FORUMS: list search recent posts

Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Brooks Tomlinson
Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 5:03:57 am

First, I prefer OSX. I edited on DS for 8 years, and now I'm all mac, I'm happier. But lets take personal preferences out of the equation.

Where is the Pro-res codec introduced? where is it needed for the final step? If Pro-res came to windows, would we look at widows differently?

Quantel Pablo and Scratch just announced Pro-Res encoding. A need that there customers cried for. I free lance around, and a lot of the shops I work at, have to stay mac because their clients (i.e agencies) handle everything pro res, and sometimes require pro res.

to my knowledge AJA were the people that launched in the field pro res. This video at the 11:00 mark is what convinced me that pro res is a good codec at that time,

http://www.macvideo.tv/camera-technology/features/?articleId=3264896

(in the video he shows what compression brings to the picture) I would love to see this done with new codec of today.

So if you are PC land, you have to jump thru hoops to get good prores. Hoops means time, time means money. But, you can get more power and more flexibility with PC builds.

My point is wondering how much of workflow is really tied to Pro-Res, vs OSX.

Brooks Tomlinson
"I dream in 32bit float"


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 6:05:54 am

I have heard and read good things about Miraizon, but it doesn't change my mind about Windows.

Although Windows has gotten better, the times I do have to boot into it I'm amazed how much stuff has to happen, and install, and update, and (random activity here) just to shut down or restart. It's a tradeoff of time I'm not willing to make.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 6:06:52 am

[Brooks Tomlinson] "So if you are PC land, you have to jump thru hoops to get good prores. "


Please please please look through the COW archives. This is simply not true, as has been reported every time it comes up. There have been multiple ways to handle this for years, including solutions that are free. If all you need is a ProRes deliverable, render final output and be done -- no different or more difficult a process than has been undertaken from the first days of this industry, or every day in this era.

If you need something more, there are server-based applications that blast through whatever quantity you need.

The bottom line is that it can be done affordably, at whatever degree of complexity you need. This has been true for years.

[Brooks Tomlinson] "First, I prefer OSX. I edited on DS for 8 years, and now I'm all mac, I'm happier. But lets take personal preferences out of the equation. "

I don't think it's possible to take personal feelings out of it. I also don't think it's prudent.

Using yourself as an example, why SHOULD you consider going back to something less pleasant? There's certainly no technological or business reason. Do what makes you happy.

That's my bottom line for an awful lot of life. I don't think it's easy to figure out what makes ourselves happy, but I think a lot of misery comes after you DO know what makes you happy, and you don't actually do it. Be happy!

So yeah, you absolutely can get a PC that's faster than a Mac, more powerful, more extensible. But how much faster, etc. would it have to be to make you HAPPY? How much time would you have to save on a faster PC in order to make up the time you'd lose by setting up a new workflow?

(My own experience is that learning curve is a non-issue. You're smart people. You can figure it out.)

But I also think, far more than ProRes, maybe even moreso than preferring Macs, the preference for FCP/FCPX is titanium-laced cement. ProRes on a PC is a piece of cake. FCP/X on a PC is impossible. There's really not anything I can think of that would budge somebody off that position....

....but it's easy to observe that all over the COW, once people untether themselves from their commitment to FCP/X, their commitment to Mac is up for grabs too, as they sometimes find themselves happier than they could have imagined using another NLE on a PC.

Or, depending on personal preference, not. :-)

I dunno, I could be wrong about any of this, but it's past my bedtime on a Saturday night, and this is fun to think about. :-)


Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 2:01:20 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Please please please look through the COW archives. This is simply not true, as has been reported every time it comes up. There have been multiple ways to handle this for years, including solutions that are free."

