Mixing formats in the edit

The sheer mix and volume of formats to deal with today can be mind-boggling. Videotape player/recorders – formerly a common denominator – are a vanishing breed. Post facilities still own and use VTRs, but operations at the local market level, especially in broadcast, are becoming increasingly tapeless. Clearly, once the current crop of installed VTRs become a maintenance headache or are no longer an important cog in the operation, they won’t be replaced with another shiny new mechanical videotape transport from Sony or Panasonic.

It all starts with the camera, so the driving influence is the move to tapeless acquisition – P2, XDCAM-HD, GFcam, AVC-HD and so on. On the bright side, it means that the integration of another format will cost no more than the purchase of an inexpensive reader, rather than a new VTR to support that format. Unfortunately this will also mean a proliferation of new formats for the editor to deal with.

The term format should be clarified with tapeless media, like P2. First, there is the codec used for the actual audio and video content (essence). That essence is defined by the compression method (like DVCPRO HD or AVC-Intra), frame size (SD or HD), pixel aspect ratio and frame rate. The essence is encapsulated into a file wrapper (MXF), which holds the essence and metadata (information about the essence). Lastly, in the P2 example, the files are written to a physical transport medium (the P2 card itself), using a specific folder and file hierarchy. Maintaining this folder structure is critical in order that an NLE can natively recognize the media, once it’s copied from the card to a hard drive.

Nonlinear editing systems have been built around a specific media structure. Avid Media Composer uses OMF and MXF. Apple Final Cut Pro is based on QuickTime. In theory, each can ingest a wide range of tapeless file formats, but the truth is that they only work well with a much narrower range of optimized media. For instance, DVCPRO HD is handled well by most NLEs, but H.264 is not. You can toss a mix of formats onto a common timeline, but the system is internally operating with specific settings (codec, frame size and frame rate) for that timeline.

These settings are established when you first create a new project or a new sequence, depending on the application. Any media on the timeline that deviates from these settings must either be scaled and decompressed on-the-fly by the real-time effects engine of the application – or must be rendered – in order to see full-quality playback.  Most systems are optimized for NTSC, PAL, 720p and 1080i frame sizes. Even Final Cut Pro – touted as resolution independent – works best at these sizes and effectively tops out at 2K film sizes. All the desktop NLEs freely allow you to mix SD and HD content on a timeline, but the rub has been a mix of differing frame rates. FCP could do it, but Media Composer wouldn’t. That barrier disappeared with Avid’s introduction of the Mix & Match feature in the Media Composer 4.0 software. Now, if you edit a native 23.98p clip into a 29.97i timeline, all of the leading editing applications will add a pulldown cadence to the 23.98p clip for proper 29.97i playback.

When editing a project that has a mix of SD and HD sources and formats, it is best to select a timeline or project setting that matches the predominant format. For instance, if 75% of your media was shot using a Panasonic VariCam at 720p/59.94, then you’d want to use a matching timeline preset, so that the 720p footage wouldn’t require any rendering,  except for effects. In this example, if the other 25% was NTSC legacy footage from Betacam-SP, you’d need to have a system equipped with a capture card capable of ingesting analog footage. The Beta-SP footage could be upconverted to HD during the capture using the hardware conversion power of a capture card. Alternately,  it could be captured as standard definition video, edited onto the timeline and then scaled to fill the HD frame. Betacam-SP clips captured as standard definition video would ultimately be rendered to match the 720p/59.94 settings of the timeline.

Until recently, Avid systems transcoded incoming media into an Avid codec wrapped as an MXF file. This creates media files that are optimized for the best performance. Final Cut would let you drag and drop any QuickTime file into the FCP browser without a transcode, but non-QuickTime files had to be converted or rewrapped as QuickTime MOV files. These frontrunners were upstaged by applications like Grass Valley EDIUS and Sony Vegas Pro, which have been able to accept a much wider range of media types in their original form. The trend now is to handle native camera codecs without any conversion. Apple added the Log and Transfer module to Final Cut and Avid added its Avid Media Access (AMA). Both are plug-in architectures designed for native camera media and form a foundation for the use of these files inside each NLE.

Final Cut’s Log and Transfer is recommended for importing P2, RED, XDCAM and other media, but it still doesn’t provide direct editing support. Even natively-supported codecs, like REDCODE and AVC-Intra must first be wrapped as QuickTime files. When clips are ingested via Log and transfer, the files are copied to a target media drive and in the process rewrapped as QuickTime MOV file containers. It’s Apple’s position that this intermediate transcode step is a safer way to handle camera media without the potential of unrecoverable file corruption that can occur if you work directly with the original media.

