FORUMS: list search recent posts

AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?

COW Forums : AJA Video Systems

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
cow
Christopher S. Johnson
AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 10, 2007 at 11:06:57 pm


The AJA and Blackmagic SD and HD Uncompressed codecs are transferable between systems, right? They are both Apple UC, right?

I'm going to capture UC on a BM and give the drive to an AJA editor.

Thanks.

-Christopher


Return to posts index

cow
Shane Ross
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 10, 2007 at 11:53:56 pm

No...they're different. But all the other guy has to do is load the black-magic drivers and they will be fine. They will be able to see the footage via the Kona card.


Shane

Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net


Return to posts index

cow
Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 11, 2007 at 2:16:46 am


Coolio. Thanks.


Return to posts index


cow
Sean ONeil
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 11, 2007 at 6:55:37 am

[Christopher S. Johnson] "The AJA and Blackmagic SD and HD Uncompressed codecs are transferable between systems, right? They are both Apple UC, right"

There are Blackmagic and Kona legacy codecs from before Apple had UC natively. But you're right. Nowadays in Final Cut, both of them just use the Apple UC codecs.

The other guy doesn't need to load any Blackmagic software unless it was captured w/ the BM codec - which most likely it was not.

The only exception is 4:4:4 RGB. I believe AJA and BM still have to use their own codecs for that.

Sean


Return to posts index

cow
Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 11, 2007 at 6:04:13 pm


So they will play, but...

The files I capture with Blackmagic in DV, DVCPRO-50, DVCPRO-HD, and Uncompressed SD and HD -- can my client, who has an AJA Kona card, play them back and edit them with NO RT performance hit. Are the codecs exactly the same on both sides? Or are there small differences that will make green RT bars show up on an AJA?

I need my client to not notice any difference between my captures and his -- in HIS FCP timeline.

Thanks for the clarification.

-Christopher


Return to posts index

cow
JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 11, 2007 at 7:16:09 pm

Both companies use the Apple codecs, except where Sean has mentioned. There'll be no problems if you use the Apple codecs which all the cards default to these days.


Return to posts index


cow
Shane Ross
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 12, 2007 at 3:12:48 am

Then why do I hear the argument these days that Decklinks codecs are so much cleaner? IF they are all just Apple codecs....



Shane

Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net


Return to posts index

cow
John Pale
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 12, 2007 at 4:38:48 am

For regular run-of-the mill Uncompressed 8 and 10 bit (SD and HD), they all use the Apple codecs.

The original Kona card, many years back, actually used a codec written by Blackmagic.
Then Apple came up with RTxtreme (and Blackmagic got into the hardware business with the Decklink). AJA, Blackmagic, and Aurora eventually switched to using the Apple codecs to allow RTxtreme support on their cards.

As Sean stated, there are also legacy codecs and 4:4:4 codecs that are not Apple supplied.



Return to posts index

cow
Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 12, 2007 at 9:08:50 pm


And the same would go for say DV, or DVCPRO-HD between systems? No dark green RT bars? Because even on the AJA alone, DV files seem slightly different between FW capture and SDI-to DV capture. Cross pollenating DV files from either method results in dark green RT bars.

Thanks guys.


Return to posts index


cow
JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 2:36:27 am

Christopher, please explain.

jeremy


Return to posts index

cow
Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 4:19:34 am


What I mean is, I have a creepy feeling that if I capture say...DVCPRO-HD through SDI on my Blackmagic Mac, that my clint, on his AJA Mac, will get a file that is MOSTLY right but is still little different and makes for an RT effect just for him to play aback and edit.

My experience is with AJA and I know that even on that single system a DV file captured over SDI or Component, vs. just FireWire will not behave properly in each other's Sequences. There is an AJA DV Sequence and a FireWire DV Sequence, and if you transplant, you get a dark green render bar.

It shouldn't be, but I think this might happen between a BM Mac and an AJA Mac. And that would hurt my relationship with my client.

I'm looking for someone who knows that, not just the Uncompressed, but all of the DV based codecs also playback cross platform and with NO dark green render bars in each other's timeline/ Sequences.

Thanks guys, this is educational.

-Christopher


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 2:03:53 pm

Christopher, this shouldn't be the case and I would triple check your settings. The DV/DV50/DVCPRO HD codec is the same on all machines.


Jeremy


Return to posts index


Joe Murray
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 2:08:26 pm

Yes, it should be the same, but I've had the same problem as Chris.

