FORUMS: list search recent posts

Archiving/Consolidating

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Shane Ross
Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 6:54:32 pm

I onlined a 96 min feature doc cut in Avid, consolidated for online in Resolve. All ProRes HQ. The consolidated media takes up under 600GB of space. So this, along with all the audio deliverables, GFX masters, and other assets, fit on a 1TB drive for archiving.

I recently onlined and delivered a 90 min doc cut on FCP-X. The consolidated footage (PRHQ) from FCP-X took up 6TB of space....because it doesn't trim media not used in the cut. HUGE waste, IMHO. And yes, there is a third party app to deal with this. I'm just getting a bit frustrated that in order to do basic edit functions in FCP-X, you need to keep relying on third parties to come up with the solutions.

"But it's because not everyone needs all these features, Shane!" I would argue that most people would want the ability to consolidate ONLY the footage, with handles, used in a cut, for archival purposes. As well as keeping the camera masters and project files. But I guess most people who use FCP-X cut short form, so all the assets are pretty damn small as it is, and this is only really a thing that us long form people care about?

It's just another one of those basic functions that FCP 7 had that FCP-X doesn't that then requires someone outside of Apple to come up with a solution that adds to my not liking Apple. They know there's a need, and don't make the add-on solution themselves. No, they wait until some third part person goes, "Hmm, this is a need, but is it enough of a need that I can then spend time making an app to do this, and make enough money doing it to make it worthwhile?"

Of all the great things FCP-X can do, it's the basics that annoy me. BUT HEY, I get annoyed at Avid for not fixing the basic stuff it needs to fix too...

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 7:21:01 pm

Funny enough - I've used Resolve to trim FCPX projects before. Export FCPXML, import to Resolve, check that everything came in ok, then render a flat pass with handles. In the future, it might make more sense just to edit it in Resolve!

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 7:27:26 pm

Yeah, in the future I will be doing that....possibly. But the point of the archive is so that the media can still be accessed in both the edit app, and the finishing app....if I trimmed with Resolve, then did away with the original media, then FCX wouldn't be able to link to it. I do have enough handles (2 seconds) to allow for minor trims as needed. But I guess I COULD render it out as something that could then be opened in FCP-X.

My main gripe is that say you only used FCP-X to edit and online and all that, you couldn't consolidate the final cut with only the media used, unless you had this third party tool. Further evidence (IMHO) that Apple doesn't care about a certain sector of editors by leaving off basic tools, and HOPING the some third party programmer would come up with them and that enough people in that market would buy them so that programmer would make some money for the effort.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


David Mathis
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 22, 2019 at 6:45:20 pm

For smaller projects like blogs or event videography Final Cut Pro X is fine. However, multicam clips can be an issue. 🙄 Everything else I plan to use Resolve for. Apple needs to address consolidation and batch syncing — two areas were Resolve is great at. 🏆 Oh, don’t get me started on keyframing! 😉


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 10:16:23 pm

[Shane Ross] "I would argue that most people would want the ability to consolidate ONLY the footage, with handles, used in a cut, for archival purposes. "

Yes Shane, that's what I want. I copy the "project" to a new library that I place on a hard drive and only source material from "the cut" is in that library and it's a lot smaller.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding?


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 10:29:22 pm

Nope! That's it. But FCP-X won't do it. You need a third party app in order to do that.

WORX4 X

https://marquisbroadcast.com/worx4-x.html

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 10:45:30 pm

X will give you the project with only the source material you used in the cut without a third party app. I'm guessing that's what most use to simply archive a project. This app looks more useful for setting you up to move your project to another app but for simply saving space archiving, do I really need it?

It looks cool.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 10:54:11 pm

OK....Not quite what I want. I want ONLY the footage used in the sequence, with handles. So, for example, I have a 6 min 4K archival clip (Apollo launch). We use 10 seconds of that...and only 10 seconds. If you archive using only FCX, then it'll copy over the FULL 4K ProRes HQ file, many many GB...instead of just 14 seconds (10 seconds with 2 second handles).

And when I have a project with lots of clips where only small portions are used, then I get LOTS AND LOTS of large files, making the archive for this project, nearly 6TB.