With a Windows app that can't output ProRes directly (i.e. still most of them, including, critically for us, Resolve), if you want ProRes with no loss of quality vs. what you'd get via direct output, you first need to render to an uncompressed format and then feed that into external ProRes encoding software. For feature-length 1080p/2K content that means you'll need around a terabyte of storage to hold that temporary render, and if you want to output at full speed it needs to be fast. For instance, the Mac Pro in our main suite can render a 1080p/2K sequence out of Resolve at ~70-90 fps. Doing that to, say, 10-bit DPX requires storage that pushes over 700 MB/s. Then you need to take that output and separately encode it to ProRes, which can easily increase the total time required to get your ProRes output by 100% vs. rendering directly to that format.

For short-form content or occasional use this might be fine. For a busy facility with deadlines, it's a deal breaker.

That said, there are lots of other factors that cause us to continue to prefer OS X — and I say this in the aftermath of an ~18 month attempt to shift some of our core operations (color grading, transcoding) to Windows during the period where Apple wasn't updating the Mac Pro.

As far as creative editing goes... that's generally not something that requires some dual socket 24-core monster with a couple of Titans, or some other thing you can't get in the Mac world. Most of the projects we do post on (indie features) seem to be cut on someone's MacBook Pro these days. That means going to Windows for this task is mostly just about saving a little money, but for a pro using a tool 40+ hours a week, this seems like a poor place to try to economize — unless you actively prefer Windows, you'd be crazy to switch just to save a few hundred bucks, i.e. less than a dollar a day over the expected lifespan of the machine.

We will probably go to Windows in-house for disc authoring though. There's no actively maintained non-consumer disc authoring software for OS X anymore since Adobe EOL'd Encore. And of course we have to keep Linux around for DCP replication (although running it in a VM under OS X saves some hassle).

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 6:37:40 pm

[Chris Kenny] "With a Windows app that can't output ProRes directly (i.e. still most of them, including, critically for us, Resolve),"

As Tim said before, all this is a non-issue. There are several solutions available on Windows to output directly from within the app to Prores. From within Avid, Premiere, Edius, Vegas, you name it.
It IS strange that a majority of people still seem to not know about all these options.

------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 7:09:24 pm
Last Edited By Chris Kenny on Apr 13, 2014 at 7:10:02 pm

[Frank Gothmann] "As Tim said before, all this is a non-issue. There are several solutions available on Windows to output directly from within the app to Prores. From within Avid, Premiere, Edius, Vegas, you name it.
It IS strange that a majority of people still seem to not know about all these options."


As far as I've been able to tell there's one option that exports ProRes directly from video apps on Windows, it hasn't been around for very long, it's pretty slow, it doesn't work in Resolve, and gamma might be wrong out of RCX.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index


Frank Gothmann
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 7:38:43 pm

[Chris Kenny] "As far as I've been able to tell there's one option that exports ProRes directly from video apps on Windows, it hasn't been around for very long, it's pretty slow, it doesn't work in Resolve, and gamma might be wrong out of RCX.
"


There's the solution from Miraizon an there's Mediareactor from Drastic. Both export directly out of Windows apps. Gamma's ok on both as long as the source app handles Quicktime gamma ok. Gamma is a QT issue, not a problem of those export plug-ins.

------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Ricardo Marty
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 5:01:13 pm

but can i ingest and work with prores on a win/pc or is it just output?

Ricardo Marty


Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 6:00:57 pm

[Ricardo Marty] "but can i ingest and work with prores on a win/pc or is it just output?"

Haven't really tried it, but I got 1.87 million hits on Google with "ingest edit ProRes on Windows" as a search term.

I am really thinking about a Windows-based fourth suite to load up R11 when it arrives and then make that my first-in last-out workflow room. Pre-digest new incoming timelines in whatever format they arrive in, trouble shoot, reconform if necessary, pass along to the hero grade suite, and then when that is done, pass it back for mastering, versioning, and DCP/deliverables.


jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index


Gustavo Bermudas
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 6:58:22 pm

The issue with ProRes on Windows is a bit more complicated than it seems from the previous posts.
There are solutions, like Miraizon, to output ProRes files, but it's very slow, and it's their OWN version of ProRes, not Apple's ProRes, and while this may be argued as a not big of a deal, for some is. If you try to import those in FCP7 you may get the message that this file is not optimized for playback and need to be rendered, also, some broadcast deliverables when they ask for ProRes files, they're really asking for Apple ProRes files, not a third party version of ProRes, and this can be cause for further rejections, not to mention a bit of embarrasment when explaining to your client why you failed to deliver.