Joe Murray


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 3:38:39 pm

That truly doesn't make any sense.

Can anyone shed some light on this?



Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 15, 2007 at 10:38:28 pm

[JeremyG] "That truly doesn't make any sense.

Can anyone shed some light on this?"


You're right, it doesn't make sense.

DV/DV50/DVCProHD are all Apple codecs. As far as RT playback, it makes absolutely no difference what you capture it with. It's just a quicktime movie encoded with an Apple codec. Might wanna check the anamorphic flag. That could cause non-RT playback if the sequence isn't set for the same.

As far as capturing over SDI vs. Firewire, the image quality can definitely look different. Capturing FW is like copying a file from a disk. Capturing SDI means that the deck is first converting it from DV to Uncompressed (SDI only carries Uncompressed video), and then the Mac's Quicktime engine re-encodes that file.

As far as differences between capturing SDI->DV over Blackmagic vs. AJA - they should look identical. Quicktime is doing the encoding, not the card. If they look different, that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. The Kona 3 has hardware assited DVCProHD decoding. But not encoding.

Sean


Return to posts index


JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 12, 2007 at 3:41:36 pm

WHo told you this and where'd you hear it?


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 12, 2007 at 4:37:29 pm

It seems to be the basic argument in BlackMagics favor. Heard this around NAB...why it was used on SUPERMAN, because the codec is so CLEAN (might be getting into 4:4:4 proprietary territory here). I hear this all over the variety of forums (a while ago, and I cannot find examples, darn it) when researching what I wanted as a card. Back when I had an Aurora card...which ALSO has been told they have the best SD codec in the business (and working with it I noted how nice it was).

This is just one of those "I heard it around...or on the streets" kind of things.



Shane

Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net


Return to posts index

Joe Murray
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 12, 2007 at 9:04:52 pm

I read a lot of forums and have never heard anyone say Blackmagic has a quality advantage, so I guess I just missed those posts. I might expect to hear it on the Blackmagic forum but I don't have any reason to follow that one. If you can point us to any specific threads I'd be interested to read them.

Joe Murray


Return to posts index

John Pale
from Blackmagic's website
on Aug 13, 2007 at 1:58:47 am

This is from Blackmagic's website, explaining that they use Apple's Uncompressed Codecs starting with FCP 5.0. Apple wanted this standardized among the different manufacturers... I have read that AJA did the same thing, though I have not found that link as of yet. The Googlefest is ongoing, unless Rudy from AJA wants to put this to bed once and for all.

FINAL CUT PRO 5.0
Apple were keen for DeckLink cards to standardize on using Apple's codecs so that there would no longer be the potential for confusion between the Apple and Blackmagic codecs.

Apple and Blackmagic Design have worked together on this issue and, starting with Final Cut Pro 5.0 and the DeckLink 5.0 drivers, all DeckLink cards use the Apple uncompressed 8-bit and 10-bit codecs for all standard definition and high definition uncompressed 4:2:2 video. The Blackmagic codecs are no longer installed for uncompressed 8-bit and 10-bit 4:2:2 video.


ARE ANY BLACKMAGIC CODECS STILL USED OR INSTALLED?
Yes, the DeckLink 5.8 and newer drivers install the following Blackmagic codecs:

Blackmagic 8-bit (2Vuy) - this is our original 8-bit codec and is still included to support legacy files captured in this format and also is what was used by the Cinewave.

Blackmagic 10-bit RGB - Apple do not currently have a codec with the RGB color space for high definition 4:4:4 dual link video. Blackmagic Design will need to include this codec until such a time as Apple might introduce its own codec for 4:4:4. We would probably discontinue the Blackmagic 10-bit RGB codec at that time.


For the full story check out this link.

http://www.blackmagic-design.com/support/detail.asp?techID=78


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: from Blackmagic's website
on Aug 13, 2007 at 4:41:24 am

[John Pale] "Blackmagic 10-bit RGB - Apple do not currently have a codec with the RGB color space for high definition 4:4:4 dual link video." via decklink website

This was the original reason that Blackmagic developed an uncompressed codec which was then used by AJA in hardware except that it pertained to HD. Apple's uncompressed codecs did not differentiate between HD and SD color space back then. Then the split happened, and Blackmagic and AJA had their own uncompressed codecs. Once Apple released the Apple Uncompressed codecs that were 'hd' enabled, AJA and Blackmagic started using them, albeit reluctantly, but the codecs were wrapped up in rt extreme. Since Apple doesn't make a dual link codec, Decklink and AJA are 'on their own' in this regard.

