Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates Forum
Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Bill Davis on Jan 8, 2019 at 8:54:49 pm

Yes, it’s pretty much a LumaForge marketing video.

https://youtu.be/w3fKC1ZqnPE

But it still signals the promise is that smaller “virtual studios” can now more easily do stuff like this on more of a DYI basis without necessarily needing quite the same level of constant engineering hand-holding.

Surely there will be lots and lots of operations where configuration expertise needs will remain way beyond what any DYI approach makes sense for - but for other classes of startup users, it’s getting easier and easier to get a seat at the new moderate volume web based content creators table.

Specially interesting to me was how he graded “to the screen” rather than “to the scopes” - since no broadcast stage is involved for them. Talk about a change. I had an internal debate with myself just yesterday, when I was set to deliver a web gig and found myself checking my WFM and saw some “over limit” spikes - and had to think hard about whether in the context of my delivery specs, that mattered any more.

Change is happening. And so it goes.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Mark Suszko on Jan 8, 2019 at 9:27:10 pm

So I'm an old fart, we'll stipulate to that. That said, I don't like the idea of "just eyeballing it" on a particular monitor, no matter how good the monitor is, versus using known, stable standards and scopes.

You have no control over what other delivery screens will do to your grade and levels, but if you keep everything within standards using scopes, you stand a at least chance that your output is cross-compatible across as many ways of seeing it as possible. I don't believe anything remains "just" for one particular platform any more, no matter the original intention; indeed, the hardware sellers and content distributors market a multi-device viewing style where you pick something up on your phone, or your wristwatch, then maybe finish watching it on a bigger screen, and vice-a-versa.

It reminds me of the casual way I slapped a long playlist of music into my car's playback unit without getting all the levels at least close to the same... and it makes for an annoying user experience when you have to keep cranking the volume way up or down for each song, to keep it appropriate and not overdriven or at a whisper.

I'll adjust my belt onion and sit down now, so someone else can take a turn.


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Bill Davis on Jan 8, 2019 at 10:05:13 pm

[Mark Suszko] "So I'm an old fart, we'll stipulate to that. That said, I don't like the idea of "just eyeballing it" on a particular monitor, no matter how good the monitor is, versus using known, stable standards and scopes. "

I don't disagree with you at all because that's exactly the same way I've been conditioned for decades of practice.

However, the FACT of the matter is that if most people are watching content on computers and pocket devices today - and IF those devices do a credible job of reflecting the colors that another computer has generated - the need for scopes and keeping "within the lines" on stuff like the broadcast NTSC 100ire limit might be less mission critical than it used to be.

These young producers are creating content nearly exclusively for a relatively newly viable non-broadcast market. The gold standard for them is clearly NOT AC Neilson ratings, but "likes" and subscribes — and so that's where they concentrate. They know the new game. And it's NOT the same as the old game.

That's just how it is.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.



Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Mark Suszko on Jan 8, 2019 at 10:10:21 pm

Blown-out whites on a phone don't look any better on a bigger screen.


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Oliver Peters on Jan 9, 2019 at 12:45:43 am

Let's not get carried away. The "facility" described represents a pretty huge investment in capital. Note that he also mentions shooting with Alexas. So hardly DIY. And frankly that's been the norm for quite a few years. There really hasn't been the need for too much engineering handholding, unless you invested in a full-blown Avid system (storage, Media Central, etc) or similar.

As far as displays - NO COMPUTER DISPLAY IS VALID FOR GRADING - if you expect reliable and consistent results. In fact, the newest screens on the iMac Pros are far less accurate than previous Apple-branded models. They are too bright, too contrasty, and too saturated. Pretty - yes. Accurate - hardly. And in general, no two computer displays - even of the same vintage - match each other with consistency.

However, if you want a cheap way to grade - especially for FCPX - buy a high-quality consumer display and connect it via HDMI. FCPX pumps out a/v to it. That will give you more reliable results than the computer display ever will. Of course, use scopes, such as the built-in FCPX scopes. I would also go further and recommend using video limiting and audio limiting, too. This will give you the best results across a wide range of media devices.

