Question for Jan
 

Hi,
normally i dont do this, but i thought i would pipe up since i saw ur post pertaining to FCP on the "Is ONE DAY learn and shoot possible? (hvx200) " thread...

Im curious..
what is Panasonic doing to ensure that other NLEs on different platforms are given the opportunity to edit footage aqcuired with this camera? Or will they be forced to jump the NLE (or cam) ship ??
Its just that PremPro2 is arguably the NLE with the highest user base, and even with a RT2 it doesnt support this format. Then theres Vegas
I know this "may not be Panas problem" however is Panasonic offering the codec to NLE producers to implement within their NLE's ???

Im just wondering because like many Event videographers, i await for NLE support before i decide on this camera, or whether i stick with tape based devices. Now that the Cineporter is nigh on completion, the long form versatility of the camera will start to rear its head, and its at this time where we Pana devotees are counting our pennys and tossing up the realities of what we do now vs what we'd LIKE to do in the future...

If you have been following the forums: Sony - who produces Vegas - opted not to support DVCPRO HD.

If you read the Matrox Specs for RT.X2 - it supports 100 Mbps HD captured as I-frame MPEG-2.

The decision to NOT support DVCPRO HD and P2 has nothing to do with Panasonic, who seems to be doing their best to get support out there.

"If you have been following the forums: Sony - who produces Vegas - opted not to support DVCPRO HD."

Forums are just that.. forums. I want the official word. Obviously i wont find it here, but at least Jan is in the know. In addition to that, where did u get THAT info from?? Do u honestly think Sony would shoot a toe off by NOT allowing the use of this codec? Or more likely variations of it? Considering their primary market is event videographers (not film or broadcast) they'd be making a stupid decision if they were to not implement DVCProHD, or to allow Intermediate formatted files to work within Vegas. Again, i dont know where u got this info from and until i hear anythign official from Sony from my own contact, or until i hear back from Pana, then i take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt

"If you read the Matrox Specs for RT.X2 - it supports 100 Mbps HD captured as I-frame MPEG-2."

I have read the matrox specs, i sell the bloody things.. lol
But its not the codec which is the issue for the RT2, it the resolution. It DOES NOT SUPPORT 720p. Late alone 1080p 24... hell the only progressive frames it does support is SD..
Let alone variable frame rate 720p in MXF format. The concept of P2 is to NOT HAVE THE NEED TO CAPTURE. WIth this, you have to run and capture the footage, which defeats the purpose. In addition to that, shooting DVCPRoHD i CHOOSE to use that format... if i wanted MPG2, id go HDV... Againt his 100mbps MPG2 defeats the purpose of using this camera and the codec cadence

Again, this is why I ask the questions i ask...
Removing the need for Intermediate encoding/and or capturing to a different format is an ideal time saving workflow and this is what im getting at. Ideally one would copy the footage across to HDD and start editing..

"The decision to NOT support DVCPRO HD and P2 has nothing to do with Panasonic, who seems to be doing their best to get support out there."

Well it does u see. Considering the codec itself is a patent of Panasonic, the use of that patented technology requires licensing (in most cases) as well as the source code for the technology itself, which can then allow for it to be integrated/manipulated as required to allow for implementation of said codec within any given NLE environemnt. Whether it be a QT shell with DVCPro 422 material within that stream or whether it be native MXF DVCPRoHD it doesnt matter.. the fact remains that the camera itself is an incredible tool, and to only have certain "friendly" NLE's given the ability to manipulate footage acquired from this camera would be the biggest mistake Pana could make.
In addition to that, there are MANY DVX100 owners out there looking for a HD solution. and the natural evolution for them is to keep the Pana hat on. The use of existing power supplies is one cost saving feature. Another feature is the menu system and camera layout. Basiclaly ANY DVX100 owner with half a brain can theoretically pick up the HVX and start shooting.
If however these existing users are stunted by a choice of NLE to edit said HD footage, (Ie if its a toss up between camera or NLE) then 98% of users would opt to stay with their NLE's
So again, i stand by my questions listed above.
I would like to be enlightened and i would prefer not have the buck passed

I'm really sorry I stepped into your anti-Panasonic rant.

Peter you've got to realize that the chance of Sony supporting DVCPRO HD is about the same as Chevrolet offering Ford engines... it just ain't gonna happen, and that's not "stupid," that's "business."

Premiere is something else again... don't forget the best kept secret on the PC side of the NLE field, and that's Canopus. They support everything. Any system that runs Premiere Pro should run Edius without issues.

Panasonic doesn't really need to "do" anything to ensure that other NLEs "are given the opportunity" to edit MXF footage. It's out of Panasonic's hands, really. It's to their advantage to have ~everyone~ MXF-capable...why would they want to limit this? Why would they turn down a revenue stream and deny licensing to a software company that wanted to implement DVCProHD in its editing software? Doesn't make sense.

I agree that it's highly unlikely you'll see Vegas supporting DVCProHD -- look at how long it took Sony's DVCam decks to even play back DVCPro (and still won't record it) versus Panasonic's decks, which played back DVCam very early in the product cycle. Sony isn't going to do anything that benefits Panasonic unless they're absolutely backed into a corner by their customer base.