Jeremy



Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 6:00:34 am

[Shane Ross] "Then why do I hear the argument these days that Decklinks codecs are so much cleaner? IF they are all just Apple codecs...."

If you transcode to Uncompressed from a different colorspace (like 4:1:1 DV25), then apparently the BMD codec does a better job at chroma upsampling.

But if you're talking about SDI/HD-SDI capture from a 4:2:2 source, then they will be identical.

Sean


Return to posts index

mattso
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 4:40:14 pm

I'm the 'CLIENT' that Christopher is speaking about.

I want to address his concern here, specifically the idea that COMMON codecs are different between machines.

Let's talk first about a simple, compressed codec, like DV.
If you go sit down and capture a file thorugh firewire in your dual G5, the capture preset you'll choose in the 'Log and Capture' is going to be "DV-48khz" or some such... the common, everyday DV codec that we all know and love.
It is a software-based codec and is uniform from system to system.
HOWEVER. If you sit down at your system and instead of using the firewire, chose to use the AJA KonaLh card you've got, and select "AJAKona-to DV25" in the Log and Capture window's 'catpure settings' you'll also capture a nice little DV file. But THIS file is different from the other file...
I'm not asking- I'm Telling.
It IS different. WHY? HOW? dunno. Is it a Hardware- CODEC? I dunno. But if you take that file and put it in the standard DV timeline, it WILL have at least a dark green bar above it in the timeline.
And the same is true in reverse... if you put a standard DV file in a Kona-DV timline, it will indicate with at least a dark green bar (maybe worse) in the timline.
This is true, and unequivical and repeatable.
My interpretation is that this is a different kind of file. Maybe one field-ordered-one-horizontal-square-pixal different - but different, none-the-less.

NO BIG DEAL... I mean, we aren't using DV codecs for our upcoming project...

But if is the case with the ubiquitous little DV25 - as it is with DVCPro50... this will almost CERTAINLY be the same with DVCproHD - or any THIRD-party 10bit HD codec being introduced to the mix, no?
I mean, I will bet HARD CASH that if Christopher sends me a bunch of media captured through the BM decklink, that the mechanism by with that media is encoded will have made that codec in it's prefered image, and will therefore be different enough from the media I'll have otherwise captured through my Kona as to cost me some real-time in my timeline. Or WORSE?

Please... tell me I'm wrong. and Proove it!

It should be said that the reason Christopher is asking about this is that I'm preparing to buy him a system with a AJA card in it, which he could then use to help do remote work on this project. He's dutifully trying to argue the cost savings for the Decklink, and this codec issue is our last sticking point.

Thanks gang,

Praising the Cow -
Matt S.
Seattle




Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 5:42:47 pm

I just don't find this to be true as I just tried it. I have some dv and dv50 SDI captured footage on my machine right now. I start a new project, import those two different files. First I select the DV-NTSC easy setup (the default FCP one, non AJA), make a new timeline and drop in the footage. The media bar is registering as 'Media File' which it should, no rendering, no weirdness, no nothing. Same for DV50. Same for DVCPRO HD as well, actually, just tried that. All of these were captured SDI, then put in timelines using FCPs easy setups, not AJAs.

OS 10.4.9, QT 7.1.6, FCP 5.1.4, MacPro

Any chance, Chris, you can post a 2 second dv capture somewhere so I can download it and see what's going on?


Jeremy


Return to posts index

Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 13, 2007 at 6:09:59 pm


"Any chance, Chris, you can post a 2 second dv capture somewhere so I can download it and see what's going on?"

Im on another job right now with just plain FW Macs. Mattso, can you provide one?

-Christopher


Return to posts index

Christopher S. Johnson
Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 13, 2007 at 10:37:35 pm

OK, this is from Blackmagic tech support today! I wrote them about this.
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Christopher,

Okay...so long as both of you are using a modern version of FCP (5 or later)
then it should work well as both Blackmagic and AJA use the native QT
codecs. There should be absolutely no difference between them.

There may be problems on older versions of FCP as both AJA and BMD had their
own codecs to make up for the lack of proper codec support for QT.

