But then later, partway through the cut, they came back and asked to see my progress.  O…K…  Well, I don’t normally show something part way through…not on short form 90 second spots anyway.  But…OK.  So they watched, liked what I had done, and left. So, I got back to my cut.

Then a few minutes later they came back and said that they didn’t think that one shot worked, and wanted me to find another. Then proceeded to sit down while I looked for the shot.  And they stayed there after I found a replacement and continued to edit.  They were watching me edit.  My ROUGH CUT.

To say this unnerved me is an understatement.  To have someone sit there (who isn’t an assistant editor looking to learn how to edit…and see my thought process…which I am TOTALLY cool with)…someone who is in charge of the project, is distracting. Because they’ll see me try something, and it won’t look good. And they will tell me that.  Well, after I see it, I KNOW it won’t be good, because I see it too.  It happened more than once.  ”Are you sure about that? I don’t know if that will look right.”  ”Wait, do you have a shot of this?  How about that?  Anything from the next day?”

And not only footage suggestions, but when to cut.  ”How about cutting out a hair sooner? This feels like it is on screen too long.” They are behind me (or beside me at the desk) basically driving the cut. Trying to give me instant feedback to my initial cut.

This is wrong.

The rough cut phase is my time to play around and see what works.  My time to look at the footage, toss things on the timeline and see if they work, or if they don’t work.  To see if things cut a certain way looks right, or not.  This is the phase when we are basically feeling our way through the cut like a blind person down an unfamiliar hallway.  We need to find out what is there, and how to get around it.  I need to try several things before I get what I like. To have the producer there during this phase is just plain wrong.  They need to give me the time to create what I think is good.  Or, at least, the beginning of something I think is good.  They will get their time to give me feedback.  They will get a LOT of time to give me feedback.  But the rough cut is my time.

Sure, they can hang around after giving me notes and watch as I change things to their liking. That’s fine. Because I am addressing THEIR notes…their thoughts. While I would prefer to decipher their notes myself and see what works, and tweak things just right (because I might need to do large changes to the music) on my own. But, if they stay while I do this…I’m used to that.

So…how to get this producer out of my bay while I finish my rough cut? I was gentle, tactful, but straight with them. “Hey, if you don’t mind, I’d like to do the rough cut on my own. Because I tend to make try a lot of things and make a lot of mistakes, and I don’t want you to see my mistakes. I want you to see my successes. I want you to watch this spot when it is all assembled, and to my liking.  So that you can see a complete piece.  And then I will welcome you into my bay while we change things to your liking.  Cool?”

And they were cool with that. And apologized for being there. This was an important project for them, and one of the first they were producing on their own, and they  just wanted to make sure it was good.  Didn’t realize they were stepping on my toes.

And I have had more experienced producers in my bay during the rough cut phase. But they were smart enough to not pay attention to me or the cut until I was ready to show them. They know that we are trying out several things and that most won’t work.  They tend to bury themselves in email or the internet or writing, and only look up when I ask, “are you ready to see what I’ve got?”

Project #1 – Show Pitch/Sizzle.

I have a producer who is in development mode. Working on four to five show pitches in hopes of getting one of them picked up as a series. Them being low low budget, he’s forced to shoot it on his own, with a flip camera that shoots .AVI files. When I was first approached to edit these, I figured I’d use Avid to get back up to speed with that, and to beta test it while I went along. But, as it turns out, trying to convert those AVI files into something Avid could import was a huge issue. When audio did carry over, it didn’t stay in sync. It was way out of sync. And after 5 attempts to get things right, I gave up. I launched Premiere Pro, used the Media Browser to bring in those files and guess what? They worked perfectly right away. I cut them natively and they were always in sync. And because I worked with them natively, they imported instantly…no conversion time.

Now…I must mention that the computer I used for this was my personal machine. A MacPro OctoCore 8.0Ghz (Early 2008) with 12GB of Ram, and the Nvidia 285 graphics card that enables CUDA and speeds up the Mercury Engine…so it enabled PPro to deal with this format more easily. At one point I did move the project to a different machine (with the same version of PPro), but this machine was a Quad Core 3.0 and had an ATI graphics card. So the Mercury Engine was relegated to software only…and boy, did it become sluggish. Glad I only used that for changes.

But for this project, Adobe PPro CS 5.5 was perfect. Did quick edits on four show pitches, all shot with either the producers AVI flipcam, or in two instances, an HPX-170. Native import of the P2 files was nice to have. And editing that format was much smoother. I was able to do quick graphics (lower thirds), able to send a few VERY shaky clips to After Effects for smoothing out, and export directly to the MP4 format my producer wanted. And because this was all so quick, the low rate I was getting for the job actually worked out to be a better deal, as less time was spent transcoding the footage.

Project #2 – Family Home Video…shot with my Canon T2i.

The other project I decided to take into Premiere Pro was the family trip up the coast to San Francisco, along the coast. I’d been putting this off for a while, but finally, because I had a couple weeks of no work, decided to get it done.

Again, I brought the footage into PPro 5.5 natively…H.264 files that would choke FCP 7, and also chokes the new Avid MC6…although I hear FCX does fine with them. And again, because of my faster processors, amount of RAM, and the CUDA enabled Mercury engine, editing went smoother. When I took the project to my laptop (Dual Core 2.4Ghz MacBook Pro)…it was more sluggish than a turtle in the mud. So I really needed to stick to my main rig for this. Editing was smooth, easy, and when I was done, I was able to export a nice quality H.264 file for Vimeo for the family to see our exploits in SF.

Now for the nitty-gritty.

PROS:

I am pretty comfortable working in the PPro timeline. Things act pretty much the way they acted in FCP. The way I can grab clips and move them, the way I can adjust audio in the timeline by dragging the levels up or down. I can even do a SELECT ALL DOWNSTREAM and move things down (Press T using the FCP keyboard setup, and hold SHIFT to get the double arrow to select all the tracks. Just T will get you one arrow that selects one track). Making titles was easy, doing my moves on stills was sure JOY as I have my AE controls, and EASE IN and EASE OUT actually work!

My editing time was sped up because I didn’t need to take time to convert media before I began editing. Very cool when under a tight deadline, and when your budget is low. The less time you spend editing, the more you make per hour.  And the less you stay late getting the work done.  And I could play back multiple layers without rendering. That was something new to me, and nice to actually see in person. I had 4 layers with a text layer on top of that for one of the pitch pilots, and it played with only one minor hiccup…but I attribute that to the AVI files.  They were not optimal.  PPro did well with them anyway.

