Editing in FCP Question

Bob Griffiths · April 26th, 2010, 10:37 AM

Hmmm... what you are saying Rafael, NOW sorta makes sense to me. Here's why.

I am editing my first job with nano footage... 1080 30p Long GOP 100Mb/s. I used Ned's method and edited on an XDCAM timeline and set the rendering to Apple ProRes. Mostly high quality interviews and b-roll. After the basic edit was done, all of the clips were treated with a few Tiffen Dfx filters as well as 3-Way color corrector. All went well and the renders were pretty fast as you indicated.

The "problem" is final export. Regardless of whether I use the "Current Settings" or an Apple ProRes settings, the entire timeline has to be re-rendered... again, as you indicated... a major time suck!

So, the method you suggest... putting the XDCAM footage on a ProRes timeline from the start... will save this render time on final export because the ProRes renders are final, not previews? If so, that's the way to go. I also just did some quick tests with the XDCAM footage on a ProRes timeline and the footage plays back fine in real time, displaying only a green (preview) render bar at the top of the timeline. That gives you speed for the initial edit. Once treated with filters, you lose that. But you can't have it both ways! Is all this correct?

One interesting note and question. Whenever I used a "real time" (bolded) video filter like 3-Way Color Corrector, it doesn't work in real time. It sorta flashes slightly. Is this because i am working with Long GOP footage that has to be constantly decoded, negating the real-time filters?

Thanks!

Bob Griffiths · April 26th, 2010, 11:21 AM

So let's say that you have a situation like I do right now. I have a XDCAM timeline where the renders have been done in ProRes. And I'm gonna take a render hit on final export, regardless of what codec I use. So what's the "best" codec to use? "Best" would be defined as the sweet spot between quality and render time, favoring quality.

Just trying to figure out a workflow here... any suggestion welcome!

Rafael Amador · April 27th, 2010, 12:03 PM

Bob,
In the end a codec is like a container.
Its allows a certain quality; if you want more quality you need a bigger container.
You start withe the quality of your picture.
When you CC, you are adding something to your picture. You need room for that.
If after CC, adding effects, graphics or whatever you compress again, you are crunching a lot of what you just had added.
If you shot in a 411/420 format, render at least in a 422 format.
If you shoot in 8b, render in 10b. Try to avoid re-compression; whenever you have to send stuff from one application to other, try to do it as uncompressed as possible.
The only format that do not produce degradation when rendering is 444 Uncompressed (even 422 Uncompressed rendering degrades the picture).
We can not work in 444, neither in 422 Uncompressed. The closest option we have is Prores.
Is a great solution. Is to you to chose between the different flavors. I work with Prores HQ.

About your rendering problems (green line etc), I don't know which computer are you using.
I work with a MBP (two years old) and I can put a couple of layers with 3W-CC, crop and a Boris 3D title on top, and I have RT (green line).
You may need a bit of System maintenance (Permissions, DiskWarior,..).
rafael

John Richard · April 28th, 2010, 06:46 AM

Remember the other part of Real Time editing of large data rate files such as Pro Res is the data rate the drive or drives that the timeline accesses.

High speed large data rates from raids arrays with their own controller cards capable of 600mbps or more definitely improve your RT capability. If an expensive raid is not possible, then lower end raids are still better or even a separate fast drive that is different from the operating drive. But if you are trying to edit files stored on the same drive as the operating system and editing application, you will not achieve much RT with large date rate files like ProRes or much of anything for that matter.

Bob Griffiths · April 28th, 2010, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rafael Amador

Is a great solution. Is to you to chose between the different flavors. I work with Prores HQ. rafael

So, essentially you are saying to edit the XDCAM footage in a ProResHQ timeline. That will:
- give reasonable real-time performance
- result in higher quality
- preserve the renders during final export

Yes?

Thanks!

Bob Griffiths · April 28th, 2010, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Richard

Remember the other part of Real Time editing of large data rate files such as Pro Res is the data rate the drive or drives that the timeline accesses..

Hey John,

No troubles here with data throughput. I have a Rorke HDx with FibreChannel. Fast.

Thanks!

Rafael Amador · April 28th, 2010, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Griffiths

So, essentially you are saying to edit the XDCAM footage in a ProResHQ timeline. That will:
- give reasonable real-time performance
- result in higher quality
- preserve the renders during final export

Yes?

