a different way so you should just rent one and do the tests yourself .

Here ya go...

Finally some ungraded UHD slog clips to play with. Thank you very much!

Alex

What can I say? The Noise, Color Fringing, and Artifacts are really bad. And you are not moving the camera. (that's when all hell breaks lose)

With all due respect to Nate for taking the time to shoot the clips and post them, you can't make any judgements about the performance of the camera from these clips. By Nate's own admission they were shot with a bunch of randomly selected settings that don't work together and with no attention paid to exposure or anything else. We don't even know what the lens was. Take them for what they are, but PLEASE do not judge the camera my these hastily shot tests. I would send my camera back to Sony if I thought this is what the camera really looks like.

What can I say? The Noise, Color Fringing, and Artifacts are really bad. And you are not moving the camera. (that's when all hell breaks lose)

I"m not sure if I am the only one but I honestly don't understand what you guys are complaining about, that last clip (10000 using PP7 with S-Log2/S-Gamut3.cine Color.) looked perfectly fine to me, I would be glad being able to shoot such a nice and clean image at 10.000 iso, my wife was standing next to me when I was viewing that clip and I asked, "can you point out noise, color fringing, and artifacts" and she had no idea what I was talking about, for her it looked fine as well. Ofcourse it could be that most of you shoot high end commercials for big companies who expect artifact free images at 10.000 iso without extra light but seriously, are you not expecting too much or staring too close at the screen while pausing the video or taking frames out and magnifying them in photoshop? Or do I really have so low standards that I am blind to the obvious?

Can I make a suggestion? Form now on, whenever we discuss the noise performance of this camera, can we all use "0db" or "+3db", "+6db"...etc? When we talk "ISO" terms with all the different gamma curves the FS5 has, it just mucks up and confuses the conversation.

"ISO" is fine but I think that measuring the actual amount of "GAIN" amplification that the camera is applying to the image is just a better way of discussing it with the gamma setting that is being used.

I dunno, that's just me I guess.

Obviously these clips need transcoding before bringing into Premiere Pro CS6. Is this best through Adobe Media Encoder or is there a bit of free software that will equally do the trick?

With all due respect to Nate for taking the time to shoot the clips and post them, you can't make any judgements about the performance of the camera from these clips. By Nate's own admission they were shot with a bunch of randomly selected settings that don't work together and with no attention paid to exposure or anything else. We don't even know what the lens was. Take them for what they are, but PLEASE do not judge the camera my these hastily shot tests. I would send my camera back to Sony if I thought this is what the camera really looks like.

You are so right. After I posted I had second thoughts about it since it really is a terrible scene! Good for seeing how the clips work in your editor but not much else. I've shot a bunch of stuff I'm happy with, but client work so no posting on video forums. FYI lens was kit lens wide open to about F5.6.

I'm in a shoot right now with some down time, so I'm going to try again in better light. I'm not so familiar with the Gain terminology, does 0db 9db 18db work as a usable spread?

With all due respect to Nate for taking the time to shoot the clips and post them, you can't make any judgements about the performance of the camera from these clips. By Nate's own admission they were shot with a bunch of randomly selected settings that don't work together and with no attention paid to exposure or anything else. We don't even know what the lens was. Take them for what they are, but PLEASE do not judge the camera my these hastily shot tests. I would send my camera back to Sony if I thought this is what the camera really looks like.

I"m not sure if I am the only one but I honestly don't understand what you guys are complaining about, that last clip (10000 using PP7 with S-Log2/S-Gamut3.cine Color.) looked perfectly fine to me, I would be glad being able to shoot such a nice and clean image at 10.000 iso, my wife was standing next to me when I was viewing that clip and I asked, "can you point out noise, color fringing, and artifacts" and she had no idea what I was talking about, for her it looked fine as well. Ofcourse it could be that most of you shoot high end commercials for big companies who expect artifact free images at 10.000 iso without extra light but seriously, are you not expecting too much or staring too close at the screen while pausing the video or taking frames out and magnifying them in photoshop? Or do I really have so low standards that I am blind to the obvious?

Ouch, getting clobbered here. :) The truth is I'm a rank amateur at this. I appreciate both comments.

You are so right. After I posted I had second thoughts about it since it really is a terrible scene! Good for seeing how the clips work in your editor but not much else. I've shot a bunch of stuff I'm happy with, but client work so no posting on video forums. FYI lens was kit lens wide open to about F5.6.