Joshua Helling
Director of Support
Blackmagic Design Inc.
http://www.blackmagic-design.com




On 8/11/07 11:44 AM, "christophersj@earthlink.net"
wrote:

> Name: Christopher S. Johnson
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Product: DeckLink Extreme PCIe
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Driver Version:
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> OS: Mac OS X
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> OS Version:
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Message:
> Hi, Im wanting to buy the HD Extreme card for Final Cut Pro. My question is
> this.
>
> The files I capture in DV, DVCPRO-50, DVCPRO-HD, and Uncompressed SD and HD --
> can my client, who has an AJA Kona card, play them back and edit them with NO
> RT performance hit. Are the codecs exactly the same on both sides? Or are
> there small differences that will make green RT bars show up on an AJA?
>
> I need my client to not notice any difference between my captures and his --
> in HIS FCP timeline.
>
> Thank you.
>
> -Christopher
>


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 14, 2007 at 1:59:28 am

Yeah, that's what I have been trying to say. If you guys could post a 2 or 3 second clip that's been captured via Decklink, it'd be really helpful. If you can't, I understand.


Jeremy





Return to posts index

Christopher S. Johnson
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 14, 2007 at 4:07:32 am


No. I dont have a BM card yet. This was an exploratory question before buying the card.

Anyone else have a BM captured UC, DV, or DVCPRO-HD file they can share with us?

Thanks,

-Christopher


Return to posts index

szumlins
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 14, 2007 at 1:25:43 pm

Decklink cards DO NOT have hardware scalars. If you ever plan on ingesting signal to DVCProHD, you will experience lossiness. In addition, the lack of hardware scalar and tie in to RTExtreme means that a Decklink card is not doing any math scaling out your images for output or monitoring. This literally equates to less real time using DVCProHD (even if you captured using a P2 card).

AJA's cards all have hardware scalars on the card. This frees up processor time by handling all scaling of non full raster codecs (HDV, DVCProHD, XDCAM). You can argue that you don't need the real time performance on output, but I would think that when doing a capture/transcode to DVCProHD, the quality of your ingest would matter.

There are more reasons, but I would think if DVCProHD workflows are important to you, this would be a big sticking point.




---

--

-Mike


Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 16, 2007 at 5:05:02 am

[szumlins] "Decklink cards DO NOT have hardware scalars. If you ever plan on ingesting signal to DVCProHD, you will experience lossiness. In addition, the lack of hardware scalar and tie in to RTExtreme means that a Decklink card is not doing any math scaling out your images for output or monitoring. This literally equates to less real time using DVCProHD (even if you captured using a P2 card).

AJA's cards all have hardware scalars on the card. This frees up processor time by handling all scaling of non full raster codecs (HDV, DVCProHD, XDCAM). You can argue that you don't need the real time performance on output, but I would think that when doing a capture/transcode to DVCProHD, the quality of your ingest would matter."


I'm sorry, but it just amazes me what a lack of understanding there is around here. If you're so nit-picky about the quality, why the hell are you capturing over SDI instead of firewire?

You realize you are re-encoding it. This is a very LOSSY process. No matter how good the scaler is. Firewire avoids this process entirely.

I know there are very, very respectable people here (like Walter) who capture these formats over SDI. But reality is reality. You are decompressing it to uncompressed, and then re-compressing with a completely new lossy process. And it makes no difference that the codec you choose happens to be the same codec that camera used. All that information is thrown away once you plug it into the SDI port.

There is one very odd and very complicated exception. Certain situations it may be better to upscale from DV to 4:2:2 using hardware instead of software (if you use FCP chroma smoothing filter it makes no difference). I don't want to get too much into this - all that matters is that it doesn't apply to DVCProHD whatsoever.

Sean


Return to posts index

walter biscardi
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 16, 2007 at 9:59:30 am

[Sean ONeil] "I know there are very, very respectable people here (like Walter) who capture these formats over SDI. But reality is reality."

I have captured DVCPro HD via Firewire in the past but switched over to SDI when our Mac Pro was having all sorts of audio issues via Firewire from DVCPro HD decks. No clue what happened there, but we switched over to SDI and what was explained to me by AJA is that it is still a lossless process coming in via SDI and in fact, the quality is a smidge better. The compression artifacts can be less noticeable and softer than when it comes in via Firewire.

Now with HDV to DVCPro HD via SDI I see absolutely no perceptible difference between the original HDV image and the image that the Kona 3 transcoded to DVCPro HD. I know there's something there because as you said we've transcoded the image to another format and if I were to really blow up the scopes, the noise would be there. But viewing on a 50" Panasonic Pro Plasma that really emphasizes noise and compression, you can't tell the difference using your eyes, at least I can't.