I was able to use my Kona card for external monitoring (you need to use AJA sequence settings for this) so that I could see what I was doing on my external monitor. One tip for monitoring is that while you do use the AJA settings, in the Adobe Preferences, PLAYER, do not choose AJA, rather choose ADOBE.  This enables things to work smoother. Dunno why, but it’s how it is done.  But, initially this was pretty problematic. Nearly show stopping.  Why?  Well, because when you viewed the Program Monitor (Canvas…the timeline playback monitor) on the external monitor…it was smooth. But the window in the PPro interface was not. It stuttered badly.  And since that is the primary window I look at, it was unworkable for me.  Also, the Viewer…Source monitor…wasn’t viewable on the external monitor.  ONLY on the computer display. And if you use the AJA player, you could ONLY see it on the external display…the Source monitor in the computer interface was black…empty.  So it wasn’t the optimal viewing by any means.  It was pretty poor actually.

But then a couple days ago AJA released the 9.1 drivers for the AJA card, and the 9.1 drivers for the Adobe Plugin, and with that came the option in the Player Preferences for “AGGRESSIVE CACHING,” meaning that (according to the release notes):

“When this Option is enabled, AJA’s Plug-ins will read further ahead in the timeline during playback operations. The feature should be used to mitigate minor frame dropping issues. Particularly, this feature was created because some DSLR clips can take a very long time to open, and subsequently cause frames to drop when they are played back.”

That new driver and plugin solved all the monitoring issues. Now I could see smooth playback on the Program monitor and my external monitor…as well as see what was on my Source monitor in the computer and on the external.  But one thing I noticed is that when I use AJA settings, editing and playback aren’t as smooth as when I choose the native format settings, or use other Adobe settings.  Now, I know that AJA does support the Mercury Playback Engine with their hardware I/O, but the amount of GPU support you get from that is limited…it does take a hit.  That’s why things were a bit sluggish.  I do hear that Adobe is working with AJA and others to improve this.

CONS:

OK, now for the bad.  My biggest issues with Premiere Pro was the overall working in the timeline. There were too many things that just slowed me down. The biggest issue I had was patching the source tracks to the timeline tracks. When I dragged the source video to V2, or V3…that track wouldn’t enable…meaning, it wouldn’t light up…become selected.  I’d have to click on that track after I patched my source.  So too many clicks. Avid automatically enables the track you patch to.  And in FCP, once the source is patched to the timeline, it is always connected, and patches to the layer you move it to…until you manually unpatch it.  So…too much clicking to get stuff patched.

No matter how you have your Audio and Video tracks selected in the timeline, audio will always be put into tracks 1 and 2 if you simply drag from the Source to the Timeline.  If you INSERT EDIT, or OVERWRITE EDIT, it will follow your patching. But no matter what, if you drag to the timeline, audio will always go to A1 and A2.

Here’s an example video.

I cannot adjust my audio levels on my source clips.  Not while they are in the Source monitor. That’s a problem. They might be too hot and breaking up, so I’d like to lower them.  Or, I’d like to universally preset the audio levels on that clip so when I cut multiple parts of it into the timeline, the audio is already good.  As it is now, I can only adjust the audio AFTER I cut it into the timeline. So I have to adjust the levels for every clip I add, and always after I add it.  Annoying, and slows me down.

On the topic of audio…the audio mixer works unlike any NLE audio mixer I have ever used.  The sliders will affect the WHOLE TRACK, not the individual clips on that track.  So if I lower A1 by 6db, the entire track is lowered by 6db.  Unlike in FCP or Avid where the audio mixer relates to the CLIPS in the timeline and in the source monitors…the Adobe mixer doesn’t interface with the clips in either location. It only interfaces with the timeline as a whole.  See, when I am in FCP or Avid, and I have my playhead parked on the timeline on several layers of audio, and clips, when I adjust the levels of say, tracks 10 and 11, the mixer adjusts the levels of the CLIPS that it is parked on.  This way I can mix the levels of my clips.  With Premiere Pro, you can only adjust the audio of the clips on the timeline, by dragging the levels on the clips themselves.  And if they are mono, you need to do each and every individual clip.  Unlike in Avid where I can gang all the tracks I want to adjust in the Mixer, or, enable all the tracks on the timeline and adjust the audio keyframe of one clip, and all the other tracks that are selected move as well.  So this is a major stumbling block for me as well.  Audio mixing needs to be addressed.

Audio output…so far it is limited to stereo out.  That is a big issue for me as well as I need to deliver QT masters with between 8 and 16 channels of embedded audio.  Before today only FCP did that, but with Avid MC6 coming out with this same ability, we now have two options that enable me to deliver what I am required to deliver. This is a feature request I have filed with Adobe.  If you have feature requests, you should file some too.  I hear they are eager to get them.

The trimming capabilities are worse than even FCP…which I didn’t think possible.  So trimming should be absolutely avoided in PPro.  Heck, I avoided it 95% of the time in FCP as well, as it was poorly implemented.

Batch capturing is spotty, at best.  I was able to capture video with my Kona card, and that was cool.  But what I do to save time is log clips as I scan the tape, then set the application to then batch capture all the clips while I then go each lunch, or do some other menial task. Adobe PPro’s batch capture with the Kona 3 was so unreliable, that I’d have to sit and babysit it.  It’d miss a clip several times, and often I found myself capturing one clip at a time. Booo…a working lunch!  Tapeless?  Adobe shines!  Tape…which I still capture a good bit of…not so much.  Rememeber guys…tape isn’t gone, not yet. I’ll have the need to capture from tape for quite some time now…being a documentary editor.

Overall I did like it.  And do feel that it is the next step up from FCP 7.  There are just a few stumbling blocks in terms of general editing that have me shaking my fist at the computer screen and swearing out loud.  Small things like needing to click several times to patch audio and being limited in the ways I can mix audio…and I do a LOT of audio mixing. The small things do count…but so does the ability to work native.  So if I am faced with tight deadlines and tapeless footage, PPro is high on my list.  Tape capture…That’s Avid-land.

So now you can make clips a putrid split pea green if you wanted.

NOW, onto the AMA tip.

So, you might want to bring in some footage via AMA and work with it natively…alongside your other Avid media. (People have indicated that they have done this, or plan on doing this…so they don’t waste time transcoding). So you now have a mixed bag of Avid media and AMA footage. And then you get to a point where, for some reason, you need to transcode only the AMA footage. There are several reasons for wanting or needing to do this. There are some things that don’t quite work right with a timeline full of AMA footage. Avid has fixed a bunch of these issues, but others might still be in the wings.