I read in one of these forums that to get your movie on iTunes, it needs to be AppleProRes, not only that, it seems they have a way to check if it was created on anothe non-propriatory ProRes before it was converted to their own version, but I never saw anything like this in the real world, so it may be just rumors.

The announcement of Scratch offering "Native Apple ProRes" it's a big dal, because it offers "true" Apple ProRes encoding on Windows, and unless I'm wrong, it's the first one.


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 8:14:09 pm

You get a warning message also with some files coming from Hyperdecks or Kipros. They QC just fine, never heard of anyone rejecting them. The only difference is the writing library which, in all those cases, is not Quicktime.

------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 9:37:50 pm

Frank, you said on another thread that Miraizon was working for you flawlessly. Is that still the case?

If so, not bad for $50.

Telestream has been doing it since 2011, btw. So has Rhozet. Sure, your mileage will vary, but those options have been working fine for years, and I've seen only positive comments about both of them.

Those are admittedly multi-codec transcoding solutions that aren't meant to be "the" answer for ProRes on Windows, but for anyone doing it regularly on a large-ish scale, they're affordable and very simple.

It's a codec, ppl. Just a codec. People manage codecs every day. People manage QC every day. This isn't rocket science. It's barely even science at all. The solutions are more numerous, easy, affordable and high-quality than most web or DVD solutions just a couple of years ago.

So for another tack at Brooks' question, yes, the BELIEF that this isn't possible may be keeping people on Macs. :-)

But for another tack at my answer, what's keeping people on Macs is that they prefer Macs and/or FCP/X -- and preference is the only reason to do anything. Once you do what you prefer, you can make the rest work, and it's almost never all that hard.


Return to posts index


Frank Gothmann
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 10:01:11 pm

Tim, yes, the Miraizon solution is working flawless for me. Given its price, it is a great solution although it isn't the fastest option out there.
I have to say, though, that I am not using Prores or Quicktime in general very often these days when outputting from an NLE (Edius). Only when circumstances specifically require it.
HQX in avi container is our in-house codec of choice apart from film restoration work which is all DPX.

------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 14, 2014 at 12:54:38 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Telestream has been doing it since 2011, btw. So has Rhozet. Sure, your mileage will vary, but those options have been working fine for years, and I've seen only positive comments about both of them."

As of last year when I checked, Harmonic Carbon (aka Carbon Coder, aka Rhozet etc) still was living with a requirement of running windows server in order to access the ProRes encoding. Also, they had a new requirement of using a multi-node farm in order to encode to ProRes. ca-ching, ca-ching!

Telestream requirements were the same for windows episode (you needed to be running windows server).

I'm not aware that either has changed.

Beware of the ffmpeg solutions because they are 8 bit processing going back to 10 bit codec. So if your source is 10 bit or better and you drop down to ffmpeg to make the ProRes, then you are dipping to 8 bit to ultimately go back to 10 with a lot of filler "0s".

It seems that every NAB we see more officially licensed ProRes encoding/decoding solutions. Apple is employing a good strategy here. They do seem to have stringent requirements on granting rights to the licensee, but it is probably a really good thing for the industry that this is the case.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 16, 2014 at 3:13:06 am

[Keith Koby] "Beware of the ffmpeg solutions because they are 8 bit processing going back to 10 bit codec. So if your source is 10 bit or better and you drop down to ffmpeg to make the ProRes, then you are dipping to 8 bit to ultimately go back to 10 with a lot of filler "0s"."

ffmpeg is capable of 10-bit processing if you set the pixel format accordingly.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Brooks Tomlinson
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 14, 2014 at 12:01:47 am

As far as the person preference goes, I was just trying to keep the mac vs pc debate out of it for a second, so people would take a fresh look at what keeps them on mac. Is it prores, or fcpx? thats all.

as far as your prores articles on the cow go. I guess I have to be uber specific, and say "you can render prores from every single program natively like you can in mac, that way you can keep your prores workflow" Because having to using another program is a hoop. Having to do anything besides render out prores natively from your program is a hoop. Having to set up a script, so you can render prores without having to double render is a hoop.

