FCP X Proxy Work Flow

[Dave Perry]

Howdy folks.

I'm editing a project using proxy media because of the filters I'm using. They suck up a lot of RAM, well, all of it actually. I just exported a rough cut as a Master File so I could see it full quality in QT 7. It looks quite soft however. I chose ProRes 422 under settings, not ProRes 422 (Proxy) because I wanted a master quality file. My question is, do you need to switch back to full res files and let it render before exporting a final master or does FCP X using the High Quality media when exporting from a Proxy project?

Thanks.

[Nate Haustein]

Yes, I believe you need to switch back to Optimized/High-Quality media before exporting or else it will blow up the proxy files for the 422 export.

I've found this to be true in my experiences and also on the Final Cut Pro forums at discussions.apple.com

This could change in a future update, so get those feedback forms ready to go!

[Dave Partington]

You need to switch back to high quality, but don't need to let it render before export. It will render any un-rendered section as it exports without storing the render files which take up HDD space.

[Dmitri Zigany]

This is quite irritating. And is somewhat counter productive in my opinion.
Wish you could just export a full quality version without having to switch back to hi-res.

[Dave Partington]

I agree, it would be nice to have a checkbox in preferences that says only export highest quality, but I don't actually want this to be automatic otherwise.

Often exporting a proxy video for corporate client approval is quite sufficient and definitely a lot faster! Then we only need to export at high quality for the final approval and distribution.

[Mathieu Ghekiere]

Originally Posted by Dmitri Zigany

This is quite irritating. And is somewhat counter productive in my opinion.
Wish you could just export a full quality version without having to switch back to hi-res.

I thought that too, until someone remarked that it's handy for quick client copies. It goes very quick and quality is enough for reviewing. They are right.
So my mind changed a bit on that fact, I think the fact that FCP X can quickly switch between two such qualities with one button is very powerful.

That being said, I do think it is very dangerous because you don't see a clear warning of it, it's more something you just find out by mistake.
It would be nice that when you go to Export Master File, there is something that reminds you that you are exporting a proxy version (and maybe with an override button)

[Dave Perry]

Thanks for the reply guys. I did my own test and discovered that indeed you do have to switch back to HQ media in preferences to get a full res export. I do export proxy copies for review and it's handy but it would be nice if when you select ProRes 422 or PrRes422HQ in export settings that it used the high quality media instead of proxy.

However, despite it's shortcomings, I hate it when I have to use our "legacy" suite running FCP 7.0.3.

[John Nantz]

I'm trying to get started with FCPX to process a batch of small video files. The earliest files were taken several years ago, like in 2004, using a Kodak digital still camera with video capability and the somewhat newer files are in various ranges of Standard Definition to Hi Def. These are all family videos and I'd like to do the best reasonable job I can.

My system includes FCPX, Toast 11 (for the DVD menu), and the Roxio/Corel BD Blu-ray plug-in.

However, after doing some Internet search I've found that Blu-ray disks aren not the most stable in the world as the top layer on the disc can become distorted and therefore ruin the digital content over time. It has been found that storing the disc with something above the digital surface can leave an imprint on the surface. So, my plan is to go with just an archival quality DVD disc and burn with the best quality I can.

What is frustrating is the darn workflow from FCPX to disc.

After reading this thread I feel exhausted. There are so many little details, so many gotchas, so many places where the process can mess up your work or cause computer runtimes to go ballistic.

I'd like to start a new thread on workflow of FCPX to disc but really need to break it down into pieces, but where to start? or, How to start?

It would be nice to have a flow chart with options, like a road map or decision tree.

I don't want to hijack this thread but start a new one (actually, probably more than one, breaking it into pieces), but where to start?

[Dave Partington]

You can also buy archival Blu-ray discs (100 years life) - so I really wouldn't worry about that too much. for a start, I doubt anyone will have blu-ray players 100 years from now!

If you want high definition then DVDs aren't even a viable option. Yes, you can trick the system and put shot blu-ray movies on to DVDs and SOME players will play them but not all.

In terms of archiving, I wouldn't even think about transcoding to DVD or Blu-ray as a player format because some one would then have to transcode it back again once they wanted to copy it back to other systems.

I'd be looking to store the files as 'files' and not playable discs.

