#Ami Imagine 3.1
16 messages in this thread
Mike,
I just got back from the Third International Avid User's Group Conference in
Florida. The Avid is the most popular nonlinear editing system used in the
high-end production industry (the Harrison Ford movie _Clear and Present
Danger_ was cut on it, for instance, and Lucas's ILM uses it for a lot of stuff
as well). The Avid comes in various implementations for editing film and
video.
My largest client has an Avid system which it uses for editing large-scale
industrials for commercial clients. At the moment I'm trying to come up with a
good way to import Imagine animations into the Avid system.
The Avid will import and export sequences of Mac .PICT files, so it would seem
that the best way is to use Adpro to convert Imagine output from either rbg8 or
iff24 files into pict files, write them to a mac formatted photo optical drive
and port them across that way. The Avid will also read and use an alpha
channel; evidentally the Mac .PICT format is a full 32-bit file format that
includes the alpha channel data with each image file. In the next version of
Imagine, what are the chances that there will be alpha channel data that I can
supply to the Avid? It would be EXTREMELY cool (for want of a better term) to
be able to do this, as it would mean staying in the digital realm throughout
each stage of production (after the initial capture).
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
BTW, Avid Technology and several other vendors have created yet another file
format called "OMF" (Open Media Framework) which is intended for the
import/export of video, audio and sequence data at a very high level (e.g.,
network television, features, etc). If you're interested I can send you some
data and get you in touch with the right people at Avid; let me know. OMF is
public domain; there are no licensing fees although they do charge a one-time
$500 fee for the toolkit, including sourcecode for various platforms. They
don't require purchase of the toolkit, though obviously it makes things easier.
Pete
>> The Avid will import and export sequences of Mac .PICT files, so it would
seem that the best way is to use Adpro to convert Imagine output from either
rbg8 or iff24 files into pict files, write them to a mac formatted photo
optical drive and port them across that way.
I tried that. It's kind of like taking a slow boatride through Hell itself.
The Avid graphic import software is, to say the least, not robust. It died.
Many times.
The solution we came up with was possible because we had a BetaSP deck
available. We used a DPS PAR, outputting in component to the Beta, and then
captured it as a video sequence. It's a lot less painful that way.
Send me more info on your configuration, and maybe I can help out.
Jim Shields
Regal Rodent Development
Jim,
>> [Transferring .pict files into the Avid is] kind of like taking a
>> slow boatride through Hell itself. The Avid graphic import software
>> is, to say the least, not robust. It died. Many times.
At the user's group meeting I was assured that this problem is fixed in version
5.2 of the software, shipping in early December. I hope they're right!
>> We used a DPS PAR, outputting in component to the Beta, and then
>> captured it as a video sequence. It's a lot less painful that way.
That's exactly what I'm doing now. While there's no doubt that it works, it
still leaves out such things as matte reels (which Mike mentioned they're
working on at Impulse). Plus it means your graphic is getting JPeg'ed twice:
once by the PAR and again by the Avid at import time. And actually it gets
clobbered a third time, if you're keying it over something, because you have to
render the (matte) key.
I'm looking for a cleaner solution. We'll see how robust the .PICT importer is
in 5.2; it looked pretty darned good at the show. Then again, you wouldn't
expect anything else, would you? 😉
Pete
Pete
I saw an this gear once and then someone was standing over me with a
small bottle of some rude smelling stuff, I guess it had something to do with
the price tag, so I have assumed that the majority of the user base, (almost
all of it) would not have access to this stuff. I am going to go to COMDEX and
I will talk with the folks over there and see what we can do to make it more
usefull for you and the other two guys that have the access you have.
Have fun.
Mike
Mike,
>> I have assumed that the majority of the user base, (almost all of it)
>> would not have access to this stuff.
At a $50K – $100K pricetag, I'm not surprised.
Then again, some facilities that spend that much don't have anything left over
to purchase an SGI workstation, and would welcome Imagine if they could learn
how to use it easily (e.g., classes and seminars being available somewhere) and
if they could integrate it into their systems. But that's another chapter.
As for the .pict files and alpha channel stuff, that's applicable to much lower
end applications than the Avid. From your last messages I have the impression
that you're working on a "real" alpha channel anyway, independently of this
conversation. How's it looking?