This is just my own personal experience. DVCPro HD, HDV can both be captured Firewire and edited just fine using the Kona systems. It's really a personal preference at that point.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
http://www.biscardicreative.com
HD Editorial & Animation for Broadcast and independent productions.

All Things Apple Podcast! http://cowcast.creativecow.net/all_things_apple/index.html

Read my blog! http://blogs.creativecow.net/WalterBiscardi


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 16, 2007 at 1:56:06 pm

[walter biscardi] " it is still a lossless process coming in via SDI and in fact, the quality is a smidge better."

Holy cow, the jig is up. I am glad someone else has said this, because no one seems to believe me that capturing through an HD SDI pipe (or even SD SDI) has advantages, and I am not just talking about RS-422 transport. HD SDI is HARDWARE not software. WIthin the deck are little electronics that are meant to push every last bit of quality out of the DVCPro HD tape and into the HD SDI. Hardware conversion almost always do a better job than software.

Thanks, Walter, for now sending us on the road to believability.

When you speak people listen.


Jeremy



Return to posts index

walter biscardi
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 16, 2007 at 1:58:26 pm

[JeremyG] "WIthin the deck are little electronics that are meant to push every last bit of quality out of the DVCPro HD tape and into the HD SDI. Hardware conversion almost always do a better job than software.

Thanks, Walter, for now sending us on the road to believability."


Well it's a combination of the hardware on the deck and the hardware on the Kona 3 that equates to a slightly better image. Quite honestly I delivered about 30 masters using Firewire workflow before switching to SDI. I think it's one of those "6 of one, half dozen of the other."

If SDI is available to you, then use it. If Firewire is all you have, then use that. Just my own personal observation that SDI certainly does not make the image any worse.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
http://www.biscardicreative.com
HD Editorial & Animation for Broadcast and independent productions.

All Things Apple Podcast! http://cowcast.creativecow.net/all_things_apple/index.html

Read my blog! http://blogs.creativecow.net/WalterBiscardi


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 16, 2007 at 3:53:41 pm

[walter biscardi] "Just my own personal observation that SDI certainly does not make the image any worse."

Exactly. And when you bring in the SDI to a higher quality codec, all of the hardware cleaning up is translated into a better file, in my opinion. Even on regular ole DV stuff.


Jeremy






Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 16, 2007 at 6:48:29 pm

[JeremyG] "Holy cow, the jig is up. I am glad someone else has said this, because no one seems to believe me that capturing through an HD SDI pipe (or even SD SDI) has advantages, and I am not just talking about RS-422 transport. HD SDI is HARDWARE not software. WIthin the deck are little electronics that are meant to push every last bit of quality out of the DVCPro HD tape and into the HD SDI. Hardware conversion almost always do a better job than software."

Sorry guys. It's just not true. Sure, hardware conversion is better than software conversion. BUT, hardware conversion is not better than NO CONVERSION AT ALL - which is exactly what firewire xfer is.

Capturing DVCProHD over SDI takes a hit. Plain and simple. One could subjectively say that hit actually looks "better". Whatever. To each his own. But I think people should use filters for this kind of creative alteration, as oppose to recompressing lossy video.


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 16, 2007 at 6:56:46 pm

[Sean ONeil] "BUT, hardware conversion is not better than NO CONVERSION AT ALL"

We will have to agree to disagree.






Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 17, 2007 at 10:41:38 am

[Sean ONeil] "It's just not true. Sure, hardware conversion is better than software conversion. BUT, hardware conversion is not better than NO CONVERSION AT ALL - which is exactly what firewire xfer is."

Sean

that would be true if all of the binary conversions were the same. The deck/ camera hardware conversion is certainly better than anything else ( especially FCP)

I agree with Jeremy...

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows


Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 17, 2007 at 10:31:08 pm

[gary adcock] "that would be true if all of the binary conversions were the same. The deck/ camera hardware conversion is certainly better than anything else ( especially FCP)

I agree with Jeremy..."


This isn't a matter of optinion. You two are just misinformed. Badly misinformed. Sorry to be so blunt about it but that's the 100% incontravertable truth, regardless of who's pictures are up at the top there.

Gary, using the deck's hardware decoder (and prefering it to the software decoder) is absolutey fine. Many people feel that way, especially with DV25. But this only makes sense if you are capturing to uncompressed or ProRes. Capturing back to the same format it used to be, means you're still using the Apple software codec. And it's taken a hit.

