Pro Res 422 Project Stalls Compressor & Matrox

Gurus, stuck on this one. FCP7.0.3 project with a series of clips edited into a 18 tracks from 90-seconds to 8/9-minutes. No big - just cleaned them up. The Inspector shows the clips to be "Apple Pro Res 422, 12800x720, 60fps, 141.86 MB/sec (lovely HD TV) and the Browser confirms (although the data rate does not show), and Pixel Aspect is Square. Dense, but good.
When sent to Compressor 3.5.3 to encode to Best Quality (2-pass) DVD, Compressor wants an probhibitively long amount of time, like two days. This on a MacPro eight-core. More specifically, a 90-second track would take Compressor better than an hour.
When sent to Compressor using the Matrox MX02 with MAX H.264 hardware accelerator the same thing occured. It wanted 18+ hours to encode on the Mac Pro 8-core.
It feels like there is a hidden process occuring -- some sort of other conversion that I just do not see. Adivce?

Michael amd Shane, using Michael's advice to Export as a self-contained movie, I took a 1:53 1280 x 720, 60fps track in the Project and it made a nice 1.85 GB clip, which I then brought onto Compressor. I applied the Best quality DVD 2-pass, and it made the m2V file in elapsed time of 1:35 on the whiz bang MacBook Pro 4 core. Have not tried H264 yet. But here's an unusual thing I've discovered -- most likely the cuase of this hang-up:
I went back to the FCP Project and transferred this same 1:53 track my usual way -- highlight the Sequence in the Browser, Control-Click, Send To Compressor -- and when it arrived in Compressor, the timing or the time code in the Preview screen hs a start time of 16:00:00:00 and an end time of 23:23:20:03 showing a duration of 07:23:20:04 on the same 1-minute-53-second clip. I have no idea why. Any guesses?

Similar Messages

If I imported proxy media to edit in fcpx, can I export a hight resolution (apple pro res 422 (hq)) version of the project ?

If I imported proxy media to edit in fcpx, can I export a hight resolution (apple pro res 422 (hq)) version of the project ?

OK, let me re-answer here. You HAVE to have either original or optimized media, you can not have Proxy only media, when using FCPX's inport options. You will switch between which FCPX is using; in 10.1 via the Canvas menu option called "Media", or in 10.0.9 and earily via the Preference's "Playback" settings.
When set to Proxy, FCPX only references that medai, which is 1/4 resolution, and not full quality. When set to Original Or Optimized, you'll get full resolution output, as FCPX is not referencing those files.
The only way to have Proxy only media is to convert it in Compressor and then import that. And that would just be a huge mistake.

Exporting FCE project to Apple Pro Res 422 HQ Quicktime conversion file

Hi Folks,
I have recently tried exporting an FCE project (HD 1080 16:9) as:
1. Quicktime file
2. Quicktime conversion using Apple Pro Res 422 HQ
and noticed that the Pro Res file is 2Gb. larger than the standard Quicktime file.
Does this mean the quality is 2Gb better? (it certainly looks crisp and clear)
Should I be doing this everytime I export from now on?
Any information much appreciated. Regards.

Transcoding your material from one codec to a higher quality codec will not improve the quality of your source material. You are always limited by the quality of the image prior to the transcode.
If you have a pair of shoes you want to store, you can put them is a shoe box, or you can put them in a shipping crate - but neither method will improve the shoes.
The shipping crate will just take up more space.
The only possible advantage of transcoding your AIC sequence from FCE to ProRes would be:
1) you force the need to repeatedly decompress and recompress the file - ProRes will bear this better than AIC
or
2) you plan to use the file in an edit system that supports working directly in Pro Res.
MtD