ANYWAY…so you’d like to track this footage. How can you tell which footage in the sequence is AMA, and what is not? The answer to this is simple…Color all the AMA clips a certain color. Make it that ugly split-pea color if you want to…or bright pink so they stand out. Just give them a unique color, and then they will appear in the timeline with that color. Even if you do this after you edit them into the timeline:

FYI, the clip colors don’t show up in the timeline automatically. In fact, the option for this is defaulted to OFF…not showing any clip colors. You have to enable this action. To do that you go to the little “FAST MENU” (us editors still call it the “Hamburger” menu…because it looks like a small hamburger) on the lower left of the timeline and choose the option CLIP COLOR:

In there, you will need to check the option for SOURCE.

That will enable the color you assign the clip in the bin to appear in the timeline. I also enable OFFLINE, so that I can see at a glance what media is offline or missing. And you see that you have options to show mixed media in your timeline. Useful stuff.

I mean…Walter Murch.  Listening to this man talk is an experience. He doesn’t think like the rest of us do.

Here’s the speil…

Los Angeles CA / Boston MA – The agenda has been set for the Second Annual

Boston SuperMeet, to take place on Thursday, October 27, 2011 at the Stuart

Street Playhouse, Radisson Hotel Boston in Boston, MA. The SuperMeet stage

show will begin at 7:00PM and continue until 11:00PM. Doors open at 3:30pm

for the “SuperMeet Digital Showcase” featuring over 15 software and hardware

developers. Tickets are on sale online only for $10.00 each and $7.00 for

students and Teachers with valid ID. The Boston SuperMeet marks the last

city stop in celebration of the Tenth Anniversary of SuperMeets in 2011 and

is expected to sell out as historically every SuperMeet sells out.

Scheduled to appear on the SuperMeet stage will be Oscar and BAFTA winning

film and sound editor Walter Murch, who has recently completed post

production on director Philip Kaufman’s HEMINGWAY AND GELLHORN, starring

Nicole Kidman, Clive Owen and Robert Duvall.

This will be the first public appearance by Walter Murch since the launch of

Final Cut Pro X. It is expected Murch will share his thoughts on Final Cut

Pro X, but more importantly give Boston SuperMeet attendees a rare chance to

listen to and learn from Walter on the craft of editing itself.

In addition to Murch, Avid will feature Andrew Weisblum, A.C.E., who will

discuss his editorial workflow on BLACK SWAN. Weisblum was also editor on

THE WRESTLER, and supervising editor on FANTASTIC MR. FOX, among other

credits. Avid is also slated to make a very special announcement.

Canon has just announced the Canon EOS-1D X DSLR, Canon’s latest DSLR

redesigned from the inside out, and presenting on behalf of Canon will be

filmmaker Jem Schofield of theC47.com, who will talk about Canon’s new DSLR,

which features an 18-megapixel full-frame Canon CMOS sensor, Dual DIGIC 5+

Imaging Processors, a third dedicated DIGIC 4 Imaging Processor for metering

and AF control, a completely new 61-Point autofocus, 14-bit A/D data

conversion, fast shooting up to 12 frames per second (FPS), Full HD video

recording and much more. Jem is an engaging presenter and is certain to

share some interesting news at the SuperMeet as well about his DSLR workflow

and on the present and future state of Canon EOS filmmaking.

Colorist Alexis Van Hurkman, who spoke on behalf of Blackmagic Design at the

recent London SuperMeet, returns to the stage to share new workflow and

support for Final Cut Pro X on Version 8.1 of DaVinci Resolve for Mac.

Hurkman will discuss how, in the last nine months, DaVinci Resolve from

Blackmagic Design has changed his color correction practice. In the process

he’ll show off a few of his favorite Resolve workflow and color correction

features in examples from projects he’s worked on this last year, which

includes the television pilot NUCLEAR FAMILY and the feature CARGO, and give

insight based on years of experience grading and finishing broadcast content

for The History Channel, for the BBC, and for The Discovery Channel Network.

Marc-André Ferguson, the SMOKE Industry Manager at Autodesk, will

demonstrate groundbreaking new finishing workflow for SMOKE on Mac OSX using

the latest Thunderbolt enabled MacBook Pros from Apple and a Promise

Technology Pegasus Thunderbolt RAID. Ferguson, a long-time Final Cut Pro

editor and Adobe After Effects artist, will demonstrate how accessible

Autodesk SMOKE really is, how to blast past the apparent steep learning

curve it has and hit the ground running to bring the power of SMOKE on the

road.

Rounding out the evening will be the always wild and fun “World Famous

Raffle,” where over $50,000 of dollars worth of valuable filmmaker-related

prizes will be handed out to dozens of lucky winners, including a fully

licensed copy of Autodesk SMOKE on Mac OSX (value $14,995).

While the main SuperMeet presentation will begin at 7pm, doors are scheduled

to open at 3.30pm with the SuperMeet Digital Showcase featuring over 20

filmmaker-related software and hardware developers including Adobe, AJA,

Apogee Digital, Autodesk, Avid, Blackmagic Design, Boris FX, Canon,

EditShare, Fast Forward Video, Genarts, G-Tech, HB Communications, Imagine

Magazine, JVC Professional, Matrox, Manhattan Edit Workshop, Noise

Industries, Promise Technology, Raven Research, Talamas Broadcast, and more.

Here, attendees can enjoy a few cocktails, mingle and party with industry

peers, network one on one with leading manufacturers and learn about the

latest trends in collaborative editing workflows for post production and

broadcast markets.

Tickets are on sale online only at $10.00 each plus ticket fee (includes 2

raffle tickets) for Adults and $7.00 for students and Teachers, or $20.00 at

the door. Complimentary and tasty hot hors d’oeuvres and cash bars will be

available throughout the evening. To purchase tickets online, directions,

transportation options, and a current list of raffle prizes, visit the

Boston SuperMeet web site.

http://supermeet.com

OK, now on to me.

I finally downloaded the FCP-X trial and explored the application for a full day. Prior to this, I used it briefly for two hours. But now, while spending all day trying to make something with it, I discovered that I disliked  just about everything about it.  Every minute I spent using it made it worse because it was backwards from the way I like to work.  But I guess that is how it is designed…to be unlike any other NLE, and to do things very differently.  But is the different way better?  Not for me. Am I too tied to TRACKS?  Maybe. To tied to two monitors when working?  Maybe. Dislike that I needed the Skimmer on to view footage in my EVENT, but that meant that the Skimmer would be on in the timeline too, and every time I moved the mouse, I’d be hit with a barrage of hyper fast audio? Definitely.