Where you're wrong is that there is no conversion when capturing firewire. None. Nothing is being altered. Period. FCP doesn't convert/encode FW data streams. It captures raw data and records the 1's and 0's exactly how they were recorded on the tape. That's how it works. Just like copying a quicktime file from a firewire hard drive to another disk. Or importing a P2 card.

You don't like Apple's software decoder? Then you should capture it uncompressed or ProRes. Again, by re-encoding it to DVxx, you're in the same place you were if you used FW capture. The software still does the decoding for playback The only difference is now the video has also taken a hit.

So what you are saying has to do with playback. Not capture. Let's look at capturing.

If you capture SDI, there is still no "hardware conversion" taking place inside a Kona card. FCP/QT still does the encoding. Software encoding. The Kona 3 doesn't have a DV encoder, or a DVCProHD encoder. It has hardware that HELPS the software codec crunch the numbers. But it's still the Apple software codec.

Jeremy, you mentioned the Kona's scaling non-full raster footage on ingest is what you think helps it. Well it doesn't work that way. Trust me. When you output SDI from a deck, it's already full raster. The deck is scaling it, not the card. SDI doesn't transmit 970x720 video. The Kona card will scale when converting NTSC to HD, etc. But it doesn't do the 970x720 to 1280x720 conversion. The deck has already taken care of that.

One can certainly argue that the hardware decoder in a deck is better than the software decoder in FCP (like Gary did). That's fine. That is an opinion, which I respect. And most people agree with it for DV25 footage. That's why it's beneficial when capturing to uncompressed or ProRes. But if you're encoding it back to it's orginal format (like DVCProHD) then you completely throw away what you were hoping to achieve. You now have DVCProHD files on your Mac, and the Apple software codec is being used during playback.

And all these times this topic has come up, I have yet to see any literature stating that lossy SDI capture of DVCProHD is somehow equal or better. This is from the AJA web site:

"The Panasonic DVCPROHD format takes advantage of KONA hardware as well. KONA


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: Blackmagic Speaks!
on Aug 17, 2007 at 11:34:38 pm

[Sean ONeil] "Jeremy, you mentioned the Kona's scaling non-full raster footage on ingest is what you think helps it. Well it doesn't work that way. Trust me"

First of all I didn't say that because I know it's the deck that does the conversion on input to FCP. This is my whole entire point.

[Sean ONeil] "One can certainly argue that the hardware decoder in a deck is better than the software decoder in FCP (like Gary did). That's fine. That is an opinion, which I respect"

Read my posts again. This is the argument I have been making.

Anyway it's Friday and I'm off to drink beer and grill pork chops.





Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re:
on Aug 18, 2007 at 1:57:07 am

[Sean ONeil] "Where you're wrong is that there is no conversion when capturing firewire. None."

Never said there was, my comment was based on the original discussion about converting formats when capturing and that all bits are not created equally. The discussion started as the difference between the way AJA and BMD do conversions when capturing over HDSDI

In that space/ with those regards my statement stands.


"Gary, using the deck's hardware decoder (and prefering it to the software decoder) is absolutey fine. Many people feel that way, especially with DV25."

I have only cut in HD for the last 5 years, I will leave the DV discussion to you.


"If you capture SDI, there is still no "hardware conversion" taking place inside a Kona card. FCP/QT still does the encoding. Software encoding. The Kona 3 doesn't have a DV encoder, or a DVCProHD encoder. It has hardware that HELPS the software codec crunch the numbers. But it's still the Apple software codec."

only partially accurate, yes if you are talking about the SD compressed content, but many people like me only use the compressed content (like DVCPROHD) for offline work. My HD masters are always raw uncompressed or lightly compressed original files, preferably DPX, D5 or HDCAM SR.

"There is a HUGE difference between "virtually indistinguisable" and "it makes it look better". I think the language is pretty clear. It still looks almost as good despite taking a hit. Most people could never tell the difference. Nowhere does it claim to be better than FW capture."

You are mixing the statements between jeremy and I.

It is always better to capture baseband video if you plan to do more than just cuts, as the depth of the larger color space offers better latitude for effects, conversions, transitions and the like. There is no comparison between working in a compressed space vs working in the decompressed version of the same file and that is what I am referring to.


[Sean ONeil] "Now that we have ProRes, why even bother with this kind of workflow?"

you trust apple way too much. it is not the only way

Since the first ProRes film out tests are just coming to light, and while impressive, there are still issues to be dealt with in any compressed workflow.





gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows


Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: Re:
on Aug 19, 2007 at 3:42:13 am

[gary adcock] "you trust apple way too much. it is not the only way

Since the first ProRes film out tests are just coming to light, and while impressive, there are still issues to be dealt with in any compressed workflow."


