EX Workflow - do you keep BPAV files - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds

Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds
Sony PMW-300, PXW-X200, PXW-X180 (back to EX3 & EX1) recording to SxS flash memory.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old July 31st, 2010, 03:13 PM   #16
Major Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 411
I don't keep the BPAV folders. I import to the mac with XDCAM Transfer, trim and name the clips with QT Pro, tweak them in AE and then back up to external disks.
__________________
http://www.markoconnell.org
Mark OConnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2010, 03:19 PM   #17
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark OConnell View Post
I don't keep the BPAV folders. I import to the mac with XDCAM Transfer, trim and name the clips with QT Pro, tweak them in AE and then back up to external disks.
But you'll get burned the moment you have to hand them to a non Final Cut Pro person whether editor or client.
Craig Seeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2010, 03:44 PM   #18
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Malvern UK
Posts: 1,931
A few things.

1. If you do need the BPAV structure in the future, just format a new card in the EX and export back to XDCAM with FCP. You can recreate a BPAV structure if you really want to if you deleted the original, with no recompression of material.

2. ProRes codec is now available for free for the PC. You could just export for that and hand it over to a client, along with a multitude of other types.

3. Sometimes I find the idea of keeping the BPAV structure 'just in case' to be like keeping junk in your garage just in case. How much milage you get will depend precisely upon how truly realistic it is that you'll need to hand off to someone else on a different system after you have imported and edited it all. Lets be realistic, for most of us that will be never. And on top of that you can always rewrap to MP4 with the XDCAM exporter, or even export/rewrap as the 1920x1080 MXF format.

Look, there is always a way. That's the whole advantage of using files. The BPAV structure is only important if the editing system in question can only take XDCAM footage in using some sort of dedicated importer. But if that NLE can import files and have them dragged natively to the timeline I'm not sure what the issue with deleting the BPAV structure is. Even if the NLE in question is pathetic, you can always find a way to do it.
Simon Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2010, 04:42 PM   #19
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Bracknell, Berkshire, UK
Posts: 4,957
Writing an XDCAM EX .mov from FCP out as an mp4 is simple, but each clips has to be done individually unless you are prepared to put them all in the timeline and then export in 12 minute chunks. You also have the issue of having to re-split long clips back into 4Gb chunks if your writing to the camera or other Fat32 media. If you are looking at a big project with 100's of clips this would be a real drag.

I've had to walk at least 3 production companies through this whole process as for various reasons they had to move from FCP to other platforms. It's not pretty and they could have saved themselves a lot of agro by keeping copies of the BPAV's.
__________________
Alister Chapman, Film-Maker/Stormchaser http://www.xdcam-user.com/alisters-blog/ My XDCAM site and blog. http://www.hurricane-rig.com
Alister Chapman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31st, 2010, 07:04 PM   #20
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Seeman View Post
But you'll get burned the moment you have to hand them to a non Final Cut Pro person whether editor or client.
That's tough though isn't it? I'm the production company, I store the files. If someone else wants the files they can either have them in the format I choose to store them in or pay me to convert them to a format of their choice. If it's my project I make the calls. I archive the complete project (to HD and Blu-Ray or DVD) and also the MOV files (again HD & Blu-Ray or DVD). The movs are instantly playable and editable. The only reason you'd need the BPAV's at any stage would be either future use on another platform or to hand over to someone else. But this is an easy problem to fix with the 3rd party exporters that will rewrap the files for you.

If shooting for a 3rd party then yes, keep the BPAV's, but for me there is no benefit. I can always rewrap back to mp4 if I really need to thanks to the 3rd party exporters available (Calibrated Software isn't it?).

If I ever did move to another NLE (unlikely) then I'd do what I did with Premiere on the PC and keep a legacy system running to edit the older projects.

I've always archived my DV tapes to HD and DVD as well. As a result I have never had to go back to a tape after the original transfer. They all sit there on the shelf looking pretty, but only played the once. And that's what would happen with the BPAV's, they'd never be used.
__________________
Marcus Durham
Media2u, Corporate Video Production For Your Business - http://www.media2u.co.uk
Marcus Durham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 11:31 AM   #21
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,782
Marcus, your fundamental mistake, IMHO, is you're trying to predict the future.

XDCAM EX MOV is specific to FCP and to FCP at a specific point in time. The change in workflow ahead may not be of your choosing. The future scenarios are far too broad and can happen more quickly than you can anticipate.