Pete
Pete
All is well on the midwestern front, and yes we are working on a real
"real" alpha, more on that later, around Jan I think
Mike
With all due respect, The company I work for has looked at non-linear
systems as is Avid. But we found the output to be less than the digital
systems we work with now. They do function as great OFF-LINE Systems (ala
Clear and present Danger), but the final cut must be done on digital
systems or Quantel systems which feature higher levels of video.
Just an observation.
Regards,
Bud Brown
On Autopilot 1.74
Norfolk, Virginia
>> non-linear systems as is Avid. But we found the output to be less than the
digital systems we work with now.
Yah, no kidding. I remember the first time I saw a completed project on the
Avid, with the Broadcast Output Option (read: $10K extra) and I just about
choked. Ever been in this situation? The client just spent $70K or more on a
nifty new nonlinear system, and the JPEG artifacts are so bad it looks like a
consumer VHS dub? Now, try to be positive.
Jim Shields
Regal Rodent Development
Jim,
>> The client just spent $70K or more on a nifty new nonlinear system,
>> and the JPEG artifacts are so bad it looks like a consumer VHS dub
I often see comments like this, and it usually turns out that the maker of them
saw a low-resolution image without realizing it.
Avid rates its resolutions with its own numbering system. AVR-1 (AVR=Avid
Video Resolution) is the worst image quality but takes up the least space, and
it goes right up through AVD-27, which was just introduced. A common practice
is to do your offline at AVR-2 or -3, then when everything is "locked in,"
redigitize only the footage actually used in the production at the highest
resolution. The Avid will do that automatically.
I doubt you could tell which is AVR-27 and which is the original source
footage, unless the source is something like a test pattern captured straight
to D1. I certainly can't find identifiable JPEG artifacts anywhere in it, and
I'm pretty darned picky.
The only trouble with 27 is that it is SO data-intensive it requires striped
drives (a process in which drives are arranged in hardware pairs — say, 2
nine-gig drives, side by side — and the data is divided between them so they
can keep up with the flow.
Pete
>> it usually turns out that the maker of them saw a low-resolution image
without realizing it.
That's certainly possible, but the user of this Avid told me that I was looking
at a hi-res "broadcast" signal. I have only the information he gave me; in
this case, the video looked like garbage.
Jim Shields
Regal Rodent Development
Bud,
>> With all due respect, The company I work for has looked at non-linear
>> systems as is Avid. But we found the output to be less than the
>> digital systems we work with now.
I agree, but I didn't make the purchasing decisions.
The fact of the matter is, though, that the Avid is getting steadily better.
Remember that the Avid can produce different resolutions depending on storage
requirements. The current top resolution is so close to true online quality
that only an engineering type can spot the tiny differences. The new release
of software, due out in early December, has an even higher resolution.
Ultimately these systems will replace conventional edit systems. It's just a
matter of how long it will take for compression and storage technologies to
reach the appropriate point.
Pete
>> Avid is getting steadily better. Remember that the Avid can produce
different resolutions depending on storage requirements. The current top
resolution is so close to true online quality that only an engineering
type can spot the tiny differences. <<
I agree the systems will EVENTUALLY be the environment of choice. However,
I believe most individuals CAN see the difference. And I would be
reluctant to introduce a new system in either post or on-line news until
the system reaches maturity. Until the software is there, avid and all
linear systems (Quantel exempt) remain off line systems. Just my opinion,
but I think you already thought that.<g>
Regards, Bud Brown
On Autopilot 1.74
Norfolk, Virginia
Bud,
>> I believe most individuals CAN see the difference. And I would be
>> reluctant to introduce a new system in either post or on-line news
>> until the system reaches maturity.
Have you seen AVR27 yet? I think that one's the convincer.
Pete
>> Have you seen AVR27 yet? I think that one's the convincer.
Is AVR27 a Discreet Cosine Transform (DCT) compression scheme like JPEG, or a
different (i.e. Wavelet or ASC) scheme altogether?
Jim Shields
Regal Rodent Development
Jim,
All Avid video is compressed using harware-based JPEG encoding; it's just a
matter of how much compression there is.
At AVR27 the data transfer rate is so high it requires striped (e.g., paired)
drives to make it work: the data stream is divided with half going to each
drive.
Pete
PS – I'm off to France for a shoot; be back in ten days.