On Dec 31, 2018, at 2:33 PM, Bouke <bouke@...> wrote:

You sir, are a snob.

Nervertheless, happy new year!

Bouke

Edit ‘B / VideoToolShed.com
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS  Nijmegen
+31 6 21817248

On 31 Dec 2018, at 18:51, Dave Hogan mactvman@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Where I work we only do uncompressed 10 bit or better, virtually all 23.98.  Evenly distributed between file based and HDcamSR based delivery.

Not that it would necessarily work in your scenario, but one way to have the ability to punch in updates on digital files and not have to re-QC the whole thing is to use DPX sequences as your file output medium.

Media Composer has no problem with re-linking back to the frame sequence of your whole show, and you can re-write only corrections to the DPX sequence, which will be updated in your Linked version you can view..  You can view the show and update/write corrections to specific parts of the show, down to a single frame replacement for bad pixel fixes or other junk.

As many know, there are some clients who insist on a completely uncompressed workflow in post, and often require final delivery to EXR frame sequences.  It’s a much more straightforward conversion from DPX to EXR than from other formats.

Many of the PPV networks work in 10 bit (or higher, to accomodate HDR) for delivery, so that’s our reality. it’s also generally required by studios distributing to the major broadcast networks as well (20th Century Fox, Warner Bros.)

It’s only the intermediate cable networks that often allow 8 bit, fairly compressed source materials in delivery.

Dave Hogan

Burbank, CA

On Dec 31, 2018, at 8:47 AM, bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

No disagreement that a mixdown is faster but I'm working up against air so the ability to watch the content go to tape in real time is of tremendous value as I catch things along the way and can punch in fixes.  I'm not on the latest Avid version so file based inserts is not an option right now.

Another factor is I'm stringing out all kinds of mixed frame rate elements.  Some cut in 23.976 and some 59.94i so my protools audio stems vary in frame rate between different elements.  

With last minute changes to different elements, keeping track and augmenting video mixdowns or just sections of video mixdowns and audio mixdowns is less desirable then simply punching into a tape and recapturing and again it forces me to watch in real time for better QC assurance.

In a perfect world without all the last minute changes a mixdown would be more efficient but given all the dynamic elements in play tape just makes things more manageable over all.

If I was working at a major facility/network with a more rigorous file workflow I might work differently.  I don't have the time or man power to capture in another bay right now so it all comes through me.  Again recapturing the tape affords me a second pass at catching errors.

---In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, <bouke@...> wrote :

On 30 Dec 2018, at 19:37, bigfish@... [Avid-L2] <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Given the network wants DNX 145 instead of DNX 220X clearly storage space is more important. 

Not really.

Since broadcasts are (afaik) most of the time 8 bits, and are finished already, it makes no sense to have 10 bits shows to broadcast. And, it is ‘good enough’

Over here MpegII (aka Sony XDcam) is the standard. That is just 50 Mbits, but long GOP. Small, compatible, elegant (even when it is a quite old codec.).

‘good enough’, and practical.

What I don’t get, how is outputting a show to tape and re-digitize faster than a mixdown and export? That takes (besides setting up) 2 times RT. Any half decent machine should outperform that.

(And, does your facility has only one computer? You could capture on any el cheapo machine with a BM mini recorder or alike. That would also eliminate the resolution loss (HDcam is 1440 instead of 1920, not?))

Bouke

Edit ‘B / VideoToolShed.com
van Oldenbarneveltstraat 33
6512 AS  Nijmegen
+31 6 21817248