FORUMS: list search recent posts

Browser versus Transfer

COW Forums : Sony XDCAM - EX & Related

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
John Woods
Browser versus Transfer
on Jun 16, 2009 at 6:14:52 pm

I need some help please. There seem to be two ways to get my EX3 footage into my PowerBook: the Sony Clip Browser(v2.5) or the Log and Transfer under control of FCP. I can use the Transfer method fine to import my footage, but the Clip Browser method has me stumped. I read the SxS card with Clip Browser and save the footage on my hard drive in the default format. Then later when I try to import it with FCP, I get an error and no footage.

If I get both methods to work, which is better to use if I just want to save the data on my cards to a hard drive and then use FCP later?

Help, John

John Woods
WOODS Productions
Clifton Park, NY, USA


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Browser versus Transfer
on Jun 16, 2009 at 8:41:47 pm

[John Woods] "There seem to be two ways to get my EX3 footage into my PowerBook: the Sony Clip Browser(v2.5) "

PowerBook is PPC based. Clip Browser will not run on PPC based Macs.
Sony XDCAM Transfer 2.9 will work on PPC Macs as does Log and Transfer

On the Mac, Clip Browser is primarily used for copying BPAV folders.
The other two aforementioned are means to wrap to MOV and import into Final Cut Pro.

If you'd like to import the MP4 directly, Calibrated Software has a plugin that will allow FCP to use MP4 directly.







Return to posts index

John Woods
Re: Browser versus Transfer
on Jun 16, 2009 at 9:18:28 pm

Sorry for my mistake, I have a MacBook Pro. So the problem is that the MPEG 2 is in a MP4 wrapper? I notice that Clip Browser can export in various formats. Which would be the friendliest to FCP, i.e. require the least rendering?

Thanks,
John

John Woods
WOODS Productions
Clifton Park, NY, USA


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Browser versus Transfer
on Jun 16, 2009 at 9:34:24 pm

[John Woods] " notice that Clip Browser can export in various formats."

MXF would be useful if you were working in Avid for example. That's also just a re-wrap.
You do NOT want to re-encode the file. Sony has a workflow documented on their EX site.
http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/micro-xdcamexsite/cat-editing/resource.downloa...

[John Woods] "o the problem is that the MPEG 2 is in a MP4 wrapper?"
It's not really a problem but it is something to be aware of. XDCAM Transfer and Log and Transfer re-wrap. With the CalibratedSoftware plugin (about $80) you don't even need to do that.

[John Woods] "Which would be the friendliest to FCP, i.e. require the least rendering? "

I'm quite sure what you mean by "least render" FCP handles EX .mov natively. With the aforementioned plugin FCP handles MP4 natively. Set sequence renders to ProRes (but keep editing codec EX) and there's no long GOP confirm during editing. Exporting Long GOP will require a longer render than an I-Frame based codec though.



Return to posts index

John Woods
Re: Browser versus Transfer
on Jun 16, 2009 at 9:47:42 pm

Thanks Craig.

John

John Woods
WOODS Productions
Clifton Park, NY, USA


Return to posts index

Tim Kolb
Re: Browser versus Transfer
on Jun 17, 2009 at 1:35:21 pm

One advantage to the Sony Clip Browser is that it will join together clip fragments that span across cards.

It can also conduct some light recovery work when the data on a camera data card has an error.




TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]