Red Rushes Vs. Metafuze

[Igor Ridanovic]

I was wondering if you had ever done a Red project in FCP? You simply transcode to ProRes and start cutting. A lot of this discussion about the ease of using Metafuze, BootCamp, MXF wrappers, "fast importing" etc (fast compared to what?) rings a little hollow...

Right, but it also ties up your FCP machine while transcoding. It all depends on the volume of dailies you're dealing with. You can load MetaFuze on any number of machines and go to town transcoding while your Media Composer is still available for editing. You can even start cutting your transcoded MXF media as soon as it becomes available.

 

[a kines]

Right, but it also ties up your FCP machine while transcoding.

Only if you're using the L&T method. Put Clipfinder and the RED software on any machine and you're in the same place as Metafuze; heading into town, transcoding and cutting as footage becomes available.
There is no single winner here. Pick the story telling tool you like, then bend your workflow to make the story flow. Everyone wins.

 

[Alex Carr]

Right, most workflows steer far clear of FCP Log and Transfer, too slow and color is almost always in-accurate.

 

[Job ter Burg]

Sure, Log & Transfer lets you bring in R3D through the application itself (tying up the machine of course). And you cannot do that in Avid today, you need to launch an extra application. That's a difference.

Either system will allow you the advantage of using a separate (standalone or networked) system to do the transcoding. This is exactly why I wrote that I fail to see the practical difference between Avid or FCP workflows at this point in time. You use a standalone app to render either to ProRes/QT or DNxHD/MXF.