Brooks Tomlinson
"I dream in 32bit float"


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 14, 2014 at 1:23:43 am

[Brooks Tomlinson] "as far as your prores articles on the cow go. I guess I have to be uber specific, and say "you can render prores from every single program natively like you can in mac, that way you can keep your prores workflow" Because having to using another program is a hoop. Having to do anything besides render out prores natively from your program is a hoop. Having to set up a script, so you can render prores without having to double render is a hoop."

Well, you don't have to set up a script or another program. With the plug-in mentioned you just render out prores the same way you'd render out to any other codec. There is no difference to the way you'd render to prores on a mac.

------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 14, 2014 at 2:18:31 am

Frank (or anyone) do you know if it lets da Vinci Resolve 10 (Win 7) render ProRes. I have been using Cinec to convert the final output to ProRes from Uncompressed. Having switched to Pr for final timeline out of Resolve I could use the Miraizon to make the Pr output ProRes but can I get to ProRes from Resolve?

To answer the thread question. No - ProRes hasn't made me stay with Mac. I deliberately went to Win for Resolve and Adobe CS6 as I could get the maximum bang for buck with hardware, particularly graphics grunt. XML and Macdrive means I can take Mac based projects. I still have a MacPro for FCP7 jobs which still dominate.

I have just taken delivery of my second FCPX job and getting the audio in was a mess via Xto7. No real issues with that software apart from a few clips being unenabled but clips were a dogs breakfast- all over the place trackwise. You might tell me it is the young editors fault for not setting roles properly and he might have had the same mess with tracks but so far thats two X jobs with untidy audio. Too small a sample group but not a good sign.


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 14, 2014 at 9:07:54 am

[Michael Gissing] "Frank (or anyone) do you know if it lets da Vinci Resolve 10 (Win 7) render ProRes. I have been using Cinec to convert the final output to ProRes from Uncompressed. Having switched to Pr for final timeline out of Resolve I could use the Miraizon to make the Pr output ProRes but can I get to ProRes from Resolve?
"


Resolve is the only app I have come across where it's not available (Miraizon is not the only codec that doesn't show up in the selector panel, other QT codecs also don't show) because it doesn't use the regular QT selector. Why, I don't know but it should be a minor technicality that is up to BM to fix. And they should. No issues with any other app that I know of, including Speedgrade.

Btw, if you want to go with the FFMPEG ie. Cinemartin route as you do right now you may want to look into using FFMPEG directly as it is free and you are not limited to only 2/6 cores but you utilize all cores on your system as new FFMPEG builds with Prores are fully multithreaded so you get something like in the attached screenshot. Much, much faster output. 1 Min encodes in approx. 7-10 seconds on my system.



------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 16, 2014 at 2:16:40 am

Brilliant info thanks Frank.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 13, 2014 at 11:03:09 pm

My deliverables are all ProRes and it is a factor keeping me on Macs. I know there are some windows solutions for this, but why would I want to go with a third party solution for my main deliverable? I want something that my NLE can handle straight out of the box, so that when something goes wrong I can simplify my trouble shooting. Editing is hard enough, I have no need to be a pioneer when I don't have to. When Quicktime can run on a PC as well as it does on a Mac, or when my deliverables change, then I'll happily change back to PCs.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Santiago Martí
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 14, 2014 at 2:08:41 am

I am using Miraizon with great results, it works great with everything but Da Vinci. I've tested it with Adobe CC, Redcine X and Scratch 7. I don't find it that slow though. It's like any other codec, no hussle, no trouble at all.

