I'm quite new in Avid and I have a question about workflow. If anyone can help me, I will appreciate it very much.
I'm going to edit a documentary which is shoot with the new C300 camera (mxf archives). Some of the footage is 1920x1080 and some other footage is 4K broadcast (3840x2160). I'm editing in Avid MC 8.4, the color correction will be done in Da Vinci Resolve and the online and finishing process again on avid.
The project will be 1080p but during the edition I'd like to maintain the resolution size of the clips shot in 4K to resize it and not have a bad quality visualization. I will have any issue during the edition because of that?
My question is, which workflow is the most convenient for this project?
I've read in other posts that working directly with the raw footage via ama link is not a good option for long and complex projects and that it's better to consolidate or transcode the footage linked via ama. Is it better to consolidate it or transcode it? What's the difference exactly? Another option I was thinking was transcode the footage to DNxHD 36 in DaVinci and after the offline edition in Avid, conform with the original footage in DaVinci.
I think I've got a mess in my head because I read to much posts and I'm not sure which is the best workflow for not having any issue on the online.
I'll appreciate any help ;)
Thanks in advance!
AMA link and transcode the footage to DNx36 for the C300 stuff that's 1080, in a 1080p project that matches your frame rate. And the 4K footage, AMA link and transcode to DNxHR LB in a 4K project that matches the frame size and rate. THen bring the bin of that footage into your 1080p project and edit.
Edit. Lock picture.
Send an AAF of the cut to RESOLVE and add all the media to the media pool. Relink to the masters in RESOLVE. Grade, export from Resolve. NOW...are you doing the grade in resolve, or is someone else? Do you need footage with handles exported from resolve, or will you be able to export a single Quicktime file and bring that into Avid? Depending on your needs, the workflow will be different.
Scott Freeman has a blog post about this, and the steps needed:
OR...you can AMA link, transcode in Avid to work offline, then relink in Avid to full res, send that to Resolve. Scott Freeman talks about that here:
These are both offline to online workflows...so that you can relink to the originals later. And transcode to lighter codecs so you don't need as much hard drive space to store all that footage. Working full res will take a LOT of space and require very fast drives....because working with 4K DNxHR won't work on firewire or USB3 drives.
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
Shane, thank you very much for your quick and complete respond. I will read carefully the links you give me by Scott Freeman to do the workflow correctly and not have any surprise with the online. Also I think I'll make a test on the workflow you recommend me before editing, just to be sure of all the process.
I will not do the grade but I think a single quicktime file from Resolve (graded edition) will be the best way to finish the edition then in Avid.
Sure, I will transcode the footage to DNxHD 36. Only one more question. Do you think it's interesting to maintain the two sizes (2k and 4K) in the offline edition or better transcode eveything to 1920x1080? Will I have any trouble in Avid working in a 1080 project with 4K footage (transcoded)? The only reason I wanted to maintain de two sizes was because I'm afraid that if I resize the image in the offline it will look horrible, but of course it's only an offline.
Thank you very much.
Depends on how far in you want to zoom. If you want to extract an HD frame from the 4K image or do like a 25% zoom in for a reframe. For offline, it will be up to your tolerence as well as your source footage, but I find that in many case, zooming in is not that bad for creative editorial when all dailies are at HD resolution.
Here is an example of a 4K (4096x2304)16:9 image with an HD extract using both FrameFlex on a DNxHR LB version of the 4K frame, and again as a 25% resize on a DNxHD 36 transcode of the same frame:
Original image showing HD extract in FrameFlex
I then transcoded the original 4K image to DNxHD 36, then applied a 3D Warp and resized it to same parameters. I exported both as DPX so as to not introduce any further compression, then did a side by side in Photoshop at 100%. Hard to tell at 100% a whole lot of difference:
The same images in Photoshop now zoomed in at 200%. It is easier to now see some of the compression and resize artifacts:
If you do more typical resize type work, I did the same test again but only with a 75% extraction in FrameFlex compared to a 25% resize in DNxHD 36 using 3D Warp - here's what it looked like in FrameFlex:
And then the exported frames comparing them side by side in Photoshop at 200% zoom in:
So as you can see, the impact may not be as server as you think it might be. And if everything is going to be conformed in Resolve or other third party, the AAF will carry the resize and the conform application will have the same resize applied as with Resolve, in my opinion, use a better resize algorithm.
If making Avid media in Resolve first, please make sure you have REEL properly set. It is best to use "use clip filename" in "conform assist settings in Resolve.
On on a somewhat related note but using stabilization on the higher resolution file versus the HD proxy, see my blog: http://24p.com/wordpress/?p=253
Thank you Micahel, a big "WOW" for your explanation. You're right, the impact may not be as server as I thought.
I'll consider your advice about the "use clip filename" in the conform assist settings in Resolve, if I decide to make transcodes in Da Vinci.
Thanks for the link of your blog. Interesting information.