For those software developers who choose not to support P2 MXF (it's ~their~ decision, not Panasonic's), there's Raylight, by DVFilm. I can't comment on how well it performs, but it's available, it's cheap, and I'm sure other 3rd party products will come out that use a proxy method to link MXF with non-MXF editors.

HA!
If u knew anything about me, youd know that im am more of an advocate of their products. With 2 DVX's in my own production studio and a myriad of other cameras passing my way, the DVX's are the constant equation within everything i shoot. In addition to that, having an EZ1, MX300, MX500 and DS88 one might consider me to me PRO Pana. And considering i have 2 Z1's sitting here collecting dust adds weight to my own considerations pertaining to Panasonic equipment.
It seems that there might be some confusion as to my tone within my post. Reason being is that im not one to fluff about or try to gloss over things. I say things how i (and my clients) see it

Edius for the PC supports all modes of the HVX.
I know I have the HVX 200, Edius and FCP 5.1.1

For basic cutting Edius is fine. However the HVX footage will only work in Edius on the PC, no AE support etc.
You could export lossless sequences if you need to work
in AE or another compositing program.

I bought into FCP soon after my HVX purchase.
As a long time Matrox DigiSuite user am I glad I
quit fighting and went to FCP. Once you get over the fact you are on a MAC then you can go with the flow.

:)
I hear ya mate.. but with the edius SP system we have here, the upgrade requirements for the codec is just too much to warrant (here in aus, your looking at about $5500 for an edius SP card, connection box, and codec pack, that doesnt include PC... with $5500 one can acquire a FCP system and have some change... and this is what im getting at. to NOT have to change NLE's would benefit Pana as the exisitng DVX users can easily upgrade without too many hassles..

I have to say, within the last 12 weeks, ive had 7 clients question me about HVX vs HD101 and i cant tell them whos coming or going...
Now thats 7 cameras which Panasonic has LOST SALES. Whos fault is that?? The NLE makers?? or the Camera maker??
IMO its both, however as most people have issues adapting to NLE's they will choose the NLE over the camera in most cases.

With regard to NLE support, in the end, if Panasonic want to have their codec and or file extension used within these systems, then somethiing must be done to allow these to be implemented.
Reason i question Panasonic, is due to the fact that they own the patents to said technology. In the end, they know what is being asked of them from each respective NLE developer.

Premiere Pro works with HVX footage right now, if you get DVFilm.com's Raylight.

New cameras often require some manner of workaround. The HD100's been on the market for close to a year and FCP still doesn't support its 24p mode, so people have been using Lumiere to edit with. That's how things go.

Raylight supports every mode and every frame rate of the HVX, in both 50Hz and 60Hz versions, and it works with Premiere Pro and Vegas and Liquid and AfterEffects and every other PC application.

And CineForm is beta-testing their product too.

EDIUS is the most-integrated editor, even better-integrated with MXF/P2 than FCP is. FCP and Avid both have comprehensive support (except for 720/50 modes; and using HD Log gets you 720/50 support in FCP). Raylight and CineForm extend support to basically every other editor on the market.

You're right, I don't know anything about you. My response to your original post was short and to the point, not meant to belittle. Your response was, at best, agressive. I'm sorry I responded to you with "anti-Panasonic rant." As you said:

"I say things how i (and my clients) see it"

Regarding Vegas, keep in mind that Vegas 6 was released before NAB last year. You can't really fault it for not anticipating the need for DVCProHD support.

The SONYc foundry team has a history of making bug fixes during minor releases, but offering no new features, so we can't really read anything into the current situation.

When Vegas 7 is announced, we can then make our judgements.

As a Vegas user who has his eyes on the HVX200, I hope they make the right decision.

...I'll also be happy if Sony releases a camera with variable frame rate, a data-oriented work flow and moderate intra-frame compression. Then Sony can sell me an NLE *and* a camera. :)

even with all this, there IS a way to implement DVCProHD into the Vegas timeline.. quite easily too, with Cineforms latest offering.. Just released over the last day or so.. http://www.cineform.com/products/ConnectHD.htm

I guess the question now is how can Pana continue to advertise "shoot, transfer and edit" the way they do, when a conversion to an intermediate format is usually required for a majority of NLE's? Not many NLEs support native MXF let alone DVCProHD from an MXF source... I guess this goes back to my initial post re-native MXF support...

See this whole conversion thing continues to defeat the purpose of the Direct to Disc/card recording functionaliy of the camera, considering a major reason why many would want to use this cam is to do away with tape based acquisition altogether...

With NLE's im not just refering to Vegas here, im talking about FCP, Premiere, Vegas and pretty much most of the "average" NLE's used by many different production houses.
As an example, I know for a fact that Australian Idol here in aus (the dvd's which are released during the competition) are compiled and distributed for DVD using Premiere 6.5 on a Digisuite and Matrox RTx100, and authoried using Maestro.
Now i KNOW for a fact that the production house in question will NOT switch NLE for any camera. If they cant use footage taken from that camera, they wont use the camera.
Its a simple equation, and many houses are of the same mindset.

Now the "workaround" solutions are all good, pricey and time consuming, but they do what they say theyre going to do, however they still defeat the purpose of shoot and edit.

I guess these days with DVCPRoHD and HDV, these additional steps for conversion are a given... shame really considering the capabilities of the camera...