I'm in a shoot right now with some down time, so I'm going to try again in better light. I'm not so familiar with the Gain terminology, does 0db 9db 18db work as a usable spread?

I think the reason people are asking for gain vs. ISO is that depending on the gamma setting the ISO readout means very different things.... 0 gain in SLOG3 is according to Sony 3200ISO but 0 gain in CINE2 gamma is 640ISO I dont use it to edit or work but for testing purposes Sony Catalyst is great because it gives you all the EXIF data you need

Thanks for posting, you are braver than I am.. I kept seeing this post and wanted to share but after posting samples on the FS5 FB page and even on another video site I learned my lesson (this post looks likes its going well, but this camera really brings out the crazy in people for some reason :) )

Ok, heres another couple scenes in better light. Two scenes, each shot first with stock PP6, and then PP7 with the S-Gamut3.cine color.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vi4r3efyz6ukkyx/FS5_TESTS-2.zip?dl=0

Specs: FS5, UHD 100Mbps, Sigma 18-35mm. Other info is audibly spoken in the videos. Sorry about the loud mic - forgot channel 1 was on manual control when I switched to the internal mics.

Interesting....when you try to pull a "Media Info" on these files, you get ALL the metadata fields being empty!

This exact same thing used to happen on the original Sony PXW-X70 with it's original firmware. Sony then repaired that in the next firmware release. Sony Vegas was able to then use those new firmware recordings with now problem.

With all this metadata being missing, it could make it hard for some NLEs to identify and playback the files properly.

Anybody else seeing this too? It's the X70 firmware 1.0 problem all over again.

Interesting.....

Hallo Nate

If is possible make a test C100 MarkII vs FS5 1920x1080 in hi iso :-) ,unfortunately FS5 is not camcorder for 6000 usd which I expect from Sony.weak performance in low light,codec problems.
I want to convince myself that I deserve this money,Sony must quickly resolve problems.I want to buy this FS5 but always watch back Canon C100 Mark II,ok is not 4k,no 10 bit....,codec ..

Hmmm. I deleted the MXF files from the folders that weren't for public eyes. I'm sure the metadata got kind of messed up, but I was still able to import the clips to FCPX. The metadata does not show up in FCPX, but when I view the files in Catalyst Browse, all the metadata is still there. I believe it may be a NLE thing. They don't make it easy to share a single file these days...

Interesting....when you try to pull a "Media Info" on these files, you get ALL the metadata fields being empty!

This exact same thing used to happen on the original Sony PXW-X70 with it's original firmware. Sony then repaired that in the next firmware release. Sony Vegas was able to then use those new firmware recordings with now problem.

With all this metadata being missing, it could make it hard for some NLEs to identify and playback the files properly.

Anybody else seeing this too? It's the X70 firmware 1.0 problem all over again.

Interesting.....

all the EXIF information is shown in Sony Catalyst

I think that "Media Info" pulls it's metadata from inside the .mxf wrapper itself. Sony Catalyst probably pulls it's information from the surrounding metadata files associated with each .mxf video file.

I dont know. However, we have seen this exact same thing before with the original Sony PXW-X70 firmware before. Sony did fix it it the next X70 firmware release and "Media Info" was able to read the metadata again.

NEVER delete random files through a standard file browser. Use Catalyst Browse to make a new folder and import the footage into a new folder. Worse comes to worse, get a fresh SD card and transfer only the clips you want to be public and then share THAT entire card.

Also, always write protect your card before import on a Mac.

Thanks for sharing the files!
I am actually curious to try some 10-bit HD files...

NEVER delete random files through a standard file browser. Use Catalyst Browse to make a new folder and import the footage into a new folder. Worse comes to worse, get a fresh SD card and transfer only the clips you want to be public and then share THAT entire card.

Also, always write protect your card before import on a Mac.

With XAVC-L and XAVC-S, when I'm done shooting, I simply copy the .mxf files and the .mp4 files with File Explorer and only keep those files for my projects.

I dump all the rest of the files and format the card for the next shoot. I have never had a need for anything else in those folders.

I do occasionally use "Media Info" on those files to verify what bit rate they were shot in and look at any other embedded data into the files.

[Side note] I do also prefer XAVC-S' .mp4 container over .mxf. I strongly believe that h.264 unpacks and plays back smoother and with less CPU overhead than h.264 in an .mxf container.

