Hi Friends:
Upon reading (The Latest) XDR Manual in the section referring to NLE support, there is a caveate to Avid Media Composer support with Long GOP MXF files, which I don't think is getting the proper emphasis it deserves. Clips recorded at 100 Mbps data rate are listed as only being "partially supported," and "sometimes does not display single frames from the timeline (gives a buffer overflow message)."

....May I humbly suggest this reference be changed to *is not supported ?* I've been tearing my hair out on an interview peice that is repleate with this very error, and not only this error, one *cannot* also export the completed (edited) sequence out of AMC to anything ! The thing which drove me the most crazy, is the fact that the other sit down interview I shot works fine in AMC and is exportable to whatever format you need (It was recorded in 50 Mbps)

....Looks like the workaround is to go re-edit the whole malfunctioning sequence in FCP 7.0 !

....I think it is not a good idea to claim that the XDR/Nano clips are supported in Avid Media Composer without considerably more testing. Has Convergent Design tested clips with the new AMC 4.0.2 ????

Hi Mark-
Sorry you had problems, but this has been in the Flash XDR / nanoFlash manual for quite some time. We have not hidden this issue with Avid and Long-GOP.

Avid does work well with 50 Mbps Long-GOP, which is the native XDCAM 422 format. It also plays all the I-Frame only files, even up to 220 Mbps.

Avid does have sample files from all our formats and is working on full compatibility in a future release.

Best-

Hi Mike:
Uh yeah, but there is a *BIG* difference between saying, "partially supported," and the actual reality that Long GOP @ 100 Mbit frankly doesn't work at all.

....Looks like the workaround is to go re-edit the whole malfunctioning sequence in FCP 7.0 !

Mark, couldn't you just transcode to DNxHD before your export? Simple to do to the sequence right in Avid.

Hi Vito:
Nope ! In the versions of Avid Media Composer below 3.5.x you cannot get transcode to DNxHD to work, because I shot the clips @ 100 Mbps, and when you import clips which are Long GOP at this rate, then all hell breaks lose in Avid MC ! What I will try to do now is do a simple 1:1 export of the Long GOP XDCAM HD 100 Mb clips as a Long GOP HDV clip. This might work because XDCAM HD and HDV are both Long GOP based formats, but hey. who knows ? ! I can confirm that MC 3.5.4 and the new 4.0.2 handle the Long GOP formats in a very different manner now. It is no longer necessary to do a video mix down or any transcode to get HDV or XDCAM HD based clips back out of Avid.

.....The other possible workaround is to re-edit in FCP 7.0. Can anyone reading this who's using FCP 7.0 as their main editing application please confirm if XDR clips shot in Long GOP 100 Mbps edit and output OK ?

Dear Mark,

We may be able to assist.

If you send us the clips, or upload them to our server, we could play them out of one Flash XDR into another Flash XDR at 50 Mbps, or any other mode/format/etc. you choose.

Hi Dan:
This is a good idea Dan. Thank you. I think I will go straight over to my FCP 7.0 iMAC and edit there before I resort to the big file exchange. Can you confirm if FCP 7.0 can handle XDR files in Long GOP @ 100 Mb ?

Yes it does.

Hi Aaron:
I'm assuming you're referring to FC 7.0, Well this is good news. Thanks for the confirmation.

Dear Mark,

Yes, I can confirm that Final Cut Pro handles our Long-GOP files, as well as our I-Frame Only modes.

Your final render options are limited to the modes that Final Cut Pro supports.

This, however, does include full uncompressed which can then be encoded by the Flash XDR / nanoFlash to any of the modes we support.

This, of course, depends on your system, specifically if you can output HD-SDI or HDMI.

Hi Dan:
You confirm *what* exactly in FCP 7.0 ?? You write it handles your files. OK. It handles *all* your files ? Specifically, does it handle your *Long GOP @ 100 Mb files* ? This is the deciding factor and what I need to know.

Dear Mark,

Yes, to be specific, all of our Long-GOP and I-Frame Only modes work in Final Cut Pro.

As always, your final render options are limited to the options available in Final Cut Pro.

Final Cut Pro does an excellent job in working with our files.

Personally, I have not worked with Final Cut Pro 7.0. I have every reason to believe that it will work as well as Final Cut Pro 6.0.4 or higher does, which is excellent.

Hi Dan:
OK. Very good. FCP here I come !

;)
Nobody sells more copies of FCP than Avid does today.

Hey Grinner:
Avid is by far a superior editing tool, but many folks can't get their head around its completely different editing paradigm. Avid is NOT intuitive in ANY way that's for sure ! However, once you do learn it, then your ability to cut a mjor movie or Tv spot takes a quantum leap. Avid's price, attitude of company and useless half baked finishing tools are what sells FCP to folks. FCP is easy to use, very intuitive, and has a suite of excellent, and in my opinion, far superior finishing tools. Media Composer 4.0.2 is supposed to be a quantum leap in this direction as well, but I won't know until I get my upgrade next week. We use both FCP 7.0 and Avid in our production company.

