" If you really want to do significant HDV editing you need to plan to buy a dual-processor computer no matter what solution you're using"

That is simply not true. The Cineform AspectHD solution offers ample performance from a single 800+ bus P4. The latest release v3 has just doubled the number of RT streams in the PPro timeline. 3-4 in 1080i or around 6 in my prefered 720p. At $800 including PPro, audition, and Encore, it can hardly be considered overpriced for what you get.

"The Cineform AspectHD solution offers ample performance from a single 800+ bus P4. The latest release v3 has just doubled the number of RT streams in the PPro timeline. 3-4 in 1080i or around 6 in my prefered 720p. At $800 including PPro, audition, and Encore, it can hardly be considered overpriced for what you get."

Ken: that's a fair statement, except Cineform reportedly only supports a handful of editing features in real time and hasn't (at least until now) been able to offer full-quality HD preview output, plus rendering times for finished projects are reportedly quite slow even with dual processors. (As is true for other HDV editing options.) So although $800 for the Cineform/Premiere bundle isn't a bad deal, it's not necessarily a better deal than spending a few hundred for Edius Pro 3 and then building or buying a hot-shot computer to back it up. It all depends how far you want to push your HDV editing and how much you can afford to spend to do so. Even with Cineform, the benefits in terms of reduced rendering time from dual processors would be worth the extra investment in base hardware.

OK, let's put all the speculation aside and get to the facts.

I own a 3.2 Dual Xeon and have ran LE 6.1 with Long GOP on it with my FX1 footage. I get about 3 layers in RT on this setup. No more. That's with transitions and color correction only.

I own a 3.2 P4 box with AspectHD (which will soon be going on my Xeon Box) and I get a solid 4 layers with the same transitions and color correction.

There is no way Edius SW only solution can outperform LE 6.1 Pro in Long GOP.

A few people claim there Edius SW only solution is performing well for what they are doing, which might be true, but let's compare apples to apples.

AspectHD easily outperforms the Edius SW only solution. There is no comparison. Noticed I said software solution. I am sure the NX series trumps the AspectHD solution, but everyone here seems to be using the sofware only in Long GOP and AspectHD beats it easily.

Ed: the problem here is that you're not specifying what editing features you can support in real time on those setups. I've seen screen shots from people who have the Premiere Pro/Cineform software showing that the total number of filters and effects available in real time can be counted on your fingers, whereas with Edius it's pretty much the entire feature set of the application. I don't have any comparable information for Liquid Edition, but what little feedback I've seen for that is that most people can't get it to work reliably with HDV footage.

Ultimately I don't see a conflict in what we're saying here. Cineform is a good value for basic HDV work on single-processor computers if you don't need full-quality HD monitoring or a wide range of real-time editing features. Liquid Edition may be pretty good at editing native HDV if you can get it to work, and again if you don't need true HD monitoring. Edius will do HDV on high-end single processor systems but not older ones, and offers the most advanced HDV solution available if you can afford a fast computer and a Canopus HDV hardware card. On this last point there isn't any competition, because Canopus is the only company shipping an HDV solution with full-quality HD monitoring as an out-of-the-box option.

I posted above about what RT capabilities I have. I do mostly narrative work and dissolves and color correction are all I use. If you are doing PIP and Page curls, I would guess it would tax the best machines out there. I don't have time to test things I don't use, so I apologize for not delving deeper into the RT capabilities of all products. As far as RT Monitoring in AspectHD...I have it. My 6600GT with component out to my Mitsu HD monitor works just fine and dandy.

"As far as RT Monitoring in AspectHD...I have it. My 6600GT with component out to my Mitsu HD monitor works just fine and dandy."

Ed: you're right, it is now possible to generate draft-quality HD ouptut from Premiere Pro/Cineform using a high-end video card costing around $200-250, which brings the total price of this solution to over $1000. That's still a lot less than the complete Edius NX bundle costs, but as you said we shouldn't compare apples to oranges. Cineform is an excellent compromise if you don't need anything beyond the supported feature set, and if you're not picky about whether your monitoring output is full quality 1080i video. And then there's the empty slot on the NX hardware card for a future real-time HD DVD encoder, but that's a subject for next year.

Cineform is apparently more hardware-efficient than Edius, but that doesn't make it more advanced. Gotta look at the overall picture...

You guys keep posting large numbers like we didn't already own Premiere Pro. Many of us do. If, perhaps, you didn't have anything, it might be a good idea to try Edius. But since I already own Premiere Pro, I chose a solution that was right for me.