Personally, I don't care for the Roxio mastering. I know it's cheap, but you get what you pay for.

DVD studio pro is far better for DVDs if you can still find a copy.

Adobe Encore is better for both DVD and blu-ray, and this is what we typically use.

The gotcha (yes another one) is that chapter markers added in FCPX are not recognised by Adobe products (especially Encore!).

If you're not looking for 'fancy' then of course FCP X can make it's own DVDs and Blu-ray discs. We'd never use them for a professional workflow, but for home use, it works :)

[John Nantz]

Originally Posted by Dave Partington

You can also buy archival Blu-ray discs (100 years life) - so I really wouldn't worry about that too much. for a start, I doubt anyone will have blu-ray players 100 years from now!

I'll try and find some of the links on this subject later.

I've read about putting HD on DVDs and the problems and will pass on this option.

Originally Posted by Dave Partington

In terms of archiving, I wouldn't even think about transcoding to DVD or Blu-ray as a player format because some one would then have to transcode it back again once they wanted to copy it back to other systems.

That is a real problem and I've had the same similar problem with old Microsoft Word and Excel files, and of course with Autodesk's Autocad. The new computers don't play the old 5-1/4" floppy disks, the newer floppies, and the newer Microsoft Word won't read Word 2.0 or Multimate. Video will certainly go the same route. I've got some 8mm video film that's over 50 years old that is still viewable, though. So much for "new technology." What to do???

Originally Posted by Dave Partington

I'd be looking to store the files as 'files' and not playable discs.

Personally, I don't care for the Roxio mastering. I know it's cheap, but you get what you pay for.

DVD studio pro is far better for DVDs if you can still find a copy.

Storing as files: The problem is, I'm running out of space even with several TB of disk storage available. Maybe instead of archiving the old 8mm to digital, one should archive the digital to 8mm???

I did some searching for the later version of DVD Studio Pro and they tend to be pretty expensive because they're bundled with FCP 7.

Putting the old videos, rendered in FCPX, on DVDs in SD is an option but not one I'm really excited about.

Roxio & Toast: If you think their software is bad/lousy, try their technical support.
I couldn't agree with you more. If only I had known.

[Dave Partington]

Originally Posted by John Nantz

The problem is, I'm running out of space even with several TB of disk storage available. Maybe instead of archiving the old 8mm to digital, one should archive the digital to 8mm???

The only sensible archiving solution we have found is LTO tapes. The drives are not cheap, but the tapes are cheaper than HDDs GB for GB and they will last a LOT longer on the shelf.

I can't imagine trying to maintain hundreds of TB on DVDs or Blu-ray discs.

[William Hohauser]

I used to do this years ago but the speed of the tapes was glacial. Have the tape decks sped up in the past decade?

[John Nantz]

William -

Umm ..... nothing to do with technological improvements, but a lot more to do with global warming, glacial movement has actually speeded up!

Speaking of technological improvements, I'm not getting rid of our 8mm movies just yet. Until I get this storage and archiving problem figured out. Maybe it'll be "Back to the Future"??? Archive my digital stuff on 8mm???

Don't laugh! We've got family pictures going back over 150 years and how long will digital stuff last?

[Dave Partington]

Originally Posted by William Hohauser

I used to do this years ago but the speed of the tapes was glacial. Have the tape decks sped up in the past decade?

It takes me about 3 hours to backup 800GB. Try writing that to DVD, or even copying to a USB 2 drive ;)

[John Nantz]

With regard to longevity of BD disks, here is one article I came across that discusses the surface "issue" in detail. The first post was in Jan 2010 but the most recent posts are last month, Dec 2012.

Warning about storing Blu-rays in anything other than cases - Blu-ray Forum

The discussion centers on the viability of the clear scratch-prevention surface layer.

One thing I found of interest was that when stacking DVDs horizontally on a spindle, one should not mix DVDs from different spindles. Apparently the recording surfaces do not touch and there is only a small area near the hole that is slightly thicker than the recorded area and this is what keeps the surfaces separated.

Look at the pictures of the recording surfaces that were posted.

This was an interesting article about the quality of DVD discs.
http://blog.consumerpla.net/2011/02/...ds-review.html

And, of course, there is always the Chinese counterfeit look-alike knockoffs to be leery of.