Best practice - applying Filters

Question

What's the best practice in terms of performance versus code reuse, when applying filters?
Right now, I see 3 ways to specify a filter:
1. as a <mx:filter> or <s:filter>
2. in actionscript:
var glowFilter:GlowFilter = new GlowFilter();
--OR--
3. in SVG:
<s:rect>
  <s:filters>
       <s:DropShadowFilter blurX="20" blurY="20" alpha="0.32" distance="11" angle="90" knockout="true" />
  </s:filters>
</s:rect>
What's the best way to apply this, in terms of performance? Thanks.

Answer 1

Fredrik,
Though similar to your workflow, here is how I would do it.
Import those "raw" Clips into a Project, and do my Trimming in that Project, relying on the Source Monitor to establish the In & Out Points for each, and also using different Instances of any longer "master Clip.". I would also do my CC (Color Correction), and all density (Levels, etc.) Effects here. Do not Trim too closely, as you will want to make sure that you have adequate Handles to work with later on.
Use the WAB (Work Area Bar) to Export the material that I needed in "chunks," using either Lagarith Lossless CODEC, or UT Lossless CODEC *
Import my music into a new Project and listen over and over, making notes on what visuals (those Exported/Shared Clips from above) I have at my disposal. At this point, I would also be making notes as to some of the Effects that I felt went with the music, based on my knowledge of the available visuals.
Import my Exported/Shared, color graded Clips.
Assemble those Clips, and Trim even more.
Watch and listen carefully, going back to my notes.
Apply any additional Effects now.
Watch and listen carefully.
Tighten any edits, adjust any applied Effects, and perhaps add (or remove existing) more Effects.
Watch and listen carefully.
Output an "approval" AV for the band/client.
Tweak, as is necessary.
Output "final approval" AV.
Tweak, as is necessary.
Export/Share, to desired delivery formats.
Invoice the client.
Cash check.
Declare "wine-thirty."
This is very similar to your proposed workflow.
Good luck,
Hunt
* I have used Lagarith Lossless CODEC with my PrE 4.0, but have not tried UT. Both work fine in PrPro, so I assume that UT Lossless will work in PrE too. These CODEC's are fairly quick in processing/Exporting, and offer the benefit of smaller files, than Uncompressed AVI. They are visually lossless. The resultant files will NOT be tiny, so one would still need a good amount of HDD space. Neither CODEC introduces any artifacts, or color degredation.