ProRes vs. Quicktime Wrapped R3Ds

[Tommy]

I'm trying to decide between editing a feature with transcoded ProRes or with Quicktime wrapped R3Ds. My system specs are as follows...

Mac OS 10.4.11
2x 2.66 GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
6GB 667 MHz DDR2 FB-DIMM
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT
FCP 6.0.3

I'm pretty sure I'll need to update to Leopard and FCP 6.0.5. Personally, I'd like to edit native as it will allow for color correction in Apple Color without reconnection to the original R3Ds (I'm finishing in ProRes HQ 1080p). This is also a money saver since we're going to a post house for color grading and won't have to do an online. I've heard there can be some issues when trying to reconnect the ProRes files to the original R3Ds and I'd like to avoid this if possible. Also, the fact that the transcoded ProRes files are larger than the R3Ds means additional hard drives. On the other hand I'm not sure if my system is going to be able to handle the Quicktime wrapped R3D files. It's not a multicam project and there are only about 5 dissolves (which can be applied at the very end), no effects. Does anyone have any recommendations? Thanks, Tommy

 

[Tommy]

An additional concern, I just realized, is the fact that Red Final Cut Studio 2 Installer only supports cameras up through Build 16. So, is it even possible wrap the R3Ds if you're shooting with the current build? Thanks, Tommy

 

[Vico Martin]

Yeah! you can wrap with B17.
I prefer ProRes and color conform, more confortable for the machine during edit.

 

[Scott Simmons]

It's best try a test and see what is better for you. You will find both opinion around here. Personally, I would make ProRes files for edit. I work with both and prefer ProRes 95% of the time. Performance is better all around and you can do more with that edit. No worry of performance hits and rendering. And for all the media and timelines that a feature will require there is no way that I would edit the R3D QTs ... that's my opinion.

 

[Craig Schober]

i would be inclined to go with pro-res too but aren't we talking about 10-bit (pro-res) vs. 12-bit (wrapped r3d) in color? now when you render and reconnect to native r3d, it might not matter but aren't you making grading choices in color based upon 2 bits of data less than if you were working with native files? i could easily be wrong so any insight would be great.

 

[Sam Roberts]

The wrapped R3D's really slow the machine down when editing on the timeline...lots of spinning color wheels. I get this and my Mac Pro is running on 3.3 ghz/8gb ram with a Caldigit raid.

Today I'm experimenting with Workflow #2 from the RED/FCP Whitepaper:

work offline using prores and finish using wrapped R3d's in color. It is more time consuming than the all prores approach but I think it might be worth it once I get into Color and start grading.

I'd be interested in hearing from others who use this method of editing and what they think of it.

 

[Matt Weatherly]

I'm currently editing a feature as well and I also recommend the ProRes workflow (#2 on the FCS whitepaper).

Just do some tests all the way through and see if you like it. Yeah, with ProRes you need the hard drive space and a huge amount of time for the transcodes but having a more responsive format for the picture edit makes all the difference for me.

I'm on FCP 6.0.5 but I'm actually still on Tiger like yourself so don't worry about that. One more thing: I'm editing on a Macbook Pro! So really, ProRes was the only viable option for me and it's working out very nicely so far.

 

[Sam Roberts]

I remember the first professional editing suite I walked into back in the 70's.... Steinbeck flatbeds, big ol noisy moviolas, film in real (big) bins, heavy duty razor guillotines to chop the film, all noise and chaos to the untrained eye.

No we can do it all on a MacBook Pro.

As we used to say back then- "are you trying to blow my mind!?"