If you want true native support – meaning the ability to mount the hard drive or card containing your raw media and start editing at full resolution – then the Avid Media Composer family, Grass Valley EDIUS and Adobe Premiere Pro provide the broadcaster with the strongest desktop solutions. All three recognize the file structure of certain camera formats (like P2), natively read the camera codec and let you use the media as an edit source without the need to transcode or copy the file first. These APIs are evolving and are dependent on proper media drivers written by the camera manufacturers. Not all applications handle every format equally well, so select a system that’s appropriate for you. For example, P2 using the DVCPRO HD or AVC-Intra codec is becoming widely supported, but Panasonic’s AVCCAM has less support. Sony hit snags with XDCAM-EX support for Final Cut Pro when Apple upgraded the Mac OS to 10.6 (“Snow Leopard”). Fortunately these issues are short-lived. In the future it will be easier than ever to mix taped and tapeless camera media of nearly any format with little negative impact.

Written for NewBay Media and TV Technology magazine

©2009 Oliver Peters

Final Cut vs. Avid Redux

People like competition for its own sake, so the NLE argument – just like other platform wars – never dies. In the past year, Apple and Avid have broken new ground with very solid updates to their flagship editor applications. Apple with its introduction of the “new” Final Cut Studio, featuring Final Cut Pro 7 – and Avid, first with Media Composer 3.5 and now 4.0. Although Final Cut is today my first choice when picking an NLE to use, I have years of experience with both systems. In this post, I’m trying to present a balanced (non-”fanboy”) look at the two.

A market share tally

Apple claims 1.3 million licensed Final Cut users, however, this figure includes all Final Cut Pro, Final Cut Express and Final Cut Studio licenses since day one, excluding upgrades. One research study pointed to 47% market share for Apple and 22% for Avid a couple of years ago. Recently Apple execs indicated to me that FCP has now passed the 50% mark for all new NLE sales. If the figure of 1.3M licensed users represents nearly 50% of the total market, then this means that Avid must have between 400,000 and 600,000 systems (all products) out in the field worldwide.

Although this would seem to give Apple the lead in the NLE wars, one must understand that the Final Cut world is heavily skewed with a wide range of amateur users – students, hobbyists and non-editing video professionals who occasionally do some of their own “hands on” cutting. I think that it’s fair to say that a greater percentage of Avid users are professional editors. It’s my observation that broadcast news and traditional (major studio) film and television show post is dominated by Avid NLEs. In contrast, the boutique editing world of small and medium markets has shifted in favor of Apple’s Final Cut. In all likelihood, the number of users who make a living with either Final Cut or Avid (Media Composer/NewsCutter/Symphony plus Avid DS) is probably fairly even.

Many perceptions of Apple’s and Avid’s products are based on outdated information. Both are robust enough to meet deadline-driven demands. Each comes with pros and cons, however, the choice often comes down to preference and background. Avid reacted late to market forces that have brought better hardware and lower cost, but they are by no means out of the game. Final Cut is no longer the young upstart. It still benefits from Apple’s “coolness” halo, but there’s no longer the “pirate radio” attitude among users that spawned the fledgling FCP user groups at the beginning. Lots of indie films and reality TV shows can be counted in the FCP camp, but the number of major broadcasters and feature film editors who continue to stay loyal to Avid hasn’t significantly changed. In spite of such notable editors as Walter Murch, the Coens, Angus Wall and Billy Fox being vocal proponents of Final Cut, the numbers really haven’t shifted since the release of Cold Mountain. Nevertheless, by every assessment, it seems clear that Apple’s Final Cut Pro market share is still growing in all sectors, while Avid’s isn’t – even in Hollywood.

Let’s take a look at how these two newest versions stack up against each other.

What comes in the box

The Final Cut Studio and Avid Media Composer bundles are both collections of several companion applications. It’s obvious with Final Cut, but often forgotten with Avid.  Both software packages include dedicated applications for editing, compression, DVD authoring, Blu-ray authoring, multi-layered compositing/effects and film database management. Final Cut includes a separate DAW (Soundtrack Pro) and color grading tool (Color). Avid doesn’t have these, but does offer the Boris Continuum Complete filters. BCC6 would double the price of Final Cut Studio if you purchased these for FCP.

Software updates are a touch-and-go issue. We see that once again with Snow Leopard and I’m sure we’ll see that with Windows 7 as well. Avid tends to hang back before their products are qualified for the latest OS updates, but when they are ready, it’s a fairly simple matter of a few updates and you are done. If you live in the Final Cut world, then you’re more likely to stay on top of Apple’s latest updates. This typically involves both the OS and QuickTime. Unfortunately this comes with an uncomfortable dance to make sure all your software, plug-ins and hardware drivers are compatible. Final Cut users simply have to be more vigilant anytime an update or upgrade rolls around.

One further consideration is that Media Composer is cross-platform and FCP only runs on Macs. This isn’t a big deal for FCP users, of course, but many professional editing environments are built on Windows workstations. Using either a dongle or software activation, the same Media Composer license may be legally installed on multiple computers – both Mac or PC. The activated system (or with dongle attached) is the one that may be used at any given time. This means that Avid editors enjoy the benefit of being able to use a PC workstation at work, then activate a Mac laptop and continue editing the project at home or on the road – all with the purchase of a single license. Final Cut Studio does work with multiple installs on different computers, but technically this is a violation of Apple’s EULA. Actually it’s OK to install FCP on 2 personal machines, like a laptop and a tower. Apple intends that you only run one copy at a time and they won’t run concurrently if they are on the same network.