I had a list of all the issues I had with FCP X, and I was going to gripe about every one, but then my blog went down for five days giving me time to think about things and I’m not going to post another rant.  I am only going to say that I will not be using FCP X in the forseeable future.  Why?  Well, it doesn’t solve any post issues that I currently need solving, and the whole reason why I moved to Final Cut Pro in the first place was that it solved a big post issue I was facing

You see, I started this blog many many years ago, April 2005 to be exact, when I made my leap from Avid Media Composer to Final Cut Pro.  I had been using FCP for a couple years before that (starting with FCP 3) on smaller side projects, like actor demo reels, a handful of short films, a couple of corporate videos.  But I didn’t think it was quite right for me to use on broadcast work…even though FCP 3 was enabled to do this with the RT Mac and Cinewave hardware cards.  It wasn’t until FCP 4.5 came out with it’s native workflow with DVCPRO HD that it caught my attention.

See, I was working at the time on a National Geographic series that was shot with the Varicam to tape at 23.98…720p 23.98.  But the Avid Meridians that we were using couldn’t deal with that format…they were SD only…so we dubbed all the footage to DV tape and offlined that way.  And then when the time came to online, we were faced with a big issue…The Avid Adrenaline that we were onlining with didn’t do 720p…only 1080.  So we needed to upconvert everything, and deal with the 29.97 to 23.98 frame rate difference, and that was complicated, and costly.  We went over budget by just over a hundred grand for 9 episodes.  Not good.

Shortly thereafter I was asked to edit a History Channel series on the Mexican American War…and the producer wanted to shoot with the Varicam.  I was hesitant, given my recent experience.  And while Avid did release an update shortly AFTER our online to allow for 720p onlines…I had just been to a LAFCPUG meeting where I saw FCP 4.5 demo’d showing how it could capture DVCPRO HD from tape natively.  No offline/online…it was online from the start.  And it was 720p…23.98.  Final Cut Pro offered a solution to a post production issue I needed solving.  So I leapt on it.  Then we were going to also try to shoot with the new Panasonic P2 cameras as b-roll…and FCP was the only NLE to actually work with that format as well…so it was a no brainer.  (If you want to see my experiences with that, dig into the archives).

So…with the release of FCP-X and how Apple seems to have changed the way it feels editors should work…it doesn’t offer any solutions to any post workflow needs I have.  In fact, it actually lacks many features I need for the type of work I do. Other than being able to string pictures together to tell a story, and make the audio sound decent and picture look OK…it is missing everything I need to master for broadcast.  You know the list…no OMF for audio mixing, no output to a broadcast monitor for color grading, no ability to export to Color or Resolve for grading, no way to export multi-channel audio that I need (oh, wait, with the update I now have ROLES…), and on and on.

So, instead of trying to make it work…or wait for it to eventually work…I will be looking at the alternatives.  Going back to Avid Media Composer…and exploring Adobe Premiere Pro…both of which are making advances yet retaining the basic editing methodology that editors rely on to edit quickly, and concentrate on the creative and not the technical. They solve the post issues that I am currently faced with.

The thirty-seventh episode of THE EDIT BAY is now available for download.

This one is about how even the editors…and DPs and Production Designers…need to get approved by network and feature film heads in order to be hired on a show.

To play in your browser or download direct, click here.

To subscribe to this podcast in iTunes, CLICK HERE.

That tutorial can be found here.

But the other one…well, that was a doozie. It’s the one I blogged about last time…the one that required the DNxHD Quicktime with 12 channels of embedded audio.  That wasn’t the only tricky part. The show, that was edited at 23.98, needed to be delivered at 29.97.  This was easy, actually.  Because of MIX AND MATCH (available since Avid MC 4) I could easily convert the timeline and have it look right.  We were given the uprezzed project (they edited low res, DNxHD36 from XDCAM EX, uprezzed to DNxHD175) as 23.98.  Then I would open that project, and remove all the matte graphics…all the lower thirds and other keyable graphics they had in the project.  Because while I can convert the media to 29.97, mattes won’t.

I put the prepped sequence in a new bin.  Then created a 1080i59.94 (29.97) project, and dragged the bin into it.  I then opened the bin, and double clicked on the sequence.  I was prompted with a message stating “This sequence is of a different frame rate than the project.  Would you like to convert it to 29.97?” Why yes, I would!  So it did.  When we tried this with the mattes in the sequence, it said “whoa whoa whoa…I can’t do that.  You have matte graphics in here!”  (I’m paraphrasing)

Now, when I did this, the timecode was way off.  I mean, the original sequence was 48:00:00, but the converted sequence was over an hour long.  In looking at the sequence, stepping through frame by frame, I noted that several timecode numbers were missing.  At first every 5th number, so I was missing 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 00.  But then later, I was missing 1, 6, 12, 18, 24.  Really odd.  To correct this I loaded the sequence into the Source monitor, made a new sequence and just cut in the old sequence into the new one.  That fixed things.  We were back to picture ending at 1;48;00;00.

But what caused that? Well, it appears to be because they cut with a 23.98 Drop Frame timeline. Wait…what? 23.98 DROP FRAME timeline?  But 23.98 is a non-drop frame only format…right?  Well, yes.  On tape, and with QT files, 23.98 is non-drop only.  But apparently Avid MC 5 (not sure about earlier versions) allow you to have 23.98 drop frame sequences.  I’m guessing they do this to allow you to cut to a proper drop frame time for delivery.  Clever.  But, it does have that small hiccup of an issue.  Figured that workaround though…

OK, the frame rate conversion was done. And it was delivered in high resolution, all I need to do now is color correct it.  Yes, I could do it in Avid MC, but I don’t that much time, and I am a tad rusty with color correcting in Avid MC, and I really like the control I have with Color…so…I thought I’d go with Color. But, I cannot SEND TO Color like I can with FCP.  So, what did I do?

Simple.  I exported a Quicktime file from Avid MC 5.5…encoded as ProRes 422 (Because Color doesn’t work with DNxHD).  At first I tried exporting as DNxHD and then converting to ProRes with Compressor, but when I did that, I got the famous gamma shift.  But I found if I exported directly to ProRes (something that requires FCP be installed on the system) I didn’t get that gamma shift.  So I exported the QT file, and then I exported an EDL.  What made that easy is that all the video was on one layer.  Well, after I prepped the cut and moved things to one layer.  And then I launched Color and imported the EDL into Color. When you choose the option to use it as a “cut list,” Color then knows that there’s a media file that this references. So it asks for the path to the QT export.  So I selected the EDL, the path to the QT file, chose settings for 1920×1080 29.97, and clicked OK.

And Color imported the media, all chopped up…perfectly.  And yes, where there was a dissolve, Color added dissolves.

