XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

The JVC GY-LS300 shoots using a codec that is very similar to XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD. Even with 10.0.9 under 10.9.5 I can import a .mov file from the HD -- haven't tried from an SD card yet.

I request Optimize but no Proxy. As soon as a clip appears in the browser I can begin editing. The tiny clocks seem to not function.

Eventually I check on a clip and see it now has a green Optimized mark. Two questions:

1) Once the Optimized version of a clip is available, does FCPX automatically switch to using it? Doing so would make sense because ProRes should be easier to work with than long-gop h.264.

2) If one exports to ProRes 422, will FCPX use the already ProRes 422 Optimized -- but second gen -- clips or will it follow the "rule" that the original -- first gen -- source is always used for export, even if it takes longer?

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

It is my understanding that when you select OPTIMIZE, you RECEIVE a ProRes transcoded version of each clip in your events location, and the original files are not additionally transferred or copied to your Macputer.

I had a loaner HD200 last week, and was pretty surprised to find that the HD422 files REQUIRED transcoding before I could export a timeline, even though they are already MOV, and optimized was not selected. This is not the case with other ProHD products that produce MOV files, and that was a big selling point for JVC.

Paul

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

I'm surprised you say "the HD422 files REQUIRED transcoding" and see it as a problem or change.

When you select Optimize, all h.264 files are automatically transcoded -- as you say -- to PR422 in the BACKGROUND. The h.264 files are either on a card or on your disk. If the former, you can't remove the card until the Render indicator shows 100%.

While this can take a few minutes -- I'm not sure why this bothers you because while the transcoding is being done you are already busy at work logging your clips, rating them, adding keywords, and editing them into a timeline. All this work is done using the h.264 files that are either on a card or on your disk. If the former, you can't remove the card.

So it's hard to imagine you could finish an edit before all the clips had been transcoded in the background. So when you go to export your edited timeline -- it will export immediately as it always has with ProHD.

My question was -- once all h.264 files have been transcoded to PR422 -- does FCPX automatically use these files while you are editing?

Obviously, if the h.264 files are on a card you would want FCPX to switch to the PR files so you can eject the card. I suppose if I eject the card, I will find out. I suspect files will go OFFLINE and I'll need to do a RELINK. Don't know because I always elect to copy all source files to my disk.

When the transcoding is done, I have 2 copies of each clip -- one is h.264 and one is PR422. It would seem FCPX should auto-switch to each PR file as it becomes available because PR422 is far more processor efficient than h.264. But, I'm thinking it doesn't. So how do I force this to happen?

My guess is that I can RELINK them to the PR files, but that will still leave the h.264 files on my disk. Anyone?

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

I just finish shooting a breaking news story at 10:45PM, and it needs to be on air at 11PM. I insert my SD card, and now must WAIT for transcoding, before I can FTP my exported b-roll clip............do you see MY problem in this normal ENG situation? Many times, I am out of the car on my next breaking news story while FCPX is still exporting my last story, so that previous story gets put in line (on hold) to FTP in via mobile broadband, because I am not at my Macbook when it finishes exporting to begin the FTP. And on all my current FCPX systems, transcoding is PUT ON PAUSE if I begin playing back my timeline, and slows severely if I apply a color correction and let it render. When I say put on pause, it may just slow to 1% speed, but it basically visibly stops the little clip circle complete pucks.

Again, this is not an issue with HM600/650/790/890 MOV files, including the 50Mbps 1080p60 HM850/890 files, they can be exported the moment they touch the timeline, even if the darn raw clips have not made it from your card to your HDD. Again, this is a selling point for JVC ProHD gear, rapid FCP workflow.

As for having 2 version of each clip......unless you did the import TWICE, once as copy, and once as optimize, your event will only contain one copy of files. You can go to your ingested files and right click show in finder, and it will open a window to all clips in that event. Your raws will remain on your card unless you ingest them again, or copy the card over to a finder folder. FCPX can be slow at ingesting, because it does so much transcoding, even if just to make things mov, so copying over your entire card, then ingesting from that new card folder, will be a faster process and get your card back in the camera quicker. :)

Paul

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

[QUOTE=Paul Anderegg; ... this is a selling point for JVC ProHD gear, rapid FCP workflow. Paul[/QUOTE]

Why do you compare the GY-HM200 to the old line of "ProHD" camcorders?