I will admit, though, that iPads and smart phones have become the defacto lowest common denominator on which to check your video, much like Auratone cube speakers have historically been used in audio and recording studios. So load your file to FrameIO or Vimeo and check it on one of these devices and you'll probably see what most of your clients will watch. At least for review-and-approval. Sad but true.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by greg janza on Jan 9, 2019 at 5:49:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Let's not get carried away. The "facility" described represents a pretty huge investment in capital"

In the youtube comments, Max Yuryev:

"I know you guys can afford it and Jellyfish is one of the first and now a high end brand nice but dang 40 grand... I’m putting together an updated new Qnap NAS for FCX (also 10GBE but also includes thunderbolt 3) $1800 for the unit and then add 8x 14TB drives (not cheap but still way less). 84TB usable space with raid 6 and same speed for shared editing since its limited to 10GBe. Just slightly more difficult to setup but works the same way and a total of under $5800 vs $40,000. What I’m more surprised about is you guys weren’t using a Server/NAS sooner. We just have two of us and switched over a year ago, so crazy to be swapping drives back and fourth. Congrats on the unit though and especially on the team!! Keep putting out that crispy content."

Tallmanproductions.net | Windows 10 Pro | i7-5820k CPU | 64 gigs RAM | NvidiaGeForceGTX970 | Blackmagic Decklink 4k Mini Monitor |
Adobe CC 2019 13.0 | Renders/cache: Samsung SSD 950 Pro x2 in Raid 0 | Media: Samsung SSD 960 PRO PCIe NVMe M.2 2280 x 2 | Media: OWC Thunderbay 4 x 2 Raid 0 mirrored with Resilio


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Herb Sevush on Jan 9, 2019 at 1:33:29 pm

[Bill Davis] " the need for scopes and keeping "within the lines" on stuff like the broadcast NTSC 100ire limit might be less mission critical than it used to be."

A minor point here. The 100 ire limit is a legacy of early analog transmission where video over 100 ire often bled into the audio track creating a buzzing sound. There has been no reason to stick to that limit in HD other than bureaucratic laziness. Many broadcasters, other than PBS, allow highlights that go up to 104 or so.

As for using a computer monitor for grading, I'll quote Richard Pryor - "who are you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes."

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


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Paul Neumann on Jan 9, 2019 at 4:24:32 pm

I remember redubbing carts that had audio buzz from bad video levels.


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Oliver Peters on Jan 10, 2019 at 1:04:35 am

[Bill Davis] "These young producers are creating content nearly exclusively for a relatively newly viable non-broadcast market. The gold standard for them is clearly NOT AC Neilson ratings, but "likes" and subscribes — and so that's where they concentrate. They know the new game. And it's NOT the same as the old game."

While that is true in this case, it's not universally true for today's video producers. Many of those are doing fairly standard work fare for clients - as they always have - and still need to deal with the "why doesn't it look right on my ___" question. That's where proper video disciplines still come in handy.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Andrew Kimery on Jan 10, 2019 at 5:12:06 pm

[Bill Davis] "These young producers are creating content nearly exclusively for a relatively newly viable non-broadcast market. The gold standard for them is clearly NOT AC Neilson ratings, but "likes" and subscribes — and so that's where they concentrate. They know the new game. And it's NOT the same as the old game."

I beneath the surface I think the new game is very much like the old game. For example, ad revenue pays the bills for YouTubers with channel subscriptions, likes, and views being peddled as no-middle-man-needed Neilsen replacement. But channel subscriptions, likes and views are easily (and commonly) artificially inflated by click farms, and there's not any objective, agreed upon guidelines for what constitutes a 'view' so online video platforms are all free to cook their numbers however they want. For example, if you scroll past a video in your social media feed or on a website and it auto-plays for a quarter second that could count as a view.

I feel like once a year in tech media there is a 'bombshell' article about how the self-reported numbers from video platforms are wildly inflated (shocker). Advertisers certainly don't want to buy ad time based on fake and/or unverifiable traffic, which is one reason why ad rates for the web are so low. So what's the solution? Maybe an independent third party that can apply a standardized set of metrics across all video platforms and make those numbers publicly available? Basically Neilsen TV ratings but for the Internet.

This, of course, doesn't even get into things like sponsorships, merch sales, affiliate links, Patreon, etc., As much as things can feel new and crazy and wild in the beginning, once the dust starts to settle the new boss starts to look an awful lot like the old boss.


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Tony West on Jan 9, 2019 at 5:24:01 pm

Looks like to me his focus was more on showing their collaborative workflow and may have just been roughing that grade in order to get to what he was really showing you.

Scopes or not, the production value of the video was nice. Nothing looked too blown out and they even handled the exposure of the one African America they featured well. Something I often see productions struggle with.

They had a natural ND if they had just pulled those blinds down a little more in the station shot but that's minor.