I color corrected and then…hmmm, now what?  Rendering.  The options I have are to render as QT…ProRes, AJA 10-bit codec, or Uncompressed, or as an Image Sequence.  I could do 10-bit, but that requires a LOT of space.  And I did still need to do a playback with the client, and have them give changes, and I wanted to do the changes in real time…so I opted to render as ProRes HQ, and playback in FCP.

Yes, this is adding adding a layer or two of compression.  DNxHD175 to ProRes 422 HQ, rendered again as ProRes HQ.  And then exported out as a self contained file (when all the color notes are done), and then using AMA to bring that into Avid MC, transcode to DNxHD220 (the delivery requirement, and because we would be adding titles in MC), again, being able to avoid the gamma shift (the AMA clip and transcoded material matched exactly).  That’s three conversions (DNxHD to ProRes HQ, render to ProRes HQ, transcode to DNxHD)… but that is fine. DNxHD and ProRes are very good compressed formats and hold up well after many conversions.  And, this is not any less than I would be doing if we, say, output to tape, color corrected on a DaVinci, then output to another tape, captured that tape in Avid again for titling.  It might be one more than I’d get with Resolve (as it reads the Avid media, and renders back out Avid media)…but it did hold up VERY well.

Slightly tricky?  Yes…but it worked.  FCP was used in this case only as a means to get the footage from Color to Avid (export self contained QT file)…and as a means of playback.  Well, that’s not true.  I did do the blurring required in FCP, with Andy’s Region Blur.  Because it is far better than the blurring the client was able to do (more subtle).  But other than that, just an in-between option.  So it looks like I can get a bit more mileage out of COLOR while being able to move to Avid Media Composer.  And I was able to convert 23.98 to 29.97 inside the Avid with very good results. Something I couldn’t do inside FCP…and if I used Compressor, would end up taking quite a while rendering.

So how are we supposed to make this QT file with embedded audio?  If Avid MC doesn’t allow you to export it?  Well, I had no clue, so I asked a lot of people.  Phone calls, Twitter, email.  A lot of people said they use Quicktime Pro to do this.  They export out a Quicktime Reference file, then add the audio mix, and then SAVE AS a self contained movie.  I can see doing that…I see how that works.  I’ve done that before…but only adding a stereo pair or other type of audio.  But I need these QT files to have audio in a very specific order. And I know best how to do that in FCP (see the above linked tutorial).  And interestingly enough, most of the responses I got were people saying, “oh, we use FCP for this.”  They export a QT file from Avid, take that into FCP to add the audio and export a self contained file with the audio assigned they way they need it.

So that is what I opted to do.

It was fairly simple and straightforward.  But I would get some oddness from the exported file.  FCP would load it, and make a sequence setting to match.  Of course I couldn’t view this on the external monitor when I played, because it wasn’t a codec FCP, nor the capture cards worked with.  But one odd thing caused lots of strangeness.  Where I had picture, I could see the picture.  But in the black…it didn’t show up as black, but rather as gray.  And when I scrubbed the playhead from the black…gray…to picture, suddenly the picture would glitch out big time.  Oversaturate and pixelate.  I scrubbed a little more, then it would go away.

But, when I exported a small section of this as a self contained file…to test the export to ensure it would play and the audio was assigned properly, the file looked fine.  So I exported the full file.  But, when I checked it, I noticed oddness.  Every cut before picture would go to black, would have one frame of that odd oversaturated pixelization.  Just one frame, but at the end of every clip right before a cut.  End of acts, and in all the clean covers…er…textless elements at the end.  This had me scratching my head.

But wait…this didn’t happen after the bars or slate.  Why not?  Hmmm…well, after a bit of pondering I hit upon it.  The slate and bars I built in FCP.  And between them I had placed SLUG…black.  But the rest of the show was a full self contained QT file from the Avid.  And the blacks were FILLER.  Now, the odd thing about Filler in the Avid is that it is both something, AND nothing.  Like FCP, when you have nothing in between clips, it is nothing…not black, just nothing.  But in Avid land, the Filler is black…sorta. It goes back to film….it is supposed to be black film filler.  Something you splice onto the film if you want black.  If you want a gap between clips, you need to LOAD FILLER and cut it in between the clips (although the newer updates to Avid allow you to move things, and Filler appears between the footage).

It is also something you can apply filters to.  If you drop a filter on a layer above your cut, it get applied to the entire track of FILLER, and effects everything below it.  You can add splices to this Filler so that the effect only falls within that range.  If you grab clips, you cannot grab just the clips, you must also grab the Filler in between the clips.  If you don’t, you cannot move the clips.

But then it also doesn’t act like a physical thing.  If I want to add black at the end of my sequence, you would think I load Filler and attach it to the end of the sequence.  That works with SLUG in FCP…but not with FIller.  It won’t do it.  You add it, and nothing happens.  So what I do to solve that is make a new Title…and leave it black.  Then add that as the black at the end.  Another solution was to put only one frame of something and then add the Filler before that…in between it and your sequence.

But because this Filler isn’t really filler…it isn’t BLACK…it is something else…it causes issues.  I had forgotten about this, having used FCP for so long.  But I used to either use a blank title as black…or I would capture black from a tape and use that as “filler.”  because when I’d export QT files, I’d get that odd grey issue, or when outputtting to tape at times I’d get some oddness.

And I was getting it again.  So, I put SLUG between the acts, and all the textless elements, and exported the file again.  Boom, it worked.  It was fine.  I have now taken it upon myself to export SLUG from FCP as a self contained file, and then transcoded that to DNxHD, and use that as black.

Quite a side track from the main topic, but that was a big issue that plagued me all day, and caused a huge delay in delivering the master.  Back to the main topic…this is something that should be addressed soon by Avid, I hope.  The ability to export QT files with multiple channels of embedded audio.  Well, and that odd Filler issue.  Until then, I’ll be using FCP to do it.

As always, there are good tips and strategies in the comments.

If you wanted to manage it even more, you could make folders with project names to point FCP to as the CAPTURE SCRATCH.  So that you could just back up the entire folder, capture scratch and all the render files.  So instead of “Captures and Renders” like I have above, you’d have CAPE MAY, and then Audio Renders, Capture Scratch, Renders…and so on.  Keeping media separate was easy.  And if you wanted to manually organize the footage on the Finder level even more, you could.

But Avid Media Composer does things a little differently.

Avid MC will make one folder on your media drives and call it Avid MediaFiles. And inside that will be MXF, then numbered folders.  Inside those numbered folders are your media.