Aspect HD.

Excellent point Steven. Aspect HD is a great way for Premiere Pro editors to migrate to HDV. The workflow is actually very smooth, and as was mentioned, you aren't going to have to buy a new computer to run it.

Working with a digital intermediary technology (what a mouthful) takes getting used to. But I think the results are worth it. Premiere editors save a TON of time and money.

- You don't have to learn a new NLE. Premiere Pro is a very powerful editor, with a great feature set.

- You don't have to go and buy a dual processor computer. This is a very important point that should not be overlooked. P Pro w/ Aspect HD will run great in a P4 2.2 Ghz machine with a GB of RAM. Even a laptop!

- You still keep the Adobe workflow and integration with their other apps - After Effects, PhotoShop, Encore & Audition. This will only get stronger and better with future releases.

- With new Dual head graphic cardcs like the PNY540V you can get real-time HD previews out to an HD TV.


Gary

<<<-- Originally posted by Gary Bettan :
- This will only get stronger and better with future releases.
Gary -->>>

yes, i do agree "in time" Premiere will be stronger and better, but there solution just isn't there yet.

Joel,

I am really interested in what you think is wrong with Premiere Pro and Cineform Aspect HD 3.0

Which technical issues, or workflow issues are you unhappy with?

I know that the solution is not perfect, but it works great for me. It could be faster. But the effects are sufficient for my needs, as are the transitions. And the realtime editing is great.

I would like to buy a new video card that can handle monitoring the HDV editing like I have when editing DV. But that will come.

Steven,

There is nothing wrong with Ppro, I love it and as I mentioned in a earlier posts I have been using Premiere since v5.0. It’s Cineform that I do with out. I still don't see the point in using an intermediate codec for editing. m2t>avi>m2t- then i am finished? NO WAY! I can tell you this, the performance I am getting off my single processor 3.2gHz 533 FSB PC with a gig a ram is very good in the Software only version of Canopus Edius. I get (I would say) 98% RT WITH color effects and a slow motion effect. Not bad and thats in native m2t. (Not the HQ codec some people have referred to.) Listen, I tested out AspectHD 2.5 & 3.0 and it just doesn’t come close to the quality and performance (Native m2t editing) as Eduis. Another issue I have is when I captured using the HDlink and from Ppro I get "broken up" frames and green screens. (I don't with Edius). Another, sometimes when I would add an effect the picture would turn upside down and get very pinkish redish. These alone are enough to look the other way. Not to mention that you got to wait before you can edit. Edius is very easy to use and is rock solid 1080i HDV Editing and I also get great results when I do 1080i to 720p Down conversion using Procoder Express that comes with it all for near the same price a AspectHD “PLUGIN”.


Joel

<<<-- Originally posted by Steven Gotz : Joel,

I know that the solution is not perfect, but it works great for me. It could be faster. But the effects are sufficient for my needs, as are the transitions. And the realtime editing is great.>>>


The Edius solution is so far PERFECT! :)

j

Perfect? Wow, that's great. That means you can copy from an After Effects timeline to a Edius timeline?

I don't know why you were getting broken frames. I don't. And I don't know why you got green screens and upside down video. I don't.

But your claims that Edius is perfect are simply nonsense. I am glad you are happy. I am happy with Aspect HD. But neither are perfect.

Steven,

Its not nonsense. How are you biasing your level of perfection? Does a application have to integrate well with Adobe products to be perfect? When I say perfect I am stating that thus far there is nothing I can complain about the Edius software. everything works well with absolutely no flaws and never crashed. i get great high quality professional HDV results. If I have a project to do in after effects, no problem just render it out and import it into Edius. Easy as 1-2-3.


joel :)

Joel
"I still don't see the point in using an intermediate codec for editing."

Speed, colour correction, any FX work. Native Mt2 is not ideal for any of these.

"Listen, I tested out AspectHD 2.5 & 3.0 and it just doesn’t come close to the quality and performance "

Are you kidding? You really can't do much with a mt2 file befor it falls apart. And performance is frickin light years over native mt2 editing. Unless maybe you have an ill configured system with no RAID to handle the larger intermediate file size of the Cineform .avi. Were you trying to run it with your 533 bus P4 system? Cineform needs (excels with) dual channel ram and 800fsb+. A 2.8 P4 with 800fsb would run laps around your system.

"Another issue I have is when I captured using the HDlink and from Ppro I get "broken up" frames and green screens. (I don't with Edius). Another, sometimes when I would add an effect the picture would turn upside down and get very pinkish redish."

