Editing HDV what is the best way to go with the Adobe CS3 Production Studio; Use Cineform with it, or the Matrox RT.X2? Which gives the best quality, shortest rendering times, etc.

Can you use both together ? Would that be a good idea or not?

I currently have the old PPro1.5 suite and use the cineform codec with it. This seems to work well on short projects, but anything over 20-30 minutes (depending on how much color corr,. effects, etc.) seems to cause PPro or Encore to crash during the lengthly 12+ hours encoding for DVD output. Crash might not be the correct term, I just get a "error exporting movie/unknown error" message. Thanks - PK

No Responses?

I guess my question must seem dumb, but I would like to know the pro/con of each.
I have PPro1.5.1 and cineform. This works for short projects but the rendering out always freezes/crashes on any project longer then about 30 minutes or so. I don't know if this is/was a common issue with PPro1.5.1 and if it is improved with the latter versions, or if going the Matrox route would solve the problem.

Also, capturing with cineform - the Canon HV20 24p pulldown is recognized. On the matrox site the mention Canon 24F - used by the big canon's, but no mention of the 24P used by the HV-20.

Any info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks -PK

I have been using Premiere since 6.5 for DV and using Cineform with Premiere Pro (now CS3) to edit hdv successfully, and I have never had any serious insurmountable problems. I am not even quite sure what one would need Matrox for, although I am sure there are some people's workflows that benefit from it, based on how popular it is.

I have been using Premiere since 6.5 for DV and using Cineform with Premiere Pro (now CS3) to edit hdv successfully, and I have never had any serious insurmountable problems. I am not even quite sure what one would need Matrox for, although I am sure there are some people's workflows that benefit from it, based on how popular it is.

Thanks Jim for the reply. It is greatly appreciated because I have to decide on the Cineform upgrade to the new version (5?) by tomorrow to get the discount price (Yes it is technically Tuesday, but I will be on a flight out of the country Tue AM). I use Aspect with Vegas 6 and PPro 1.5.1. The only problem with Aspect and PPro has been that I can't render anything longer then about 35 minutes or so. Longer projects just never complete the rendering step. I don't have this problem with Vegas. Did you do HDV with ver 1.5, or were you up to PPro 2 by that time? Maybe with the newer Adobe versions this is not a problem anymore, or its soome quirk with my system. Thanks again - Take Care - PK

Did you do HDV with ver 1.5, or were you up to PPro 2 by that time? Maybe with the newer Adobe versions this is not a problem anymore, or its soome quirk with my system. Thanks again - Take Care - PK

I used to use P Pro 1.5.1 with Aspect HD 4 to edit hdv and it worked for me even with long (120 min.) videos. The newer version Aspect HD 5 with CS 3 plays a little smoother from the timeline though so I am happy with the upgrade. If your renders are stopping or giving an error that is most likely an issue with your hardware or software or installation of the apps.

Make sure you have applied the adobe update for the media encoder for Premiere Pro 1.5. There was an issue where it would stop rendering mpg files part way through it and spit out an error that said something about "could not return frame" or a similar message. The patch for the media encoder of premiere fixed this. Hope this helps with that issue.

Peace.

Make sure you have applied the adobe update for the media encoder for Premiere Pro 1.5. There was an issue where it would stop rendering mpg files part way through it and spit out an error that said something about "could not return frame" or a similar message. The patch for the media encoder of premiere fixed this. Hope this helps with that issue.

Peace.

Thanks Marty. I believe you are refering to the Adobe 1.5.1 upgrade, which
I have- sorry if I did not mention that. If there is another, newer upgrade, I am unaware of that. Thanks Again -PK

There is definitely a different update for this exact problem that is not addressed in the 1.5.1 update.

http://www.mainconcept.com/adobemedia/downloads.html


Here is blurb from that page:

"Adobe Media Encoder MPEG Update to version 1.1
This installer updates the Adobe Media Encoder to include the latest versions of the MainConcept MPEG encoding files. This update is recommended for any user experiencing the following issues: “Adobe Premiere Pro failed to return a video frame. Canceling the operation.” Or an “Out of memory” error when using the Premiere Pro Export to DVD feature. This version includes an enhancement which fixes this MPEG encoding failure and error."

Hope this helps.