Apple pro res 422 file consuming more space than usual

hi everyone!
I've been working with FCP 7 since 2008 and at the same time I started working with Canon T2 from 2 years ago and I haven't had any problems with my FCP workflow files, editing and output used to be H. 264 based files until I started to have problems with my hd DSRL projects. Recently when editing the audio went out of sync and I was suggested to change the Quicktime video settings from FCP 7 to imovie (which is th application I commonly use to create chapters and share to iDVD) this worked perfectly. It was the first time I which I had to change the Quictime Settings to Apple Pro Res 422 The Out of sync problem was resolved but the space consumed by the file was enourmosly ncreased instead. ie. A 5 min project usually would take like a 500 mbs quicktime file and now using the Apple Pro Res 422 this 5 min project went up to 5.3 Ggs!! And also the exporting process is taking forever!! For instance I'm working with a 30 min project and the Quicktime conversion never ends. It's taking about 12 hrs and is not taking more than the 20% of the process. Is there something I'm doing wrong? I need help in a extremely urgent way! Thank you all guys! And best regards from Mexico!!
Mac Pro early 2008
Processor 2.8 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
Memory 10 GB 800 MHz DDR2 FB-DIMM
Graphics ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256 MB
Software OS X 10.8.4 (12E55)

>using the Apple Pro Res 422 this 5 min project went up to 5.3 Ggs
That's about right for a ProRes 422 file. High quality video takes a lot of space. It's sufficient to use the lighter ProRes LT for the footage from your T2 by the way. Your MacPro can also have up to 4 hard drives for plenty of storage.
Why are you using QuickTime Conversion?
Exporting to QuickTime with current settings and self contained is the better way. Then you use Compressor to make your delivery format from that master. Compressor is faster because it can take advantage of multiple cores - FCP doesn't. It will also give you far more control and choice over the encoding.

HDV to Pro Res 422 HQ, how would you do it?

I am shortly going to short some HDV 1080' and deliver it to the customer after I've edited it, on a hard disc as Pro Res 422 HQ 1920 x 1080.
Last time I simply ingested the HDV in the normal way and exported to Pro Res using "make Quick Time Movie".
Should I have injested the footage from HDV, direct to Pro Res 422 HQ and edited this and then outputed the Pro Res 422 HQ edit master? In other words did I needlessly encode the material twice when I did it before?

Why can't I simply change the "Capture settings" to Pro Res HQ?
Because FCP doesn't do that via firewire. The data rate is too high. It only does ProRes 422 via firewire.
Now you are getting into professional workflows, and for that you need professional hardware.
Why do I need to sling my Macbook Pro in the bin and start all over again, because I presume a capture card wont go in a laptop.
You presume incorrectly. The Matrox MXO2 and MXO2 LE will work on a laptop just fine. I use my MXO2 all the time on mine. BUT...here's the rub. You can't capture 1920x1080 29.97 at ProRes HQ. Well, you can, but not for long durations. Because the encoding of that needs to be handled by the processor, and you need at least a Quad Core to do that, laptops are Dual core. BUT, you can get the AJA IO HD, that works on a laptop too, and has a ProRes encoder built in. Issue is that it is $3400, while the MXO2 LE is $1000 (that encoder adds a lot).
I think it would be best to capture as HDV, then use the Media Manager to Recompress to ProRes HQ. Because they might want full raster ProRes and HDV>ProRes gets you anamorphic ProRes. I believe the Media Manager will make it Full Raster. As will Compressor.
Shane

Feature film in Pro Res 422 hq to mpeg 2 program stream slightly slightly brighter ??

Having completed another feature we have decidec to try the encoding at our facilities for distibution .One we gave a try at is the conversion to mpeg 2 program stream at a cbr of 25mb/s large GOP Dolby 5.1 digital progressive from apple Pro res 422 hQ . After converting in compressor we viewed the outcome . Everything was great except for a slight , very slight brightness increase . Any way of converting without this outcome?

thank you for your responses-I tried transcoding everything to xdcam in a fresh project-no difference, crashing at the same rate, despite changing storage to fibre channel raid. so MM'd to Prores LT (no obvious difference to prores HQ on the cinema display) and all good.
David, the project was inherited with a whole load of identically named clips in different subfolders (!!!) although I doubt this caused the crashes. AFAIK they were editing w/o cards in the field.