Well you probably know very well this is not the norm. Cineform tech support would resolve these issues I'm sure. Did you ever contact them?

"Not to mention that you got to wait before you can edit."

My capture conversion time is very close to real-time. HT has been enabled in the latest releases and has sped this up greatly.

As far as NLE preferance goes, to each their own. I don't care what anyone uses. But don't give a half-assed shot at some software on a sub-minimum recommended system and then announce it is crap. Editing native mt2 is crap. That is why all but the entry level NLE's have made an intermediate codec part of their high end package.

thanks ken,

now why don't you chill a little, i never insulted anyone why are you insulting me? my whole point is with my pc configuration i get great results with Edius. if you read others who posted the whole point for Aspecthd that you are able to get good results with a "not so beefed up system" , not the case with me. i get better results with edius. and eduis is not a entry level application. it may lack some features but it's not entry level have you tried it for your self? if not you have no say in whats more efficient than another.


J

Telling you your system is subpar for running AspectHD is NOT a insult Joel. We are talking NLE's here, nothing personal.
I am making no comments as to how well Edius works. If it is good for you all the better. It was you who were painting AspectHD with a negative brush. Apparently with a corrupt software install and a sub recommended sytem spec to boot. Many of us here use AspectHD and think it is an amazing product, even for the $. We are in a little disagrement with your opinion of native mt2 editing as being better.

ken,

try it and see the light they have a 30 day demo on there site.

Will have a fully functional copy of Edius 3.22 this weekend. I will run tests with it's Long GOP vs Liquid's Long GOP vs Aspect HD on my P4 3.2 and dual Xeon box.

Although Joel swears his performance on the Edius SW is better than the AspectHD, I just don't see it.

Sorry for my scepticism Joel, but I just can't see Edius with 1080i footage in Long GOP even playing back two layers on your machine. Liquid give mes about 1 layer with some effects without breaking up on my P4 3.2 800FSB and V7100 FireGL. Even if Edius is on par with LE 6.1 (which I doubt), your machine is radically underspeced for Long GOP editing. How many fps are you getting on your timeline in just playback with some minor cc?

I am not trying to start a fight, simply expressing my opinion based on compareable product. If Edius can edit LongGOP as well as you claim, I have found a new editor. But unfortunately, I think your claims are a bit exaggerated.

We will soon find out, either way. Report back on Sunday night with results. Just had twins, so it's going to be a busy first Easter for them. :)

Ed: if it's not too much trouble, please comment on what editing features are supported in real time on your system with each of the respective applications. Also, a quick test of WMV and MPEG2 encoding times would be informative. Thanks!

Hi Ed, I have a Canopus Nx card and dual 3.6 Xeons and you are right about 2 layers of .m2t and a choke down....and I saw above where someone claimed they could do 3 layers with Pinnacle....baloney. m2t is just too tough....it is an extremely hi bitrate very compressed format that just kills the processors and anyone who needs to do serious editing just can't use it with even the top of the line machines like mine...and it doesn't matter what editing app has it on their timeline. I think Joel is capturing to Canopus HQ and mistaking that for .m2t.
About Cineform....I think David Newman will agree that if you want full frame full resolution output to external monitor and not the "accelerated" version that is frankly very clever and good(but not as good as full frame full resolution) then even with aspect you are talking about dual Xeons. Both aspect and canopus have great codecs. They both use variable bit rate that has quality settings and are both 4:2:2.
Where I think Canopus has the edge is the hardware card right now does the overlay work(using aspect it is done by the processor)...more importantly the card does all the line scaling which is very important and a big burden on the processor without the card when you have mixed formats on the timeline like SD stuff with HDV or different aspect ratio material. The canopus card will also be used in the future to provide hardware acceleration of effects(new effects are in the works that will use the card) and most importantly for anyone who has had the pleasure of rendering Aspect,Canopus HQ or any other codec back to .m2t or any other usable format then the future planned hardware encoder/daughter board will be a must have....
What I find hard to reconcile is talk about 3 and 4 layers (using accelerated preview)with Aspect(which tells me RT is important to the user) and how you get to stay with the full features of PPro...the problem there is Aspect as a plugin has only a few RT filters(color correction and pan zoom) and 3 or 4 basic categories of transitions....all the native Ppro stuff has to be rendered (not including motion and opacity). Edius on the other hand has 25 plus filters and tons of transitions (including the same type wipes, fades etc as Aspect) and they do NOT have to be rendered(unless you stack too many tough ones up). Edius also comes with Inscriber title motion pro(a HD version) and just makes the native Ppro titler(which you may recall originated from inscriber) look just plain.
Edius has much lower overhead than Ppro and is much stabler. It is only in a 3.0 version and yes there are some big time features I miss from Ppro like matte handling and nested sequences but they are coming SOON!! Audio editing is way ahead in Ppro and canopus needs to do some serious catching up. I use audition to sweeten and edit audio but there are many things I wished I could do without exiting edius that you can in ppro.Don't anyone kid them selves it has a learning curve but not any worse than any professional product.