Meanwhile, in Avid (and Resolve, and Premiere land)...when I MEDIA MANAGE, I can have the option of only clips used in the sequence, with handles. And my archive is much smaller. In the case mentioned, only 600GB.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 17, 2019 at 10:57:29 pm

FCP USED to do this. FCP 7...totally did this. For some reason, this very simple little operation is something Apple didn't think people wanted anymore. It's not included in any version of FCP-X. So a third party app was made to fulfill this need, which enough people needed, apparently, for this to be made. But in google searching this topic, people have been missing this feature ever since FCX first came out.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 18, 2019 at 1:42:15 pm

I wish FCPX has this too, bit for archiving necessarily, but for trimming for sending to color grade in other applications outside of Resolve.

Ironically I use Resolve to trim but the process is tricky and clunky. Worx4X would be great but it doesn’t trim MXF media. This means I would have to transcode everything first and then trim the transcodes, which is a huge time suck.

This is one area where FCPX is not the greatest. A straight forward way of trimming media with handles to a common codec would be amazing.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 18, 2019 at 8:47:24 pm

What FCPX offers is a collect and copy function, so you get the full-length original source clip without transcoding. Premiere offers both. However, the purist/engineering answer, which came from Adobe BTW, is that any transcode degrades the image and therefore, not ideal. It’s their excuse for not consolidating (with trimmed media) any Alexa clips that have embedded LUT metadata. So everyone has some sort of issue in this case.

Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 19, 2019 at 6:54:26 pm

Let's not forget FCP 7 did this, BUT, only with ProRes media. FCP7 didn't work with long gop/h264. And if you did happen to jam some in there and use it, it didn't get trimmed. My understanding is that Premiere will trim it, but it has to transcode it, which makes it 10x the size in the first place.

______________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates
New Transition Pack! SLIDE WIPES Customizable Wipes that Move
https://bretfx.com/product/slide-wipes


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 3:26:08 pm

I agree that this would be great to have for grading in another app, but I don't know how useful it would be for me in archiving a doc. In my doc the largest files were the interviews. I interviewed people for hours and I would want access to everything they said (even though I only used bits). I like how I can save only the people who were in the film because I really don't need people who weren't. After keeping my interviews of interest, my Library would be smaller but not to the extreme that yours was. In your case Shane it's a game changer.

When I looked at the youtube clip for Worx4 X it had 1369 views and 6 comments after being up there for 2 years. I wonder how many they sold and if they made enough money for it to payoff.


Return to posts index

Warren Eig
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 19, 2019 at 6:25:59 pm

I ran into the same issue with a 90 minute Doc I cut in FCPX. Huge time waste at the end to make back ups to multiply drives of material that was never used or never will be. It should be basic...

Warren Eig
O (424) 293-1164


email: info@babyboompictures.com
website: http://www.BabyBoomPictures.com
Vimeo: https://vimeo.com/babyboompictures



For Camera Accessories - Monitors and Batteries
website: http://www.EigRig.com



Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 20, 2019 at 3:30:39 am

[Shane Ross] "I onlined a 96 min feature doc cut in Avid, consolidated for online in Resolve."

Before we sing too many of Avid's praises. I have tons of archived Avid projects from 2000 to 2006. I can't access a single one of them. Not to mention, I can't access the media either. Because they are in Avid's proprietary .omf file format. Not to mention audio is split from video so even if I could find a program to open the OMF files, reconnecting the two is next to impossible.

Yes at this point I could buy an Avid license and maybe open the projects. But 20 years from now? What if Avid drops support of OMF? Or goes out of business? At least with FCP X I know I'll be able to access my media, if not the library file.

Long-term archiving is tricky business. And I'm not at all convinced Avid is better at it than FCP X is. FCP X's weakness is size of archive. Avid's is proprietary formats.


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 20, 2019 at 5:41:12 pm

[Bret Williams] "Let's not forget FCP 7 did this, BUT, only with ProRes media. FCP7 didn't work with long gop/h264. And if you did happen to jam some in there and use it, it didn't get trimmed. My understanding is that Premiere will trim it, but it has to transcode it, which makes it 10x the size in the first place."

It worked with any intra-frame codec (not just ProRes), and it would trim inter-frame codecs but it would have to transcode/create new media (which you have to do due to the nature of inter-frame).

[Brett Sherman] "Long-term archiving is tricky business. And I'm not at all convinced Avid is better at it than FCP X is. FCP X's weakness is size of archive. Avid's is proprietary formats."