Thanks!

Is like that Bob; However as i said, I recommend you render in "High Precission" (32b FP).

This will slow the rendering down although ensures a better rendering.
Normally during editing I render just to have an idea of how things will look.
In the end I set "High Precision" and I re-render all the sequence.
rafael

Bob Griffiths · April 28th, 2010, 11:01 AM

Cool! Thanks, Rafael!

April 26th, 2010, 10:37 AM	#16
Bob Griffiths Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Carbondale, Colorado Posts: 117	Hmmm... what you are saying Rafael, NOW sorta makes sense to me. Here's why. I am editing my first job with nano footage... 1080 30p Long GOP 100Mb/s. I used Ned's method and edited on an XDCAM timeline and set the rendering to Apple ProRes. Mostly high quality interviews and b-roll. After the basic edit was done, all of the clips were treated with a few Tiffen Dfx filters as well as 3-Way color corrector. All went well and the renders were pretty fast as you indicated. The "problem" is final export. Regardless of whether I use the "Current Settings" or an Apple ProRes settings, the entire timeline has to be re-rendered... again, as you indicated... a major time suck! So, the method you suggest... putting the XDCAM footage on a ProRes timeline from the start... will save this render time on final export because the ProRes renders are final, not previews? If so, that's the way to go. I also just did some quick tests with the XDCAM footage on a ProRes timeline and the footage plays back fine in real time, displaying only a green (preview) render bar at the top of the timeline. That gives you speed for the initial edit. Once treated with filters, you lose that. But you can't have it both ways! Is all this correct? One interesting note and question. Whenever I used a "real time" (bolded) video filter like 3-Way Color Corrector, it doesn't work in real time. It sorta flashes slightly. Is this because i am working with Long GOP footage that has to be constantly decoded, negating the real-time filters? Thanks! __________________ Bob FireDancer Productions, Inc.

April 26th, 2010, 11:21 AM	#17
Bob Griffiths Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Carbondale, Colorado Posts: 117	Another question... So let's say that you have a situation like I do right now. I have a XDCAM timeline where the renders have been done in ProRes. And I'm gonna take a render hit on final export, regardless of what codec I use. So what's the "best" codec to use? "Best" would be defined as the sweet spot between quality and render time, favoring quality. Just trying to figure out a workflow here... any suggestion welcome! __________________ Bob FireDancer Productions, Inc.

April 28th, 2010, 11:01 AM	#23
Bob Griffiths Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Carbondale, Colorado Posts: 117	Cool! Thanks, Rafael! __________________ Bob FireDancer Productions, Inc.

April 27th, 2010, 12:03 PM	#18
Rafael Amador Major Player Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Vientiane (Lao PDR) Posts: 349	Bob, In the end a codec is like a container. Its allows a certain quality; if you want more quality you need a bigger container. You start withe the quality of your picture. When you CC, you are adding something to your picture. You need room for that. If after CC, adding effects, graphics or whatever you compress again, you are crunching a lot of what you just had added. If you shot in a 411/420 format, render at least in a 422 format. If you shoot in 8b, render in 10b. Try to avoid re-compression; whenever you have to send stuff from one application to other, try to do it as uncompressed as possible. The only format that do not produce degradation when rendering is 444 Uncompressed (even 422 Uncompressed rendering degrades the picture). We can not work in 444, neither in 422 Uncompressed. The closest option we have is Prores. Is a great solution. Is to you to chose between the different flavors. I work with Prores HQ. About your rendering problems (green line etc), I don't know which computer are you using. I work with a MBP (two years old) and I can put a couple of layers with 3W-CC, crop and a Boris 3D title on top, and I have RT (green line). You may need a bit of System maintenance (Permissions, DiskWarior,..). rafael

April 28th, 2010, 06:46 AM	#19
John Richard Major Player Join Date: May 2006 Location: Incline Village, Nevada Posts: 604	Remember the other part of Real Time editing of large data rate files such as Pro Res is the data rate the drive or drives that the timeline accesses. High speed large data rates from raids arrays with their own controller cards capable of 600mbps or more definitely improve your RT capability. If an expensive raid is not possible, then lower end raids are still better or even a separate fast drive that is different from the operating drive. But if you are trying to edit files stored on the same drive as the operating system and editing application, you will not achieve much RT with large date rate files like ProRes or much of anything for that matter.