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 Media Composer 7

By the way, Alexa with ProRes is another discussion - each format will have a different impact on workflow, budget and overall pipeline. With ProRes though, I can render out to the same codec/data rate which changes how I look at a post pipeline.

Michael
 
Personally, I think FCPX has the workflow for 4K really down:
You just let the program make low resolution Prores Proxy in the background, and you can just leave with your laptop and those Proxy Files, come back in the studio and relink with (really) just a button in your preferences. Boom. Export 5K.
 
That is pretty cool, and what v7 mostly brings - background transcode, etc. Only thing missing is the 2K+ finish and output. I have yet to have anyone ask me for anything 3K plus yet. Not saying it's not going to happen, but not yet. But when they do, I have all the creative decisions preserved with metadata be it on MC or any other third party system using AAF.

Michael
 
Mike Halper said:
You still can't have 4K sequences or output 4K, so nothing to get excited about imo. Without full 4K support, I think Avid is basically useless these days. Even the $300 FCPX has 5K support.
Click to expand...

You are delivering a lot of 4K content?
 
Sergio Perez said:
In a couple of months Apple releases "retina" consumer PC's with 4K resolution. Playstation 4 comes out with a 4K spec Bluray. Everyone will be hungry for 4K content. Those that have it ready will earn a lot of money.
Click to expand...

And 1080p will STILL be the deliverable for the next few years.

It is not an either/or scenario.
 
Mike Halper said:
You still can't have 4K sequences or output 4K, so nothing to get excited about imo. Without full 4K support, I think Avid is basically useless these days. Even the $300 FCPX has 5K support.
Click to expand...

You do realize that "The Hobbit" 3D HFR trilogy is edited on AVID, do you?
And "Star Trek into Darkness" you know, the one that was partially shot on IMAX.

When it comes to the big stuff, no other editor comes close.

Peter
 
Mike Halper said:
You still can't have 4K sequences or output 4K, so nothing to get excited about imo. Without full 4K support, I think Avid is basically useless these days. Even the $300 FCPX has 5K support.
Click to expand...

You're confusing an editing tool with a finishing tool. To some people - apparently including yourself - those two things should be one and the same. But for most editors on high end long form work, editing is all about fluidity and having everything available instantly, which means using big data files (which come with the territory on 4K and higher material, and even with uncompressed HD) is not practical. So they tend to use an editing tool that can do everything they need in a way that's familiar, and provide information in a very usable form to pass to the finishing tools, which can work with the higher resolution files if necessary. But even as a finishing tool, Media Composer can fulfill the need for HD deliverables, which represent about 95% of the real world. If you actually have clients requiring 4K deliveries, you're in a very small minority at this point in time.

Avid is the defacto standard for essentially all studio level work and has been for a long time. I would hardly categorize that as "basically useless." It might be "basically useless" to you personally if you don't happen to do longform editing, don't have a lot of familiarity with Avid as an editing tool, only shoot and edit your own personal projects (or shortform material) that are shot on Red cameras, and never need to collaborate with others using standard interchange formats and lists. But that's not exactly a basis for making a general observation.
 
The odd thing is why Avid don't offer the option of doing it. Adding such an option (that's pretty much universal across its competitors) won't remove people's ability to use their existing workflows. The system even allows you to work with 4k plus media in the 2k and smaller timelines ( giving you a fair portion of the current advantages of shooting in 4k) so it can handle the files.
 
So what is the preferred de facto FINISHING software program?
 
Smoke, Avid DS, Baselight, Scratch, etc...

Michael
 
Ya, they just forgot about the editing part.

Mathieu Ghekiere said:
Personally, I think FCPX has the workflow for 4K really down:
You just let the program make low resolution Prores Proxy in the background, and you can just leave with your laptop and those Proxy Files, come back in the studio and relink with (really) just a button in your preferences. Boom. Export 5K.
Click to expand...
 
Thank you

M Most said:
You're confusing an editing tool with a finishing tool. To some people - apparently including yourself - those two things should be one and the same. But for most editors on high end long form work, editing is all about fluidity and having everything available instantly, which means using big data files (which come with the territory on 4K and higher material, and even with uncompressed HD) is not practical. So they tend to use an editing tool that can do everything they need in a way that's familiar, and provide information in a very usable form to pass to the finishing tools, which can work with the higher resolution files if necessary. But even as a finishing tool, Media Composer can fulfill the need for HD deliverables, which represent about 95% of the real world. If you actually have clients requiring 4K deliveries, you're in a very small minority at this point in time.

Avid is the defacto standard for essentially all studio level work and has been for a long time. I would hardly categorize that as "basically useless." It might be "basically useless" to you personally if you don't happen to do longform editing, don't have a lot of familiarity with Avid as an editing tool, only shoot and edit your own personal projects (or shortform material) that are shot on Red cameras, and never need to collaborate with others using standard interchange formats and lists. But that's not exactly a basis for making a general observation.
Click to expand...
 
Round-tripping between Resolve and editing software exists for a reason. Because people need and want to do it. I've needed to deliver final outputs and masters for many projects in 4K, and needed to do that in FCP and Premiere for various reasons. Recently I had a client specifically request a 5K master because they want to be ready for the future. Going back to the editing software allows for various changes that I've found are common, from special filters that needed to be applied after color grading, edit changes after color grading, titles, etc. There's a lot of reasons for that kind of workflow and for the need for the editing software to be able to handle 4K and 5K sequences and output in 4K and 5K.