When a project gets really big, there will be more than the “1″ folder. There will be a “2″ and “3″, because there is a file limit of 5000 media files.  But the main point is that no matter what project you have going on, ALL of the media from multiple projects will be stored in that one file path.  All of the organization is done internally in the Avid MC app.  If you need to delete media, you do it in Media Composer.  Move media from one drive to another, you use CONSOLIDATE…inside Media Composer. (Avid’s “Media Manager” for all you FCP people)

But what if you want to copy all of the media used in a project…including render files and precomputes (titles)…to another drive to give to another editor?  Or what if you want to delete all of the media and render files for a certain project.  Well, if you had to do this internally in Avid MC, it could be quite a pain.  You would use the Media Tool, but it does take quite a few steps. A lot of work.  (Or you could get Media Copy by Automatic Duck…that’s pretty slick!) But I have a tip that I can show you how to keep all of your media separated by project.  It’s something you do on the Finder level (or whatever the desktop is called in PC/Windows land).

Let’s say you have only one project going at the moment, so all of the media for that one project is in the Avid MediaFiles folder.  But now you want to start another project up, and you want to keep all of the media separate.  So, all you need to do is change the name of the Avid MediaFiles folder to something else.  Because if the folder is named anything other than “Avid MediaFiles,” Media Composer will not see the media inside.  It’s like playing peekaboo with a baby.  You cover your eyes and suddenly the baby can’t see you. “Where the devil are you?!” Well, that’s what happened to Stewy on FAMILY GUY anyway.  What I do is just add the name of the project to the end of the current name.  So “Avid Media Files X Games,” for example:

Now when I make a new project and start importing media, Avid MC will make a new Avid MediaFiles folder and put the new media in there.  And when I want to switch back to the other project, I just add the project name to the current Avid MediaFiles folder, and take off the added name from the first one, and then launch Avid MC.  Then if I want to copy all of the media and renders associated with the project, I simply drag and drop the entire folder onto another drive.

EDIT: OK, for an even better way of doing this, read the first comment by Ian Johnson.  How to keep your media separate, but online at the same time.  Even better than my tip.  Thanks Ian!  And another by Paul.  Great tips below.

Yet.

But, I do have a nifty MPEG STREAMCLIP tip. This app is quite the “swiss army knife” of an app. I use it to rip DVDs to editable formats…other formats to editing formats, like AVI, WMV (with the Flip4Mac plugin), other QT codecs.

OK…so I am doing this one project that required me to deliver a streaming MP4 file in the H.264 format.  I misread the email (crap) and encoded to .MOV.  Well, their web host requires MP4, not MOV.  But the compression I did, thru a lot of trial and error, looked good.  I didn’t want to go through all of that again with MP4.

Then Andy Mees (the man who brought you Andy’s Region Blur, and other fantastic FREE tools) told me that converting MOV to MP4 is a very simple process with MPEG STREAMCLIP. It will only but putting the file into a new wrapper, no re-encoding.  All I needed to do was drop the clip into MPEG STREAMCLIP, select “SAVE AS,” and choose MP4.  A few seconds later (this is a 95 min file…700 MB)…and wham bam thank you ma’am…I have an MP4.

And the client is happy.

(Thanks Andy)

The evening started off with a video showing all the movies and TV shows that used Avid in their post. But when I saw TRUE GRIT (the new one with Jeff Bridges), I was perplexed, because I knew they used FCP on that. But then I remembered that this wasn’t just a show about Media Composer, but ProTools as well. And I have no doubt it was mixed with ProTools. They had sound bytes from many industry people, including my friend Norm Hollyn. All positive comments…very typical marketting video.

Then on stage they had two editors who had used Avid, switched to FCP, then back to Avid. Alan Bell and Jonathan Alberts.  They both started on Avid, and switched to FCP…and both for similar reasons.  Cost.  Avid systems used to cost upwards $65,000 to $100,000.  And renting them was a huge chunk of change.  Alan said that the budget for the system was more than the budget for him… so he explored other options, found that he could buy FCP and then put the full post budget for editing and the system into his pocket.  This is very true.  This is why a lot of people went to FCP…cost factor.  Jonathan had a similar experience…and was able to convince Fox Studios that FCP would be right for a feature he was cutting.  But then after a few years, they both went back to Avid MC.  Project sharing being a big factor.

A new presenter came on stage and talked about Avid’s recent history…how often updates happened.  Avid MC 3 in June 2008, then 3.5 a year later.  Then 4.0 six months after that.  Then last year in June, MC 5.0…and this year, March 2011, Avid MC 5.5.  That updates were happening faster than ever, because they knew they needed to keep up with current tech.  That they no longer needed to follow, but lead.  They talked about people demanding to work with formats natively, and Avid responded with AMA…and it works with P2, Red, XDCAM, DSLR…and won an Emmy for their efforts.  And that they know that the future of the NLE are the kids, so they have a great pricing plan for students…$295 for a fully functional Media Composer and 4 years of free updates.  DUDE…great time to be a student!

Then the presentation turned to third party support.  Before they continued they put up a legal disclaimer that they said they HAD to do…to protect themselves.  They said that anything they discuss about future possibilities and features “are not a promise.”  They may or may not happen.  They said this was for legal reasons only…that stuff is coming.  But, they needed to cover their butts.

They started off with showing the Matrox MXO2 Mini….then the AJA IO Express, and how they work with Media Composer.  But also showed off the M-Audio device (pardon me for forgetting the name/model), and said that now you can run Avid MC and ProTools on the same system without hardware conflicts.  And then the screen shifted to a new device…the AJA Kona 3 (much applause from the crowd)…and they said “yes, we are listening.”  And then they mentioned that they are not only working with AJA and Matrox…but also MOTU, BlackMagic Design and BlueFish.  And then went on to show that they are looking forward to more plugin support, from Red Giant Software (more applause…from me too.  COLORISTA 2 is what I want on Avid MC).

NEXT…the new UI.  Now, rememeber that I said that I had three Heinekens earlier? Well, I had two before the presentation, so I had to go to the bathroom really bad.  So when they started to show off the UI, I had to dash.  But I did come back in time to see some of the presentation.  Here’s a pic I borrowed from pietaricreative:

But I had seen the new UI before.  I am on one of Avid’s “Customer Advisory Boards.” They invite groups of working professionals to talk about what they are planning for the future, and want our feedback. I saw the new UI then (Oh, UI is USER INTERFACE).  Nice update, great look without changing the tools and locations of buttons we have gotten used to.  VERY sleek.  I love the look of the Audio Tool.

