FORUMS: list search recent posts

Raw Camera or Converted footage on SAN?

COW Forums : Square Box CatDV

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Rich Rubasch
Raw Camera or Converted footage on SAN?
on Jun 26, 2013 at 8:44:14 pm

Assuming that whatever metadata is needed from the camera will be added to CatDV after conversion (we are a ProRes facility) is there a distinct advantage to having the raw camera folders (BPAV, CONTENTS, etc) live on the server instead of converted ProRes footage?

Seems there would be advantages to both. ProRes would not have to be converted (we still cut in FCP7) but we would have to manually add some of the metadata into CatDV. Raw camera would have the metadata but we would have to convert to edit (unless we adopt Premier, but we would still probably convert to a standard codec) or if we go to FCPX after the new Mac Pros come out.

Anyone else rethinking their server footage strategy with the new MacPro and the promise of a more complete FCPX?

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index

John Heagy
Re: Raw Camera or Converted footage on SAN?
on Jun 26, 2013 at 9:28:19 pm

We only keep the ProRes on our San. We're also still on FCP7 so no real use for the raw. The only metadata we need is "reel" and TC which we use CatDV to assign and Episode to "bake into" the file.

John


Return to posts index

bryson jones
Re: Raw Camera or Converted footage on SAN?
on Jun 26, 2013 at 10:50:24 pm

It varies widely.

Most of our clients are archiving camera raw straight away and only dealing with an edit format. However, that process is highly dependent on your edit software.

Avid shops tend to keep their raw on near-line or tier 2 so they can relink and do an online offline workflow without moving drives, but still not clogging the "SAN" with too much media. They relink and bring that media onto the SAN for online outputs and color grading. NSA actually has a few documented workflows for this process with Avid and XDCAM since there are some issues with relinking if you import incorrectly for the offline.

FCP7, it's mostly as you do it. But a lot of our folks never go back to the RAW, it's in a deep archive that can be called back but probably never will. Going forward, ProRes is the master.

Premiere and I assume FCPX will be a new game. We're in the process of rolling out our first Premiere/RED/Pegasus/SDNA deployment including our new RED proxy creation package for making automated proxy of RED R3D files. That will tell us a lot about the future.

Basically, RED files hit the SAN, are taken into Premiere for edit, cataloged into CatDV Pegasus where an automation creates a proxy and then sends it to SDNA Evolution for archive (all in the background.)

This client doesn't use CatDV for logging per se, but they do want an archive of all their footage and also the ability to search old footage using proxy. This will be an easy, mostly automated way to do it as opposed to their old way of making proxy with Premiere and saving it in the RED folders along side the footage.

We have another shop that we're talking to who uses almost the same tools but they have to do an offline edit due to footage size. They can't really make use of the native editing in Premiere due to storage costs. So just because it can do it technically, doesn't mean you can afford to do it that way. (SANs can get big and pricey with 5K RED footage.)

It's a wild world out there right now, I look forward to seeing the next few months as all three players catch up to using native footage.

By the way, I'm still not convinced that we'll all be editing natively in TV any time soon on anything beyond XDCAM but I've been wrong before and I will again. ;)

Sorry to ramble,

bryson

bryson "at" northshoreautomation.com

northshoreautomation.com


Return to posts index


Rich Rubasch
Re: Raw Camera or Converted footage on SAN?
on Jul 1, 2013 at 2:41:29 am

Interesting that DVCProHD and XDCAM are the two native formats we do edit with in FCP7 but we do log and transfer them first, even though the new clips end up being the exact same size after transferring.

We as editors are sort of ready for the next big codec....maybe an x264 size with the ease of editing of ProRes LT. Small filesize, easy on the processor, cuts with ease. What is up Apple's sleeve? A new universal codec package with the new FCPX? Something cross platform (doubtful) or will Adobe come up with it's own codec, perhaps after purchasing Cineform or other? Plus they will all need to be scalable to 4k.

Hmm...

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index

bryson jones
Re: Raw Camera or Converted footage on SAN?
on Jul 1, 2013 at 3:47:40 pm

"What's up Apple's sleeve?"

Unless it works on a phone? Nothing. ;)

bryson

bryson "at" northshoreautomation.com

northshoreautomation.com


Return to posts index

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