Apple Pro Res 422 versus Apple Intermediate Codec

I'm new to the world of FCE HD. I'm transfering video from a Canon HG10 to my MacBookPro and storing on an external drive. Earlier projects are bringing in video with Apple Intermediate Codec compressor... no problems, editing doesn't require rendering... Now video is being brought in as Apple Pro Res 422. The Pro Res is requiring that I render everything once I bring it from the viewer to the canvas. I've searched all menus, preferences and settings looking for where and how to change this setting. Does anyone have a solution to this snag?
The data rate for Pro Res 422 is 15.3mb/s and for Apple intermediate codec is 9.9
None of this makes sense to me... please assist.

Hi(Bonjour)!
How did you convert to ProRes 422?
ProRes 422 codec is a part of final cut studio 2.
FCE HD cannot edit nor render in ProRes like Final Cut Pro. You material havs to be NTSC, PAL or AVCHD and HDV (converted to Apple Intermediate Codec).
Michel Boissonneault

Pro Res 4444 to Pro Res 422

I have Pro Res 4444 footage that I want to edit in FCS for the web. My understanding is that it would be better to work in Pro Res 422 (easier to work with etc). Would it make sense to import the Pro Res 4444 in FC and used compressor to export it to a Pro Res 422 format? Or is there a better way?
Thanks in advance for your help.

Take the footage directly into Compressor and convert to 422. No reason to go to FCP first. OR...better yet. With the footage in FCP, use the media Manager to RECOMPRESS to PR422.

Converting 7D camera footage to Apple Pro Res 422 HQ

I shot footage with the Canon 7D. I brought the footage to Compressor (latest version as part of Final Cut Studio). I am transcoding the footage to Apple Pro Res 422 HQ for editing in Final Cut Pro 7.
A few clips have been transcoded. I open up the original file and the Pro Res HQ file and compare them side by side on my Mac Book Pro. I would like to attach the screenshot but don't think I can do it that here. Anyway, the Pro Res clip is slightly smaller when opened with Quicktime 7 and 10. Also, the colors seem to be darker and the clip a lot muddier than before.
Has anyone had any experience with this? Thanks.

My clips do experience a slight color shift but nothing nominal. However, I have no problems converting my files using the preset and opening them up in FCP 7. When I open them in QTX they appear the same size as their original. Have you checked the inspector pane on your MBP? I have had issues where QTX will not open a video full size due to screen resolution limitations and would always downsize instead. That could be your issue since the MBP cannot display a 1080p file at full resolution.

Apple Pro Res 422 / FCP7 render issues

Hello,
I do a lot of timelapses and have pretty good workflow for all this. However, I am experiencing one issue that makes everything a bit difficult. I appreciate if anybody could help me.
My workflow is:
1. Shoot some stills RAW
2. Develop in Adobe Camera RAW
3. Import stills sequence and render in AfterEffects CS4 to AppleProRes 422
4. Import to FCP7 and edit
5. Grading / color correction
6. Publishing
All works fine, however I am having very often an unpredictable issues with the Apple Pro Res 422 codec under FCP7.
I always render a bunch of sequences from AE using the same settings for all files. The only difference is resolution.
My render settings for exporting from AE are:
- Apple Pro Res 422 wrapped in MOV
- render in 10-bit YUV from RAW 16 bit sequence files
- AE project in 16 bit
- Resolutions of rendered all files around 3500x2500 px, this vary from file to file.
The sequences render fine in AE.
The sequences play properly in QT, I can import them to FCP properly, play in FCP properly. I can drag to timeline, scale, rotate, scrub etc.
However: Some sequences fail to render in FCP7.
When I drag them to my working sequence in timeline (Usually a Full HD 1080p, Pro Res 422, YUV), scale down (usually) and try to render timeline footage (don't mean exporting here yet) I get the following error:
"Codec not found. You may be using a compression type without the corresponding hardware card."
This happens on many computers including iMac, MacbookPro and a Mac Pro.
I discovered that setting the footage size to even width and height figures when exporting from AE eliminates the problem sometimes, but it does not help in all cases.
Also it sometimes help if i take such sequence, crop and export using QT under the same settings, just a few pixels less in size. But again - it helps sometimes.
Can anybody help me with these?
Anybody experiencing similar issues?
Thanks a lot.