And not only that…64 BIT!  Meaning that it can access more processors, more RAM…and render faster.  64 Bit, and a new UI that doesn’t completely change the way you do things… That’s what we look for in an NLE.  Unless the change is for the good (Smart Tools), changing the user interface because you THINK it will be better is one thing (FCP X for example…not designed by a professional editor with professionals in mind)…but changing the look to make things better.  There were a LOT of working professionals working on this interface, and that is all the difference.  Added speed and functionality under the hood with 64 bit…a new look that is cool, but the steering wheel, gear shift, turn signal and window controls are where you are used to them being.

What else? Support for Dolby Surround 7.1 mixing…IN MEDIA COMPOSER.  More audio functions because editors demanded them.  DNxHD 4444 (more applause!)…and ProRes encoding.  Yes, ProRes ENCODING.  From Media Composer, Mac or PC based.  Because they know that a lot of deliverables are now based around that format.

Then they showed a video of the ELLEN SHOW…on how they were Avid, switched to FCP, then a year later came back to Avid.  This video was a little dated, and very much a marketing tool.  The editors involved were all definitely from Avid backgrounds, so when they said things like “something I did in Media Composer with two steps took five to six steps in FCP,” I rolled my eyes.  Because I know that people from Avid backgrounds don’t run FCP properly.  When i was on a show with 6 editors…4 FCP experts and 2 Avid converts, the only people who constantly had issues where the Avid people.  This was a case of switching to a tool and not having people who knew how to use that tool properly…so they switched back.  BUT, I will say that Avid MC in a shared workflow environment is hands down better than FCP.  No question.  MC lets you work without having to think about the technical stuff.  And with FCP, you need to pay attention to the technical stuff, or crap will happen.  That’s the big difference.  But, with creative editors, not having to think about the technical stuff is a weight off their shoulders.  Only a good thing.

Then the presentation ended, and the mingling began.  They invited us to talk to Avid representatives about our concerns, our wants and our needs.  I stayed in the theatre for a while chatting with my friend Dan Wolfmeyer (@dwolfmeyer), and with Rob Ashe (who I know from twitter as @robtheeditor and just met that evening).  We all came from Avid, and switched to FCP…and were shooting the shit when Angus McKay (Avid employee) came by and wanted to hear our thoughts.

Then I wandered out to the vendor tables.  I spoke to the Red Giant people who assured me that they were working closely with Avid to make plugins for them…GREAT news.  Saw MOTU there, but they were demoing FCP (odd…)…Avid, Matrox, Sorenson.  I wandered outside and looked at the Euphonix Artist Series including the Artist Control and Artist Transport. Not sure how I’d integrate these into my editing workflow, but I sure would like to see what they would add.  Completely programmable..get my hand off that mouse, which I’d like to do.

I met a lot of people I knew, more that I didn’t.  Got a ribbing from Terry Curren of Alpha Dogs (who has a podcast with Phil Hodgetts) about my steadfast devotion to FCP in the past… yeah yeah.  I have always walked in both worlds, but yes, I did prefer FCP.  Now…well, we all see where FCP is going, so coming back to Avid isn’t that big of a transition.

The biggest thing they wanted us to take from this event is…”We are listening.”  Avid of yore (8 or so years ago) became this bloated, content, arrogant thing that we had to listen to.  They released products and we had to do things they wanted…and had to pay through the nose to do it.  They had a strangle hold on us and knew it.  Then when then dumped Apple as the platform…Apple released FCP and slowly FCP crept into Avid’s territory, eating up it’s market share.  That woke Avid up…because suddenly they went from top dog to being on death’s door. They were on the brink of foreclosure.  Avid realized they had to change, and change fast.  LISTEN to the demands of editors, otherwise we would switch to another application…because we could.  And they did change.  A full 180 in a few short years.  Now they heed our advice more than their own internal voices.  That is the makings of a good company.  One that listens to the users.

Oh, and they did mention at the presentation that they are used in 80% of the “professional” marketplace (I quote that because the term “professional” is the topic of much debate lately)…and that 50% of the Avid workforce were editors and people who worked professionally in post.  So they have people who worked in the trenches, who worked as editors and sound engineers…now working at Avid to make the tools better.  That instills in me confidence that they will continue to do right by us…and hopefully not let us down again like they did years ago.  Like Apple did weeks ago.

OK, I’ll end this with a final note.  One thing that I have taken from the NLE wars is this…be on your toes. Don’t be content with one system.  You do a great disservice to yourself by being proficient on only one system.  When Avid fumbled, I was familiar enough with FCP (from all the small side work I did), to be able to pick up the ball and keep running without missing a step.  Now that Apple fumbled, I can pick up the ball with Avid and again continue without stumbling about.  I am also learning Adobe Premiere Pro, just in case I need to use that in the future on some job, or in case Avid stumbles again.  Be on your toes…be knowledgeable with multiple tools.  You only make yourself more employable.

Then FCP 4.5 came out.  Now it not only had external hardware for it (Targa Cinewave, Matrox RT Mac), but it also worked with DVCPRO HD natively…capture directly via firewire, at full quality.  And that was the HD format that was taking the documentary world by storm. I did work on a TV series that was shot with that format.  720p 24over60.  But the Avid Meridians, that the production company used at the time, didn’t edit HD.  So all the tapes were converted to SD and then captured.  And we were going to online with the Avid Adrenaline.

Well, the Adrenaline was Avid’s big mistake.  It was slow, ploddingly so…and it was difficult to get accurate captures and outputs.  And at the time we went to online…it only did 1080i.  Well, all of our tapes were 720p…so we had a problem.  The tapes had to be converted to 1080 and then captured…and that was a HUGE expense.  The nine-episode series went $200,000 over budget.  That hurt.

Then I was approached to edit a two-hour History Channel show and the producer planned on shooting DVCPRO HD with the Varicam.  Well, I knew that Avid couldn’t do this. Sure, the Adrenaline had been updated, but I still was very wary.  Besides, I just attended a Los Angeles Final Cut Pro Users Group meeting where they touted DVCPRO HD native workflow with FCP 4.5.  So we talked to a post expert about workflow, and they highly recommended FCP 4.5  And said that we could do all we needed to do with it to deliver a broadcast show. AJA had the hardware, it was solid. We could use firewire drives…all was good.  So we leapt.

And since then Final Cut Pro was my primary choice for editing. Yes, I still used Avid, but editing with Final Cut Pro was more natural to me. It seemed to think they way I thought.  I was faster, able to do more effects with ease.  It was the perfect tool to use for the projects I was presented with.

