Quick question...

DJPadre wrote on 9/13/2006, 10:29 AM
umm...
can someone explain to me why Prem can capture straight to cineform but Vegas doesnt? (through firewire out of the cam... not decklink and the like)

Im just curious is all... as it seems that to save copious amounts of time and system resources, one may need to out and purchase one of these "on the fly" capable apps, simply to capture said footage to the favoured codec...

thoughts?? Ideas??

just wondering..

Comments

Nat wrote on 9/13/2006, 10:39 AM
I think the focus was to make native mt2 editing much faster, which they did, making cineform less useful.

I can edit native HDV at good speeds on my little 1.6ghz Turion...
Wolfgang S. wrote on 9/13/2006, 10:47 AM
Well, there is also Canopus Edius on the market, that can capture to the Canopus HQ intermediate codec directly - so another fly conversion.

As far as I understand the Sony approach, Nat is right: the goal was to go toward native m2t editing. That is something that some people will like, some will dislike.

So, that is still something that you can do with the Cineform products with Vegas only.

Desktop: PC AMD 3960X, 24x3,8 Mhz * RTX 3080 Ti (12 GB)* Blackmagic Extreme 4K 12G * QNAP Max8 10 Gb Lan * Resolve Studio 18 * Edius X* Blackmagic Pocket 6K/6K Pro, EVA1, FS7

Laptop: ProArt Studiobook 16 OLED * internal HDR preview * i9 12900H with i-GPU Iris XE * 32 GB Ram) * Geforce RTX 3070 TI 8GB * internal HDR preview on the laptop monitor * Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K mini

HDR monitor: ProArt Monitor PA32 UCG-K 1600 nits, Atomos Sumo

Others: Edius NX (Canopus NX)-card in an old XP-System. Edius 4.6 and other systems

DJPadre wrote on 9/13/2006, 10:56 AM
i dont doubt that..

but heres another example...

capture m2t to dual core 1.73 laptop with 1gb ram, nvidia 7300 go gfx card...

Vegas
1 video track, no filters.. works a treat.. native..
do ANYTHING to this and it starts to bog down though... add another layer.. forgt it.. take out filters... try it again.. 2 layers.. hmm. not bad.. killing 20fps..acceptable
RENDER that layer though.. may as well go take a shower...


Ok, now do the same thing in prePro2... Same native M2t...
same as vegas.. nice and quick.. throw on a filter.. or 5 .... wow.. still full frame...
hmm.. let try another track...
same results.. 5 filters on track b... no filters track a.... full frame.. hmm..

add filter to second track.. get a bit gluggy now...
kil all filters... full frame..

and add track after track..
whoops.. 4 native m2t track....no filters... not bad for a laptop...
Ad a filter.. still full frame... okies...
ad another filter on track b... geting a little gluggy now..
render out...
goodness me.. its almost realtime..

Try the above with cienform (in vegas... )
VERY similar results to Prem2 speed.. prem 2 IS being assisted by the nvidia however... but if i didnt want native m2t.. i still have the optin to capture as cineform...
Wow.. teh best of both worlds...
Vegas.. ok. i want cineform...
capure as m2t.. with timecode now.. now throw this on the timeline and render out as cineform..
damn whers my timecde?
Whoops... defeats the purpose of what im tryin to acheve here..
As compositing with m2t suck the donkeys balls compared to CineAVI... i use CineAVI for image integrity... BUT im still sacrificing my timecode data...
so whats the point?

That and the fact is still doesnt perform any better than premPro2... assisted or not.. avi or m2t...

bugger
Jay-Hancock wrote on 9/13/2006, 11:13 AM
This .m2t performance with PPro ... if adding effects / compositing / layers / etc. makes the output quality suffer, why bother with it? How much "bang for the buck" are you getting from fast 4-layer .m2t playback if you get sub-par render quality?

Seems like .m2t editing is best for making cut edits, and both applications now are evidently doing well. For the more complex stuff, we still want to rely on CFDIs.
DJPadre wrote on 9/13/2006, 11:30 AM
"Seems like .m2t editing is best for making cut edits, and both applications now are evidently doing well. For the more complex stuff, we still want to rely on CFDIs. "

and THAT my friend is my point...
Go cineform.. YAY.. oh hang back i gotta capture as m2t, THEN render to cineform... hmm.. how many tapes do i have?? Oh.. 6 you say.. pretty average for a wedding.. ok.. lets capture then render out..
6 hours capture and 5 hours render later.... i can start my edit..

Prem...
Oh.. 6 tapes you say.. pretty average for a wedding.. ok.. lets capture then render out.. whoops.. no need to render out...
6 hours later.... i can start my edit..
Wow, ive jsut saved 5 hours production time... ive jsut saved 5 hours from my Hardware wear and tear.. ive jsut saved 5 hours of a fat assed PC pumpin 550w.... wonder how many hours and dollars i save with THIS capture routine...

This is my point..




Jay-Hancock wrote on 9/13/2006, 3:38 PM
If you're doing that much work in CFDI, it's probably time to squeeze out the $200 for HD Connect so you can directly capture to CFDI (it can also give you both by saving your .m2t files at the same time). That extra $200 is less than the cost of buying PPro instead of Vegas. And in any case, most users of PPro evidently find they have to buy Cineform's Aspect HD product to get real performance, and that one costs an extra $500 (not the $200 that we pay). True, they are apples and oranges (Aspect vs. Connect HD), but that's the deal.