A Different Work Flow Idea For Vegas: Cut 5DMKII Clips in Vegas Using Epic ??

[Chris Barcellos]

I tried the trial of Epic, for Vegas, and liked the simplicity of the process. Rather than convert all of my Canon 5D shots and then cutting them all up in Vegas, how about doing a rough cut in Vegas using Epic before converstion, and then rendering to Cineform codec from there of just the footage I will use. Epic renders from the original file, and it would seem to me this would create no difference in generations .

Any body have any thoughts about issues with this kind of a process ?

[Chris Barcellos]

So I went ahead and bought Epic from DVfilm.com, paying for the full version.

My idea turned out to be a flop. The idea to use of Epic for intermediate proxy proved to add more burdon to the process than I had expected.

My idea was that in a large batch of clips, one could quickly convert to the Epic's proxy files, then cut out clips needed to edited in full Cineform files, and render those portions out. I expected time and drive savings.

It seemed like a good idea, because Epic's demo version seem to render almost instantaneous proxy files. Problem is that in its demo version only renders 5 second sections of any clip, and it hides the transcoding process time for a large file. It also hides how big your transcoded file will be.

The renders times are longer on my Window 7 lap top, than rendering the same file in Cineform.

The Cineform file is about twice the size, but both files play back in Vegas with equal ease.

Except for file size savings in a larger project, I am not seeing a benefit to this program for Cineform owners.

Cineform users pay a bit more for DVFilm -- by about three times-- but the fact that you get a clean editable file outweighs the $ 100 or so extra in cost.

[Marcus van Bavel]

Hi, thanks for purchasing it. You can certainly use Epic as a transcoder, however that's not what it is.

The point of Epic is that you can do many of your editing tasks while Epic is preparing for real time playback in the background. The point is to get away from the tape-like workflow that transcoding forces upon you.

Right after shooting you can drag your DSLR quicktimes directly into Vegas from the file explorer. You can select takes. You can select the in and out points with the trimmer. You can put the clips into the timeline and set up your rough cut in its proper order of shots. You can adjust transition points. You can do all those things without waiting for any transcodes to finish.

Also if you drop clips into the timeline in rough order from start to finish, the first clip is likely ready for RT playback by the time you have set its in and out points (say for example, one minute to think about the in and out points on a 30 sec clip). Once the clip is trimmed then, it will playback in real time. And thus once all the clips are assembled and roughed in, the whole rough cut is ready for RT playback.

Also its important to use the purple mode for rendering. If you do this the real time playback mode is irrelevant to rendering-- thus the fine quality of the real time files are not important-- you are always using the original files for rendering.

One more point: people have to keep their transcode files forever. With Epic the extra files are deletable. You don't need them to archive or later restore your project. So the extra file space, long-term, is zero.

[Chris Barcellos]

Marcus:

Not trying to dis the product, but with Epic, I don't see any significant time savings or Cineform users. I had approached it with that idea, and that is why I posted this idea in the first place.

For my work flow, and most Cineform users feel this way, I want to be editing, transitioning and color correcting in Cineforms codec, not in the h.264 codec. It stands up better to those thing.

As far as storing the intermediate Cineform files after edit is done, completely unnecessary. If you ever really have to come back to the original transcoded files, you simplye rerender the ones you used with Cineform once again. The file should be exactly the same, including in naming convention.

[Marcus van Bavel]

I want to be editing, transitioning and color correcting in Cineforms codec, not in the h.264 codec. It stands up better to those thing.

Epic has 10-bit 4:2:2 YUV. There's no evidence that Cineform is better. Epic should be better because there is no extra recompression. For example for a DVD project you have Epic-->Mpeg2. With Cineform you have Quicktime->Cineform->Mpeg2. Extra recompression with Cineform.

As far as storing the intermediate Cineform files after edit is done, completely unnecessary. If you ever really have to come back to the original transcoded files, you simplye rerender the ones you used with Cineform once again. The file should be exactly the same, including in naming convention.

But who would do it that way? You would more likely keep the CF files to avoid having to laboriously re-do every single transcode if the project needed to be restored in a hurry.

[Chris Barcellos]

"Epic has 10-bit 4:2:2 YUV. There's no evidence that Cineform is better. Epic should be better because there is no extra recompression. For example for a DVD project you have Epic-->Mpeg2. With Cineform you have Quicktime->Cineform->Mpeg2. Extra recompression with Cineform."

My understanding from your "readme" literature is that anything I render for final render is rendered directly from the Canon original file, and that proxy files are used for preview only. That would also mean that transitions, color correction, and other filters will be applied directly to the original files. Are you saying that Epics process actually converts to a 10bit 4:2:2 YUV from which DVD file is rendered ? I am unclear on what you mean.

[Steve Howe]

I would imagine that the 10 bit files are for rendering with their improved colour correction ability. They would be a bit of overkill simply for viewing.

[Harry Simpson]

I was following Marcus and Chris's discussion here and the Epic was sounding great until Chris asked a question and Marcus never answered back - the thread died in May 2010.....I'm still wondering what the answer to Chris's question would be from Marcus....

[Marcus van Bavel]

The answer to the question is that with Epic the conversion to 10-bit 4:2:2 is done internally as part of the rendering process. If you have a followup question on DVFilm Epic I please post it in the Sony Vegas forum. Thanks!