I had the same problem when we started to edit on Pro Res timelines. The solution I found was to go the Sequence Settings > Video Processing > and change the Render setting to "Render in 8-bit YUV" that allowed me to actually render the timeline and view my work. Hope that helps.

Exporting a DV PAL Timeline as Apple Pro Res 422.......Any Advantages????

Hello
Apart from the file space you save are there any quality advantages in exporting a DV PAL sequence to Pro Res 422? Some of my students are convinced that it looks better and plays better on their monitors.
I'm thinking that their final output will be DVD so will DVD Studio Pro allow you to import Pro Res 422? Is there any point being that the final sequence is going to be re-encoded to MPEG?
I'm yet to test things myself so any pointer would be great.
One particular student says that their QT sequence looks grainy in QT player where as Pro Res looks GREAT!!!
Thanks
Til

Til
One particular student says that their QT sequence looks grainy in QT player where as Pro Res looks GREAT!!!
QT plays DV files at low quality by default. You can change it to high quality playback in movie properties: Apple + J.
You will not *add quality* transcoding the movie from one format to another. For DVD use you'll get the most of the quality exporting to MPEG2 using Compressor directly from your timeline with any extra transcoding in the middle.
Hope that helps !
Alberto

Speed of conversion into Pro Res 422

Has anyone done a test to check the speed of a conversion from HD to Pro Res 422 using compressor?
example 1- a 10 minute clip in HD converted to Pro Res 422 using compressor takes . . .
example 2- a 10 minute clip in HDV conveted to Pro Res 422 using compressor takes . . .
also, does the meta data come across during the recompress (ie the timecode)?

Ok, at least one of them:
I converted a HDV "reference" export of 7 minutes to ProRes 422 HQ and it took about 16 minutes on a G5 Quad, 4GB memory using the second internal drive for source and results.
I did it a couple of ways: using the smart defaults, and then tweaking it a bit to get rid of "jaggies" on all edges. I can't make them go away when viewing the resulting ProRes 422 HQ movie in Quicktime: tried changing QT to deinterlace, HIgh Quality, and all other known variants: no dice. It actually looks like what compressor 2 would do when down converting HDV to SD directly without the Bonzai workaround. I'm sure I'm doing something wrong.
I was at the FCS 2 seminar in San Francisco on Tuesday, and their ProRes stuff looked great, so I don't know if it's because I started with HDV or what, but my HDV video in Quicktimes look MUCH better than my ProRess 422 HQ.
The PR422 file size is and data rate are big enough; 220mb/s data rate and 10.6GB file. Hmmmmmmm.
Anyone got a clue?
Ed

DVCPRO HD/Apple Pro Res 422 HQ slow to transcode to DVD on 8 core Mac Pro's

I've been conducting some tests and narrowed down the slow transcode times I'm having specifically to DVCPRO HD or Apple Pro Res 422 HQ clips when transcoding to 90-150 MPEG-2 DVD Presets. These formats take forever to render on a Mac Pro 8 core when compared to a G5 or a quad 2.66GHz Mac Pro. DV and DVCPRO 50 are transcoding at very fast speeds on a Mac Pro 8 core. I would like other Mac Pro 8 core users out there to confirm this... that way Compressor developers can do soemthing about these slow MPEG-2 transcode times. A 6 minute DVCPRO HD clip is taking 52 minutes to transcode to a MPEG-2 90 minute DVD Best Preset in Compressor. This is in comparison to 20 minutes on a G5 and 10 minutes on a Mac Pro 2.66GHz for the same transcode. This problem does not happen while transcoding to MPEG-1 or HD DVD MPEGs.
I've tried everything:
1. Wiped the system
2. Switched memory
3. Tried virtual clusters.. still slow even at 750% cpu utilization.
4. Tried with updates and without updates.
5. Tried with multiple other clips.
6. Looked at my file permissions for each clip
7. Made sure that each file is self contained.
8. Tried custom presets.
9. Googled to see if other people are having the same problem... found this: http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/155/866630
10. Compared times to DVD Studio Pro's encoder... DVD Studio Pro is way faster.
11. I've written to Ken Stone and Mike from HDforindies.com... just to confirm the problem... waiting for their response.
12. I've also written a suggestion/problem report to Compressor developers.
Message was edited by: Trancepriest
Message was edited by: Trancepriest
Message was edited by: Trancepriest