NEVER delete random files through a standard file browser. Use Catalyst Browse to make a new folder and import the footage into a new folder. Worse comes to worse, get a fresh SD card and transfer only the clips you want to be public and then share THAT entire card.

Also, always write protect your card before import on a Mac.

With an EX1(r) and EX3 and other EXCAM camera's this is very true.
It seems that FS5 uses a more user friendly structure :-)

No. NEVER assume you can just copy select files. You lose your "Digital Negative" of the shoot each time you only copy the files instead of the entire structure.

Trust me, if you make the same mistake with P2 on a critical shoot, you will be yelled at.

NEVER COPY THE FILES YOU "NEED." COPY ALL THE FILES ON THE CARD AND IT'S FOLDER STRUCTURE. I know DSLR shooting has made this point soured down cause everything's in one file, but PLEASE. COPY EVERYTHING.

WATCH THIS: (go to 1:04) https://youtu.be/AhDnyWFAM10?t=1m4s

I guess it all depends on the work flow you are using. Some might need to be concerned with time code or other metadata. This could easily be a major concern for many people.

The .mxf or .mp4 files that XAVC-L/I/S create don't have any playback dependencies on their folder structure or external file metadata. They contain their own metadata inside that needed for simple playback.

My workflow has never needed those external XAVC files and folders. Whatever works for you.

No, it's the principal of keeping digital negatives. Only keeping select files is not archiving AT ALL.

This is not a simple case of "to each their own," cause this is the number 1 post production nightmare people have to face, where people didn't back up properly.

You already have incomplete backups of your footage. Don't take it as "only what I need." Take it as "Preserve the digital negative of the original card."

NEVER think "Oh, I don't need it so it's not getting backed up." You will so regret said choice when you send your footage off to another editor and he can't open the files because the structure is incomplete, wasting countless hours fixing a problem you started.

KEEP ALL THE FILES. I'm sorry but this subject matter CANNOT BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. This is serious in a post production workflow.

This is not a simple case of "to each their own," cause this is the number 1 post production nightmare people have to face, where people didn't back up properly.

A thousand times this. Jack is absolutely right, and you ignore his advice at your own peril.

No. NEVER assume you can just copy select files. You lose your "Digital Negative" of the shoot each time you only copy the files instead of the entire structure.

Trust me, if you make the same mistake with P2 on a critical shoot, you will be yelled at.

NEVER COPY THE FILES YOU "NEED." COPY ALL THE FILES ON THE CARD AND IT'S FOLDER STRUCTURE. I know DSLR shooting has made this point soured down cause everything's in one file, but PLEASE. COPY EVERYTHING.

WATCH THIS: (go to 1:04) https://youtu.be/AhDnyWFAM10?t=1m4s

Did you shoot with a FS5 already?
For i.e. P2 and EXCAM the folderstructure should indeed not be ignored.
I don't know yet how critical the folder structure is for editing FS5 footage: haven't used it yet, but proving your point by using a video of a NLE (FCP7) that was not only discontinued in 2011, but also a transcoding nightmare to start with with the advent of solid state cameras, seems a bit silly.

I'd say: yes copy the entire card to be sure you don't lose any info, but that doesn't mean it is 100% certain that you can't edit FS5 footage without it's folder structure. :-p
That is something to be tested to go beyond assumptions ;-)

(I understand you like solid rules :-p )

I'd say: yes copy the entire card to be sure you don't lose any info, but that doesn't mean it is 100% certain that you can't edit FS5 footage without it's folder structure.

Does it matter? Has anyone ever screwed up by copying over the complete folder structure intact? However, I have witnessed an entire shoot lost because someone copied files out of the structure.

I'd say: yes copy the entire card to be sure you don't lose any info, but that doesn't mean it is 100% certain that you can't edit FS5 footage without it's folder structure.

Does it matter? Has anyone ever screwed up by copying over the complete folder structure intact? However, I have witnessed an entire shoot lost because someone copied files out of the structure.

I always copy the entire card, I started copying everything when I just switched from a mini-dv camera to a sd card camera a few years ago, I first also just handpicked the videofiles and ignored the folder structure until I noticed I was missing some files which resided in another folder I thought was empty. Copying the entire card prevents that from happening.

