Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

AVID DNxHD / DNxHR + RED DSMC2

Bob Gundu said:
Thats what the OMOD is for. I'm sure Mark will chime in!
Click to expand...

No. We are not doing burn in to media on OMOD. We are doing burn in of meta data, like lens data, to the live video on the monitor paths for ACs, etc. So, no. Different thing.

Back to the subject - DNxHD + RAW at the same time - no render - is freekin' AWESOME.
 
Steve Sherrick said:
I want to make sure I don't derail this thread with negativity because what RED is doing is exactly what people have asked for. This announcement is awesome news!

What I'm referring to is what I typically encounter in dailies workflows:
- Apply looks
- Sync Sound (Either in dailies app or in Avid)
- Scene take renaming (this happens automatically via BWF in most of the tools I use)
- Window burn (this can get complicated because some of the editors I have worked with are very picky about how this info is displayed. In one case we had to customize the dailies software so that it could match exactly what he wanted. When you win a couple of Oscars, you get to call the shots)
- Deliver DnXHD 36 MXF (sometimes DxX115)

As far as I know OMOD does not do that but if it does, then I need to take a closer look at that because clearly I haven't understand the concept from the get go. :-)
Click to expand...

Steve -

One workflow with DNxHD + RAW is to record the DNxHD in RLF (log). Deliver to editorial with CDL sidecars & BWFs.

Editorial can sync in Avid with BWF and import and sync CDLs. CDLs can process over LOG n real time with GPU. No render. Edit.

Burn In's on editorial media are silly IMO since any NLE can generate them in real time with no render.
 
Craig Parkes said:
I think in this case it would make sense to take the high bitrate DNxHD or DNxHR files and transcode them out to your dailies format, rather than the tackling the .R3Ds which may take more processing grunt - especially if you are talking fast turn around broadcast workflows where you won't ever go back to the R3Ds.

I don't imagine in camera functionality being there for full offline proxies functionality in this generation of equipment personally, although with things like Fool Control and a little more work I feel like we are probably one camera generation away from that being a possibility (or maybe even something that could be unlocked internally with firmware upgrades in the Weapon eco system - but that might be a stretch.)

This seems much more how you can fit a R3D into EFP/Broadcast workflows natively, while still offering the R3D files for later use. This particularly makes sense for EFP kits shooting promo material/additional camera for sporting events/highlight packages etc whose material is also going to go into archive. Get the drop in functionality of the DNxHD or Prores workflow for the fast turn around event side of production, but the R3D's for the high quality archive and ancillary.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly. Which is why I think it's great that it has happened and should be a very welcome advancement for RED in those areas of production that will greatly benefit from it. Features and high end TV are just a tiny segment of the industry so for a lot of others this will make workflow far less tedious.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
Steve -

One workflow with DNxHD + RAW is to record the DNxHD in RLF (log). Deliver to editorial with CDL sidecars & BWFs.

Editorial can sync in Avid with BWF and import and sync CDLs. CDLs can process over LOG n real time with GPU. No render. Edit.

Burn In's on editorial media are silly IMO since any NLE can generate them in real time with no render.
Click to expand...
Haha, but you've been around the industry long enough to have seen that old habits die hard. :-)

I absolutely agree about the potential of DNxHD to save some computing cycles when dealing with R3D dailies generation but I know editorial teams in feature world will still want things done like they have been done. Takes a while for these things to change. But over time, things are going to get more automated, new workflows will take hold and hopefully there is less work needed to get to the fun stuff which is editing and being creative.

What RED has done is give people far less excuses to not shoot RED. R3D, ProRes, DNxHD/HR. The options are there, the workflows are reliable. It's just coming down to personal choice of what to shoot on. I think RED is in a great position to attract more people to the party.
 
Great news! :) But I wonder if it's MXF OP atom or Quicktime wrapped? If it's DNxHD in MXF OP atom, you don't have to even import/fast import the files into Avid, just put them in the media folder and start editing. Quicktime DNxHD in Avid works just as ProRes quicktimes really.
 
Jarred Land said:
We are very proud to welcome Avid DNX to the DSMC2 family. DNxHR and DNxHD will be enabled in camera @ NAB.
Click to expand...

Wow. Just wow. Awesome news! Been an Avid user for about 20 years, and this is seriously sweet icing on the cake. I think we're just shy of the DSMC2 cameras actually editing the footage themselves at this point - maybe that will be NAB 2017.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
Great news! :) But I wonder if it's MXF OP atom or Quicktime wrapped? If it's DNxHD in MXF OP atom, you don't have to even import/fast import the files into Avid, just put them in the media folder and start editing. Quicktime DNxHD in Avid works just as ProRes quicktimes really.
Click to expand...