Personally, I think there should always be a master in the higher resolution the footage was shot in. There's always a chance you're going to want the 4K master down the line, especially now that we have 4K TV's coming out and delivery methods for 4K to those TV's around the corner. Even Red says it... 4K is here now. So I stand by my statement, though I admit it's my own personal feelings. I just find it absurd that Avid doesn't support 4K, which every other major competitor does.
 
M Most said:
You're confusing an editing tool with a finishing tool. To some people - apparently including yourself - those two things should be one and the same. But for most editors on high end long form work, editing is all about fluidity and having everything available instantly, which means using big data files (which come with the territory on 4K and higher material, and even with uncompressed HD) is not practical. So they tend to use an editing tool that can do everything they need in a way that's familiar, and provide information in a very usable form to pass to the finishing tools, which can work with the higher resolution files if necessary. But even as a finishing tool, Media Composer can fulfill the need for HD deliverables, which represent about 95% of the real world. If you actually have clients requiring 4K deliveries, you're in a very small minority at this point in time.

Avid is the defacto standard for essentially all studio level work and has been for a long time. I would hardly categorize that as "basically useless." It might be "basically useless" to you personally if you don't happen to do longform editing, don't have a lot of familiarity with Avid as an editing tool, only shoot and edit your own personal projects (or shortform material) that are shot on Red cameras, and never need to collaborate with others using standard interchange formats and lists. But that's not exactly a basis for making a general observation.
Click to expand...

Mike,

Honestly, reframing is becoming more and more part of editing. And, AFICT, MC 7's FrameFlex decisions don't get carried over in an AAF export to any finishing application. Which means those editorial choices are going to have to be recreated.

4K? MC/Symphony can't even do 2K. That means letterboxed cropping to make a 2K DCP.

Sure, if you need to finish in 1080P only, you could finish in MC/Symphony. But the CC toolset is more than 12 years old. Just adding a vignette is PITA. The tracker is abysmal by modern standards. Symphony's secondaries are not nearly as precise as what you get with other finishing programs. The available noise reduction plugins are not near the quality of Neat Video. And the color math isn't 32 bit float, it's 12 or 16 bit integer depending on the how the CC effect is applied. I'm sure you've seen situations where a similar change is made is MC/Symphony, Baselight and Resolve... and the Avid grade just doesn't look as good as the Flimlight or DaVinci grades.
 
As was discussed in the FCP X threads, there are different segments of the video editing marketplace and hence different needs. There are big time feature film editors still cutting on Media Composer 4 and 5. The tools do what they need. But for a one man band Avid may not be the right tool.

Anyway, we all know that. So, the question becomes when will Avid implement 4k or higher projects? As far as I can tell, the foundatoon for this has already been built in. When they moved to 64-bit they put high resolution timelines on the roadmap. But they also needed to get this new version of Media Composer stable first and implement some other often requested features. In my opinion they still have some time before they have to do 4k projects. And by doing these high res project settings they may also have to consider more carefully the need to finish in Media Composer. That may require some new toolsets that will take some time to get in there.

So, while I think Media Composer is perfectly fine as a no nonsense editing interface, I do think Avid will have to offer the option of 4k eventually, if they want the market that deals with finishing inside the NLE. I think a strong partnership with Baselight for doing internal CC at 32bit float would help cover some of their deficiencies with grading and continuing to make the roundtrip between Resolve as smooth as possible.

So, no doubt Avid can keep improving but it is far from useless.
 
Steve,

My fear is that Avid's 4K will be UHD, a.k.a quad HD, i.e. 3840, and not true 4K, i.e. 4096. I fear this b/c Avid listens to broadcasters *A LOT MORE* than it does to professional post. And it's shaping up that 4K for broadcast is UHD.
 
Peter Moretti said:
Honestly, reframing is becoming more and more part of editing. And, AFICT, MC 7's FrameFlex decisions don't get carried over in an AAF export to any finishing application. Which means those editorial choices are going to have to be recreated.
Click to expand...

Not quite true as you can AAF a sequence with FrameFlex to another MC project and it will be there. The question is when will third parties have support for it? I hammered on this during beta working with third party tools and hopefully we will start to see these solutions come online.


Michael
 
One bet here:

When will AVID release the upgrade of Media Composer 7UltraDefinition™ ? For an additional 1000$ ?


Editing VS Finishing is a 1990's concept. And AVID are just k$ll$ng us with that. They had DS 10 years ago that was able to handle different frame rates/size/codecs they could have done the ultimate editing tool years ago.

I don't accept the 1080 argument for that.

Edit in what ever res you want, choose your preview res depending on editing speed, output whatever res you want.

Resolve works like that, FCPX works like that, Pemière/AE works like that.

Because AVID is leader of the market it doesn't need to? 1080 mastering is enough? (Yes AVID mastering).

And if I want to make my 8000pix by 2000pix special art project. Edit it in 4000x1000pix and render it full res. Why not?

It's all about $$$$, not technology.

Pat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top