There is metadata in the BPAV that FCP currently doesn't use. That may change. If so, you've locked yourself out of that.

BPAV is "universal" (can be changed to whatever) and to charge clients for something that shouldn't be necessary is a business practice that can come back to bite you.

You are "a" not "the" production company and a client at any future point may decide that they want you to work on "x" part of the project while another, with different gear and expertise, will work on "y" part of the project.

Will you generally find away around most "movement" issues, probably, is that the most time and cost efficient, no. Read Alister's post for example. I could certainly add many more.
Craig Seeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 01:46 PM   #22
Trustee
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Malvern UK
Posts: 1,931
There's a Quicktime codec available for both the PC and the Mac by Calibrated Software that allows EX and XDCAM HD and 422 .mov files to be read by Quicktime on either system without having FCP installed.

I'm just not convinced that keeping the BPAV's is essential at all. What do people do with NanoFlash recorded files when they record to native .mov format? You could record to MXF with the nano too, but you can also rewrap your existing EX files to MXF too.

The way I see it is that the NanoFlash lets you record right from the beginning without the BPAV structure. So why not keep your EX files in the same way that the Nano gives them to you from the beginning?
Simon Wyndham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 02:11 PM   #23
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,782
Simon
As I've said there is certainly ways to rewrap. Do you wand to force someone to buy a plugin though? Do you want to spend the time rewrapping files or explaining how to do this to clients?
I tend to take what I believe is the easy path. BPAV is no larger than the rewrapped MOV. BPAV can get you anywhere you need to go quickly. MOV is fraught with obstacles great and small.

I do not want to force clients or other production houses to buy a specific plugin.
I do not want to invest time rewrapping or billing clients for rewraps that wouldn't have to be done otherwise.
I do not want to lose the metadata that is thrown out in the rewrap to MOV as it may server a future purpose to someone.

Not only does NanoFlash offer MOV recording so does JVC HM series. Yes it can be an immediate convenience recording to MOV directly but that's not what the EX cameras do. Use BPAV to one's advantage, I say

Personally I suspect that their are disadvantages in the metadata use from camera file sources that Apple might account for in the next FCS.

File portability should be an advantage and not something one has to tie up resources working around. I think retaining that advantage is important.

Calibrated also makes a plugin that allows one to use the BPAV/MP4 directly in Final Cut Pro. Disclaimer, I was a beta tester for it. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple including such a feature in the future (along with AVCHD direct support). There's a big advantage having ingested files that link directly to camera master files. That fact that we have to debate the use of MOV shows it's disadvantage. The files take some work to make portable to other workflows.
Craig Seeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 04:54 PM   #24
Major Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Seeman View Post
But you'll get burned the moment you have to hand them to a non Final Cut Pro person whether editor or client.
I don't think QT will go away any time soon, and as long as it's around I suspect I'll be able to find an acceptable way to transcode the files for whoever might need them. We don't all have the same needs when it comes to workflow. It's not one size fits all. I'm not suggesting that there's no point in anyone keeping BPAVs, just that I personally have no need for them.
__________________
http://www.markoconnell.org
Mark OConnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 05:32 PM   #25
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 693
If Quicktime files become obsolete, the camera master issue would become just one of a number of other issues that we would all hit.

What about stock footage you buy? Any animations or screen recordings in your production? How about other footage you may have that only exists as Quicktime files? In the week I have to transfer some VHS and I'll store that footage as Quicktime. The tape will go back so then I'll left with the file and nothing else.

And what about the fact I store finished productions as Quicktime files as the days of dubbing back to tape are long gone?

Believe me, if Quicktime support vanished you are going to have alot more issues than just your camera masters not working.
__________________
Marcus Durham
Media2u, Corporate Video Production For Your Business - http://www.media2u.co.uk
Marcus Durham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 05:40 PM   #26
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Seeman View Post
There is metadata in the BPAV that FCP currently doesn't use. That may change. If so, you've locked yourself out of that.

I'm guessing it's just logging information in which case I have a system in place already for this that works perfectly well and fully integrates with my non XDCAM footage (as I've previously pointed out I've been storing all my footage as files for 5 years now).
__________________
Marcus Durham
Media2u, Corporate Video Production For Your Business - http://www.media2u.co.uk
Marcus Durham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 06:06 PM   #27
Sponsor: Westside AV
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA
Posts: 1,365
It is my personal opinion that BPAV folders will go away long before QT.

Just my guess.

