Renders from QT wrappers VS. REDCINE

[Chris Kenny]

Actually you can do this today just by swapping files with the same name and reconnecting.

Sure, except for the present lack of full-quality-decode QuickTime wrappers to re-link to.

 

[I Bloom]

These are some of the tricks I will try using until things get sorted. Actually, I'm more of an FX/compositor, so my FCP editor will try these workarounds.

Until the full quality codec comes out. This is just an excercise in futility. Better to try work with 1K proxies and then get downconverted footage from Redcine.

IBloom

 

[Curran Giddens]

How about this:

1. make 1k (low-quality debayer) DPX in RedCine
2. edit in FCP
3. save FCP project as xml
4. open xml in a text editor
5. change project settings to 4096x2160 pixels and save
6. make list of DPX files used in xml
7. export 4K (high-quality debayer) DPX from list manually
8. swap 1k DPX with 4K DPX files with the same name
9. open xml in FCP
10. render 4K DPX

 

[number6]

Adobe is gonna make 'em sit up and start coding faster after NAB 2008 -

Anything concrete, or even a semi-factually based rumor would be welcomed!

 

[John Tissavary]

How about this:

1. make 1k (low-quality debayer) DPX in RedCine
2. edit in FCP
3. save FCP project as xml
4. open xml in a text editor
5. change project settings to 4096x2160 pixels and save
6. make list of DPX files used in xml
7. export 4K (high-quality debayer) DPX from list manually
8. swap 1k DPX with 4K DPX files with the same name
9. open xml in FCP
10. render 4K DPX

I think it's a monstrous task to (re. item 7) run a manual export from RedCine or RedAlert for anything but the shortest projects, or those with very few edits.

BTW, can FCP conform DPX sequences? W/O gluetools you can't even import DPX...

cheers,

jt

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Anything concrete, or even a semi-factually based rumor would be welcomed!

I plead the 5th.

Please take my "predictions" as pure non-fact based rumor :devil: :shifty:

 

[number6]

I plead the 5th.

Please take my "predictions" as pure non-fact based rumor :devil: :shifty:

And you have the properly signed NDAs to prove it! :biggrin:

 

[Curran Giddens]

I think it's a monstrous task to (re. item 7) run a manual export from RedCine or RedAlert for anything but the shortest projects, or those with very few edits.

This is just a temporary solution until RedCine has a Pull List feature. Also, I will probably manually grade each 4K file in RedCine anyway.

BTW, can FCP conform DPX sequences? W/O gluetools you can't even import DPX...

I wouldn't really know about that. Like I said, I'm not actually an editor.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

How about this:

1. make 1k (low-quality debayer) DPX in RedCine
2. edit in FCP
3. save FCP project as xml
4. open xml in a text editor
5. change project settings to 4096x2160 pixels and save
6. make list of DPX files used in xml
7. export 4K (high-quality debayer) DPX from list manually
8. swap 1k DPX with 4K DPX files with the same name
9. open xml in FCP
10. render 4K DPX

That's pretty painful. And it won't work - MAYBE with the new, soon to be released glue tools version - but even still - try this -

#1) why make a 1K DPX when you already have a 1K QT wrapper with TC + reel # - you can transcode this to prores or another codec ( a few clicks in Compressor) if you like to edit self-contained (with audio like we do) - your EDL and XML have what they need to conform.

#2) you could manually create a pull list - depending on your skill - you can automate this if you are clever - however, I expect that REDCINE will have a pull list feature any day now (or already - I am on vacation - they are not) - now you export 4K DPX - slow and painful depending on your system and disc array speed - conform - lots of options to conform from DPX - I THINK you can even do it from XML in Fusion??

Anyway - much easier to come to Offhollywood - or another facility with Scratch if you really want to deliver 4K - we copy the .3rd files used in your project to our system - open your edit - grade as much or as little as you want and export fully conformed 4K timeline.

Just sayin ... life is short ...

 

[Curran Giddens]

That's pretty painful. And it won't work - MAYBE with the new, soon to be released glue tools version - but even still - try this -

Anyway - much easier to come to Offhollywood - or another facility with Scratch if you really want to deliver 4K - we copy the .3rd files used in your project to our system - open your edit - grade as much or as little as you want and export fully conformed 4K timeline.

Just sayin ... life is short ...

Yeah, that would be much easier, and I would love to check out the new facility when its completed. Hope you're having a nice, relaxing vacation.

What is new in the soon-to-be-released Glue Tools version?

 

[M Most]

now you export 4K DPX - slow and painful depending on your system and disc array speed

It's slow and painful regardless of your system and disk array speed. However, it's ridiculously slow and painful if your hardware and disk array are not blazingly fast. I wish more people here (and elsewhere) would realize that when they talk of finishing their material at 4K resolution.

 

[Chris Kenny]

If the commodity desktop workflow gets to the point where you can work compressed right up to the final output stage (as is already the case in SCRATCH, I believe), generating a 4K uncompressed deliverable might not be so painful. At the end of the process you'd just point your conforming app to a volume large enough to hold 100 minutes (or whatever) of 4K DPX files, and come back several days or a week later....

Though I'm not sure why anyone would feel a need to produce a 4K uncompressed deliverable in the sort of budget ranges where commodity desktop workflow is your best option. Not having a 4K deliverable isn't exactly likely to hurt the market value of your indie feature, when 2K DI is still considered fine even for Hollywood blockbusters.