Marty

Thank You Very much Marty. I did not see that one. I don't know the date of it from the Adobe site that your link points to, but I will definitely be sure to add that one if I don't alread have it. I am traveling and in a hotel room with my laptop right know, so I won't be able to check it out until this weekend, but again, Thanks for the help. Have a Great Day - Paul Kepen

Hi guys. I am a RTX2 user and this is just an example of the time it takes for rendering. The first thing to understand when using one of the Matrox products and its working well, is that most things you have to render with Premiere native are non existent. For example, dropping clips on timelines from simply source or bins, transitions, etc. The next thing is that when you do actually have to render, its very quick. But this is highly dependent on your system and how long it takes. For example, I can export cuts only HDV down to Mpeg I-frame SD with my current system in much less than realtime. Also, with a two pass Mpeg2 that is ready to drop into Encore, it takes approximately 1.5 times realtime. This is with pretty much transitions and cuts only.

I don't have to ever render these hdv clips when working with them unless I have to add effects. With my current gpu and HDV, some require rendering for full frame playback, and some do not. However, if once again, I do have to render an effect, it is extremely fast, even with my lowly 7600GS gpu.

I am running a Q6600 which speeds the HDV considerably. But with regular DV, there was almost nothing I ever had to render with the exception of the more complex effects. And this was with me normally working with 2-4 layers of video, with effects. The Matrox cards really are huge timesavers as long as your system is up to snuff.

Another example, I did some analog Mpeg I-frame captures today of 45 minutes a piece. Very simple captures.. The only thing I had to do was trim the heads and tails of each clip, drop it onto the timeline, hit the space bar, add cross dissolves to the head and tail of the clips, I exported to movie(I frame once again since Encore accepts it) each clip on its own individual timeline, and am transcoding in Encore now. For each 45 minute raw clip, it only took 5 minutes a piece When I began this post, Encore had just begun to transcode, and approx ten minutes later, it looks to be 65-70% done. I never had to render anything, and it all is working smoothly. The capture aside, I would say per dvd it will probably take me 1/2 to 45 minutes total to complete, with no rendering at all.

Once again, this is with a Quad. With my previous Pentium D 945, it was not nearly as fast with the downconverts from HDV, but the SD, was still pretty quick. But to answer the questions of the rendering, you really don't do much at all, depending on the complexity of your project. Besides, almost everything is very accelerated with the hardware, so that helps alot..

But that is just my experience with their cards. I simply love them and cant imagine using Premiere native... The X2 has spoiled me that much.. As a matter of fact, I first tried using CS3 in native, capturing and editing, and it just gave me a headache with how many times I either had to render simple things or the framerate would not be fulltime. This once again was performed with my Pentium D.. I haven't tried native with the Quad, but I figure I really don't need to, so why bother...
D

Thanks Jim, Marty, and Damon for your very informative and helpful responses. It is summer up here in Minnesota, and other then the terrible Bridge incident, its been a very nice warm but not humid summer. I am going to enjoy what is left of summer, hopefully get my last 2 current projects (that are almost complete) finished, and then this fall I plan to do the dreaded reformat and reinstall software to hopefully speed things up. I also did purchase the cineform upgrade because I use that with Vegas as well as PPro, and that will be installed at that time. I have not decided if I will just upgrade to CS3 or go with the Matrox board as well. Thanks again, and enjoy the rest of summer - PK

Hello Paul, Matrox RTX2 is great for quick-n-dirty editing as it's REALLY powerful, but you're to get into problems if you want to use matrox-captured footage in apps other than Premiere. I tend to use Matrox for event videography and Cineform for planned stuff like music videos, movies and such. Nice thing with Cineform is that it upconverts color space to 4:2:2 (HDV is 4:2:0, DV is 4:1:1), which gives you more color latitude for postproduction and the quality doesn't suffer as much when doing multiple passes of post.

I would suggest Matrox's RTX2 support forum to see how many people (including me with Matrox-certified turnkey workstation, mind you...) have problems - audio dropouts, playhead stopping extra 5-7 frames AFTER you stop playback, issues with Matrox-captured files outside Premiere... On the other hand, you get HW-based previews on your PC monitor while capturing (with sound), which sole Premiere CS3 cannot do and all the effect are really realtime, no matter how many you throw at RTX2.

So it all boils down to what do you intend to edit.