The media backbone

A big item in FCP7 is the addition of more codecs within the ProRes family. This brings ProRes on par with Avid’s DNxHD and in fact, ups the ante with 4:4:4:4 and 2K support. At a casual glance, FCP would seem more open, because of QuickTime – FCP’s underlying media architecture. With the right codecs, QuickTime media files can be directly dragged into FCP – ready to edit without ingest, conversion or rendering. Avid requires an import or ingest phase to convert the media into Avid-compatible OMF or MXF files. That’s the perception at least. In fact, QuickTime is a media standard controlled only by Apple and media that doesn’t match the narrow specs of FCP optimization won’t play very well. Take, for example, H.264 files or RED’s Redcode files. Neither result in a fluid editing experience compared with DV25/50/100 or ProRes.

Yes, you do have to convert some files to DNxHD within Avid, but once you’ve done that, the media plays and scrubs much more responsively in Media Composer than inside FCP. In fact, it’s my experience that even lightweight files like DV25 media are somewhat more responsive in Media Composer than in FCP. Now we are confronted with the issue of native camera formats, like P2 (DVCPRO HD and AVC-Intra) and XDCAM. Avid has embarked on its AMA structure (Avid Media Access), which lets you edit directly from the camera files (or clones of them). Apple still requires these files to be copied and rewrapped as QuickTime movies. I’m all for copying the files before editing, but in a fast-breaking news environment, AMA would seem to give Avid an edge. Copying your files is safer, but native is faster, though at times riskier. In any case, working with native camera media without ANY backup somewhere can be a recipe for disaster.

Media management

FCP is often criticized for its media management. This has become considerably better over recent versions, but it could still stand to improve. I occasionally still run into problems going from offline to online in FCP – something that’s pretty bullet-proof in Avid. Seriously, if you get better results using an EDL than the app’s own Media Manager (as I have), then something is wrong.

The rub is that media linking in FCP is based on a match of name and QuickTime parameters (mainly length and number of tracks). Avid uses reel number and timecode. In addition, both applications track other metadata, but lately Apple has chosen to hide some of that data from the user. For example, when you roundtrip a sequence through Color, your FCP project contains two sequences – before and after Color. The corresponding clips in the two timelines will both carry the same name, but each sequence is linked to a different set of media files: the originals in the before sequence and the Color-rendered media in the after. Although FCP tracks this, that information is “under the hood” and not directly available to the editor.

Avid has always based its media management on two factors: rich metadata that’s embedded into the file wrapper of the media and a database file that cross-references media clips and projects. This results in a more robust media architecture, but one that’s less conducive to drag-and-drop media imports. On balance, both approaches do work well and in spite of occasional hiccups, the FCP approach offers some added versatility for the editor. Thanks to the use of XML, the Apple method has also opened to door to many developers who have created plenty of useful companion applications that let you manipulate media via XML round-tripping.

Collaborative editing

If you’ve ever worked on a feature, TV series or a newscast in which the editors rely on shared storage, then Avid’s Unity has set the standard for concurrent editing workflows. Numerous editors can work inside the exact same project at the same time and each has access to the timelines created by others. This workflow is uniquely Avid’s, although EditShare has created their own viable solution for a similar workflow using either Avid or FCP. If you use another shared storage environment for FCP, like Apple Xsan, you still can’t attain the style of sharing that Avid editors enjoy with Unity. Even though Avid, Quantel, Grass Valley and Facilis are among the companies who have embraced FCP support on their storage, sharing is limited to media, not projects.

It’s important to understand that this does not mean you cannot collaboratively edit with FCP. Mark Raudonis of reality TV shop Bunim-Murray Productions has explained the workflow quite well in this article at Avid2FCP. The key is that Avid stores its metadata in the bins. When an Avid editor on Unity works within a bin, he or she is actually locking all other editors out of that bin. It becomes “read-only” for the others until it’s closed and updated.

FCP stores metadata at the project level. Through careful management, it is possible for FCP editors to enjoy a similar workflow as Avid editors do. Since multiple FCP projects can be open at once, editors can work on local copies of a project. In effect, projects in FCP are treated like bins in an Avid Unity workflow. Nevertheless, the key point is that Avid’s approach automatically takes care of some of the project organization issues. FCP is far more freeform and requires the editors to impose a structured approach of their own, in order to avoid trouble. I personally do some TV station work with both shared Avid+Unity and shared FCP+Xsan systems (in separate departments). I can attest that the “Avid is better because of Unity” argument is a bit of a red herring. Once you get used to the best workflow, both systems get the job done in a collaborative environment.

Tailor your system

An area in which Apple’s Final Cut Studio clearly has an edge is in the sheer number of vendors supplying hardware and software options to enhance the editing environment. I covered this in my “platform” blog post, but one glance at the two ecosystem pages at the top makes it clear that if you want options, FCP is clearly the path for you. In fact, there are a couple of hundred partner-developers who are tied into Apple’s Final Cut Studio structure, many of whom have elements that are integrated right into the FCP UI.