To me here is the bottom line. Aspect is great if you are married to Ppro and work with a P4 type machine. Edius without a card will do a lot on a P4 OHCI but since it is full frame full resolution editing it will not perform as well as the accelerated preview version that aspect offers....it will give you more effects that will not have to be rendered though. The wavelet technology is as good a preview for the money and is a nice way to get decent preview without stopping playback on a lower spec machine...but don't confuse that with full frame full resolution RT playback, they are different and all you need to do is some tough keying to see the strengths of Canopus full resolution benefits. Aspect is also great if you work flow does not need RT for anything more than color correction, simple Pips and transitions. The combo with ppro is great if you don't mind rendering the native full features that you use.But
If you can afford dual Xeons and a NX type card then the Edius solution can't be beat "for now". I really think once you start seeing HDV in full frames full resolution on a 1080i monitor while you edit in Rt with lots of layers, filters, titles and transitions you will know what I mean. You guys don't know what you are missing seeing this quality(HDV) in full glory. Oh BTW I can't swap between AE but I can composite inside Edius with Boris Red and do just about everything I could do in AE. In some cases more.

It would be difficult to argue that it is possible to throw a lot of money at a new PC with dual processors and a hardware accelerator and not get a better editing experience. I can picture myself getting into that one of these days perhaps.

But claiming that the software only solution is far superior to Aspect HD is just plain unreasonable. And that is what Joel is claiming.

I envy you Randy, but it just isn't time to get rid of my PC just yet. Maybe by the end of the year. And at that point I may have even more options.

"But claiming that the software only solution is far superior to Aspect HD is just plain unreasonable. And that is what Joel is claiming."
I think Joel does have some good points and here is my experiance on a P4 3.2 with Edius(no harware acccleration) and using canopus HQ. I can get 3 layers(one background and 2 pips) to play for about 10secs and 2 layers all day. The preview is full frame full resolution and you could hook a camera ohci and a monitor to that and get monitor out. I can do one filter like CC or blur and titles, and transitions and still maintain Rt playback full resolution. I have tried Aspect and if I didn't have my rig I would bottom line use both edius and PPro with Aspect. Edius OHCI doesn't carry the overhead PPro does and it also doesn't have as much keyframing(part of the reason for lower overhead) so it is a give and take. If you were to turn accelerated preview off in aspect my bet is Edius will outperform it software only....Now I agree that the preview mode that aspect has is really nice and I wouldn't turn it off unless I was keying or doing really technical CC. I think the point is edius ohci is an option with more features RT than Aspect....but on a layer stacking basis Aspect will win since it degrades preview(very cleverly) to get its RT...they are both worthy options and again if Ppro is your soulmate it is a no brainer....stick with aspect. If you want RT with more filters take a look at edius ohci....if you want the best get a dual machine and a hardware card.

Randy, you can choice not to believe, but LE 6.1 will do three layers of 1080i. I just took Kaku Ito's M2T footage (LE does not directly support transport), ran it through HDTV2MPEG, loaded it clips on line 5, 6, and 7. I applied a GPU PIP to clip 6 and 7 with the PIPs over- lapping about 25%. After a 1 minute render (where I could play it, but the frame rate was about 5 frames in each window per second), it will now play at 29fps in all the layers. The files are IPB Mpeg-2 MP@H4. I tried a capture with Windows Media Encoder, but it drops too many frames to show it.

I must have misunderstood...what I am talking about is editing the native Sony format( .M2T or TS whatever you want to call it). No way 3 layers....I can barely do two for a few secs. Now if we are talking about a mpeg 2 format with a lower bitrate I bet edius can stay step for step....in fact edius was the first NLE that let you mix mpeg 2 and Dv on the TL. It cuts through mpeg 2 like butter. What I would like to know is what type quality hit does the source take to get there....my guess is it is serious. And if you have to render that is not RT to me...but I am confused about the render and the 5,6,7 business. Are you saying with 6 or 7 layers you have to render? Also I have read where the output to the breakout box is not full resolution so what does that mean?