Hope this helps,

Jiri

Hi Jiri. Nice to hear from you and Thank You very much for your extremely informative post. It great to hear from someone with "hands on" experience with both the Matrox X2 and Cineform. I was unaware of the problems using the footage outside of Premiere. Do you have these problems on anything outside of Premiere - like After Effects? Or are you referencing anything outside of the Adobe Production suite?
Thanks again for your help - PK

RTX2-captured AVI files are largely uncompatible with anything outside Premiere. You should be fine if you have Adobe production suite with Dynamic link. I have just Premiere and After Effects (many reviews tend to overlook the fact that you get Dynamic Link ONLY with the whole expensive Production Suite). Sole After Effects 7 with Matrox Tools V2 and Premiere Pro 2 have problems importing Matrox AVIs - I get regular lockups on playback in AFX and you might be able only to play first 1:50 or so minutes of any clip. I am not alone with this problem, please DO visit Matrox RTX2 forum before you buy it.

I have yet to try new Matrox Tools V3 with new Premiere CS3 (I will keep you posted as soon as I have it installed), which may or may not fix many of these issues. Problem is that it takes forever for Matrix to even acknowledge any issue, not to mention fix it.

This is why I suggest RTX2 for quick (REALLY quick and relatively trouble-free) and dirty editing inside Premiere and buying Cineform for anything else. RTX2 is not that expensive because you get full Premiere included and some of its features (like full HDV preview on PC or video monitor while both editing and capturing, which even Final Cut Pro cannot do) are well worth the price.

Please do ask if you have any other questions :o)

Hi

I am also a Matrox RTX2 user and this is my third Matrox product. I love it and have not had any real issues at all. Currently using PP2 on a midlevel dual core system. I import in matrox HDV, edit in HDV, output to whichever mpg I need for either HD Blu-ray or SD DVD. Workflow is great and video straight from camcorder looks just like video straight from the editing bay onto a new 46 inch Samsung LCD HD (1080) model 4665F TV. I and my clients all go wow.

I will be putting CS3 onto the system as soon as I finish the next wedding.

I believe you will find enough export options in PP3 to match whatever system you wish to take your final video to use in. Since I only have two computers for editing (RTX2 system and a RTX100 system) that has never been a concern.

Bill in Ohio

Thanks Bill and Jiri. It sounds like the performance of the RTX2 must be great. However, I use Vegas and Ulead Movie Factory for HDDVD output. The incompatibility of the Matrox has me leaning towards staying with the Cineform workflow. Thanks, and Have a Good Evening - PK

Paul, I also would like to add, to take with a grain of salt the incompatability of the exported files. I have never had a problem importing either the 2.0 files or especially now the CS3 files into other apps. I primarily use Encore for authoring, but I also have used the Moviefactory HDDVD option. While I do honestly find it a bit clunky compared to Encore, I have never had a problem importing an I-frame into the program, and I just have the trial of it.

When you go to the forums, also be sure to take a look at how many registered users there are. Alot of people that can't get there system working always say "look at how many people are having problems in the forums", but some of the users both had X100's and couldn't get them working, and now have X2' and cannot. I am simply suggesting to apply balance to your consideration with the Matrox product. I couldn't be happier and have always been with the Matrox products. But then again, I build my own machines and know when something is going wrong. My point is, if there are say 5000 units sold and registered, and 100 people are having problems, that is sort of to be expected, even with turnkey systems to a certain extent. You have to count different configurations and assorted variables also.. Just something to keep in mind..

D

I'm not sure what the incompatibility is? If you finish a project and export an mpg2 or almost any other output that is used by your authoring program. When I did miniDV I would finish up my final product by exporting back to minidv tape. That can be input into anybodies system.

The only thing that is going on, is that on import to matrox RTX2 you can either go HDV native or their mpg codec. I almost always do HDV.

Anyway have fun. I do.

Bill in Ohio

I'm cautious of specialized hardware editing cards these days because with the right software you may not need it, and once you commit to using the hardware you're totally tied to that. Imagine that your editing card goes on the fritz right before an important deadline, and you can't get it working or find an equivalent setup to finish the project. With software-only solutions you just have to reinstall the software on another computer and keep going, but if the hardware card doesn't work you'd be stuck until you can get that fixed.

Good point Kevin, but to be honest, I have been using Matrox cards since the days of the X10. I then upgraded to X100 and now have X2 standard and SD version. I have never had a card fail on me. And to my rememberance, only saw a few people as many times as I was on the forums for matrox say their cards were damaged. But I suppose it only takes one time to be honest. So yes, I do agree with you to a certain extent.

