Faster than FCP / compressor transcode ?????
 

Can you explain what you mean by "faster than FCP encode".

I have a panny Avchd camera and I do a log and transfer in FCP via compressor to Prores 422 (standard). Are you telling me I can use Clipwrap to convert to prores422 STD quality and it will take 8x times less!!???

Re: Faster than FCP / compressor transcode ?????
 

Not quite - basically, we can rewrap to a playable QuickTime file incredibly fast. If you're working on reviewing dailies (or cutting in FCPX) that may be all you need, rather than waiting for the lengthy final cut pro transcode. If you actually need ProRes though, ClipWrap and FCP are both CPU-bound, so we'll be more or less the same speed.

-Colin

Re: Faster than FCP / compressor transcode ?????
 

Been running some test on my MBP 2008 with FCP & FCP X with Clipwrap 2.2 (using an older version)

Test
======
1 min of AVCHD footage to > Prores 422 std -

Clipwrap - 2 mins
FCP 6 - log and transfer -
FCP X - 2 mins BUT it does an unwrap (very nifty) and I'm converting to Proxy and Std quality so you have 3 folders with unwrapped media, proxy and std all in one - fantastic!

So, my results show Clipwrap take 2x longer than FCP and FCP X
Bad :(

BUT and this is the really cool thing. I've been trying to use Premiers Pro 5.5 on my Mac but having an older machine I don't have the mercury engine goodness so I stopped using it as native AVCHD editing works but is so slowwwwwww.

But now with clipwrap, if I didn't have FCP 6 ($1200) I could encode to ProRes and edit away on BOTH mac and PC. This is one up on neoscene as it's just for one platform (I think they have a version that can do multi platform but it's $$$$) . So perhaps you can add that to your promo material.

I tried to remove the wrapper on AVCHD footage mts to mov. Still jerky and one can always play AVCHD mts files with Movist program (free via google code)

My 2c