As a staffer and a freelancer, I never had a beef with Avid. As an owner, man they started shooting themselves in the foot when they killed the meridien line and simply havn't stopped. Ten years ago, the made sure they led the industry. Today, they seem to go out of their way to hand over profits like GM does to imports.
I know what MC 4.0.2 is SPUPPOSE to do but I learned the hard way what Adrenaline was suppose to do too. Want one? I'll give it to ya for $22k.... half of what I paid for it.
It's kind of funny. I was on Media Composer version 4 in 1994. Kind of speaks volumes where they are today, doesn't it? When competition releases an upgrade, it's more bells and whistles. Now, when Avid releases an update it's a list of bug fixes closer to what was purchased that ironicly introduce new bugs. Having their clientele pay to beta test for em is no way to stay in business. I anticipate a sell or merger in their near future.

Hey Grinner:
Yup, Avid is a company which listens to only a very small group of Academy Award Winning Editors in Hollywood and simply ignores the rest of the world ;-) We were promised Canon HDV 24 F as a *Free* patch 4 1/2 years ago and only got it as *Paid* upfrade to 3.5 !! When the Titanic director asked them for 3D editing capability, they then released such 5 weeks later ! I get angry all over again every time I think of that !

Canon 24 F = 41/2 years.

3D request from Hollywood Director = 5 weeks.

You do the math :-)

The math has been very easy to do here in the last 3 years. I continue to offer concessions in sessions due to down time BECAUSE I have an Avid, not because I don't. I didn't have to do this years ago. I simply can't afford their handicap much longer. As you see the industry evolve to FCP, there are many reasons why.

Hey Grinner:
Well, one reason is the much cheaper and plentiful options you have hardwarewise with FCP 7.0 versus Avid's way over priced *proprietary* hardware.

another is stability.
then there is capability...

Yes, price has something to do with it. FCP's doing what ya paid for has much to do with it's rising success. I summed it up well earlier...nobody sells more copies of FCP than Avid today. It was as easy as announcing they were in growing pain stages instead of misleading their market.
In my humble opinion, of course. Your milage may vary. I didn't work on Titanic. I'm trying to keep my own little boat afloat while competing with folks in my market who paid less than I did but have more capabilities from their suite. That's tough for any artist to swallow.
In the early 90's, I had folks call and would throw out the good ole A buzzword... "hi, do you have an Avid?"
I'd respond, "well no but we have a..."
(click)
By '94 it was almost a requirement and I did indeed evolve from a Dvision Pro to Media Composer 4 to enhance our linear suites. Today it's quite the opposite. If they ask at all (and they seldom do anymore) It's more like "ew... Avid huh? Well can you do it for $150 an hour instead of your regular rate?"
oi vay.
The adrenaline phase was not good on Avid and their revolving door with execs has left em in baaad shape. Here I sit a crossroads... roll the dice on Avid one more time for 10 grand to get their latest and greatest upgrade or put that money toward what I don't have to gamble on. That's where we are at, man. I have no pitty for em. They have made their bed.

Hey Grinner:
I would have to say it isn't anymore about some kind of brand loyalty, it's all about what is the best tool for editing - but here's where everything heads South !

1. IMHO, Avid *is* the best *cutting* tool.

2. IMHO, Avid is the *worst finishing* tool, because it was designed from its very inception to be a replacement for film cutting. Thus, Avid is by nature following a traditional "off-line" editing approach ready for match back film editing, but fewer and fewer post houses in film work this way anymore.
3. Avid also assums you are sending your picture edit off to a seperate sound editor with a Digidesign Pro Tools Workstation.

4. Let me state for the record that if you can afford to set yourself up in post in this manner, then it is post production Heaven, but I would say 90 % of the smaller boutique style post operators are not setup in this manner and require a wholistic solution.

* Nowardays we are asked not only to cut, but to animate, color correct, author DVD, mix audio to at least Dolby Digital 5.1 AC3, and web encode. Avid was not setup to do this easily, but now they are working on a studio suite. If you learn all the keyboard shortcuts for Media Composer, then you can fly on it and bang out Tv spots and half hour Tv shows in 15 minutes flat. I have watched Avid editors who work in local network television do so right in front of me.

** I need the XDR clips to all be accepted in AMC in MXF at any data rate for a fast cut and then we do a 1:1 QT output which simply strips off the .MXF and does a straight copy to QT and finish everything in FCS for the DVD SD & Blu-ray Master and web encode.

FCS 7.0 is really the place to do all of these operations in one workstation.

I agree with all the above.
I do it all on one station as a one man band...which is much of my gripe today. I should be able to do it all in one app today. Because Avid has not upgraded it's DVD in 15 years, it seems to me the best thing for em to do is to work out an agreement with Adobe that utilized AE as Avid's DVE...within the app itself. I mean, we all keep it open in every session anyway.. same with Photoshop. They keep adding things like marquee and Avid FX but anything you'd go in there for (bevelling, motion blur, ect) take MUCH longer to futs with and render than just busting em out in After Effects so they are a mute point and a feeble attempt. (again, in my opinion)
Over the years I have learned many ways to cheat audio effects within Avid and while I take those tricks for granted, man I shouldn't have to get so creative to do such common tasks.
Avid is only the best cutting tool for me because I know it so much better than any other NLE. Speed is important and I purchased based on comfort factor for my, and my client base that is use to Avid's workflows.
In the end, it should now be assumed we are making finished products. It's simply not the 90s anymore. It's obvious Avid has never had an editor as a consultant on their tools for editors. That is almost comical.

almost.

