BR-HD50 HDV -> DV on the fly?
 

I'm having to make a decision between Avid and FCP for editing. I am a FCP guy, but my editor prefers Avid. We have a fair amount of material shot on the JVC HD100 and would like to make that inclusion as problem free as possible. The default suggestion is to go with FCP due to the fact that it just works with the JVC. I'm wondering, however, if for now we could elect to capture via the BR-HD50 deck, converting from 720p24 HDV to some flavor of 24p DV on the fly with any sort of TC accuracy?

Thanks,

mg

It won't do that.

24p HDV is problematic at best on Avid systems.

Any possibility of bringing in the JVC through one of Convergent Design's HDV -> HD-SDI boxes as 720p60 and removing pulldown after capture? Along those lines, is any of the Avid software capable of working with a Kona or Blackmagic Design PCIe card?

mg

Matthew,

Avid (Non Liquid versions), does not work with any third party capture cards. Therfore, to ingest HDV to HD SDI through a converter box to 720/60p, you would need Media Composer with an Adrenaline I/O which approaches $30,000 with drives. There is a new Avid Liquid version 7.2 Xe Chrome version that works with an Aja Xena LE type card. and works with all of the JVC frame rates. But, I'm goingto assume that your editors are referring to Avid Media Composer style interface which Liquid is not.

If your workflow is not deadline intensive, you would need to use MPEG streamclip to convert m2t to DNXHD QT.

I've been an Avid editor for 13 years, but right now I'm planning on transitioning to FCP 6.0 later this year.

Cheers

David,

Thanks for your reply. I find using Avid's website to be utterly useless, and their forums almost as useless. Who would think that functional search would be such a difficult feature to implement for websites in the year 2007?

MPEG Streamclip may be the answer for us. Do you have any sort of time benchmark for the HDV -> DNXHD process? In reality, the only reason we are even considering an Avid product (XPress Pro) is that our editor is a career-Avid guy and believes Final Cut's media management won't handle effectively syncing his offline version at his space and our 'online' version in our office.


mg

Well on my AMD Athlon (which is not the latest dual core type performance),

MPEG streamclip converts about 3 to 4 minutes of footage, m2t to DNXHD 145 8 bit in almost an hour. On a faster computer that time might get cut in half.
Also, the lower rez offline type media would take less time to convert.

This workflow doesn't really pass the time test for long-form type work IMO. However, if your workflow is going to involve an offline and online stage, then offline on Xpress Pro and then export an EDL, re-dig and online on FCP. Or even FCP to FCP.

I think Avid's relinking capability in its Media Management is important if you are moving your project, (with same resolution MXF/OMF, effects, timeline etc) from one computer to another, completely intact. I also imagine FCP would work fine for an offline online workflow at 2 locations. EDL formats are pretty standard and straightforward.

At the risk of making an obvious statement, it all depends on the type of production your working on.

I hope this helps, tell your editor that he might want to broaden his choices of edit platforms. I love Avid, but right now I think as a company they're asleep at the wheel or living in the past.

One of the best ways to deal with Avid's current situation regarding lack of full support for HDV 720p is to shoot on the DR-HD100 hard drive. The DRHD100 can be easily connected to the Avid after shooting, where you then "import" the clips (files) into Avid, using the Avid import tool. It works quickly and reliably - at least it did last time I tried it. This is far easier that capturing from tape.

Yes, I've been using Avid only for years and I've been exploring HDV1 work-arounds for Avid for the past year. If you have any time pressure at all on anything other than short form work, the separate capture/transcode method is just too painful in my experience: It takes stupid amounts of time in a busy production environment and you lose TC, which is a killer in many cases.

The Convergent boxes are great in theory but my experience with these was hugely disappointing: timing (blanking) errors and extreme picture softening compared to transcodes out of Liquid.

I have to agree with David and Steve - Avid (non-Liquid) just won't cut it when it comes to HDV1. FCP is the solution we chose but Liquid is also very good (in fact actual HDV1 support is better) and so is Edius. FCP was the obvious choice for us because of the wider community, take-up and acceptance here in the UK compared to other non-Avid products. I also think it makes little sense for many indies and small facilities to switch from one Avid product to another little-used one. With Liquid, you're still at the mercy of Avid's pricing, support and development paradigm (that's a kind euphemism) but you lose most of the Avid advantages like talent pool, familiarity, wide community/support and acceptance amongst the broadcast production community. For us the most liberating thing about the switch to FCP is no longer being at the mercy of Avid and products that we can barely afford!