Also when you record continuously the video is split up and your nle needs the added metadata to join the clips again without frameloss.

But that doesn't mean not copying the entire card makes the videofiles useless if you only have recorded short takes, if you exactly know where all the videofiles are located, if your nle doesn't transcode and replaces your original files and if you are the only person dealing with the footage, then it would be just fine, only I would not recommend doing so because one day you are tired and not pay attention to find out you are missing footage just like I did some years back, it's just not worth it.

No, it's the principal of keeping digital negatives. Only keeping select files is not archiving AT ALL.

This is not a simple case of "to each their own," cause this is the number 1 post production nightmare people have to face, where people didn't back up properly.

You already have incomplete backups of your footage. Don't take it as "only what I need." Take it as "Preserve the digital negative of the original card."

NEVER think "Oh, I don't need it so it's not getting backed up." You will so regret said choice when you send your footage off to another editor and he can't open the files because the structure is incomplete, wasting countless hours fixing a problem you started.

KEEP ALL THE FILES. I'm sorry but this subject matter CANNOT BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. This is serious in a post production workflow.

For me?...I dont give my work to anybody. I shoot it, I keep it, I edit it and give out the masters. I have copied thousands upon thousands of XAVC-L and XAVC-S clips and used them dozens of real projects and countless home videos. I never once had even a hint of a problem. Those .mxf and .mp4 video clips have proven to be fully intact, like any other standard video file you download from the web or given to you by anybody else. They are fully structurally sound.

Although, I am curious. I guess I'll dig into the external data files tonight to see what is in them. I guess I should try to see what I'm actually throwing away and not using.

Anybody know exactly what those XAVC-L and XAVC-S supporting files are? What actual data do they hold?

And yes, if I intended to give my footage to somebody else, I certainly would preserve the entire folder structure for their benefit. (even in the XDCAM-EX days, I would always do an "Export mxf to NLE option" Even then, I never once had a single problem for all those years.

even in the XDCAM-EX days, I would always do an "Export mxf to NLE option" Even then, I never once had a single problem for all those years.

Oh my god, that is once again not keeping the camera digital negative... That's exporting MXF files. If you delete the original card, those MXFs aren't backups neither.

Being ignorant of a post production process might be good if you intend on working solo forever, but post production is a TEAM based profession and it is very worthwhile to learn these habits when you have to work with someone else.

(I understand you like solid rules :-p )

Was that an insult? If so you are basically saying all post production people should lay back, relax, miss deadlines, and just chill... Not follow a unified system proven to be efficient and instead laze about all day. YouTube is this way, and it's good for amateurs, but if you enter a post house not following the rules, you will be fired.

Even though I linked a FCP7 video, the point still stands: BACKUP EVERYTHING.

post production is a TEAM based profession

Not for all of us so there are exceptions, I have been dealing with my own footage for 10 years from shooting to delivery to the client and no, they don't get the raw files and I don't keep a copy of the raw files either, only a copy of the finished exported product.

Not for all of us so there are exceptions, I have been dealing with my own footage for 10 years from shooting to delivery to the client and no, they don't get the raw files and I don't keep a copy of the raw files either, only a copy of the finished exported product.

I don't mean the client needs the raw files, I mean for project and footage archival. Renders are often times not the best way to edit a demo reel. Sometimes reading renders results in odd frame rate reading in stuff like Premiere. I bring back up camera originals just in case there's a frame rate problem with the render I have on hand.

This is a huge rift between professionals and amateurs. The YouTube generation versus people editing Reality TV dailies in a real post house, where file structure is CRITICAL.

I"m not saying you are wrong but not all of us need to archive the footage and projectfiles the way you do, what I supply to my client does not need to be re-edited in a near or distant future, it's a finished product so does not have the same requirements as when you would deliver to a production house.

I think this is a case of a Generation gap in terms of editing methods. Old methods dying out for convenience, but through convenience, you forget how it's actually supposed to be done.

Oh my god, that is once again not keeping the camera digital negative... That's exporting MXF files. If you delete the original card, those MXFs aren't backups neither.

Being ignorant of a post production process might be good if you intend on working solo forever, but post production is a TEAM based profession and it is very worthwhile to learn these habits when you have to work with someone else.



Was that an insult? If so you are basically saying all post production people should lay back, relax, miss deadlines, and just chill... Not follow a unified system proven to be efficient and instead laze about all day. YouTube is this way, and it's good for amateurs, but if you enter a post house not following the rules, you will be fired.