Looking at the brochure and PR there's no mention that the three new 4K camcorders are part of the ProHD line.

As I have posted, the new line uses a codec very similar to Sony's XAVC-L which FCPX treats in a different way -- just as it does if you shoot with a Sony camcorder. Perhaps you need to talk with Apple.

Just for fun I imported 4K clips from the JVC into iMovie 9.0.9 and it played and exported -- only HD -- seemingly with no delays. Before you keep posting it's JVC fault, you might want to try iMovie. Also try the new iMovie. Try Premiere -- I expect it too will work fine for creating a B-roll. Otherwise, you'll need to find another camera.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

Sorry, I thought you were asking a question, not looking to validate a preformed opinion. :-P

Regardless of what is "right" for either of us, I wanted to ensure that details of these certain aspects of the cameras functionality with FCPX were posted, so that others researching these models have a better idea of what to expect, and if those expectations can be met with these models. :)

Paul

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

Since I posted a confirmation of the behavior of FCPX with certain types of h.264 I think everyone is fully aware of it now.

Actually, I've read in several places that FCPX has a problem with certain types of h.264. I just didn't know what the exact problems were until I encountered odd behavior with LS300 files.

No problem for me, but still it would be interesting to why FCPX behaves this way.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

It was my understanding that non MOV files would be either transcoded, or rewrapped into an MOV wrapper, resulting in those little circle timer import pucks. Perhaps the new JVC MOV implementation has some meta data that is making the current version of FCPX misidentify the files as not already MOV. I don't have my loaner HM200 anymore, but it would be interesting to see the difference between a camera clip (mov) and one that was run through copy import to FCPX in a finder folder, MB difference, metadata etc.
Paul

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

We really appreciate all of Paul’s testing here. This is the only place I’ve found where there is so much information on the type of cam I’d really like to get, an ENG type but one more compact than those of a few years ago and thanks to Paul’s results I’ve saved a lot of time and money. Currently I’m living with my placeholder but new models are due to come out the beginning of January and then there is spring around the corner.

I can sure understand Paul’s need for a low-light news cam as that is more of a niche profession. The rest of the news guys are out there during daylight hours or in lit buildings with talking heads and likely with crew assistants for lighting and audio. Lucky for them. Then the night guy is a one-man-show and mostly in the dark, the worst of all conditions. That is a really tough job.

Back to cams, it isn’t much fun to pick up that new cam and discover some unknown design “feature” and it doesn’t do what you thought it would. Fortunately, Paul’s serious testing (The devil is in the details) is finding some of them. It almost seems there isn’t a cam made that doesn’t have an issue of some kind for somebody.

Picking up a new cam can be a moving target as technology, needs, and price keep changing. With “needs” we’re our own worst enemy by raising the bar. I never thought I’d want anything with WiFi capability but as of last week something has come up and I just might reconsider - starting to get some ideas.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

"I can sure understand Paul’s need for a low-light news cam as that is more of a niche profession."

Very niche. Most us labor over an edit for hours or days or months -- which allows the transcode to go on in the background.

Although one can edit -- the h.264 -- immediately, working from an SD card seems less efficient than making a copy of the movie files immediately. This also frees up the card(s).

Were Paul to really want to use the jvc, and if he only needs to edit to a timeline shots that will be B-roll (before export and upload) iMovie seems not to have the problem fcpx has.

Clearly fcpx can read the files because one can edit with them. Why fcpx cannot export from these files is very odd. The other odd thing is the little clocks don't function.

One thought, fcpx may use only certain information from the source h.264 files for editing. For example, every other line. (Some compression systems offer a FAST decode option that uses only some of the data.) Partial data is fine for editing, but when it's time to export -- fcpx is smart enough to go back to the original h.264 data files.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

Because speed seems to be so important for your work, is there a reason why you cannot use another NLE that doesn't have the limitations FCP has?

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

4K cameras are not really built yet for speed, either in use or editing.

There is a reason why JVC makes the HM series (which I use), it is an extremely efficient run and gun camera with the option for wireless transfer of files by WiFi or cellular. Their 4K camera which I don't have yet (actually going to demo one this coming week) is designed to be a functional step up from cameras like the Panasonic GH series or Canon DSLRs. However they are not, to my knowledge, promoting it as a hard news camera. A documentary camera, yes. A commercial camera, yes. A low-budget film production camera, yes.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

Good points.