ProRes is proprietary and Apple has put more walls around it than Avid has around their codecs.

When it comes to digital archiving the traditional concept of long-term archiving doesn't really exist. It's more like a never ending series of data migrations every 5-10yrs into current media types and onto current storage mediums.


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 2:43:45 am
Last Edited By Brett Sherman on May 21, 2019 at 3:01:05 am

[Andrew Kimery] "ProRes is proprietary and Apple has put more walls around it than Avid has around their codecs."

Codec is only one of the issues. Container formatting is another. Avid went with an MXF implementation that common third party applications can't handle. And they insisted for a long time in splitting audio and video into different files which creates additional problems.

Now it is true my Avid knowledge is maybe dated. So maybe it has improved, but it was a nightmare for a long time trying to access Avid media.

It should also be said if you don't have your Avid Project or it got corrupted, you are SOL for accessing the media.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 20, 2019 at 9:21:50 pm

[Brett Sherman] "Yes at this point I could buy an Avid license and maybe open the projects. But 20 years from now? What if Avid drops support of OMF? Or goes out of business? At least with FCP X I know I'll be able to access my media, if not the library file."

OK...let's look at Apple's record in this reguard.

If you shot Panasonic P2 footage, in the DVCPRO HD codec, and used FCP to bring that in...it re-wrapped the MXF files as an MOV file. If you captured DVCPRO HD from tape into FCP Legacy versions...again, wrapped in QT. If you tried to open those QT files on any computer that DID NOT have FCP installed...you'd get a file playing white, and audio. The codec was so tied to FCP, that only computers with FCP installed could play that back. Found that out trying to get footage to a producer for logging.

Oh...and that's not it. Same with HDV. If you captured HDV with FCP...that QT HDV file would only play on computers with FCP installed. It was THAT proprietary. Thank goodness Apple made a new codec (ProRes) where that wasn't the case, but for how long?

This was even a stock answer of mine:
#48 - Cannot view DVCPRO HD or HDV or ProRes on my computer.

Shane's Stock Answer #48 - Cannot view DVCPRO HD, HDV or ProRes QT files on your computer.

The DVCPRO HD, HDV and ProRes codecs only comes with FCP. If your computer does not have FCP installed, it cannot view these quicktime files. It doesn't matter if it is a Mac or PC, without FCP installed, you cannot view these files.

If you need to view ProRes material, you can download the ProRes decoder (mac and windows compatible) for ProRes

http://support.apple.com/downloads/Apple_ProRes_QuickTime_Decoder_1_0_for_W....

http://support.apple.com/downloads/Apple_ProRes_QuickTime_Decoder_1_0_for_M...

If your footage was captured as DVCRO HD you can buy the Calibrated DVCPRO HD decoder:

http://www.calibratedsoftware.com/QDVCProHD.asp

HDV, XDCAM? Calibrated has you covered too:

http://www.calibratedsoftware.com/QXD.asp

If you have MXF files from a P2 camera and you need to view the footage on a computer without FCP, you can download P2CMS from Panasonic:

http://www.panasonic.com/business/provideo/p2-hd/downloads-and-updates.asp

Or you need the other party to compress the footage into a format your computer can play, like H.264.

So now you have all these people who shot on P2, or DVCPRO HD tape, or HDV...who brought in the footage with FCP...saved that footage ONLY, and didn't back up the P2 cards, or threw out the tapes. And, Surprise surprise, they are stuck. FCX will open them, and computers with FCX...but that's it! Back when P2 first came out and was one of the first tapeless formats, people would ingest the footage, and throw out the card offloads, or just erase the cards. "Hey, I have the footage, no need to keep it twice!" I had to warn about this so often, it should have been a stock answer. I tell people TO THIS DAY to keep the camera originals.

Those archived projects aren't openable in the current FCP either...need an old one to do that, obviously. So that exactly the same situation you are talking about...with the old media. I DO wonder if Avid can even open those older bins with the sequence, and then batch capture the footage from tape...not needing to rely on the archived footage.

But with so many companies tossing out their tapes AFTER they capture all the footage (something I am seeing more and more lately)...I don't think so. And then they'll have captured in a codec that's currrent for the day they captured, BUT...will get out of date fast. I've worked on archival docs where the original tapes are gone, and the vendor provided me with a "high quality avi" file...640x360, with interlacing baked in. Original tapes disposed of.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 20, 2019 at 10:42:11 pm

[Shane Ross] "Thank goodness Apple made a new codec (ProRes) where that wasn't the case, but for how long?"