You're comparing uncompressed vs. compressed. I'm 100% with you on all that (however, there is the new feature to capture native, but render non-cuts only to ProRes).

The basis for my arguments is primarily people taking a DVCProHD VTR, using the SDI output, and capturing it with there Kona back to DVCProHD. And using that as their online.

Sean


Return to posts index

Christopher S. Johnson
Re: Re:
on Aug 19, 2007 at 3:56:00 am


Right, this new "FCP 6 workflow": capture the highly compressed HD formats over Fire Wire in their native state, and set the Sequence to render in Pro Res or Uncompressed. This makes so much sense on so many levels -- everything from quality to drive space. No offline/online operations.

I'd love to hear about some folks who are actually doing this on a regular basis. Is it working as well in reality as it does on paper?

- Christopher S. Johnson


Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: Re:
on Aug 20, 2007 at 12:48:16 pm

[Sean ONeil] "he basis for my arguments is primarily people taking a DVCProHD VTR, using the SDI output, and capturing it with there Kona back to DVCProHD. And using that as their online."

But that is a necessary evil, there are any number of facilities that need and have to do just that. It is much more common than you think, especially in larger operations with dedicated machine rooms, and a limited number of decks.

there is never a single answer or solution to a problem, and just because it does not work for you does not mean that it is not viable.




gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows


Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 5:09:40 am

[mattso] "I will bet HARD CASH"

I'll take you up on that. How much are we talking? Cause I know you are completely wrong.

I have both Blackmagic and Kona machines in my studio. We share all kinds of media.

They both use the same Apple codecs dude. Sorry, but whatever problems you've had are due to something else.

Blackmagic and AJA have never made a DV codec. Nor an HDV, DV50 or a DVCProHD codec. Never. Cinewave may have. Pinnacle may have. But not BMD or AJA. They've only made uncompressed codecs and those are for legacy systems and 4:4:4 RGB only.

Sean


Return to posts index

mattso
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 3:57:28 pm

SIGH.....
A GAZZILION DOLLARS! Yep! ONE GAZILLION DOLLARS to you if you can prove this experience I've had (several times) to be untrue. It will likely require you to stop the the space-time continuum and reverese the events of my life -- AND sprinkle magic fairy dust into my editing gear, thus creating a wholesale change in its capabilities.
A GAZZILION, Sean.

I've hit this dead end several times. And I'm certainly not suggesting that your experiences are any less material. I mean its POSSIBLE you're all high... but I'm nt suggesting it.

Seriously though... could this phenomenon be a product of my still using a G5? The added processor power of the ProMac might be making more than a little bit of a difference... No?

Incidentally, this is NOT the first time I've run into this. This was also true with the CinewaveRT system I had before that product dissappeared... and I THINK it was the state of affairs with the AVID I owned before that.

Perhaps you're all just part of some sort of Wizard coven...
I am, after all, just a wee, lowly Director.... and a muggle to boot.

best
matt

"I don't Tan... I stroke."

~ Woody Allen


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 4:24:52 pm

If you can post a Blackmagic clip, I will be HAPPY to take a look and also take your Gazillion dollars.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

gary adcock
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 4:38:17 pm

[JeremyG] " I will be HAPPY to take a look and also take your Gazillion dollars."

jeremy

he is only a "lowly director" so he only has millions, so your GAZ is out-a-luck

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 4:58:43 pm

Damn. Guess I'll have to settle for mills.


Return to posts index

Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 5:48:31 pm


Mattso doesn't have a BM card to make a clip for you. He has Kona lh. That's the point. We were considering mixing a BM and AJA in our workflow. So this thread was started for research about the compatibility of the two.

We weren't looking for a debate. We were looking for people with experience cross pollenating clips between systems.

Both compressed and uncompressed formats.

What I am hearing from all of you is that you are 100% sure that a clip captured on one system will be recognized as an exact equal on the other. Meaning one will NEVER EVER see a dark green RT render bar when switching between the two cards, if using the same Sequence settings. (with the exception of that 4:4:4 thingy)

Nobody disagrees with this, right? The people saying this works I am sure are speaking from direct experience and not theory, right?

Good. Thanks for the info. This has been helpful and I am grateful for the education.

- Christopher S. Johnson


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 5:52:52 pm

So who has the Decklink?


