DVCPROHD MXF Files in the Timeline with Raylight
 

DVFilm Raylight now has a plugin for Vegas that allows you to
put Panasonic MXF files directly into the timeline.

See http://dvfilm.com/raylight

yup, its been out for a while... u DO need a chunky PC to get teh most from it, and rendering .. lets just say that if u thought HDV was slow.. this is gonna drive u mad..

The plugin for Vegas is a new feature of Raylight (as of about 24 hours ago). Previously you had to convert the MXF files to Raylight AVI but now you can drag them directly into the timeline.

Slow rendering was mainly a problem with the very old versions of Raylight. On the fairly cheap dual core AMD system I have here for example, a 2-min program of 1280 x 720 24P MXF files can be rendered to DVD widescreen format in about 2.5 minutes, so just slightly longer than real time. That's not bad.

I'm very pleased with the performance I'm getting with this -- and can't wait for the further support. It only stood to reason that if Sony wouldn't do it, someone else would see the market potential and do it for them.

It always was a matter of will to do it. I can't imagine that Marcus paid for Panasonic's DVCPRO SDK -- no way to charge what does for Raylight if he did -- so it shows that a little personal enterprise can get the job done without it. If he did pay for the SDK, this shows it's economically feasible to do so and charge the customer less than $200 for it (and free upgrades! Rock ON!). Either way, it pretty much shows Sony was simply unwilling to provide the necessary support.

We had said more than a year ago that we'd be willing, if Sony didn't want to figure in the cost of doing this into the Vegas price, to pay $200-$400 extra for an "HVX Pak." Well, someone's cashing in on that now.

If it's a market that Sony simply didn't want to pursue, it's their business (and their legitimate business decision). But frankly, that Marcus was able to do this torpedoes the idea that it was all about Panasonic's exorbitant DVCPRO SDK kit. It was obviously about something else.

How does Raylight compare to Cineform in terms of performance? Same, better, worse.. ?

Also can someone tell me if it's the rendering time that's improved by using these "after market" codecs or just how well footage plays on a time-line... or both?

Thanks..

With regard to DVCProHD, I've got old Raylight and old CineForm installed. Haven't upgraded either of them, but should.
Old versions, Raylight outperforms CineForm by a little bit.
Rendering on either codec is faster than what you'd expect.

In another thread under the Sony HC1/3/5/7 forum titled "Editing HD Footage" the thread started Joe and I tested both new codecs (trial) using Sony Vegas and posted the results there.. basically Cineform was a little slower playing off the timeline than Raylight was. The clip was 1080i with 3 effects on it.

Maybe I'm in the dark. I was unaware that Raylight had an HDV toolset?

We used the CapDVHS program to capture footage from the camera to the hard drive in MPG format, then used raylight to convert it into the raylight codec.

I wasn't aware that Raylight could convert MPEGs?

Raylight doesn't convert to MPG... we used CapDVHS to capture footage directly into MPG format from tape, then Raylight to convert.

I understood what you said. I just wasn't aware that Raylight would convert MPEGs to Raylight codec, if that's what you meant.

see
http://dvfilm.com/raylight/raylightTutorial7.htm

:)

:)

Guess I didn't have to worry about that part. Good to know!

Also in case you are editing DVCPROHD, here's another tidbit comparing the
codecs used in the 2 applications:

http://dvfilm.com/raylight/raylightRes.htm#Panasonic