When ProRes was first released in 2007 it was only made available with Final Cut Studio. In 2008 Apple released a read-only version of the codec for Mac and Windows (but I think it only worked with Apple's QT media player). ProRes has been out over a decade but Apple has made sure that support for the codec on Windows is spotty at best.

By contrast, AFAIK Avid has released their codecs (both read and write) for free dating back to at least Meridien. Avid also worked with SMPTE to make DNxHD and DNxHR compliant to the VC-3 standard.


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 2:57:22 am
Last Edited By Brett Sherman on May 21, 2019 at 3:02:10 am

[Shane Ross] "OK...let's look at Apple's record in this reguard."

I guess I've been lucky. I'm not saying Apple's history is perfect here. But at least there are options. As far as I know there are no ways to open and Avid .omf or .mxf file without Media Composer.

I guess I come down as saying it's better to have only some of your media inaccessible as opposed to ALL of your media inaccessible.

It should also be said even if you have Media Composer, if you don't have your Avid Project or it got corrupted, you are SOL for accessing the media.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 7:07:45 am

[Brett Sherman] "I guess I've been lucky. I'm not saying Apple's history is perfect here. But at least there are options. As far as I know there are no ways to open and Avid .omf or .mxf file without Media Composer."

VLC player will open them. As will EditReady....and the media player from Digital Rebellion.

[Brett Sherman] "It should also be said even if you have Media Composer, if you don't have your Avid Project or it got corrupted, you are SOL for accessing the media."

Incorrect. Adobe Premiere can open them, so can Resolve (that's one way to online, consolidate the cut, export an AAF and bring the media into Resolve, and the AAF, and there is your sequence). IN FACT, I think FCX can even read the media files Avid makes.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 7:09:58 am

[Brett Sherman] "It should also be said even if you have Media Composer, if you don't have your Avid Project or it got corrupted, you are SOL for accessing the media."

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you are saying, but you can playback, edit, etc., Avid media in MC projects that didn't originally create said media.


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 22, 2019 at 3:35:42 pm

And reconnect it the audio file? It’s been years since I’ve attempted. I just don’t remember having any luck with it.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 22, 2019 at 5:09:28 pm

The audio files and video files, while separate files on the finder level, KNOW they are connected. So when you bring them into an Avid system, one way is by making a bin and dragging the .MDB file from the media folder into it...it'll populate with all the footage in that folder, and audio and video will be linked...due to metadata.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Dom Silverio
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 20, 2019 at 9:53:12 pm

[Brett Sherman] "Yes at this point I could buy an Avid license and maybe open the projects. But 20 years from now? What if Avid drops support of OMF? Or goes out of business? At least with FCP X I know I'll be able to access my media, if not the library file."

Isn't that true for any software?
I mean you can't open FCP 7 projects in FCP X without requiring 3rd party intervention.
While you still can install FCP 7 on some modern systems, eventually the newer OS will prevent that.

With Avid at least you can trim the media and the codecs are cross-platform.


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 2:39:32 am

[Dom Silverio] "Isn't that true for any software?"

That you can't access the media itself without the software? No that's largely only true of Avid. Are there cases with FCP? Apparently, I've just never run into those. Maybe I'm lucky with the codecs I used. I just have had no issues accessing media created in FCP.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 4:45:38 pm

Thank you for this thread. It seems amazing that a feature that has been around for so many years in Avid is still nowhere near ready for prime time in most other NLE's. Premiere is also horribly inadequate for creating a consolidated archive.

Why is this feature so hard to duplicate in any other system?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 5:16:58 pm

Can you natively use h264 media in Avid now or do you have to compress it to an Avid codec?

______________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates
New Transition Pack! SLIDE WIPES Customizable Wipes that Move
https://bretfx.com/product/slide-wipes


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 5:23:21 pm

[Bret Williams] "Can you natively use h264 media in Avid now or do you have to compress it to an Avid codec?"