Having a variety of fancy plug-in filters is cool, but the true difference is the availability of third party hardware. This includes audio/video capture and output cards and units (AJA, Blackmagic Design, Matrox, MOTU, Telestream), audio interfaces (Apogee, Focusrite, Presonus) and control surfaces (JL Cooper, Tangent Devices, Euphonix, Mackie, Frontier Designs). If you are an Avid editor, then you are limited to primarily using Avid products.

You do get more choice in the Final Cut world, but at a cost of optimization and performance. AJA, Blackmagic Design and Matrox manufacture great hardware for Final Cut, but I feel that Avid’s hardware delivers more fluid playback, more robust performance and more real-time layers. Nevertheless, third party hardware does a pretty good job of giving this to Final Cut. You might not have quite as much performance, but it won’t cost you as much either. In addition, you may also gain many more options for built-in format/aspect conversions and other valuable features. The choice of third party hardware is one of the key reasons that editors and owners are turning to Final Cut over Avid solutions. That same choice is also high on the wish list of many Avid editors.

This shift toward Final Cut has not been lost on the broadcast server manufacturers, like Omneon, Grass Valley, Quantel and yes, even Avid. All have promoted the fact that you can integrate Final Cut Pro editing clients into their server environment. Media Composer isn’t automatically excluded, but obviously they see the value of promoting this feature to potential Final Cut users. Many broadcasters now work with mixed environments: Avid for hard news and Final Cut for creative services (spots, promos, specials).

Unique features

It’s hard to decide how unique features stack up when comparing Media Composer 4 to Final Cut Pro 7. Both companies are cognizant that their users have to make a living with these products and have been careful not to break things with new features. As much as I like FCP, I have to say that Apple at times tends to be a “refiner” rather than an innovator, when it comes to their Pro Apps software. Many of the products were acquired, although the very innovative Aperture, Motion and Soundtrack Pro are exceptions. More often than not, FCP has introduced new features that had been in Media Composer or other NLEs for quite some time. Apple frequently refines these features, making them easier to use and more efficient; but, the real talent is in their marketing. Apple creates the atmosphere that such “bells and whistles” were first introduced in Final Cut, when in fact they weren’t. Of course, all NLEs copy each other to some extent. Both companies integrate innovations first found in Premiere Pro or EDIUS or Quantel, as well as the other way around.

We have reached a time when NLE tools are pretty mature. It’s very hard to come up with new, earth-shattering tools that set one product apart from another. Still, I don’t want to take away from the advances in FCP 7. The new speed tools, Sharing, Blu-ray support and general editing refinements, like sequence markers that ripple, go a long way towards addressing the needs of working editors. Apple is big on the user experience and I personally find their approach in FCP makes for faster editing. Obviously, others are going to vehemently disagree. I value the in-context, in-timeline editing tools and find that my style on Media Composer has also changed based on how I now edit in FCP. In short, it’s made me a faster editor on both systems.

However, these are refinements and not truly unique items that aren’t offered directly or indirectly by other NLEs. My main beef with the FCP approach is that Apple chooses to add true finesse outside of the main editing application. If you want tracking, a 2.5D or 3D DVE, cleaner slomos and better text, you have to go into Motion. If you want elaborate color grading tools, you have to go to Color. While there are valid reasons for this, I dislike the fact that it’s one or more additional project types that I have to keep track of.

When you compare the same technologies in Media Composer to Final Cut Pro, the advantage is often with Avid. For instance, the FluidMotion and TimeWarp technologies (used for variable speed, tracking and stabilization) yield cleaner results than similar FCP functions. I say cleaner, because FCP blends fields and frames during variable speed functions. Avid’s FluidMotion creates new in-between frames based on motion vector analysis. When you compare individual frames between FCP and Media Composer, the difference is quite distinct. You get a very good chromakeyer in SpectraMatte and if you factor in 3D Warp, Marquee and Avid FX (Boris Red), then Media Composer offers a wealth of compositing, DVE and titling tools right inside the NLE.

Don’t get me wrong. It don’t see it as all rosy on the Media Composer side. The compositing model needs a serious overhaul and there are tons of limitations, but my point is that Media Composer offers the Avid editor some unique features that just aren’t directly inside FCP.

Now let’s look at really unique technologies, where Avid has led the way. Principally, this includes AMA, 3D Stereoscopic video and ScriptSync. I’ve already mentioned AMA, so no need to rehash; however, it can be argued that AMA is really just copying of FCP’s Log & Transfer. Avid wasn’t the first to incorporate 3D tools, but it’s the first NLE used in creative editing (the rough cut) to add Stereoscopic features. ScriptSync is another Avid-only tool. It’s both a feature and a workflow, because it allows film and documentary editors to work strictly with bins and media clips that are organized around a written script. I don’t use either of these two features in my work, but for those editors who do, Avid is the only option. Of course, the real question, is whether enough editors use these features to warrant the R&D investment. Avid tends to do this in-house, while Apple often leaves these niche fields open to 3rd party developers. For instance, Tim Dashwood’s 3D plug-in for FCP (via Noise Industries’ FxFactory).