I keep BPAV's for a while but all my main archives are .movs.

I would say anyone starting out should absolutely keep and backup the BPAV's until they decide the best system for handling their particular workflow.

I think we will see many more systems like P2 mp4 etc in the following years. I am personally rooting for RAW video files as media becomes faster and cheaper.

And I also bet that QT will be compatible with all of them, at least in the next decade or two.

For me it makes sense to keep everything as .movs, weather it is digitized BetaSP, DVcam, HDV or HDcam etc. etc. or whatever solid state comes down the pike. For me it is a great standard.
__________________
Olof Ekbergh olof@WestsideAV.com
Westside A V Studios http://www.WestsideAVstore.com/
Olof Ekbergh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1st, 2010, 08:01 PM   #28
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,782
Marcus if you look at the BPAV in ClipBrowser or the actual XML and other files, you'll see information about camera settings and other information that is thrown out when the file is rewrapped to MOV.

EX XDCAM codec is not standard part of Quicktime. It is part of Final Cut Studio install. The only other way to get EX XDCAM MOV is to buy it from CalibratedSoftware.

There is no easy way to wrap EX XDCAM MOV back to .mp4 or .mxf and that's especially so without Final Cut Studio.

If you look at the many NLEs, it's actually the .mp4 which is "the standard" not .mov. Premiere Pro, Vegas and I believe Edius handle the .mp4 directly.I believe Avid MC5 with AMA may handle it as well. I suspect FCS will handle the .mp4 directly as well in the next upgrade.

Basically EX XDCAM .mp4 direct support is spreading as the standard and .mov, as proprietary will be "legacy" if FCP moves to .mp4 direct support.
Craig Seeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 2nd, 2010, 04:55 PM   #29
Sponsor: Westside AV
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA
Posts: 1,365
What I like about QT, is that it is so inclusive. It is a wrapper for lots of different codecs, like mp2, mp4, mpg as well as some really great loss less codecs built in.

I like the fact that if you have the latest version of FCP, Flip for mac and Sorenson Squeeze there is almost no file you can't read or compress to Flash or whatever.

For me it is really convenient to archive in one format. I am on a Mac but it has never been a problem to transcode to Windows file formats. My main editor is M100 and it has its own codecs but they are free downloads both for Macs and PC's, as long as you have QT installed.

I don't just work with XDcam files. So it makes sense for me to use a common file format in my archives.

But I am not trying to say that everyone should use this approach, just that it is my way of dealing with my video project, and I have been doing that digitally since the early 90's, and I can still open QT files from back then, and use them in my current projects, and export them to any platform a client may require.
__________________
Olof Ekbergh olof@WestsideAV.com
Westside A V Studios http://www.WestsideAVstore.com/
Olof Ekbergh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 2nd, 2010, 05:25 PM   #30
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA
Posts: 3,782
Olof, I think Apple was banking on the universality of the Quicktime wrapper and I certainly would have liked it too but I think Apple may be rethinking that. I think they are looking for "universal" codec as may be happening with Apple ProRes. Even though "everything" can play ProRes MOV (free decode for windows and certainly on Macs even without Final Cut) that hasn't happened overall.

The key difference is the unique nature of EX XDCAM MOV which is specific to ONE NLE on the Mac only. The codec is not a standard part of Quicktime nor is it plus the MOV wrapper standard to much of anything else.

I think Apple held out a long time staying with the idea that everything in FCS should be wrapped as MOV. Just a hunch but I'm guessing Apple's about to give on that (next year) with FCS4. If anything Calibrated Software proves that a plugin can allow native codecs in their native wrappers to work with FCP.

You can't even quite compare to AVCHD. That AVCHD is likely going to ProRes and these days that ProRes file can probably go to many other NLEs.

You'll certainly still be able to play EX XDCAM MOV but given it's nature it's the "odd bird" and I don't think it's the way forward.

Of course you can always convert the EX XDCAM to ProRes but, as with AVCHD, that process is an Achilles Heal in that it takes time and the files are significantly larger. Hence I suspect Apple will be supporting native codec, native wrapper. Apple is certainly aware of the ProRes file size issue as one of the key changes between FCS2 and FCS3 was the addition of ProResLT and ProResProxy.

When I hear rumor talk of Apple working on a new codec it may be to work out that ProRes file size issue in their quest for their "universal" codec (not to be confused with making MOV a universal wrapper).
Craig Seeman is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:43 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network