I think AMA (Avid Media Access), which allows you to work with files in their native format, as opposed to ingesting and transcoding into an Avid codec, came out about 10yrs ago.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 5:34:15 pm

My Avid days are even before that! ☺ And yep, we were consolidating with handles back then in 1997. Back then everything that came in had to be converted of course. FCP 2.x I think added the feature in 2001. So with AMA, I assume it has to transcode like premiere to make handles. Which of course increases the file size ten fold, so if you're using 10 seconds of a 60 second clip, you'd actually be better off keeping the 60 second clip. It'd be cool if it could be smart enough to discern which would be the smaller file and determine whether to trim it or not based on that.

So has Avid added in blend modes yet?

______________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates
New Transition Pack! SLIDE WIPES Customizable Wipes that Move
https://bretfx.com/product/slide-wipes


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 6:11:27 pm

[Bret Williams] "So with AMA, I assume it has to transcode like premiere to make handles."

AFAIK all inter-frame codecs have to be transcoded in order to trim them because of how the compression works. The size of the transcoded files will of course depend on what codec you transcode them into.

Inter-frame codecs store incomplete frame data and rely on the previous and upcoming frame's information to rebuild/interpolate the missing data. That's why the file sizes for inter-frame codecs are so small compared to intra-frame codecs (where each frame is a stored as a compete image). Inter-frame is also called GOP (Group Of Pictures) because it requires the information from an entire group of pictures in order to rebuild each individual frame.

This is an oversimplification, but It's kinda the difference between counting by counting every number vs counting by skipping numbers.

Intra-frame: 0,1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20

vs

Inter-frame: 0, 5, 10, 15, 20

If I want to trim Intra-frame down to just 0-13 the NLE can literally just copy frames 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and put them into a new file. If I want to do the same with inter-frame the file has to be re-encoded because frames 11, 12, and 13 don't exist as discreet images. When you put your playhead on frame 13 the playback software creates frame 13 on the fly by interpolating the changes in image data between frame 10 and frame 15. This is why inter-frame codecs are much more CPU intensive than intra-frame codecs (trade off between storage requirements and CPU requirements).

In the old FCP one of my favorite tools to use was Reference Movies (files that didn't contain media, but just 'pointed' to where the media you wanted to reference was stored), but if you were working with an inter-frame codec like HDV and made a Reference Movie you actually created new media (for the same reason you can't 'trim' inter-frame codecs).


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 6:26:57 pm

Yes very familiar. Here’s a new one though. I’m able to trim an h264 clip in Quicktime Player (everybody knows you can trim and edit in QT Player, right? ) and paste it to a new player and it seems I now have a standalone trimmed h264 clip. No transcoding seems to have occurred.

Worx4x will trim most media but as pointed out earlier some mxf formats can’t be trimmed. I assume they’re transcoding the others, even if to the same format, but odd they couldn’t do it for others then.

______________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates
New Transition Pack! SLIDE WIPES Customizable Wipes that Move
https://bretfx.com/product/slide-wipes


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 6:42:58 pm

[Bret Williams] " Yes very familiar. Here’s a new one though. I’m able to trim an h264 clip in Quicktime Player (everybody knows you can trim and edit in QT Player, right? ) and paste it to a new player and it seems I now have a standalone trimmed h264 clip. No transcoding seems to have occurred."

Yes. QT 7 Pro. The discontinued QT player. And only the PRO version, that was unlocked with FCP Legacy....or if you purchased the PRO option for $30. Which you can no longer do, as it's old, discontinued. QTX cannot do this. So here is a GREAT example of an amazing tool that Apple made that was fully feature rich and could do so much (I still use it to delete or deactivate audio tracks, or add audio tracks)...that Apple dumped. And the new player doesn't do this, because Apple is ditching QT and moving to AV Foundation.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 8:17:41 pm

But of course you can. QT player X is a much better editor. You can trim, split, copy, paste, and basically do rough editing in QT Player.

______________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates
New Transition Pack! SLIDE WIPES Customizable Wipes that Move
https://bretfx.com/product/slide-wipes


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 8:36:14 pm

But you can't use QT player to qc any video since the color problem with QT goes on and on and on.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 8:38:47 pm

I’m not sure where this topic came from but I whole heartedly agree. In my book you can’t color check anything except on proper video out to a qualified calibrated video monitor.

______________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates
New Transition Pack! SLIDE WIPES Customizable Wipes that Move
https://bretfx.com/product/slide-wipes


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 10:57:41 pm

[Bret Williams] "But of course you can. QT player X is a much better editor. You can trim, split, copy, paste, and basically do rough editing in QT Player."