I chided Apple as being less of an innovator when it comes to FCP, but I have to say that Avid isn’t immune to playing catch-up as well. This is especially true for Media Composer 4’s new Mix-and-Match feature. FCP has been able to mix media of different sizes and frame rates on the same timeline for several years now. Previous versions of Media Composer could mix 480i and 1080i, but you had to stick with compatible frame rates and scan systems. That barrier is now dropped, so in MC 4, feel free to mix NTSC with PAL, 720p with 1080i, 24fps media in a 29.97 timeline and so on. The initial feedback from early users seems to indicate that Avid does this a bit better and with less rendering than FCP does. Clearly its an update that has Avid editors cheering.

People like to argue about platform wars, but this is more silly than productive. The reality is that NLEs are a mature product and nearly every company that offers editing tools has introduced many of the same features. Competition between companies makes for better and more cost-effective products. There’s a loyal user base for each of these systems or they wouldn’t be on the market. Apple and Avid will continue to run in a dead heat among professional film and video editors. Use the tool that meets your needs and your budget and I’m sure you – and your clients – will be happy with result.

(Updated 12/7/09)

© 2009 Oliver Peters

Avid Media Composer 2009

Earlier this year Avid released the 3.5 version of Media Composer software, as well as the corresponding versions for NewsCutter and Symphony. Media Composer 3.5 included more change and innovation than a typical .5 software release. Besides many small improvements, there are three big features promoted with this release: software activation, 3D stereoscopic editing and Avid Media Architecture (AMA).

Dumping the dongle

For many years, Avid systems have been tied to a hardware license key, a.k.a. the dongle. This USB device enables licensed installations of Media Composer, Symphony or NewsCutter to work on any computer to which it is connected. Install Media Composer on a PC workstation in the office and a MacBook Pro for the road and simply change from one to the other by moving the dongle.

Media Composer 3.5 introduced an optional software activation similar to that used by Adobe. Opting for software activation disables the dongle and from then on the system is authorized over the internet. Like Adobe, you may install the software on as many computers as you want, but when you change from one to another, you have to deactivate the first computer and then reactivate the second computer.

You have the option with 3.5, but Avid has switched to only software activation with Media Composer 4.0, which became available during September. Existing customers who are upgrading to 4.0 and already possess a valid dongle, will be able to flash them and continue to use dongle authorization. One cool aspect that shouldn’t be overlooked is that you may now download and use a full version of Media Composer for a free 30-day trial without dongle or software activation. This try-and-buy offer is an excellent way for anyone new to Avid systems to get comfortable with Media Composer.

I’m seeing double

Avid Media Composer 3.5 became the first creative editing application to let editors work with – and display – 3D stereo content, without the need for a third party plug-in. Other NLEs, like Quantel iQ Pablo, have already offered 3D capabilities, but these systems are generally used for DI finishing and not creative cutting.

Footage recorded for 3D productions, using either side-by-side or over-under camera configurations, is stored in two sets of image sequence files. These correspond to the left and right eye views from each camera. Avid offers MetaFuze – a free Windows utility – to combine these files into a single Avid-ready MXF media file. The MXF file contains the muxed – or “fuzed” – images in a common stereo format. Media Composer’s 3D stereo preferences can be set to off (you’ll see an over-under image), left eye only, right eye only or checkerboard (an interlaced view of the left and right eye images).  Media Composer 4.0 also adds a side-by-side view. In addition to stereo image files, MetaFuze 2.0 will also transcode native .R3D files from the RED One camera.

During normal editing, the editor would set the system preferences to left or right eye only in order to display normal images for cutting. You wouldn’t want to cut with the over-under or checkerboard display. When it comes time to screen a rough cut with a director, the editor would switch the system to checkerboard, don 3D glasses and view the playback as a stereo image. Unfortunately, this comes with a few caveats. Viewing the image in 3D requires a 3D-compatible LCD screen, plasma screen or projector with active glasses and an emitter. You cannot use a software-only Media Composer and expect to switch to full screen playback and see proper 3D on your standard computer display.

There are no controls to correct or alter convergence. 3D finishing systems, like Quantel, offer such control, which can be used to enhance the stereo effects or lessen issues that might cause eye strain and headaches. Avid uses half-resolution images, meaning that a 1920 x 1080 left or right eye frame is only 1920 x 540. The two files are then interlaced to create a single, combined 1920 x 1080 frame. Finally, Avid offers no 3D finishing path within its own product line. You can’t take a Media Composer project to an Avid DS and create a 3D stereo digital cinema master. Such a master would require full-resolution left and right eye images in a 48fps format. Currently Avid recommends that you export an EDL, AAF or Filmscribe XML file for finishing in a DI system, such as Quantel iQ Pablo.

I haven’t cut a 3D project yet, so the whole stereoscopic buzz is lost on me. I understand the box office argument, but I feel that the size of the potential user market isn’t big enough for Avid to spend precious R&D resources on. But, if you are cutting a 3D film without Avid’s new stereoscopic features, any 3D test screenings during the course of locking the cut come with a lot more effort and cost. If you are working on such a project, Media Composer’s 3D stereoscopic solution will definitely save you money.