My other thought is kind of the same with NLE's and authoring apps. Say you get used to a certain piece of software and something goes wrong, it's no longer compatable for some odd reason. Not that it's very likely(just like the unlikelyness of a card failure these days), but anything is possible. You may install for example something simple or an encoder, and maybe your NLE isn't compatable. What do you do then? And to be honest, you don't have to "depend" on the cards, they just add to or fill in where the software solutions may not be as fast.

For example, Premiere on it's on works good. I cannot say that it doesnt. However, its a bit slow since I am used to the Matrox cards and the core functions of what they can and do normally do. Could I go without the card? Yes, but do I really want to? No! Not at all because it saves time, cuts down on all that silly rendering and lower resolution playback stuff, and has been for the by and large for me a definate asset. If I were in a situation that I had to get a project done and my card went out, Premiere opens in desktop mode, and while if I used Matrox effects they would not be usable or there any longer, I could finish and open the project utilizing the "old fashioned" native mode and I would simply have to replace some of the effects. There are alternatives and it's not just a "all or nothing" with at least the matrox card.

And a backup plan can never be underestimated... As long as you store your project files on another harddrive, usually you can open the project. But if all the harddrives fail, then no matter what software or hardware solution, your looking at a problem unless you have backed up the files to either of course disc or another say swappable or external drive. But then again, that has nothing to do with the capture card. That basically boils down to if your NLE or app has a sufficient and reliable backup function to back up the project.

But I am not to the point after(if I remember correctly) 6 years of using Matrox products crippled by them.. LOL Just a bit spoiled and they have never let me down..

So you can transfer a Matrox-based project to a system with just Premiere software and it will still work, but slower?

Yes, there are a few options. There are the VFW software codecs that from what I understand you can use to open the Matrox project on another system without matrox hardware. I have never done this, but from other users I have heard it works. I, myself for example, when I have reinstalled windows and for some reason either forgot to install the tools, or I also just wished to tinker, I simply opened the project without the tools on the system and it gives a popup message saying that the mode cannot be detected, but that it will open in standard desktop mode, and you can edit that way.

So yes, you have two options say if your card crashed or you just decided you didn't want to use the card but wished to finish a project that you began in Matrox mode. But yes, it will certainly be much slower. The Matrox cards get a bad rap by alot of people that simply don't understand them IMHO...

D

Damon, I am not alone in my claims of Matrox-related issues. Anyone should check out Matrox forums prior to purchase. URL is

http://forum.matrox.com/rtx2/index.php

New drivers (V3) are out, and they seem to bring even more problems... I am glad you are happy with your RTX2, not all of us are so lucky.

Jiri, I never said you were alone. Never. But also keep in mind the flip side of the coin, which I am pointing out is that despite the activity in the forums, which this forum is an indicator, there are from on their site 2792 registered users. So if some people have problems, to be honest, that is to be expected. I am not speaking directly about you at all. I am just giving both sides, which alot of times users that have problems or have had problems with Matrox equipment do not do.

They will say, "oh my system doesn't work", but not go into details on what "all" they have on their machines. I for one to be honest have oodles of things on mine. I am not even running an approved motherboard. I haven't with the last two configurations that I had for my X2. But once again, that is my machine. I built it, and I pretty much know it's ins and outs. Buying a turnkey is great, it really is, and I know alot of people that do, don't have the time to build or it would simply be a "misallocation of resources". But at the same time, its not right to simply blame the card. Alot of it has to do with the configuration of the machine and it's components.

And to be honest, I don't go to the forums much anymore(I actually don't think I have been there at all this year) because it's much like how the X100 was from the last time I was there. There were alot of people that complained when they were on the X100 platform and then now complain about the X2 and say it's got soo many problems. But at the same time, I can't help but say to myself "hey, you purchased a card(not a cheap one also) that didn't work. If it gave you that many problems, why did you get the next one that was even more expensive?". These are just my thoughts.

One question, have you contacted your turnkey vendor? If so, what did they say? What motherboard do you have and what does the Matrox site say on it? I guess what I am saying is "no, your not alone at all", but then again, I could also say "your not alone with saying issue this, issue that", but what do you have on your system, what are your specs, etc. Also, did it ever work? Or did it all of a sudden develop a problem...

And for it to be not working with CS3, that is pretty deep. I have found this build and driver config to be the most stable as of yet for the card to be honest. I have left my machine running all night with looping timelines just to see how it would respond when I got up, and I stopped the playback, scrubbed the timeline and went on... For the 5-7 frames that the cti skips, yes, that is an issue, but to be honest, that has been there since the days of the X100, and I am with you in hoping that they will get that worked out.