JVC has a hard job in positioning the LS300. It looks like any of their previous ENG/Event camcorders. It has all the traditional controls. But, internally it is also a 4K/UHD digital cine camera "for the rest of us."

It shares its codec with other family members. A codec that at present, FCPX treats in an odd way. Not JVC's fault. Apple will hopefully fix this problem. If it does, then the new series may be very suitable for hard news with its FHD 422 codec.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

In case of use the ls300 can be, shoot in HD and use it's prime zoom ability to actually zoom with fast prime lenses, it's one of the advantages of it being a 4K camera. I see this feature to be very useful for handheld shooting.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

That's why I wanted to know if fcp is a vital part in Pauls workflow, there is no use in blaming jvc when you have to work with an nle that is not up to the task, especially since there are other nle's that don't have any issue with it.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

This is a point that we have to deal with now that nobody holds to any particular codec for any length of time anymore. Did JVC tell Apple that they were doing something unusual to the codec? How fast is Apple expected to react if they were told? Did JVC bother to test the codec with a reasonable number of PC and Mac computer models? This could also be a problem with the graphics board programming in a particular model as many computer programs now shift the video processing from the CPU to the graphic board. FCPX is one of them. Companies have development schedules that are hard to suddenly change. Sometimes third party developers are better equipped to react quickly. I remember how back in the DV tape deck days, JVC never programmed their FireWire connections properly and frequently the NLEs would not be able to recognize the decks until they were updated. Maybe the JVC 4K codec is screwy but I hope not.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

I have no idea how a camera manufacturer communicates with a NLE manufacturer but one thing is for sure, there are no updates before the camera hits the market, just look at the h.265 codec from samsung, that also took a while before NLE's started to catch up.
I don't expect the JVC 4K codec to be screwy, something seems to have changed since fcp needs to transcode it before you can start to edit but that is not the case in other NLE's.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

That cameras get ahead of NLE's is not new. It's always been the case. It's not unique to JVC nor Apple.

It is also is a minor problem. I've been editing LS300 UHD for weeks with FCPX and once I knew what to expect it has causd no real problem.

It's no different than my knowing that to edit 4K h.264 in Resolve I've got to let it transcode to PR422 Proxy BEFORE i can start editing.

And, if I shoot 2160p30 on MY computer I can only play at 25fps. Not a problem because I shoot 2160p24. But, if I shot 30p I'd have to deal with it.

When done editing in Resolve, I've got to transcode the original h.264 during the export.

In fact, because FCPX will play h264 without a transcode -- I can start editing immediately. So I'm one up on Resolve. But, when it comes to grading Resolve is one up on FCPX. All tools have limitations that we learn how to work with.

I believe the same issue affects Sony XAVC-L.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

I used the Sony PXW-X70 XAVC-L .mxf in FCPX without issues. Not only don't I optimize, FCPX doesn't even present it as an option with this codec.

It took something like six months for the camera firmware 2.0 update and the FCPX update to handle the codec though. The issue was on Sony's side. You may need to contact JVC about where there are with FCPX support.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

[QUOTE=Craig Seeman;1906281..... The issue was on Sony's side. ....[/QUOTE]

I don't think it was Sony. Edius and I believe Premiere edited XAVC-L native files created by the X70 from day one. Firmware 2.0 is I believe QFHD paid upgrade. If you don't need this then the firmware for HD has not changed. So 3840x2160 XAVC-L at 24/25/30P the X70 equivalent of the FDRAX100 at XAVC-S. MXF wrapper instead of MOV. It is up to the NLE manufacturers to stay current and work with the camera manufactures not the other way around. ADOBE and Grass Valley seem to do a good job of this. If your NLE can't manage the files from the camera you want to use then change the NLE. They are all just tools.

Ron Evans

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

"FCPX doesn't even present it as an option with this codec."

Are you saying that before the updates this was the case or is this the case after the updates?

There is an internal difference between the Sony and the JVC codec. The Sony codec employs 3 Reference frames while the JVC employs 2 Reference frames. The Sony codec is more efficient but more difficult to decode. Looks like FCPX simply refuses to do a background transcode with the Sony codec.