"After a 1 minute render (where I could play it, but the frame rate was about 5 frames in each window per second), it will now play at 29fps in all the layers. "

That's not a very informative statement, since any editing program should be able to play back complex video after rendering it. When people talk about how many layers of video they can play simultaneously in real time, that's supposed to be a reference to what you can do *without rendering*.

With Canopus Edius you can reportedly play 3-4 layers of HDV video (using the HQ codec) without pre-rendering on a sufficiently powerful computer, with true full-quality playback. With Aspect HD you apparently get about the same effective result on less powerful computers, but that's largely because the playback is really preview quality and not the full 1080i resolution. With Pinnacle Liquid Edition it would be impressive to get two layers of HDV playback in real time without rendering, because the reliance on the native HDV format causes a huge hit on processing power compared to other HDV editing solutions. When discussing "real time" editing performance, it's important to be specific about what you're describing.

OK, with my video card, it cannot play back 1080 in real-time then except at 5fps with 3 layers (and A:M open). Also note that the two upper layers were 16:9 PIP (with an aqua frame - did not mention that.) I had the full render on (PCLE breaks them in to "red" and "yellow" slices - "red" compares as a clip with a time acceleration of 200% just applied where "yellow" would be a cross-fade on two established clips.) If I try this again, I should turn of render "yellow" slices and see.

It could play at least 2 with a X800, but I did not test three. My 9600XT does not have enough video memory according to PCLE to handle 1080 effectively. Not sure that I could play 3 with the X800, which is about 20% faster than a nVidia 6600GT.

Sorry about the lines ref. When LE opens, I get 4 timelines (1-4) at the bottom for audio, video goes in a 5th. By default, there are 7 or 8 timelines on the display. I dropped the additional video clip in timeline 6 and 7 over a clip in line 5.

Not sure that LE could claim "software only". Unlike other NLEs, Pinnacle is also scheduling processing through the GPU using DirectX 9 calls. The GPU is even better at creating display operations than the CPUs. That is also why PCLE specifies 256MB of memory for LongGOP editing at 1080. I may need to retry this too (thinking about it today), as I had Animation:Master running. In XP, there is no memory management for the graphics card, so first in wins (Longhorn's Avalon engine adds memory management and a thread scheduler for the GPU).

I would like to try Edius 3.x. It does some things I really like.

The use of the GPU intrigues me as some other respected companies are working using the gpu to render effects. The memory issue with the vid card is different and I have run into this using open Gl in other apps....hdv, since it is so big data wise will eat up the vid cards ram using it for open gl and has caused me problems with lockups do to vid card resources being depleted composting in Boris Red...and I have a FireGL 7100 with 256 megs. The biggest point that those who are switching from DV to HDV MUST understand is this stuff is 6X more data than DV and the only way to attack it is with hardware IMHO....any solutions that claim to do it in software only are cutting a corner somewhere. I am sure in time machines will get to the point where soft only solutions will work without cutting corners but not now....or rather not now without giving something else up like full frame full resolution out to monitor.

Joel,

If you like Premiere Pro, but you want to edit M2T, then try out the MainConcept plugin. That is how it works.

<<<-- Originally posted by Steven Gotz : Joel,

If you like Premiere Pro, but you want to edit M2T, then try out the MainConcept plugin. That is how it works. -->>>

i also tried the mainconcept plugin it would be perfect but the playback is nowhere near real time.


j

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly : <<<-- Originally posted by Ed Szarleta :

Preimier Pro 1.5.1 with Aspect HD 3.0 works just fine on a P4 3.4. Pushing almost 4 layers of 1080i with transitions and color correction. -->>>

Actually, you are not editing HDV, you are editing a proxy file. You are also not able to view the HDV signal on a broadcast monitor in Real Time.

Cineform is a great application, but for pro edit suites you need to see the output in RT on an HDTV screen - preferably a broadcast monitor.

Hope this helps

DBK -->>>

Actually, this is incorrect. With Aspect HD, you are editing the high quality HD file, there is no "proxy" file...only "proxy" playback. For Canopus users, the workflow is similar to editing everything in Canopus HQ codec...except as CineForm is a full screen wavelet and Canopus HQ is still a macroblock DCT, I suspect there may be a slight quality edge in CineForm's favor.

As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB...