Hi Grinner:
Yup. Love Avid or hate it make no mistake, AMC is the bane of all commercial Tv Network Post and Hollywood Studio Post. This is mainly because of the superior media mangement and collaboration possible (Even from multiple workstations in multiple countries), which simply is not there with FCP. - At least not yet. Avid has a special pluggin for AE, which opens it inside the timeline I do believe. I just purchased AE CS4 but I run it on my iMac with FCS 7.0.

Avid just upgraded their Avid DVD by Sonic app to 6.1 from 5.7. It is supposed to be better. Avid MC will allow you to add a Meta Track to your Timeline, which allows you to add chapter points and thumbnail pictures for the buttons in Avid DVD. This actually works, but the workflow is so funky and clunky that most editors simply give up and use another application to author DVD's with.

Love Avid or hate it make no mistake, AMC is the bane of all commercial Tv Network Post and Hollywood Studio Post.

we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. While it use to be the case, it's simply not anymore. Surf some job sites... man, you'll see a lot more fcp gigs today than Avid gigs. They are fadin' fast and I'm not seeing much attempt at altering that. Again, I imagine selling or merging will be what we'll see, like it or not.

Hi Grinner:
For independent film and Tv projects FCP wins hands down. For all TV Network, film studio work, then it's Avid Media Composer all of the way. For the independent everyday working freelance editor, then FCP is where the jobs are. Why do you think we also invested in FCS 7.0 ? For anything higher end, then it's still Avid MC.

i.e. Entertainment Tonight. Anything HBO. PBS.

The discovery Channel will edit on anything ! Especially Discovery Channel Canada. Up here they shoot HDV, DVCPRO 100 and Flash XDR.

Hi Mark,
You nearly talked me into Avid Media Composer for uncompressed work flow until I saw how you were effected on the bleeding edge. I will put up with FCP.

Cheers

Hi Lance:
If you buy, then go AMC 4.0.2. The editor is perfect, but for finishing I would still suggest FCS apps like DVD Studio Pro and Soundtrack Pro to do your sound mix on. Export a 1:1 resolution QT Movie and AMC will do a simple copying process, strip off the .MXF, and take that QT Movie into Soundtrack Pro, then export into DVD Studio Pro and viola ! You're there. You can also use FCS's Compressor for all your web encode needs. Sony Vegas is also another way to finish, as it has a killer SD DVD authoring component.

Mark - why don't you simply transcode your footage into DnxHD? You can do this within the Avid application and retain all your edits. DnxHd is in an intraframe codec and much easier to edit and playback.

Oh sorry - didn't read the whole thread - OK, try this - export all your source clips as QT refs and use an external transcoder to convert them to DnxHD. Then batch import the resulting clip over the top. You could try Sorenson? or procoder or Compressor depending on what you have...

Hi John:
Yes. I use DNxHD 220 X often, but as a general rule, I try an avoid any transcoding or recompressing of the original footage I edit. Although I must add that the Avid DNxHD is a visually lossless compression codec. I prefer to use QT Ref file where I can, or a simple QT Movie Export @ 1:1 resolution, so there is *only* a file copying process taking place, and not a *transcode,* or a *recompression.*

Does MC 4 have > than 1080p editing and secondary color correction?

Hi John:
Yes. I use DNxHD 220 X often, but as a general rule, I try an avoid any transcoding or recompressing of the original footage I edit. Although I must add that the Avid DNxHD is a visually lossless compression codec. I prefer to use QT Ref file where I can, or a simple QT Movie Export @ 1:1 resolution, so there is *only* a file copying process taking place, and not a *transcode,* or a *recompression.*


Given the difficulty of decompressing and editing long GOP footage I would have thought DnxHD for Avid and ProRes for FCP were no brainers. Granted it is an extra step but it will get you out of trouble.

Remember it is CD that has "tricked" the editing apps into seeing this footage (which isn't an offically supported format) by deliberately mislabelling the metadata.

Does MC 4 have > than 1080p editing and secondary color correction?

What has that got to do with Convergent Design XDR or Nano?

OK - you might want to secondary colour correct your footage but these devices are limited to 1920x1080. To answer you question no it can't. You need Avid Symphony or Avid DS for that (of course these products do much more than that), or you could just buy a copy of FCP and use Color :) if secondary colour correction was your only concern. For the time being can we just accept that which is the best product depends entirely on the end user and leave the Avid vs FCP argument for another day.

If people want genuine information on what Avid can do and can't do, I'm more than prepared to help. I also use FCP but to a lesser extent so I can always use help there:)

Hi John:
Yes. I can answer questions about AMC as well. I use both Avid and FCP every day.