But it still wasn’t used in Hollywood all that much.  People looked down on it…thinking it was prosumer. It did start out that way, but it made huge strides in the professional editing market.  It started seeing use on the TV show “Scrubs.”  Walter Murch decided to use it for COLD MOUNTAIN.  More and more commercial productions and music videos were cut with FCP.  It was gaining ground.  But it wasn’t easy.  It took a lot of effort for us to convince people that FCP was ready for broadcast, that it did a better job than Avid.  That despite the low cost it was as good as Avid.  In fact, if the companies went with FCP, they could save a lot of money, and still produce the high quality they were used to.

It took years of struggle, but finally FCP made in-roads, and found a home in many production companies.  But there were still editors who mocked us for using FCP.  And who said that Apple wasn’t serious about the NLE market.  They had so many other things they paid more attention too…iPhones and iPods and iPads.  They didn’t put that much effort into FCP was their argument.  It was hard to believe, seeing that FCP 7 was so solid…there were more plugins and side apps made for it than any other NLE (HUGE support base)…more hardware options for FCP than any other NLE.

Then FCP X came out…and the rug was yanked out from under us.  Not only did Apple release a version of FCP that didn’t meet the needs of the broadcast professional…they EOL’d (End of Life) FCP 7…the last version that DID support professional broadcast workflows.  Everything the Avid guys were saying was right…Apple dumped all the professional features and made an NLE (Non-Linear Editor) for the masses.  They used to use us to tout their software.  Articles on their website showed how Bunim/Murray, the largest reality show company in the US, built their facility and workflows around FCP.  Films edited with FCP…”Jarhead,” “Zodiak,” “The Social Network.” TV shows… They were, and always had, used broadcast and film productions to showcase FCP as a professional editing solution that is so good for Hollywood, just imagine how good it will be for your projects!

Then they release a product that is useless for all those projects. Lacking every professional feature we have come to rely on. And not only that, change the interface so drastically, professional editors would be lost. All indications point to them leaving the broadcast market and aiming at the prosumer.  Why cater to 3% of your user base (according to Philip Hodgetts), when much more can be had from the people in the much larger, middle-range?  People making content for the web, DVD…  After all, tape is dead, according to Apple.  In saying that, they have indicated how out of touch they are with professional workflows. It might not be in the majority, but it is certainly there, and will be there for YEARS to come.  Avid knows this…and I highly doubt they will every remove tape capture and output from their software.

We professional editors rely on “muscle memory.” That is knowing where all the buttons, keys, menu options are when we are cutting…knowing them SO WELL that it is second nature to click on a button to do what we need done. If that one button moves, or doesn’t do what we need…that slows us down.  And in our high-pressure environment, we can’t afford to be slowed down.  When Avid changed the weight-lifter icon to an up arrow…the button indicating that you wanted to LIFT out a section of video…that threw us for a loop.  And when they moved the SELECTION arrows to the Smart Tool bar on the left of the timeline, that caused a lot of havoc.  Editors all over were furious.  Their muscle memory was disrupted.

FCP X goes well beyond that.  Forget everything you know about editing, and start over. Learn everything from scratch.  And change the names of everything, change the way things are organized…and call it “better…an improved way of doing things.”  Who’s to say it’s better?  What we have worked for us…worked well. Why fix what isn’t broken?  Sure, FCP X is now 64 bit, and can address more memory, and therefore is faster…people were crying for this.  They got it, but in the process, a complete re-design.  Adobe didn’t do that.  They went 64-bit and retained the look and feel of the app.  Everything is the same, well, most things.  But if you used Premiere CS4, going to CS5 is easy…nothings different.

Apple says that eventually they will add back some if not all of the pro-features missing from FCP 7.  But will it be too late?  Avid Adrenaline was a huge debacle that caused me and many others to switch to FCP. And even when things were fixed, and Avid came out with newer hardware, and much improved software, we stayed there, because it did what we needed. Now it looks like FCP X is doing to Apple what Adrenaline did for Avid…causing professional editors to look at alternatives. And once we find them, once we get used to the working with them, will we be inclined to switch back?  Switch back to a completely foreign interface?  We’ll see.

And yes, we could stick with FCP 7.  FCP X didn’t cause it to break. But sticking with an NLE that has no future will only go so far.  There will be no further improvements to the NLE we know and have come to rely on. It is gone. So we will continue to use it while we explore options that do work the way we need to work, and will advance with technology.

Future posts will have me doing projects with Avid MC and Adobe Premiere Pro, as I test the waters to see which will work best for me. And if Apple does come out with something that will fit my workflow later…who knows, I might go back.

Time will tell.

EDIT: To be clear.  I will continue to use FCP 7 as long as it does what I need.  But when it won’t be able to handle a workflow need I have I will explore other options.  If the next version of FCP adds the professional functionality I need… and allow for more advanced options other than included templates… then I will explore it as an option.

OK, I am doing testing, looking at the comparisons when…I noticed something.  I am parked on the same frame of video in FCP and Color.  Kind of bright, so peaking a little over 100IRE, blacks a little high too, muddied.  BUT, when I switched back and forth from FCP and Color…the signal I got from them to ScopeBox was DIFFERENT!  The image from FCP was a little hotter….brighter.  Just by a couple points, but noticeable when I switched back and forth and looked at the scopes.  The signal coming from COLOR was different than that coming from FCP…even though I had the same hardware involved.

By the way, the hardware involved is my MacPro Octo 3.0 Ghz Jan 2008 machine, outputting from my Matrox MXO2 Mini via HDMI or Component (same issue on both) into my Matrox MXO that is connected to my MacBook Pro 2.4Ghz Duo core machine.

So the image looked different.  In FCP, the image was brighter.  Well, the brights were brighter, the blacks were actually more crushed too.  This concerns me.  Which is the PROPER video signal?  Because I color correct in Color, but then output to tape in FCP.  I wondered if this was an issue with my hardware…the MXO2’s.  So I went into work and that machine is running an AJA KONA 3 feeding a Flanders Scientific (FSI) monitor via SDI.  Using the built in scopes on the FSI I checked this again.  Sure enough, THOSE scopes didn’t match what FCP or Color was showing, and it TOO was showing the offset between FCP and Color.  Again, FCP was hotter and more crushed.

This is not good.  And I am sure that if I point this bug out to Apple, they will do nothing, as FCP 7 and Color 1.5 are legacy apps, with FCP X around the corner.

The full sized screen captures of the scopes from ScopeBox can be found here.  SIGNAL FROM COLOR.  SIGNAL FROM FCP.

Comments welcomed.

UPDATE: Here is a frame of video seen from FCP and Color…output via an AJA Kona 3 to an FSI monitor via SDI.  FCP scopes, and FSI scope…and Color scopes, and FSI scope. http://www.littlefrogpost.com/pictures/ScopeComparison.jpg