<<<-- Originally posted by Randy Donato : ....hdv, since it is so big data wise will eat up the vid cards ram using it for open gl and has caused me problems with lockups do to vid card resources being depleted composting in Boris Red...and I have a FireGL 7100 with 256 megs. The biggest point that those who are switching from DV to HDV MUST understand is this stuff is 6X more data than DV and the only way to attack it is with hardware IMHO....any solutions that claim to do it in software only are cutting a corner somewhere. I am sure in time machines will get to the point where soft only solutions will work without cutting corners but not now....or rather not now without giving something else up like full frame full resolution out to monitor. -->>>

A few points...

1. HDV is the same size as DV data-RATE wise...that's how you get it on a DV tape...25 megabits per second in the Sony's case.

2. The "choke" portion of the program comes from the sheer torque it takes to compress MPEG vs. decompress it. You can play back lots of RT layers of MPEG Transport Stream, but once you add some effects, how many layers can you preview? PIP is always used as the benchmark, but frankly, all hat does is make the display raster smaller, use some screen keys or partial opacity and then report back on how much RT MPEG any app editing native MPEG will give you.

3. The data stream does get larger when you convert the HDV MPEG stream to something else...Canpus HQ or CineForm HD. However these codecs speed up the preview of effects because they are symmetrical...they take the same amount of energy to compress as decompress.

4. I'm curious how many HDV users have an HD-SDI monitor?

5. The preview mode in all CineForm products is excellent and the same RT preview mode is used in Prospect HD, Aspect's big brother and that preview was apparently good enough to color correct for a feature film...

6. As far as editing native MPEG being somehow higher visual quality than converting to either Canopus HQ or CineForm HD, it's just simply not the case. Period. MPEG is a very lossy format at the profile used for HDV and applying that codec repeatedly to footage vs. a full screen wavelet like CineForm or even a production-quality DCT-based codec like Canopus HQ will cause more compression artifacts than either one of the mentioned high quality codecs.

7. With the computing power available today, software will take over the HD post production niche much faster than it did SD production. This is proven with Canpus' Storm Daughter card for compressing MPEG in realtime. I demonstrated in the Canopus both at NAB three years ago on an AMD dual 1800 or possibly a 2400...(I can't remember which one I was standing at at that moment) that Canopus SoftMPG encoder actually smoked the real-time MPEG encoder card in compressing the same file. Again, this was three years ago...look at how far processor power has progressed.


I find some of the discussion over what's necessary for "professional" work very interesting...I suspect a "professional" is still the secret ingredient...

Hey Tim....good to see you over here. Yes you are right that the data rate is the same but the compression isn't and the bitrates are very high....and that is what chews up the processor. You have to do something to the 6x more pixel data. I would disagree that you can play back multiple layers of TS since two layers doesn't on my machine....just too much for my dualies to decode.
"As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB..." David and I have talked a bit about this in another forum.....right now if you turn "accelerated preview" off that will give you full frame resolution while scrubbing only. I will be very interested to see if they go to full frame full resolution out not just on scrubbing but playback whether they can maintain the RT claims on a P4.....my guess is we are talking dual Xeons or amds but if they can pull it off and get 4 layers on a P4 with full frame full resolution out to monitor then my hat is off.....if they will get more than color correction and pan and zoom. Software will have its day no doubt and Cineform is ahead of the software only game right now.....but the Canopus hardware/software solution is here and now and not limited to a couple of filters.

Hi Randy,

I find it interesting you can't play back two streams of TS, but then I don't work with the MPEG files so I have no point of reference...

It's true that the pixel raster of HDV 25 is 4.5 times the pixels of DV, but with the temporal compression of MPEG, there is only 1 full frame being loaded every 6 frames, so the raw data rate on playback should still be relatively manageable.

I do agree that multiple stream MPEGTS is a little improbable on a modest system in software...despite claims to the contrary by multiple manufacturers.

Right now I can run about 1 stream full res CineForm HD on my P4 laptop (3.2 GHz/2 Gig)...the preview mode enables 2 streams off a FireWire drive with titles and filters in RT. That was on a P4 2.8 (non-HT), I used that system for my TV Technology review.

You can use the PNY board to monitor the Aspect HD output in analog component High Def right now...so it's not like there's no way to monitor the output, but yes, the RT output does decrease with full res with a modest system.

As far as filters go...it's an interesting comparison. Canopus has a good selection of RT filters, but everytime someone talks about any of the multiple ways that the capabilities of Pro more extensive, the common response is that the user can use Boris with Edius.