I cannot speak to be honest about systems built by vendors, simply because from my understanding of purchasing my first pc, if they didn't get it right, they would get it back until they did, or the alternate, I figured out slowly what they were doing and how much they were charging me for doing the exact same thing with subpar components, and began building my own. I haven't had nearly a quarter of the problems with Matrox based systems as I did with that first pc that only had windows, office, a r/c flight simulator and a printer hooked to it.

Whats the moral of my rant? Same thing I said in the first sentence. I know your not alone, but at the same time, I am not also. Just by saying ok, go to the forums, doesn't give a clear picture either of the system, just like I suppose me saying that mine works completely flawlessly doesn't either. With that in mind, I will say, its a rewarding card, that just like anything else that alters performance, requires a little extra maybe. In my case, I build my own machines. In your case, you will probably have to stay on your vendor that built your turnkey, unless they deem it something you have done to the machine.

Not saying they have or will, but to be honest, I would think the last place I would go would be to the Matrox forums if I have spent the amt that they are asking for turnkey systems.. That to me is one of the luxuries or would be one of the luxuries of paying however many grand for a supposedly pre built and tested system. Especially since the card has been out what? Less than two years, or has it even been that long? If they built it, there should be a warranty? Yes? Or does it not work that way? If not, they why not build your own? Your going to have to tinker with it anyhow at some point I would think?

But I don't know man.. I didn't mean to offend you with what I said. I am just telling the story from my experience on the Matrox forums. Alot of people I helped when I was there, some I could not and it was above my head because of their configurations, as there are soo many these days. But that alone, should show how many variables are involved or could be involved.

In closing, for example, when I went to my current board(Abit AB9), it was a breeze to install the matrox card, once I figured out which slot to put it in by trial and error. But I kept getting hardware errors every now and then when I would reboot the machine after installing the card. Well, I figured out that it was my Abit Uguru version that was causing the problem. I simply updated to a different version than what I downloaded from the Abit site(I actually used the version that came on the disc, and have been using it since, despite newer versions coming out) and it was cruising. Its all a learning process with prebuilt or build your own systems I think. I strongly believe you have to know whats in your machine and how it works, otherwise your setting yourself up for cost headaches. I know people with just regular computers(most people to be honest) that have problems sooner or later with their pc. And they are lost. You throw either a Matrox, Canopus, Aja, Blackmagic card in a machine to process video, it better be up to snuf. Even just software alone can cause issues. Its like a needle in a haystack alot of times.. But at the same time, I don't think Matrox has any more issues than any other vendor for capture cards, and they don't seem from what I have observed to do alot of what the Matrox cards can(once again, just my opinion) at the same price point.

Oops, this was way too long, sorry. I could go on all day being the geek that I am. But the bottom line dude, I meant no malice, but at the same time, I think you should contact your vendor to see what type of service they can give you.. He He maybe I need to jump back on the forums(sike, they don't need me and my little help!!!)... LOL If the vendor can't help, I don't know, maybe I could take a stab at it.. I don't know everything, but I could try

D

Damon I didn't think you were offending me at all :o) No problem man, no harm done.

I was just trying to shed some light on real issues with Matrox cards, so the original poster may make informed decision. Reviews are nearly useless because of limited time spent with devices/SW, it's forums where you get most valuable input for the right decision. I was looking at Final Cut Studio to go with my JVC HD110, alas, FCP doesn't work well with ProHD at PAL land, even if Apple swears it does. This is what forums are for, as you rightly say.

I am also p**sed by Matrox support. It takes them six months to even acknowledge a problem, and a year later they release new drivers which fix none of the old issues and even introduces new ones.

With Matrox, you are locked into Adobe apps (if you are lucky, you can work with Matrox AVIs in After Effects). With Cineform, you can use ANY video app, including free VirtualDub, Combustion, Fusion... the list goes on.

Somehow I think Paul will go the Cineform route :o) If he can afford it, he should get both. I know I will.

Oh, your in PAL land... Wow, sorry.. Deep. I get the impression to be honest that most of the issues not only with Matrox, but more importantly with Premiere seem to be in the PAL versions for some reason.. At least on the forums, most of the people are running PAL that have issues it seems for some reason to stick out in my mind.