Santiago Martí
http://www.robotrojo.com.ar
Red One M-X, Red Epic X waiting for Dragon update, Red Pro Primes, Adobe CC, Assimilate Scratch


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 14, 2014 at 8:07:41 pm

No, OSX is.


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 16, 2014 at 3:33:18 am

Agreed! OSX, Mac hardware and software integration keeps me there. And don't move this to the Techniques Forum, link clicked by accident.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.1.1, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.5, Premiere Pro CS 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Avid MC, 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1 TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD


Return to posts index

Brooks Tomlinson
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 17, 2014 at 2:58:30 am

I want to thank all the people that took the time to add to the discussion, and not just berate me. I have read a little bit about the problem of Windows Pro-Res switching from 10bit to 8bit. And Windows pro-res sometimes not recognizing as pro-res for some commercial delivery. Lots more testing involved.

Then Next thing I need to do is test on windows all the cool programs you guys have mention. (need to clear some room to bootcamp)

Side note. I was doing some mac testing with the programs I own. I took a H.264 file, and encoded it to pro res HQ in fcpX, Adobe Media Encoder, and Smoke 2013. They all came out the same, within 10mb of each other.

What was interesting, that I didn't know. And maybe someone can illuminate me on this. When I used FCPx "optimized media" it was prores 422, and not HQ. Now I know it doesn't need to be HQ from H.264. But what if I'm coming from something that can take advantage of it. I tried goggling around but didn't find a clear answer. If someone can point me in the correct direction, that would be cool.

And I consider myself well informed, and only had heard of Telestreams Solution for windows as the only professional situation. But the problem with that is you need windows server, when I had check into that.

anyway thanks for the discussion.

Brooks Tomlinson
"I dream in 32bit float"


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 18, 2014 at 2:03:42 am

[Brooks Tomlinson] "My point is wondering how much of workflow is really tied to Pro-Res, vs OSX."

I'm a long-time Mac guy who started integrating PCs into my little shop a couple years ago. Imagine my shock when I found that Windows wasn't the horror I expected, and that now most days I actually rather prefer it to OS X.

That said, Macs are still an important part of my business. Since I have and use both, I just leave Adobe Media Encoder open on a Mac with a watch folder for ProRes encodes from PCs. ffmpeg works, and Miraizon works (though I haven't tested these workflows extensively), but an AME watch folder on a Mac on my network is easy and fast.

I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the degree of reliance our industry has on Apple's proprietary ProRes codec, and I'm rooting for a resolution-independent DNxHD and for greater acceptance of CineForm when and if it becomes a SMPTE standard.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 18, 2014 at 8:26:42 pm

[Walter Soyka] "AME watch folder on a Mac on my network is easy and fast."

AME watch folders are a truly useful concept but my experience has been that they can be really flaky and I keep having to delete them - a shame cos I'd love to use them more.

Have you not found this or am I just unlucky?

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 18, 2014 at 11:25:08 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "
AME watch folders are a truly useful concept but my experience has been that they can be really flaky and I keep having to delete them - a shame cos I'd love to use them more.

Have you not found this or am I just unlucky?"


[Shawn completely butting in]

I've not found watch folders to be flaky at all. I have a laptop tucked in a corner that does nothing but 'watch' a public folder on our local network. When I need to do really common encoding tasks, like converting .wav to .mp3, or .wmv to .mp4, I just drop the source files into the appropriate sub folder, and then pick them twenty minutes later. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is Pro-res keeping us Mac Based?
on Apr 19, 2014 at 8:27:16 am

Thanks, Shawn.

I'll go it another go and see how I get on.

Having used them very successfully for a while, I ran into an issue where creating any new watch folder would crash AME every time on launch until the prefs were rebuilt and the folder deleted. More than likely a system issue my end.

It's a serious time-saver when it works.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

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