Any one who talks about speed can't possibly talk about Boris in the same sentence... Even the stuff you have to render in PPro is far faster than Boris...

And Randy, I'll be more than happy to go head to head with you using Inscriber and I'll use the "plain" Ppro Title Designer. Go to Steven Gotz's website and download my typestyle library for PPro and the "DooDad" template...then talk to me about what a Titler can do...

:-)

<<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb :

Actually, this is incorrect. With Aspect HD, you are editing the high quality HD file, there is no "proxy" file...only "proxy" playback. For Canopus users, the workflow is similar to editing everything in Canopus HQ codec...except as CineForm is a full screen wavelet and Canopus HQ is still a macroblock DCT, I suspect there may be a slight quality edge in CineForm's favor.

As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB... -->>>

As I understand it to output back to HDV, you link back up with the original files. This means it is a proxy in my view, but I could be corrected.

The Canopus HQ codec, like their DV codec is a stand alone codec you can complete your edit in, view in real time on a broadcast monitor or HDTV, add multiple FX, transitions, etc. The system outputs back to the camera or deck and transcodes back to HDV in RealTime.

If you want to edit in native HDV, you can do it, but due to HDV's increased CPU requirements (transcoding in RT is CPU intensive, epecially when you add FX and transitions, etc) it is easier and faster to edit in their HQ Codec.

On my desk is a $25K Ikegami broadcast HD monitor. I have captured the same stream in native HDV and their HQ codec and done a split screen. It is impossible to see the line between the two files. I'll putmy monitor up against anything out there including Sony's Cinealta line of monitors.

On the software experience, I want you to look at Apple's FCP. Even at version 4.5, FCP realtime dies if you add a drop shadow. Doesn't matter how much CPU power you have, whether your file is DV, uncompressed, HD or WHU.

Yes, as CPU's and now GPU's get faster we may one day do without cards in our edit suites, but right now that time is not here especially for HD editing.

I've had an HD suite for 18 months now. I have used FCP(Aja Kona HD and KONA 2), Cineform's Aspect HD, Vegas Video, Ulead MSP with HDV and now Canopus Edius NX, and I must tell you the fastest and easiest is the Canopus system. I still have all those systems in my computer as I am working on a new HDV DVD. I have state of the art computers and graphic cards. The only system I don't own is the Pinnacle system and the reason for that is I tested it at DV Expo West last year, and it has an annoying chroma shift when it renders a transition. The same bad render the Fast Video Machine had 10 years ago (some will know Pinnacle bought Fast software and that liquid is based on Fast's code)

Your other question about who has an SDI HD monitor on their desk....why's that significant. There are a tremendous number of good quality LCd and CRT based HDTV's available today. No they don't touch my Ikie, but they do give better color correction than the RGB world of computer monitors.

I trust this helps

DBK

VERY NICE :)

J

"It's true that the pixel raster of HDV 25 is 4.5 times the pixels of DV, but with the temporal compression of MPEG, there is only 1 full frame being loaded every 6 frames, so the raw data rate on playback should still be relatively manageable. "

Tim: this doesn't sound right. Isn't the point here to be able to display your editing output in real time with editing effects incorporated? Seems like that inherently requires being able to process all the necessary calculations for all of those pixels, which is 4.5 times as many at native HDV resolution or 6 times as many at 1080i monitoring resolution. And even if we somehow get past that, there appears to be universal agreement that rendering HDV projects to available HD output formats is extremely processor intensive. So like I said earlier in this discussion, if you really want to do significant HDV video production effectively, it just makes sense to buy the most powerful base hardware you can afford to back it up. Doesn't mean you *have* to have a super-duper computer to work with HDV, but it clearly helps.

"And Randy, I'll be more than happy to go head to head with you using Inscriber and I'll use the "plain" Ppro Title Designer. Go to Steven Gotz's website and download my typestyle library for PPro and the "DooDad" template...then talk to me about what a Titler can do"

Already got them and for those that don't you are missing out on a great freebie.....but 3d text and animation and TM pro has it hands down....if you need those features which not everyone does. And I know where you go to do that and it is AE(kinda like RED in Edius):)And am I wrong that a coder for inscriber wrote the adobe titler?

"Any one who talks about speed can't possibly talk about Boris in the same sentence... Even the stuff you have to render in PPro is far faster than Boris..."

Apples and Oranges but we can agree that Red is slow....bout like AE. Some task ok some just slow. But it does composting so it is expected. I think it has improved since you last used it but it isn't going to win a rendering race for sure.


