Please canon release the xf plug in for free

[Mark Moreve]

I think my subject line says it all! I'm coming across strong opposition from production managers and producers who don't want to use the XF305 as the post route isn't a simple one. I know people at Canon watch and read this site. We really need them to release the XF Plugin utility software as a free download. IMHO it's the main drawback of this camera. If they can't release there own plug in software that comes with the camera please can they get somebody to build a bit of 3rd party software that will work with it.
If you agree please make this sticky add your comments and hopefully somebody at Canon will listen to us.

[Bill Weaver]

I agree. They are hurting their loyal base and their own pocketbooks.

[Peter Mykusz]

What does Canon expect editors to do when they don't have the Utility disc?
I shot 2 jobs and handed the cards over to my clients. They were having editing issues and I had to drive across town to give them the utility disc for their computers before they could edit.
What would happen if the cards were erased and the editor does not have the Utility Disc? Will they have problems with missing files?
Everyone should become aware of the potential workflow problems with the XF series. My understanding is that you need the Utility files to work with the footage but not every editor can wait for the cameraman to drop off the disc. Sometimes, there are deadlines and forcing other editors to try to figure out Canon's editing issues is not very productive.
The solution is a downloadable file on Canon's site for people who want to edit the footage. Otherwise this XF camera series is doomed as a production camera.

[Ed Roo]

Would copying the Utility Disk files to a USB flashdrive work?
You can purchase good 8GB USB flash drives for US $15. They are small and can easily be carried with you.

[Reinhard Kungel]

Originally Posted by Peter Mykusz

Everyone should become aware of the potential workflow problems with the XF series.

In my opinion there are several problems with the XF-workflow.

Off course XF-Utility and FC-Plug-In has to be available for everybody.

But also Canon has to fix the XF-Utility-Bugs quite soon. I have lot of problems with this so called utility and I´m not the only one.

regards,

Reinhard

[Andy Wilkinson]

Hi,

I'm considering a Canon XF (in my case 100 or 105) to supplement my Sony EX3 and Canon 7D. Now you've got me concerned...

I have nothing but a 99.9% rock solid, pleasurable and reliable workflow with the EX and FCP using the Sony utilities, XDCAM Transfer and XDCAM Clip Browser (I'm NOT using the new Sony Browser v1.0 software as that has issues as covered elsewhere on here).

Would you care to tell me (and us) more about the problems with the Canon XF Utility? (or point me to where I can read about them as I've missed this whilst I've been researching my potential purchase of an XF.

Many thanks!

[Doug Jensen]

Andy,

I go into quite a bit of detail about the problems of XF Utility 1.0 in my XF305/300 training DVD (Mastering the Canon XF305/300 Camcorders training DVD) and it is too complex to repeat here. However, since you are familiar with the SxS workflow, just let me say that you cannot backup, move, restore, and manage Canon's equivalent of Sony's BPAV folder with the same ease. In fact, if you edit with FCP, it is almost impossible to properly backup raw files before they have been converted to MOV. If someone doesn't care about backing up the original files, or offloading cards in the field. then the workflow isn't too bad. I sugggest some workarounds in my DVD, but they aren't ideal and require extra steps that shouldn't even be necessary.

Canon copied a lot of things from Sony when they built the XF305/300, but they sure missed the mark on the software. But since Sony is going backwards and ruining their workflow with the latest browser software, both companies get thumbs down from me right now. I don't think anyone at either company actually uses this stuff or things would be different.

[Andy Wilkinson]

Thanks Doug. Diamond post (as always!) This sounds like a real problem, especially for someone like me who edits in FCP on Macs and Vegas on PCs. I need the unadulterated "Raw Masters" for flexibility in workflow and backups for future use/disaster recovery etc. BPAVs in the Sony workflow are just fine for my needs - perfect in fact.

This sounds like Canon need to address this critical oversight with some speed. I may well put my planned XF100/105 purchase early next year on hold now - or go a different non-Canon route.

[Brett Delmage]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

Andy,
...just let me say that you cannot backup, move, restore, and manage Canon's equivalent of Sony's BPAV folder with the same ease.

???
I just use MS Windows Explorer to copy the folders from the CF cards to my main drive.
Then I copy the folder to backup drives.
Then I delete the folder(s) from the mounted CF card.
Then I start working with them on my main hard drive.