Native editing with camera file formats

Avid Media Architecture (AMA) is a new plug-in API, like Apple FCP’s Log and Transfer. AMA gives Media Composer the ability to take native media from a card, disk or volume and open it directly into Media Composer as a bin. No import or ingest required and it comes complete with all the camera-generated metadata. Avid must work with the camera manufacturers to write drivers for AMA. Right now Sony (XDCAM), Ikegami (GFcam,) and Panasonic (P2) are onboard, but there is hope that others, like RED, will join the party.

I tested AMA with both P2 and XDCAM-EX media. It works well if you stick with Avid’s recommended practices, but isn’t foolproof if you deviate. One of the P2 shooters I work with clones his cards to small USB drives. The result is a partition that mounts for each card. 13 cards means 13 hard drive partitions on my Mac desktop. The Media Composer “Link to AMA volume” command opens each partition as a bin, which is populated with clip data and is ready to edit. Unfortunately, Media Composer had trouble tracking this many different AMA volumes. After a few times opening the project, it would start to lose links to the media and more and more clips would show up as “media offline”.

Then I tested a different approach, which proved more successful. I took the same small drive and copied the contents of each partition to folders on my local drive, being careful to maintain the P2 folder structure. By doing this, it was possible to load any or all of these folders into Media Composer by designating them as AMA volumes. Avid further recommends to consolidate media that you intend to keep. Consolidation copies the native files into a standard Avid Media Files folder. In either case, my test project continued to work well with either AMA or consolidated media.

AMA offers various workflows. If you are cutting fast-breaking news, you’d probably just link to an AMA volume and cut directly from the native media. This could even be a P2 card or XDCAM disc pulled directly from the camera. A film editor would take a different approach. A digital feature project might start by linking to the AMA volume for each day’s dailies. Then transcode those clips to Avid’s DNxHD36 lightweight editing codec. Move the transcoded clips to a new bin and delete the AMA bin. When you are done with the rough cut and ready to finish at a higher resolution, simply link to one large AMA volume containing the native camera media. The files open into Media Composer as one or more AMA bins. Finally, relink your edited sequence to those files.

But wait, there’s more

The dongle, 3D images and AMA have received the most attention, but there are two additional new features worth noting in Media Composer 3.5. That’s the new FluidStabilizer and the SubCap generator effect. SubCap is a both an effect and a method to add open captioning to your sequence. You can import text files of the dialogue and set a look based on style sheets. Previously this function required everything to be built from scratch or to use one of the several plug-ins developed for captioning. Now you can do it within the basic feature set of Media Composer. SubCap will be welcomed by editors posting foreign language projects or other open captioned shows, such as museum presentations.

FluidStabilizer is a stabilization and tracking effect based on Avid’s FluidMotion technology. Instead of specifically adding a number of tracking points on the screen, simply use FluidStabilizer or FluidTracker. You can set one point on the image and the tracker will automatically set a number of surrounding tracking points related to that original point. It will then track this “cloud” of points to derive a motion path. If you are trying to stabilize a shaky image, then simply increase the scale to get rid of the frame edges. After the track has been analyzed, Media Composer will playback the stabilized shot in real-time.

The big news of Avid Media Composer 4.0 is to improve the openness of Avid’s “open timeline”. Prior to this release, you could only mix media with matching frame rates, so mixing 720p/59.94 content with 480i/29.97 and 1080i/29.97 wasn’t always practical. Those barriers are now gone, which means that Media Composer editors will finally be able to freely combine various video resolutions and frame-rates onto the same timeline.

As a whole, Media Composer 3.5 and now 4.0 are very healthy updates to this professional editing tool. It proves that even in challenging financial times, Avid is continuing to invest in its development effort. This gives experienced users a reason to stay with Media Composer and first time Avid editors a toolset that’s hard to resist.

©2009 Oliver Peters   Originally written for NewBay Media LLC and Videography Magazine

Compositing with Avid Media Composer

Most editors do a lot of compositing. Not eye-popping visual effects, but the day-to-day motion graphics work typical of promos, show opens, corporate videos and local market TV spots. There are many apps to use, but I feel that most editors would prefer to stay within the environment of their favorite NLE.

 

I know that many editors think that Final Cut Pro is a great compositing tool, because it includes Photoshop-style blend modes and uses an After Effects model for effects parameters. I might be in the minority, but I happen to think FCP isn’t really that great for motion graphics work. In fact, Apple might even secretly agree with me or they wouldn’t have developed Motion. On the other hand, I’ve done a lot of very nice compositing inside Avid Media Composer with timelines surpassing 50 layers at times.

 

 

Of the various NLEs available as software-only products, I feel that Avid Media Composer has the best built-in motion graphics and compositing tools. No need to bounce your tracks to another app, like After Effects or Motion, but if you want more, there’s AvidFX. It’s essentially an OEM version of Boris Red that runs from within the Media Composer interface. The best part of staying inside the application is that you don’t have to waste a lot of effort keeping track of additional project types and media assets. It’s all right there inside the one Avid project.