And I don't think you can have it both ways, meaning touting the RT of Aspect then defend the lack of filters(it is a plugin right) by saying you get all the Ppro stuff which isn't RT. But yes right now Ppro is more feature laden than Edius....right now.But since this thread is about RT then Edius has Aspect beat hands down on the features that perform RT.A good example is if you do any keying(and Tim you know canopus has a good keyer) that is RT in Edius plus Nx....render time with Aspect. Did you know nested sequences are coming along with mattes and full alpha support? Don't forget the new hardware accelerated effects with full key framing.


"Right now I can run about 1 stream full res CineForm HD on my P4 laptop (3.2 GHz/2 Gig)...the preview mode enables 2 streams off a FireWire drive with titles and filters in RT. That was on a P4 2.8 (non-HT), I used that system for my TV Technology review"

Is that the Aspect that the users here have or is that Prospect?....last I heard full res preview was only available with scrubbing....and that is from David. I hear of good things to come though at a performance cost...it has to. If it is the 10 bit version then I am impressed...if it is full res. I wonder what the Canopus 10 bit HD codec will do in comparrison....out of my league anyway since 10 bit is way to rich for me.

On the MPEGTS ask your friends at Cineform the why....it is a beast and you are right with codecs like CineForm and Canopus HQ it just doesn't make sense to use it. Joshua can get a few secs of playback with 2 layers on their dual 3.4 turnkeys so it is not just me....I am pretty sure the decoding just kills the processors.

Personally I hope Cineform does go to more features since I have more than once admitted to my closet Ppro use. Like all NLEs there are advantages to each....if nothing else it will prompt Canopus to get even better and competition is all good for us.


"I'm curious how many HDV users have an HD-SDI monitor?"

My 1080i LCD that takes component works just fine for me....and if it wasn't important (monitor out) then why all the fuss now by Cineform to get it (and in full resolution which I have seen David argue blue in the face is not needed). I have been enjoying it for months now and it is fine.

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly : <<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb :

Actually, this is incorrect. With Aspect HD, you are editing the high quality HD file, there is no "proxy" file...only "proxy" playback. For Canopus users, the workflow is similar to editing everything in Canopus HQ codec...except as CineForm is a full screen wavelet and Canopus HQ is still a macroblock DCT, I suspect there may be a slight quality edge in CineForm's favor.

As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB... -->>>

As I understand it to output back to HDV, you link back up with the original files. This means it is a proxy in my view, but I could be corrected.


DBK -->>>

Actually, to output back to HDV from Aspect right now, you would process back to MPEG TS using the Media Encoder, but no, you don't relink to any HDV files...you would typically dump them after conversion. The CineForm HD codec and the Canopus HQ codec exist for exactly the same reason...to create a higher quality online file to edit and preserve image quality. Canopus uses hardware to play back that material in RT on an external monitor, and Aspect uses a specially designed decode mode to play back a half res "proxy" from the full quality clip...there is no "proxy" file at all.

BTW, there is no question in my mind about the quality of the Canopus HQ codec, or the speed of the system, I just find it frustrating to see things asserted about Aspect that contend that somehow it's illegitimate next to the Canopus solution...and what's being asserted is incorrect.

As far as monitors go, I'm with you 100% on the Ike monitor. My point was the SDI, not the HD. Aspect will output video to an analog component HD monitor now with the PNY 450 board, it was shown at SIGGRAPH last August...

As far as LCDs go...don't they image in RGB? That and the high black levels might seem inadequate to purists...however I agree that there are other types of monitors and that the key advantage that the Canopus system has is SDI, so basically you and I are in agreement, there are many other ways to monitor output and some of those already work with Aspect.

Are there advantages to the Canopus system? Absolutely. Does this mean that Aspect can't be used for "professional" work? ...that may be an overstatement.

<<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb : Does this mean that Aspect can't be used for "professional" work? ...that may be an overstatement. -->>>

I'm sure it can be used for professional applications.

The output from the PNY videocard will be RGB. As to whether all LCD's image in RGB, I believe some do - the computer monitor type, while the HDTV versions immage in YUV. Once again, I could be corrected.

Any application can be used for professional applications, but when my time is worth money, I need to go with the fastest solution.

Fastest is taken into consideration with regards to

1. Speed of editing
2. Reliability of the system
3. Least hassels.

That's my short list. While Cineform provides an inexpensive solution, I'm not sure it wins as the fastest.

To each his own though

DBK