Even though I linked a FCP7 video, the point still stands: BACKUP EVERYTHING.

Jack, I TOTATLY dig what you are saying. I do IT work for a huge global media company. We own over 30 global TV brands. We have more than 50 Avid suites all over the world. Yes...you are right, we have extremely tight work flow rules for how we ingest. However, I'm talking about me and my side job. My work flow is NOTHING like this.

I work solo or sometimes with a close knit group of camera friends for multicam. When I ask for the footage in XDCAM EX or AVCHD? I say, "gimme all your merged files" and I run with it? I cut it and the project is done and in the can.

To this date, I personally have never needed the supporting metafiles of XDCAM, AVCHD,XAVC-L or XAVC-S....but that's just me. I also work allot with ProRes external recorders that dump all files into the root of their drives with nothing more than just that.

What do you do with your Metadata or supporting file structure? I would not call it a "digital negative" myself but hey,...OK I guess.

Anybody know what is in that stuff? Can anybody tell me why I have been successfully editing fine without it?

CT :-)

To this date, I personally have never needed the supporting metafiles of XDCAM, AVCHD,XAVC-L or XAVC-S....but that's just me. I also work allot with ProRes external recorders that dump all files into the root of their drives with nothing more than just that.

Yeah, that's great. That's exactly the kind of experience the individal had on the project I shot when he copied over the MXF files out of the folder structure and then when we went to edit the project the next week, there was no audio of any kind.

So that's great that it works for you, until it doesn't. Again, what is the harm of keeping the structure of the card intact vs the possibility of ruining an entire shoot?

Yeah, that's great. That's exactly the kind of experience the individal had on the project I shot when he copied over the MXF files out of the folder structure and then when we went to edit the project the next week, there was no audio of any kind.

So that's great that it works for you, until it doesn't. Again, what is the harm of keeping the structure of the card intact vs the possibility of ruining an entire shoot?

THIS. THIS x Infinity +1. There is no harm in doing this even if you believe it's unnecessary.

----

Following up my "convenience" tangent,

Modern NLEs that take in files instead of file structures are doing so to make it more convenient for the user. Modern NLEs are really good at this, but sometimes if you only work with pre-joined files (NXCAM's content browser for instance) you get sync offset compared to reading the structure directly using the media browser in Premiere. I had 1 duplicate frame appear in a pre-joined NXCAM file compared to a Nanoflash recording of the same thing, which splits files perfectly on GOP borders.

Pre-joined files are for editing, not archiving. I'm not against using it if you believe it's better, but having that as your only archive is setting yourself up for trouble. As the FCP7 video said, what happens when you move NLEs down the line? Imagine if you have 100% Grass Valley HQX files for your archive of raw footage. What would happen when you have to work on a machine that's managed, which means you can't install anything, and you need that codec to access your footage?

And final point: What if you worked with R3D? If you copied only the R3D file, some NLEs can read that, but to transcode for other NLEs, the original RED software won't be able to read that anymore. God forbid if you renamed the files but kept the file structure, it's an even worse nightmare. Google "RED file structure damaged."

Yeah, that's great. That's exactly the kind of experience the individal had on the project I shot when he copied over the MXF files out of the folder structure and then when we went to edit the project the next week, there was no audio of any kind.

So that's great that it works for you, until it doesn't. Again, what is the harm of keeping the structure of the card intact vs the possibility of ruining an entire shoot?

Wow! What .mxf file type were you using? It certainly couldn't have been Sony? What camera writes audio and video files seperately? My experience comes from 20 years of Sony cameras so I can't say anything about others.

I can also tell you that when I copy the clips, I do a CRC verify too with TeraCopy. Which I strongly recommend for people copying even entire folder structures. The last thing I can say is that I usually keep the original cards on the shelf until after the project is delivered. I have yet to ever go back to any for a recopy. I keep the cards not because I want the metafiles, I keep them in case I need to grab those clips again in an emergency.

There is nothing wrong with copying the entire folder, that's totally cool, I'm just saying I don't do it and to this date, I have never missed those metafiles. I have also never missed any metafiles from a Shogun, Ninja or Pix E5 either. (Because they don't write them to begin with)

Hell, I'm not knocking anybody here. Whatever workflow gives you kick ass videos is all you need....I'm all for you!