Ah, I guess I need to look this up then. Because the basics like MARK IN and OUT and extract and all the stuff I'm used to in QT 7 aren't in QTX. I see SPLIT CLIP, but still no ways to mark in and out. Might take some learning.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 11:03:14 pm

When you’re in split clip mode, you can click on the playhead and drag it around. Split clips, and copy, paste, move clips between open QT players with copy paste. In trim clip mode you get the range tool. Not sure if it utilizes I and O. Like QT Pro you COULD do some editing, but it’s certainly not something you’d want to do. Since it doesn’t reference clips, there isn’t much merit to someone that has an NLE handy.

______________________________________________________
https://BretFX.com FCPX Plugins & Templates
New Transition Pack! SLIDE WIPES Customizable Wipes that Move
https://bretfx.com/product/slide-wipes


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 11:03:54 pm

[Shane Ross] " I see SPLIT CLIP, but still no ways to mark in and out. Might take some learning."

Command-e is your friend in QTX.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 11:40:26 pm

[Shane Ross] "So here is a GREAT example of an amazing tool that Apple made that was fully feature rich and could do so much "

Yes. Remember all those compression options you had on export? The different size options.

Heck you could even put filters in and sharpen the image. I still have it in the doc..


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 24, 2019 at 3:37:12 pm

I'll preface this with saying that compression isn't my specialty, but this is my understanding of why things can work differently depending on if you are using an inter-frame or an intra-frame codec.

[Bret Williams] "Yes very familiar. Here’s a new one though. I’m able to trim an h264 clip in Quicktime Player (everybody knows you can trim and edit in QT Player, right? ) and paste it to a new player and it seems I now have a standalone trimmed h264 clip. No transcoding seems to have occurred. "

When you save it you'll create new media though right? And if the H.264 is inter-frame (inter-frame is most common, but the H.264 spec does allow for all I-frame/intra-frame variants such as AVC-Intra) then it will have to be re-encoded AFAIK.

Ex:
Original Inter-frame clip created from I, P and B frames: IBBBBPBBBBPBBBBI

Edited Inter-frame clip: BBBBBBBB

An inter-frame clip cannot be all B-frames (B-frames contain the least amount of image information and rely on past frames and future frames to rebuild a complete picture) so it needs to be re-encoded to create I and P frames (I-frames are the only frames that contain a complete picture, P-frames rely on info from past frames to formulate a complete picture).

New (re-encoded) Inter-frame clip: IBBBBPBBBI

The obvious problem is that the new I-frames and the P-frames were created from the lower quality B-frames (garbage in/garbage out). This is one reason why generational loss can happen so quickly in inter-frame codecs.


By contrast, if you are working with an intra-frame codec:

Original Intra-frame clip created from all I-frames: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Edited Intra-frame clip: IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

New Intra-frame clip (no re-encoding needed): IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Since each frame is a discreet, wholly self-contained image there is no compression 'cadence' to be fixed, so no re-encoding is needed. Think of it like reaching into a folder containing an image sequence and only grabbing the frames that you need, then placing them in a new order in the destination folder.

It's not that you can't trim inter-frame media, it's that I don't think you can perform a consolidate *and* trim function with inter-frame media due to the nature of it's compression.

Avid MC and FCP Legend had the option to consolidate and trim media (assuming it was intra-frame). PPro only has the option to Collect media (no trimming) or Consolidate and Transcode (allows for trimming). I thought previous versions of PPro allowed for Avid-style consolidation w/trimming but maybe I'm mistaken. X, w/out third party support, will just consolidate media. I'm not sure where Lightworks and Resolve stand with this.

With that being said, Adobe does have a feature called Smart Rendering which means certain codecs (all Intra-frame codecs AFAIK) won't be re-rendered upon export as long as your source media settings match your export settings. I think it means that, for example, if you are working with 1080p60 ProRes HQ files, you select Transcode and trim in PPro and your transcode settings are 1080p60 ProRes HQ then PPro will perform an Avid/FCP Legend-style consolidate and trim w/o any transcoding/re-encoding (even though you've picked the "transcode" option in PPro. Never tried it first hand though (just basing this off of how Adobe describes its Smart Render feature).


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 6:19:09 pm

[greg janza] "Thank you for this thread. It seems amazing that a feature that has been around for so many years in Avid is still nowhere near ready for prime time in most other NLE's. Premiere is also horribly inadequate for creating a consolidated archive.