 

[M Most]

If the commodity desktop workflow gets to the point where you can work compressed right up to the final output stage (as is already the case in SCRATCH, I believe)

Sort of. That is basically the case if you're only doing basic color correction and not performing any area isolations (what most people would call Power Windows, although that's actually a DaVinci trademark - in Scratch they're called Scaffolds). At the moment, the scaffolds don't scale, so anything you do on, say, a 1K extraction has to be manually resized and repositioned on, say, a 2K extraction (this current limitation will, of course, ultimately be fixed). Not to mention color management issues for film recording. There are, of course, workarounds, and Scratch is still a great choice for Red project finishing.

Though I'm not sure why anyone would feel a need to produce a 4K uncompressed deliverable in the sort of budget ranges where commodity desktop workflow is your best option. Not having a 4K deliverable isn't exactly likely to hurt the market value of your indie feature, when 2K DI is still considered fine even for Hollywood blockbusters.

Completely agree, which is why I always find it amusing that so few here seem to actually grasp it.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Completely agree, which is why I always find it amusing that so few here seem to actually grasp it.

I think they will grasp it quickly when they try to do it themselves without the proper infrastructure.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

What is new in the soon-to-be-released Glue Tools version?

Pliny (our Director of Operations & chief mad scientist) has a long conversation with them a week or so ago - they have some great stuff in the works. Keep your eye on their website.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

(Taking a deep breath, looking in one corner, a 5 XSERVE + XRAID, Xsan, shake + recording unit, looking in the other corner a 128 core linux cluster with raid and SAN for maya renders, looking everywhere: 8-core and 4 core macs and PC's, all and everything and his mother connected via fiber)

Before any of this 4k stuff is enabled in FCP, I'd like to see the infrastructure around FCP see a serious upgrade. Farmed out background-renders with automated on/offline tools from FCP.

Work on proxies (much like you can in Shake, just better...) and send renders/online to an external machine via an automated workflow.

And mind you: I'm not neccesarily talking 4k here, just good ole 1080/2k.

Redcine should come in a plug-in flavour for FCP (like it was hinted @ NAB)

And while we're @ it: A tighter intergration with Color, it would be nice if one could bring Color in directly to FCP/Motion and (dare I say...) Shake.

I would like to see a way to make all this processing power available to the workststions so that one could keep working on ones tasks while rendering happened completely in the background - be it prores, tiff or dpx.

THEN, when such an infrastructure is available, we could start talking 2k or 4k.

Gunleik
(dreaming on)

 

[Curran Giddens]

Pliny (our Director of Operations & chief mad scientist) has a long conversation with them a week or so ago - they have some great stuff in the works. Keep your eye on their website.

Thanks. I'll keep my eye on it.

I think they will grasp it quickly when they try to do it themselves without the proper infrastructure.

My FCP editor already has an 8-core Mac Pro with ATI X1900 XT. I haven't tested it myself, but from the render times for 4K DPX export from RedCine that I've seen posted, disk-speed doesn't seem to be much of a limiting factor. You just need a ton of storage space.

Though I'm not sure why anyone would feel a need to produce a 4K uncompressed deliverable in the sort of budget ranges where commodity desktop workflow is your best option. Not having a 4K deliverable isn't exactly likely to hurt the market value of your indie feature, when 2K DI is still considered fine even for Hollywood blockbusters.

How about future-proofing? Someone could just store the 4K files on a bunch of SATA drives for a few years. Later, package as a 4K DCI-spec DCP on a desktop for distribution if necessary. By then there will be a standard solution for the long-term archival of DCI-spec packages.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

How about future-proofing? Someone could just store the 4K files on a bunch of SATA drives for a few years. Later, package as a 4K DCI-spec DCP on a desktop for distribution if necessary. By then there will be a standard solution for the long-term archival of DCI-spec packages.

yeah, but you just need the camera original 4K redcode raw files on LTO and an EDL or XML to be "future-proof". And yeah, a project file from whatever you used to grade and finish your film would be awfully handy.

I think all the "do-it-yourself" folks out there should really focus on 4K to HD workflows. Until there is widespread 4K digital projection, the ONLY reason to finish with 4K delivery is theatrical distrbution - and even then - many can make a solid argument for 4K downsample to 2K filmout.

With an HD post pipleine - as long as you shot in 4K - well - you can go back to 4K if you need to - that is just about archiving elements properly.

How many of your clients and your realistic potential clients pay for 4K deliverables?

Now, how many of your clients and your realistic potential clients pay for HD deliverables?

Why are you spending so much time trying to figure out how to cheaply deliver in 4K?

Spend your time trying to figure out the best way to deliver 4K originated material in HD.

My 2 cents.

 

[Curran Giddens]

I appreciate your 2 cents. I guess I forgot to mention that this workflow is for my own projects and will have vfx work done to almost every shot.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

I appreciate your 2 cents. I guess I forgot to mention that this workflow is for my own projects and will have vfx work done to almost every shot.

ahhhhh ... a bit different. One could still argue that downsample from 4K to HD for FX work is good enough - but if I was an FX guy - and I had the option to work with 4K material .... yeah ... I'd take the 4K.

Out of curiosity ... what is your primary FX applications(s)?