Keen to hear about the wrapper here also. Fingers crossed it's MXF!
 
Laymans Terms?

Laymans Terms?

I can't say that I'm fully versed on formats and codecs. The only thing I can say I know about DnxHR and DNxHD is that I've read it is good at maintaining high quality with smaller file size. I have a few functionality questions surrounding this.

1. Does this mean, that if I choose to record in DNxHR over the native .r3d format, that I can record more time on a mini mag since the DNxHR format takes up less space?

2. Is DNxHR still considered RAW with the same flexibility to push files much further in post while maintaining quality?

3. I mainly edit in Premiere Pro and Sony Vegas. Does this mean I can expect my editing/playback to run relatively smoother with smaller files?

4. If I record .r3d and DNxHR at the same time, I assume this creates two separate files and will fill up cards much faster?
:confused:
 
I've been using dnxhr and dnxhd for some round tripping, but have some questions on 4k content. I orignally though "HD" standed for 1080p and the "HR" was for 4k, but here's my current understanding:
1) both HD and HR do 4k content
2) HD 422 is 10 bit
3) HR 444 is 12 bit

Reason why I'm going through this, is some programs were having problems with HR, while other programs liked HR. So I was just thinking of using HD 422 10 BIT to replace some of my DPX 10 bit workflow. It would be really nice if the Weapon did 4k 10bit HD 422, but i'm not sure if that is a standard (or is just something that works on some of my programs). I guess where I'm confused on codec, it seems it's be a bit (pun intended) confusing on when the HD/HR is defining bit range (i.e. 8/10/12) vs when the HD/HR choice of codec defines pixel count/aspect ratio. (i.e. in nuke it appears that the HD is purely a bit depth codec and can be any aspect/pixel range up to 4k).
 
Roger Alexander said:
I can't say that I'm fully versed on formats and codecs. The only thing I can say I know about DnxHR and DNxHD is that I've read it is good at maintaining high quality with smaller file size. I have a few functionality questions surrounding this.

1. Does this mean, that if I choose to record in DNxHR over the native .r3d format, that I can record more time on a mini mag since the DNxHR format takes up less space?

2. Is DNxHR still considered RAW with the same flexibility to push files much further in post while maintaining quality?

3. I mainly edit in Premiere Pro and Sony Vegas. Does this mean I can expect my editing/playback to run relatively smoother with smaller files?

4. If I record .r3d and DNxHR at the same time, I assume this creates two separate files and will fill up cards much faster?
:confused:
Click to expand...

Hi Roger,

DNxHD/DNxHR are proprietary codecs based around the Avid Media Composer editing platform, which has been a top-tier platform for many years. The DNxHD/HR codecs would not be considered RAW. They, like ProRes and most other formats, are more or less "baked in" images, meaning you want to be more mindful of things like color balance, etc. if you plan on ONLY using this file within your workflow. You can always link to the original RAW files when doing final post work like color correction. While other editing and/or graphics programs can handle the Avid codec, the real benefit goes to, of course, Avid Media Composer/Symphony users. What's great about the codec is that it's small and efficient. It's similar to ProRes in that way. But it takes it a step further and makes it even easier to ingest footage into the Avid editing bins (disclaimer: pending further clarification on whether it's an OP atom or Quicktime wrapper). Last, yes, if you record R3D and DNxHD/HR at the same time, it creates two separate files and your cards will fill up faster. More data = more storage.
 
PatrickFaith said:
I've been using dnxhr and dnxhd for some round tripping, but have some questions on 4k content. I orignally though "HD" standed for 1080p and the "HR" was for 4k, but here's my current understanding:
1) both HD and HR do 4k content
2) HD 422 is 10 bit
3) HR 444 is 12 bit
Click to expand...

DNxHD is for 1080/720 material, and can be 8- or 10-bit, and either 422 or 444 chroma sampling, depending on the resolution level you choose. DNxHR is for 4K resolutions and can also be either 8- or 10-bit, and either 422 or 444.

That said, that does pose a VERY interesting question...

Does this mean that the DSMC2 lineup can record 4K internally to DNxHR??? That would be awesome! Phil? Jarred? Anyone?
 
Kevin D'Haeze said:
DNxHD is for 1080/720 material, and can be 8- or 10-bit, and either 422 or 444 chroma sampling, depending on the resolution level you choose. DNxHR is for 4K resolutions and can also be either 8- or 10-bit, and either 422 or 444.

That said, that does pose a VERY interesting question...

Does this mean that the DSMC2 lineup can record 4K internally to DNxHR??? That would be awesome! Phil? Jarred? Anyone?
Click to expand...

The CF Weapon will undoubtably be able to record DNxHR in 4K internally as stated in the first post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top