I've just backed-up, moved and managed my folders. Seemed trivially easy to me, and the same I would handle data on any Flash card.

Is Apple that much harder? Ouch.

[Reinhard Kungel]

Hi Brett,

thats not the point. Of course I also can copy, delete or backup MXF-Files with Apples Finder.
But then I´m loosing all metadatas.

To keep them you have to use XF-Utility. But unfortunatelly XF-Utility causes different problems. For example it changes file-numbers without prompting (and reason) and the program is not able to handle (reorganzie) files that have been copied without XF-Utility. Not nice.

kind regards,

Reinhard

[Doug Jensen]

Brett,

As Reinhard has said, when you move things around with the Finder then you lose the ability to preview clips in XF Utility, organize the clips, view their metadata, and do many other things with the footage. If those things aren't important to someone, then there's really no need to even have XF Utility at all. But those things are very important to me and a lot of people who want to preserve our original clip files before they have been converted to MOV. Why? For several reasons, but mostly because after the conversion, you have lost almost all the metadata and sharing footage with non-FCP editors is much more difficult.

Because of the shortcomings of XF Utility, it's also very difficult to offload cards in the field to a laptop or Nexto and then use XF Utility with them later. So if you don't have enough cards to get through a day's worth of shooting, then you have pretty much eliminated any chance of using XF Utility to preview your clips.

Apparently Canon thought that previewing clips, reading metadata, etc. was important enough to try to build a utility program to do them, but then they didn't finish the job and left us with a half-assed program that doesn't work like it should.

Anyway, my remarks were directed to Andy or anyone who has experience with the XDCAM workflow. Most people I talk to who have experience with XDCAM/FCP are surprised when the find out they can't do the sames things they can do with XDCAM.

[Doug Jensen]

Originally Posted by Brett Delmage

I've just backed-up, moved and managed my folders. Seemed trivially easy to me, and the same I would handle data on any Flash card..

Brett,

I'm curious to know if after you have used Explorer to move your clips around into different folders etc. on your PC., can you still open them with the Windows version of XF Utility and view all the metadata, organize them, playback the clips in the preview window, etc.?
What if those clips are on an external hard drive, can you take that drive to another PC and still use XF Utility?

[Andy Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

Brett,
Anyway, my remarks were directed to Andy or anyone who has experience with the XDCAM workflow. Most people I talk to who have experience with XDCAM/FCP are surprised when the find out they can't do the sames things they can do with XDCAM.

Too right I was! I've been using XDCAM EX workflow for over 2 years now and I absolutely love it but, because I have some big well know clients (and even if I did n't) I need to be able to create multiple back-ups of my raw clips, sometimes in the field too. I never want to be in a situation where I have to break the news to a client, big or small, that I can't complete his project due to any "technical issue".

This is why I have duplicate and even triple redundancy in my workflows and back-up procedures. I also demand FULL future flexibility in how I (or indeed anyone else) with either Mac or PC workflow, or both, can use "my precious raw clips" - what professional in this game would not!

To also learn that the XF utility "randomly changes file numbers" without prompting or reason is a real, real concern, especially if I ever had to rebuild a project due to, say, a failed HDD, RAID0 etc. What a nightmare that could become.

Canon, if your listening, you may have just lost a potential customer - until I'm convinced this XF Utlity is high on your agenda to get sorted.

[Doug Jensen]

QUOTE: . . . the XF utility "randomly changes file numbers"

I don't know where you heard that, but I don't want anyone thinking that is attributable to me.
XF Utility has many problem but I am not aware of that one.

[Andy Wilkinson]

From Reinhard, in his post number 10 above Doug. I don't have an XF or the Utility so I can only go on what I learn on forums like this from those using the tools Canon have created for the XF workflow. If this is a one off, OK, but if others have had this issue I remain very skeptical that the XF workflow is right (and fool proof enough) for me, my clients and my business.

Originally Posted by Reinhard Kungel

Hi Brett,

thats not the point. Of course I also can copy, delete or backup MXF-Files with Apples Finder.
But then I´m loosing all metadatas.

To keep them you have to use XF-Utility. But unfortunatelly XF-Utility causes different problems. For example it changes file-numbers without prompting (and reason) and the program is not able to handle (reorganzie) files that have been copied without XF-Utility. Not nice.

kind regards,

Reinhard