I've had the same chooppy/ipxelated results that you are having with DVD Studio Pro's encoder at different settings. If DVD Studio Pro had worked well... I would have dropped this issue somewhat. I'm so irritated that a Mac Pro 8 core... top of the line machine is getting floored by G5's and Quad Mac Pro's. Even though it's just with the DVD 90-150 minute presets... its still a major issue because i need to make DVD's on a regular basis. I woud feel so much better if I knew someone was looking at the problem. Including you I've found 3 others with the same issue. I'm hoping to get them on this thread.

Burning a dvd h264 versus pro res 422?

Hi everyone, I have a "film" project I put together. It is comprised of many mini scenes and clips. For each clip I have exported (FCP 6.06) an H264 (720x480) version and a Pro Res 422 (HQ) version. The Pro Res was better for editing and the H264 was better for uploading to the intrawebs. Both versions play just fine, but now it's time to burn to DVD.
I was not going to burn a blue ray just yet, so a SD DVD should be just fine. I was going to use Toast/ DVD Studio Pro on my mac 10.5.8 Os to make a DVD of all the clips. Will the Pro Res footage look better than the H264, or since its compressed to SD is it better to use the H264 footage?
Thanks in advance

A DVD uses ALWAYS Mpeg-2. A DVD-Rom can take anything, it takes data.
Sound on a DVD is usually AC-3. Also, you have to decide on NTSC or PAL format, in your case (480 lines) it would be NTSC.
SD is not a compression, it just means NTSC or PAL as opposed to HD (720 or 1080 lines)

Uncompressed vs Pro Res 422 (LT) as archival codec and as editing codec

Hi -
I'm working on a project where we will be capturing 600 hours of footage from Hi8 tapes. The tapes are in somewhat iffy condition so we're only going to get one pass with them and that's it.
We've agreed with the owner of the tapes to digitize all of them for archival purposes, after which we will make a backup copy for us to edit with. We want to use Pro Res 422 (LT) as our editing codec, but there's some question about what codec we should use for archival purposes -- Pro Res 422 (LT) or uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2.
Basically, the debate is, given that the Hi8 format retains a relatively small amount of data, is there a benefit in terms of quality if we archive the tapes in uncompressed, or will the quality be just as good if we deliver in Pro Res LT to the archive?
Thanks!

Because while we would prefer Pro Res as our editing codec, the people to whom we will deliver an archival set of the material may insist on uncompressed.
Please -- no more questions about why I'm asking this question.
What I am hoping for here is a brief, to-the-point comparison of the pros and cons in terms of video quality of the two codecs (but something a little more informative than 'filet mignon' and 'hamburger').
I'm aware of the white papers, but I'd like to get the opinion of people with experience and knowledge who don't work for Apple who could boil it down --
Is Pro Res a good codec for archiving material, and how much if anything would be lost if we delivered to the archival house on Pro Res rather than uncompressed?
What argument, if any, can we make to an archival house that is leaning toward uncompressed that Pro Res will work as well for them? At the risk of answering my own question, would we be correct in saying that the image quality would be effectively as good with either codec (given that we're digitizing from Hi-8 tapes) and that delivering in Pro Res would save them a great deal of storage space?
As a reminder, we're talking about 600 hours of Hi-8 footage here. Thanks.

Pro Res 422 Project Stalls Compressor & Matrox

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for