At least with the JVC codec it will do a background transcode. But, it does take time.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

Yes, FCPX does give the option of either editing the X70 XAVC-L clips natively or transcoding (in the background) to ProRes - unless you have old versions of the camera firmware or of FCPX - see below.

No, it couldn't do this at first, nor could Vegas or Avid. I don't know (or care) if it was an Apple issue or a Sony one, but I do know that it took updates from both Sony and Apple to make the files able to be ingested/edited natively. And it required a further update from Apple to extend this same compatibility to files from the 4K upgrade. And older clips shot using the old firmware still will not import even after you update the firmware. Native HD import/editing has been available since June, 4K since September.

No, the 2.0 firmware is not the same thing as the 4K upgrade, although the camera must be updated to 2.0 (free) for the 4K installer (not free) to work.

And, when you import clips, the circular progress icon doesn't necessarily mean that transcoding is taking place. Those show up if you are transcoding, but they also show up if FCPX is just copying the native clips into your Library.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

It's easy to say that. Then all NLE manufacturers would have to buy/rent every new camera put on the market. Not going to happen. AVID doesn't do this and they are top of the line if you are in broadcast/cinema production. Apple uses QuickTime as their base which has a strict set of parameters where the PC based NLEs do their own thing which makes the NLEs more tolerant of codecs that stray from industry specs. The specs are agreed upon to help with compatibility between products. If JVC has come up with a better way to handle 4K then it's up to them to make sure it works with the four major NLE programs out there either by providing the info to those companies or by supplying their own transcoding software. JVC is not a very big company these days, they are a good company but the pro division is now essentially on it's own and has less resources than years ago.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

First I do not have the X70 so cannot confirm anything associated with Ver 2.0 I can only go by what the Sony site says:-

Functions added with the “Ver. 2.00” firmware upgrade
• Recording/playing back/outputting in 4K (QFHD) (“CBKZ-X70FX” (sold separately) is
necessary)
• Proxy recording
• Network functions
– Streaming
– FTP transfer

So yes you are correct that the 4K upgrade is separate but do not see anything mentioning changing the codec. Focus is on streaming and network functions.

Ron Evans

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

Sony is a pretty big camera manufacturer, keeping up with their developments, XAVC, XAVC-L and XAVC-S would be a worthwhile activity ? Edius ( Grass Valley who are also very big in broadcast I think ) seem to be able to do this just fine as does ADOBE and a lot of low cost consumer NLE's.

Ron Evans

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

Well, I've owned the X70 since Dec. 2014, so I CAN confirm what happened with the 2.0 firmware upgrade. As the first bullet point suggests, the 2.0 firmware made 4K possible, but only if you subsequently bought and installed CBKZ-X70FX (the part number for the 4K upgrade). If you left the camera at firmware 1.0, the 4K would not install.

I don't know about the codec, but it is a fact that after the 2.0 firmware and a combination of FCPX updates and Apple Pro Codecs updates the XAVC-L could then be ingested and edited natively. But, the 4K XAVC-L still could not until a further update from Apple which came out about 3 months after the 4K upgrade shipped. And to my knowledge, Avid never did anything to enable the clips - Sony provided a plugin for that.

The really interesting part is that Sony Vegas could not import XAVC-L natively either for *several* months. I have to assume that communication between the camera and software divisions led to a solution. And my previous camera was a Canon XF100, which also took several months and updates from both Canon and Apple (including a new plugin from Canon) before the clips were natively usable in FCPX.

In reading back in this thread, it's unclear whether the problems with the JVC and FCPX that Paul mentioned were on import or on export. If it's import, then there may need to be communication/collaboration between the two companies as I've described above to sort it out. But if it's export, I wonder if he had the camera long enough to experiment with other output options that might not require transcoding.

Re: XAVC-L 4K and XAVC-L HD questions
 

I have a FDR-AX1 and a FDR-AX100. When the X70 came out I demoed one for comparison with the two I have that of course use XAVC-S. I can confirm that Edius will edit native XAVC-L just fine but Vegas 12 will not edit XAVC-L. I think the latest Vegas13 will but I have not upgraded to Vegas13 as my main editor is EDIUS and I use Vegas mainly for audio mixing. EDIUS makes an effort to edit anything native and most of the time succeeds.

Interesting times.

Ron Evans