Why is this feature so hard to duplicate in any other system?"


It's hard, it's not a 'sexy' feature, and it inherently puts restrictions on how media is managed/accessed which might annoy end users. For example, back in the day, one of the most common complaints from FCPs editors about Avid was about media management. "Why can't I just drag and drop media from any Finder window into Avid MC like I can in FCP? Why does Avid rename my files and put them all into one, big folder?"

Yet being able to drag and drop media into a FCP project willy-nilly (and FCP not really having any inherent internal asset management) is a big reason why FCP's Media Manager was nicknamed the Media Mangler (though to be fair, it got better over the years).

A still ongoing problem with PPro is the creation of duplicate media when you are swapping timelines between projects even if both projects contain identical media. In defense of PPro, how is it supposed to know if the file AppleBanna_1.mov that already resides inside of Project A and the file AppleBanna_1.mov, which is contained in a timeline being imported from Project B, is the exact same file or two different files that just have the same name?

PPro gives you the option to add unique meta data to each clip upon ingest to help combat this problem, that requires a more organized approach to media ingestion and dissemination which may/may not sit will with users. As they say, you can't have your cake and eat it too, and there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Even with Avid's AMA you give up the robustness of having Avid MC manage the media in it's database in exchange for the convenience of managing it (or not managing it) yourself outside of Avid.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 21, 2019 at 6:05:10 pm

[Brett Sherman] "That you can't access the media itself without the software? No that's largely only true of Avid."

Incorrect. You can edit Avid media in Premiere Pro, Resolve...you can play back that footage with VLC player.

[Brett Sherman] "Are there cases with FCP? Apparently, I've just never run into those. Maybe I'm lucky with the codecs I used."

As I mentioned earlier, OLDER codecs from FCP Legacy says...DVCPRO HD and HDV....two of the most common codec in the early days of HD video (lucky you missed out). If you captured those codecs in FCP, they ONLY WORKED in FCP...or rather, if you had FCP installed on your system. You had to have it in order to have the decoder for those formats.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Erik Lindahl
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 26, 2019 at 2:44:24 pm

This is definalty one of many short comings of FCPX for certain industries. I’d however claim most pros could use this as a media / project transfer and / or archive function, be it you’re doing Cinema features or vlog’s on YouTube.

Ping-poinging to Resolve tends to work like, sadly, garbage. Fcpxml in Resolve tends to end up with TONS of compound-clips which for the purpose of optimizing a project ruins everything. Decomposing these compound-clips tends to be a manual / time-consuming process.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 26, 2019 at 3:03:07 pm

[Erik Lindahl] "Decomposing these compound-clips tends to be a manual / time-consuming process."

Andreas Kiel/Spherico has a tool that removes effects out of an fcpxml and that will mostly get rid of the compounds in Resolve, but unfortunately it doesn’t work on Mojave. (X-FX Handler) http://www.spherico.com/filmtools/X-Files/X-FXHandler/

Resolve will still make Compounds out of retimed footage though.

For now, removing effects in fcpx before exporting the XML helps.

Even so, the XML jockey of X to Resolve and back is not perfect and does take some work and foresight.


Return to posts index

Erik Lindahl
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 26, 2019 at 3:43:13 pm

It sounds like this sums up some of the FCPX-head-aches. You need the app + a tool to get to a third party app to get sort of maybe the result you want.

I could also imagine the round-trip back to FCPX can be a source of issues as well if you use effects there. The whole idea is to consolidate a project to just retain used media with handles.

That said, no app is perfect. In this specific case, Resolve is very solid it it’s media management from my experiences where Premiere Pro is very hit or miss.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Archiving/Consolidating
on May 26, 2019 at 3:59:03 pm

[Erik Lindahl] "It sounds like this sums up some of the FCPX-head-aches. You need the app + a tool to get to a third party app to get sort of maybe the result you want."

That's generally the route Apple is taking overall and has, since at least FCPX - modularity. By not doing this function internally, they streamline the program's code and can focus on the majority of features that "new media" producers want. I believe that's their target user.

The second thing it does, is relieves them of any responsibility when a given feature doesn't work 100% correctly. They don't "own" the issue. Thus, they concentrate on FCPXML and then work behind-the-scenes with third-party developers to build the add-ons.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]