They have found success with a set up that features no less than "5" iMac Pros, more than I have seen in the facilities I have been in and almost half a million views on that video.


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Herb Sevush on Jan 9, 2019 at 5:45:32 pm

[Tony West] "Looks like to me his focus was more on showing their collaborative workflow and may have just been roughing that grade in order to get to what he was really showing you. "

When the project was sent over to Matt, he had his scopes up when looking at the material, so I agree that I don't think they are really grading by eye on a computer screen when dealing with an actual edit..

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


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Mark Raudonis on Jan 9, 2019 at 6:14:05 pm

I give credit to Luma Forge for pioneering this elegant solution for shared storage for the FCP crowd... but, come on, AVID has been doing this since the 90's!




Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Ronny Courtens on Jan 9, 2019 at 7:31:10 pm

Hey Mark.

It's not only for the FCP crowd. Although LumaForge has specifically developed these high-performance servers because no other server at that time could cope with the heavy stress that the Library structure of FCP X puts on the server traffic, we now have as many clients who use Premiere Pro CC and Resolve as we have FCP X clients. And we work very closely with Apple, Adobe and BlackMagic. As an example: we are currently the only company that runs Resolve collaboration straight off our systems without needing an external server for the PostgreSQL database.

- Ronny


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Loring Weinkauf on Jan 30, 2019 at 12:17:28 am

I'd like to correct a few statements:

"Although LumaForge has specifically developed these high-performance servers because no other server at that time could cope with the heavy stress that the Library structure of FCP X puts on the server traffic"

This is incorrect. Studio Network Solutions has been making shared storage solutions for over 20 years for the M&E industry, and our EVO shared storage systems have supported shared Final Cut Pro X workflows since shortly after the release of FCPX.

"we are currently the only company that runs Resolve collaboration straight off our systems without needing an external server for the PostgreSQL database."

Also incorrect. EVO has natively hosted the Resolve Studio database on our shared storage systems since the release of Resolve Studio 15, enabling Resolve Studio collaboration.

These features (and many more) are available with all of our EVO shared storage solutions.

https://www.studionetworksolutions.com/products/

Loring Weinkauf
Studio Network Solutions


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Oliver Peters on Jan 10, 2019 at 12:51:08 am

[Mark Raudonis] "but, come on, AVID has been doing this since the 90's!"

Certainly Avid has been doing shared storage and in fact, more or less invented the way modern post is done using shared storage. However, Avid storage has historically been used in long-form editing and in newsrooms. The first group typically works with proxies and the second group with low-bandwidth media.

Today, many of the shops that are using these newer systems are also tending to work with more taxing files, like native 4K media. I know Avid Nexis is pretty solid, but honestly, how many Avid shops are pushing 4K ProResHQ (and higher) through a collaborative workflow? Usually it's more offline-online and in many cases that "online" with full-res media is pushed off to low RAIDs. So the landscape has changed a little.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Neil Goodman on Jan 30, 2019 at 2:55:36 am

[Oliver Peters] "I know Avid Nexis is pretty solid, but honestly, how many Avid shops are pushing 4K ProResHQ (and higher) through a collaborative workflow? Usually it's more offline-online and in many cases that "online" with full-res media is pushed off to low RAIDs. So the landscape has changed a little.

- Oliver"


I bet none of them are pushing 4k through those pipes. Ive never worked at one place that use media natively especially 4k and Im really not sure why anyone would want to edit natively in 4k vs a Proxy/ Offline workflow. If time is an issue - you build that in upfront, and I thi kwhatever time is "wasted" making useable files - you gain back in the edit because the files are buttery.


Re: Ain’t your grandpas TV Production studio any more, I suppose.
by Oliver Peters on Jan 30, 2019 at 1:37:47 pm

[Neil Goodman] "Im really not sure why anyone would want to edit natively in 4k vs a Proxy/ Offline workflow."

In our case (the shop that I freelance most at), we have very short turnarounds on most of the main client's marketing videos. Those projects also tend to be revisited/revised a lot, so online resolution material has to be available on the network for a long time (going on 3 years in some cases). Not to mention that the same source material often touches dozens of different projects over a few years, so a proxy workflow is very impractical. Those projects finish directly out of Premiere.

The same client also has us producing/posting a streaming travel series. That goes through a proxy workflow with a Resolve roundtrip and Premiere finish. There the schedule permits the time and the quantity of raw media is much larger per project (episode). However, even there the 4K original lives on the network and is accessible to everyone, because other content is also cut from this media.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com





© CreativeCOW.net