I'm still wondering what is actually in those XAVC-S/L, AVCHD and XDCAM metadata files....

Hmmm......

That's Panasonic P2. It's the most costly rookie mistake possible and you can lose your job as a DIT if you make that mistake.

And I know you're gonna say "Your fault for choosing Panasonic..."

It's really bad practice regardless if you think it's right. Just cause Sony's done the same file storage method (audio/video all in one file) for years, doesn't mean it's a general practice that you can use on other file systems. I guarantee you that's how the DIT copied only the files in the "VIDEO" folder under Panasonic P2 and screwed himself over with no audio.

I did it in my first P2 shoot. I still regret not having camera originals of my first P2 shoot to this day, but from then on, I copied everything. The next shoots I shot on P2 which I copied everything now natively open in Premiere and bypasses ProRes and Raylight completely.

Well? I'm not preaching that it's "good practice"...lol

I'm only saying I have done it a GAZILLION times and have never had a problem....not even once. I'm also NOT trying to convince others to do it that way too. What's the worst that could happen? I need some obscure meta file because something that has always worked fine before suddenly needs that info? If that happens, I guess I'd have to pull back the original card and get that data. No big deal, if that's the worst editing problem I ever face in my life, I'd be a happy camper.

And if I ever need ProRes meta files or meta data,...I'm totally screwed because non of my external recorders have that for ProRes....oh man, I'm starting to get nervous about that. Maybe Atomos and Video Devices need to start writing XAVC-style meta files next to the video files with their recorders...I dunno,...just for the heck of it. ;-)

To be totally honest, Over all the years I have heavily used, D8, Mini DV, HDV, AVCHD, NXCAM, XDCAM EX, XAVC-S and XAVC-L, ProRes, Avid DNXHD and even edited .mp4 junk off cell phones. Never once in my life have I ever been messed up by missing metadata. I have seen corrupt files but never any problems with missing metadata.

In Sony Vegas Pro, you can build your project with content from a 100 different file locations. You can then do a "save as" and pick the option to copy (and combine) all the content to a new folder for further editing. I have done this many times. This of course will ruin the original XAVC folder structure....but have no fear, you will continue editing just fine.

Anybody actually know what is actually in those meta files? I'll poke around in them tonight.

P2? I'm sure it's great but I cant say a word about it. I'm a Sony guy and Sony files contain both audio and video.

CT

P.S. Yes, I realize this is blasphemy talk to some people up here. ;-)

I use Vegas, and it honestly is the definition of "stupid easy" for directly using singular files... Until you get to Panasonic P2, which it needs something called "Raylight."

This is a caution to not build up a habit based on experiences with "user-friendly NLEs." If you're familar with one NLE, the import procedure in a different NLE could be completely different and thus will stump you if you don't learn the basics. This is what separates "YouTubers" from Post House editors.

I tried explaining why Mythbusters was in 50i. It's because the post house is in Australia and their facilities are entirely genlocked to 50i. A YouTuber would be like "Well, it's file based, why can't they edit 60i?" *facepalm* Cause the rest of the facility is 50i and they need to make sure everything is 50i so the workflow works and you get an episode every week. (No, Mythbusters is not 60i, it's 50i output converted to 60i for US consumption.)

Was that an insult? If so you are basically saying all post production people should lay back, relax, miss deadlines, and just chill... Not follow a unified system proven to be efficient and instead laze about all day. YouTube is this way, and it's good for amateurs, but if you enter a post house not following the rules, you will be fired.

Even though I linked a FCP7 video, the point still stands: BACKUP EVERYTHING.

I never intended to insult you or anyone else.
It was just an observation and I apologise for even letting you think for a second that it could be an insult.
I concur that copying everything is a best practise to avoid stupid surprises.
But, what I'm trying to say is that it is not always the end of the world if you don't. You more or less 'paniced' because someone only shared the files, but not the structure. Since the shared files work and the absense of metadata apperently didn't affect the content of the video files it is not always doom and gloom.
It is 'just' a fail-safe method to copy everything.
P2, XDCAM and Red files definitely need it.

And yes, even editors need to relax now and then ;-)
But I'm not sure where I suggested to lay back, chill and miss deadlines?
Eventhough I can be a rebel, I don't miss deadlines. Delivered 3 brand new promos today, so my client can show them alongside their machines on a trade show next week.