 

Aside from a solid toolkit for effects, several key software design components expedite work in Media Composer. For example, rendering can be done on intermediate tracks within the timeline and Avid does a superb job of retaining these renders as changes are made. One simple change won’t cause the whole timeline to have to be re-rendered. Secondly, you can replace the “fill” media of any real-time graphic with an alpha channel – whether imported or internally generated – with moving video. This can be a direct replacement or even a blend of moving video and the original graphic “fill” and it retains real-time performance. It also appears as a single timeline video clip that can be easily moved or trimmed.

 

 

The third powerful feature is Collapse. This lets you exceed the nominal track limits of Media Composer. For instance, a timeline might consist of 10 video tracks that each hold collapsed clips. A collapsed clip is a “container” with additional tracks inside it. Each can hold many tracks, so if the clips in this example each consisted of 10 internal tracks, the entire timeline would actually be 100 tracks deep! It’s important to understand that Avid’s Collapse is NOT like FCP’s Nesting. The latter is really a reference clip that is tied to a separate timeline and changes ripple between the two timelines. In Media Composer, Collapsing is simply a way to non-destructively combine a group of clips so you can treat and display them as a single unit.

 

 

The sample frames I’m showing are from a fake extreme sports promo that I use to present Media Composer compositing and effects concepts. There’s a base layer of stock sports images with grunge and color effects. Next is a top and bottom layer of colorized checkered flags followed by layers of crawling text. These are collapsed clips containing several tracks for the words, which are being moved horizontally using simple DVE position changes. The last layer is the word SPORTS spelled in oversized letters. Each letter is a set of full screen elements that take up several tracks for the shadow, beveled edge and letter interior. The inside of the letter is cut by a matte, which is filled by the metallic texture blended with moving video.

 

 

I use Photoshop as the graphics companion to any NLE. In this case, I created the SPORTS graphic elements in Photoshop, with layer sets for each letter’s shadow, full color image and interior matte.

 

 

The metallic texture of the letters was also created in Photoshop by using the gradient and liquefy tools. First, organize and position the layers in the Media Composer timeline. Then it’s a simple matter of using DVE moves to create the traveling effect of the word moving through the frame (combined with video inside the letters).

 

 

 

This 25th anniversary graphic uses the same concept. The Avid timeline combines stock footage and Artbeats water elements with versions of the graphic built in Photoshop. Once inside Media Composer, you can play with layers and opacity values to get just the right look, including the watery “25” reflection in the foreground.

 

 

Upfront I praised Media Composer’s toolset. To start with, there’s a much better DVE than either FCP or Premiere Pro. You can actually do decent “2.5D” DVE moves with ease. Another tool that’s simply better in Media Composer is the Spectramatte keyer for blue and green screen keys.

 

 

To me, it’s far better than the built in tools in FCP, Premiere Pro or even Motion’s “lite” version of Primatte. I’m sure you can top it with various plug-ins and the built-in After Affects keyers, but again this discussion is about NLEs. So without spending more bucks on an extra chromakey plug-in, Spectramatte does a really good job on common keying situations.

 

 

Most software NLEs have keyers, but they don’t all have matte and paint tools and built-in tracking. This is a big plus for Avid. There’s a built in tracker that comes in handing for locking composited elements together, as well as stabilizing shots. Even more handy is Animatte – a built-in paint tool for creating traveling mattes. Some apps refer to this as rotosplining, but the point of Animatte is to isolate a portion of the image. In my example, I’ve isolated the motocross rider in order to make the surrounding black-and-white. With enough patience, I can create a very tight matte and adjust that frame-by-frame throughout the shot so that it stays with the rider and completely isolates his action for the duration of the clip. This can also be used in conjunction with color correction tools to create shapes and vignettes for secondary color correction.

 

 

It’s nice to have these tools, but even better that system response if very good when you are working with them. For example, when you apply a 4-point or 8-point matte in Final Cut, the system can be very slow to respond. The performance difference is very striking when you compare the same Mac using an FCP matte versus Avid’s Animatte. In the end, you should use the tools you are comfortable with, but sometimes we overlook what’s right at our fingertips. I wanted to take this space to point out some of the tools that give Avid editors a reason to stick with the product.

 

© 2009 Oliver Peters

Improving FCP and Media Composer

I work a lot with both Apple Final Cut Pro and Avid Media Composer. They are great applications in their own right and have about 20-30 features each that I really love. Yet nothing’s perfect and they both need some serious improvement. My guess is that Final Cut Pro 7 or Final Cut Studio 3 won’t make an appearance until after Mac OS 10.6 (“Snow Leopard”) is ready for the public. I’m figuring later this year. It doesn’t look like Avid will have a booth at NAB, so I suspect improvements in Media Composer will be added in modules parsed out over the course of the coming year, rather than announced in a big April splash. [EDIT: A few days ago Avid and NAB have both announced Avid's renewed participation in NAB 2009, though no further details have been provided.]