But to be honest, on my machine, I do run and have run is Adobe aps. I don't really have the need to run anything else with the exception of 3D Cool, and I tend to install and uninstall that whenever I feel like it. I try to keep the machine as lean as possible. Creates less conflicts for me and the possiblity of interaction with other programs. And I have never had a problem with Matrox AVI's in AE to be honest(or any of the other aps either). I only began with version 7 of AE, but that version and on, I never recall having an issue as all I have ever used since I used AE is matrox AVI or now I frame to capture and do as I please.

Have you tried uninstalling some of the other aps, or maybe just starting from scratch with windows? I really personally have fears of running multiple editing aps and things of tht nature on the same system. It's just something I don't do. I think that is a large part of the reason I have never had issues. I remember when they bundled the cards with DVDit! That was nothing but a headache. Once it switched to the Pro versions and Encore, it was smoothe sailing ever since. The only thing at the moment that I am running which is non adobe for editing is Cinemacraft Basic for my downconverts. Besides that, this is my general use machine for homework(MS office) and editing. No issues whatsoever...

And yes, I see alot of people do use the Cineform. If it works for them and doesn't cause problems I say hey, go for it! I am sure like you said he will figure out what works and does not work for him. As soon as he does his research. The Matrox cards really IMHO are great cards for what they can do. I will say, and have always thought, that they are not for everyone, just like editing, video, etc is not for everyone. I, personally love them, some people hate them, some are so-so. But it all depends on the person. As it has been said before, each app/combo of hardware and software has their own ins and outs and quirks, so yes, I agree completely with you, forums definately are great!

D

I can't speak for PAL issue with Matrox or Adobe, but here in the States we've had great success witht eh RT.X2. Our customers absolutely love it, and they can't say enough about the increased productivity and performance with HDV footage. The new ver 3 drivers add support for most of the new progressive HD settings and the P2 DVC ProHD.

I made this post over on the cow, but I think it is relevant to this discussion:

I know that over the years some folks have had some issues with Matrox cards. We didn't sell DigiSuite, but we've been with them since the RT2000. Now that cardset was a nightmare to install, but we took the time and effort to learn everything we could about the issues and working with Matrox we were able to create some cookbooks and tech docs that made it work for more people. It still was a nightmare for those who ran into problems, but we kept on trying to make it better. With each new generation of Matrox RT products we have seen better compatibility and easier installs.

With the RTX.100 Matrox introduced a card that was as stable as the Canopus DV Storm. Canopus had set the bar for stability and performance as a Premiere accelerator. Unfortunately for Storm owners, when Adobe moved on to Premiere Pro, Canopus was unable to maintain the stability and performance that had made them tops in our market.

Matrox on the other hand was able to deliver solid drivers for Premiere Pro and then Premiere Pro CS2. With each FREE driver release they not only added compatibility with the new version, but additional features to the toolset. They continue to be by far and away the best hardware solution for Adobe editors. While others offer I/O - only Matrox delivers real-time performance, additional features and effects, accelerated rendering and an HDV workflow that works.

Note: We have been a Cinform dealer and supporter since before they where Cineform. I think that Aspect HD is a very cool plug-in. I am amazed at what these guys can deliver with software only. But the Cineform workflow isn't for everyone either.

Getting back to Matrox. I do think your idea about them publishing a knowledgebase of issues is a good one. While their support forums offer this information, it would be beneficial to have it be in one place as a reference.

As far as compatibility with motherboards Matrox has done a great job not only publishing a pretty extensive list of approved hardware, but you can drill down for specific installation instructions including what slot to put the card in and what drivers / updates to install for the mobo & graphics card. http://www.matrox.com/video/support/rtx2/rec/computer.cfm

One of the things I'd like to stress here is the importance of buying your Matrox card from a Gold Dealer. These guys have extensive knowledge about the cards and many submit their turnkey solutions to Matrox for evaluation and testing. If you plan on using your own computer, review the specs with the dealer and they can recommend any changes or modifications that will make everything work better.

Gary
http://www.videoguys.com/rtx2.html

Hello Gary, the truth is that PAL land is somewhat overlooked by HW/SW vendors... The same applies for Final Cut, which works great with JVC HD1xx line of camcorders and Apple Intermediate Codec in NTSC, but you really cannot capture to AIC in PAL (it always captures 50 frames per second, no matter what your settings are). I guess US vendors put more emphasis to NTSC when testing.

As a Matrox RT2000, RT100X, and now RTX2 owner - I have to say that Matrox has made my life easier. I have been editing in PP2 and Matrox with HDV since November and have had no problems.