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 5:57:44 pm

Well...I DO have the Multibridge Pro in a test machine at the moment. But, I can't get it to work. Installed the drivers, and nothing. So I am having issues getting it to work and I'll need to contact their tech support (wish me luck).

AND...I will have a DVCPRO HD deck over the weekend. SO...what I can do is capture DVCPRO HD native...then capture DVCPRO HD via HD SDI with my Kona LH, and if I get the Multibridge working, capture with that as well.



Shane

Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net


Return to posts index

Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 6:04:33 pm


Shane, you rock dude. I'm going to buy your FCP media organizer DVD when I get my next paycheck. Where can I order it?

-Christopher S. Johnson


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 6:10:52 pm

http://training.creativecow.net/dvd_store/get_organized_fcp/get_organized_f...



Shane

Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net


Return to posts index

Christopher S. Johnson
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 6:00:14 pm


Sean ONeil said he did. He said he does it all of the time.

But I also wonder if Mattso is correct in thing Sean may have all Intel machines and, because of his speed advantages, may not be seeing dark green RT bars when cross pollenating?

- Christopher S. Johnson


Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 7:05:39 pm

[Christopher S. Johnson] "Nobody disagrees with this, right? The people saying this works I am sure are speaking from direct experience and not theory, right?"

My machine has a Kona. Every other machine has a Blackmagic. We work with P-JPEG and now ProRes. Nobody here has seen a dark green line.

That doesn't mean Matt won't see one on his machine. Anything could be happening there. Some weird QT plugin that got installed years ago. Who knows? Some Cinewave thing from before. Anything's possible. But this theory you guys have that video files captured from BMD and AJA are different from each other - that ain't it. I promise you.

Look at the DV sequence settings for "Kona DV" preset... oh wait, there's no such thing. Notice how the Kona DV Easy Setups use the same exact sequence presets as regular FW DV. "DV NTSC 48khz". The same exact sequence settings used for FW capture on a system that doesn't even have a Kona or Decklink.

Here's a 1-frame clip of an Uncompressed 8-bit 23.98 movie captured using a Decklink Extreme over a year ago (long before this place even had a Kona):
http://www.crosscreekentertain.com/tmp/BMD_TEST.mov.zip

Make sure you remember the 23.98 part. You wont' see a dark green bar on a Kona system. Just like I don't see it on mine.


Return to posts index

mattso
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 7:15:30 pm

Great thread, guys thanks.
Bottom Line... shouldn't be an issue... but it is with my old machine. fine. I can live with that.
We'll figure out what kind of Hardware Christopher's going to get in the comming days.
And no, i don't have millions... only gazzilions. I divested myself of US currency when Bush took office. I only deal in Clams now.
The Checks are in the mail boys.


thanks again
matt

"I don't Tan... I stroke."

~ Woody Allen


Return to posts index

JeremyG
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 7:45:41 pm

Works for me. NO green bar, the bar reads as 'media file' as it should.

[Sean ONeil] "Look at the DV sequence settings for "Kona DV" preset... oh wait, there's no such thinG"

Yes there is, It's called 8 bit to dv.



Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 17, 2007 at 2:01:21 am

[JeremyG] "Yes there is, It's called 8 bit to dv"

That's an Easy Setup. There is no "8 bit to DV" sequence profile.

Sean


Return to posts index

mattso
Re: AJA & Blackmagic use same UC right?
on Aug 16, 2007 at 4:03:14 pm

SIGH.....
A GAZZILION DOLLARS! Yep! ONE GAZILLION DOLLARS to you if you can prove this experience I've had (several times) to be untrue. It will likely require you to stop the the space-time continuum and reverese the events of my life -- AND sprinkle magic fairy dust into my editing gear, thus creating a wholesale change in its capabilities.
A GAZZILION, Sean.

I've hit this dead end several times. And I'm certainly not suggesting that your experiences are any less material. I mean its POSSIBLE you're all high... but I'm nt suggesting it.

Seriously though... could this phenomenon be a product of my still using a G5? The added processor power of the ProMac might be making more than a little bit of a difference... No?

Incidentally, this is NOT the first time I've run into this. This was also true with the CinewaveRT system I had before that product dissappeared... and I THINK it was the state of affairs with the AVID I owned before that.

Perhaps you're all just part of some sort of Wizard coven...
I am, after all, just a wee, lowly Director.... and a muggle to boot.

best
matt

"I don't Tan... I stroke."

~ Woody Allen


Return to posts index

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