 

If that’s indeed the case, then everyone’s going to play the guessing game for months to come. Like every other editor/blogger, I have a list of features that I’d like to suggest to each company. So here goes…

 

 

Apple Final Cut Pro

 

Trim tool – How about doing a better job of copying Avid? FCP needs better JKL trimming, a 4-pane trim view and the proper display of A and B sides when trimming edits that occur on a higher track over a lower track.

 

3D DVE (or 2.5D DVE) – Using the FCP motion tab for DVE moves is pretty lame. The scaling quality is awful and DVE-style moves are a joke. Having to bounce a clip out to Motion just to make proper XYZ rotational moves is silly. Come on Apple! Let’s properly integrate Motion’s DVE into FCP.

 

GUI – For a company that prides itself on creativity and design, why won’t Apple give you tools to customize the FCP GUI? Even a simple brightness slider like Adobe uses in most of its apps would be better than what’s there now.

 

Color space and gamma – After almost a decade, this still isn’t right. Why are there gamma shifts moving between the FCS apps? Why do I get video level pops when I add built-in transitions to some clips, just because the codec is Animation instead of 8-bit or DV25?

 

Better media management – This is the pet peeve of every knowledgeable editor. FCP’s poor media database handling affects things like relinking media, losing render files and countless other problems. It’s high time to fix it.

 

Project / user preference management – Again, simply copy Avid for how to do this. And while we’re at it, how about better I/O support for things like AAF and OMF? How about better compatibility just between various FCP projects created under different software versions?

 

Color correction – Getting Color “free” as part of FCS2 was nice, but the app was broken when Apple picked it up and it hasn’t really been fixed yet. Most users shy away from it, so how about simply taking the best parts and integrating those into Final Cut Pro? This would give FCP a real color-correction mode that editors would love.

 

VTR control – The capture tool, batch capture and edit-to-tape functions are crude at best. These are frequently unreliable, non-intuitive and often not frame-accurate. Just look at what FCP does when capturing across a timecode break. In spite of the move to tapeless media, tapes and VTRs won’t go away tomorrow, so it would be nice if Apple could do a much better job here.

 

General performance improvements – Apple has some nice features in RT Extreme and the ability to mix frame rates. Too bad you actually do have to render a whole timeline before going to a master. Too bad mixed frame rates are actually done incorrectly, such as the use of 2:2:2:4 cadence when editing 24fps content into a 30fps sequence. Time to take a second pass at this work and make it better.

 

Better graphics tools – I’d love to be able to create a title and actually see the video that it will go over at the same time. How about some advanced masking tools, like Avid’s Animatte? And no, going to Motion or Shake is NOT the answer!

 

 

Avid Media Composer

 

Effects – It’s time to rethink the effects module. Nesting is very long-in-the-tooth. Why can’t you stack and rearrange effects filters easily?

 

Shapes and vignettes in color correction – Symphony used to be the gold standard for color correction in an NLE. No more. It’s time for Avid to use the Apple playbook and steal some features from Color. How about shapes and vignettes in the secondaries? How about multiple instances of grading on a single clip?

 

Titling – Just like in FCP, no one is thrilled with the titlers in Media Composer. You actually have three: Title Tool, Marquee and AvidFX. None of them work as well as tools like the titler in Adobe Premiere Pro.

 

Project I/O support – Just like with FCP, Media Composer is very insular in the files it can read and write. Why can’t Media Composer open an After Effects or FCP project? Others can.

 

Resolution independence – I realize asking for video to be resolution independent inside Media Composer is probably asking too much from Avid; but why not just be able to deal with large stills or animations? It would be great to drop these into the timeline and manipulate them without a plug-in or the need to first scale them to the project size.

 

Direct timeline editing – Avid has made some baby steps in this direction, but is nowhere near as fluid as FCP or even Quantel in direct manipulations of clips and edit points within the timeline. That should be at least an option available to younger editors more comfortable with this working style.

 

Native QuickTime support – QuickTime has its problems, but it would be great if Avid could find a way to integrate native support of QuickTime media files without the need to rewrap, fast import or transcode.

 

Direct track interaction with Pro Tools and After Effects – Wouldn’t it be great if you could simply highlight some clips on the audio or video tracks and “send to” a Pro Tools project or an After Effects project? As far as AE, look at how Sony Xpri or Media 100 have handled this.

 

Openness – Avid likes to tout their openness. I suppose that’s up for interpretation, but here are some thoughts for future improvement. How about third party hardware support – not just for AJA and Blackmagic Design boards – but, also for audio control surfaces and color correction panels? It would be nice to have some more effects choices, so what about support for VST audio plug-ins, as well as the After Effects API for video filters? I think a lot more editors would get jazzed about this than whether you can move DNxHD media to some broadcast server.

 

These lists are by no means complete, but these are just a few of the items that would make each NLE a far better product. Let’s see if any of this makes it into the next round. I’m not looking for “kill the competition” functionality. That’s a stupid attitude anyway. Instead, solid improvements make each a better product and we all win as a result.

 

© 2009 Oliver Peters