I will soon install the V3 tools and CS3-- hopefully next week.

I had a big problem once with a specific set of effects on the RT100X and after a month of trying things discovered that on the forum a solution was already posted to make a simple change in BIOS so the specific mobo would work properly. That taught me to search the forum first (as opposed to hoping the tech will remember the fix). I still have the RT100X and use it for the occasional SD project, it works great.

The RTX2 is awesome for HDV and as I discovered recently the "movie" export is faster than realtime, as opposed to the adobe media exporter, which is many times slower than real time. I tried exporting an mpeg I frame 45 min to export 52 min HDV project as a SD avi. Imported it into Encore and in 1 hour from start "burn folder" the folder was done.

I love the card and what it does for me. Make color corrections, layers of titles, speed changes and almost everything zips along at RT.

Bill in Ohio

I talked to a friend who bought the RT.X2 for HDV editing and has been told by Matrox tech support that the captured files won't work in CS3 without the card. Aside from the risk I mentioned earlier of having the card crash in the middle of a project, this also presents a problem for him in trying to outsource some of his editing to other Premiere Pro users. So while hardware editing cards can be great there are some issues to consider before committing to using one.

In case I didn't mention it before, Edius can do much of what the Matrox card does without any specialized hardware on a sufficiently powerful computer. Of course then you have to commit to using Edius and the limitations that involves, but it's another option worth considering before plunking down big bucks for the Matrox card with CS3.

Kevin, one question for you.. Has your friend removed the drivers and attempted to do what he was told by the rep would not work? Furthermore, have you seen this occurance? The reason I am asking is because if it doesn't work after a person actually "seeing" an occurance, well, that is one thing, but I am one of those that has a hard time believing "what someone told someone else". That really doesn't work for me. I am supposing this goes back to the question you asked about the VFW software codecs I suppose..

There are risks to take with any NLE, hardware or even just software combination. I am not saying the X2, or for that matter any capture card is perfect for everyone... You know, I guess there is only one way to know for myself if this is true... I will be back..

Wow! I stand corrected. I am sorry, I uninstalled my drivers and it did not work. I am a bit dissapointed. I can admit when I am wrong, and I was wrong. But from what was said, this was not supposed to be so.

I know though that if the drivers are still installed, you can open the project in desktop mode.

I am, myself dissapointed.. :-(

Damon

Has your friend removed the drivers and attempted to do what he was told by the rep would not work?

Yes, he said he tried transferring the footage to two different computers without the drivers and it didn't work. He also tried the software patches which are supposed to help with that and they didn't work. I just called him and he said he's ordered something called the "M.Key" (a dongle) which will supposedly solve this problem at a cost of $200. If I think of it I'll report back here on whether that helps.

Yes, Kevin, that would be great to hear either way..

Matrox AVIs don't work for me on computers without RTX2 either, even if they should with their VfW drivers. This was not fixed in Matrox Tools V3, like the issue that Matrox captured AVIs don't play beyond 1:48 duration outside Premiere (on RTX2 system!). Matrox rendered (as opposed to captured) AVIs play just fine. I am in contact with Matrox support, they were able to reproduce this issue and are supposedly working on fix.

You can use the Matrox Media Encoder (looks just like Adobe Media Encoder) and export an Mpg file as HDV 30i and send them the file.

However I thought I read on the Matrox site they have a utility that unwraps the matrox I frame exports (which export at slightly faster than RT) so it can be used in other non matrox based projects. Since I don't have outside sources to do other work, not an issue for me.

Question though - how do you provide your clips, etc to the outside source and how do they provide finished back to you? If you are giving them tape and they give you tape this is a nonissue as the tapes are all HDV.

If you are giving them a removeable HDD then you would simply output the media that works. I have imported both mpg files, m2t files and wm9 file and used those on the matrox based PP2 system with RTX2 card.

Bill in Ohio

I'm not sure what the incompatibility is? If you finish a project and export an mpg2 or almost any other output that is used by your authoring program. When I did miniDV I would finish up my final product by exporting back to minidv tape. That can be input into anybodies system.

The only thing that is going on, is that on import to matrox RTX2 you can either go HDV native or their mpg codec. I almost always do HDV.

Anyway have fun. I do.

Bill in Ohio

I have owned an RT2000, RT.X100 and now Axio LE. The compatibility is a non-issue. This has never been a problem for me.