For a lot of us editors- and I'm not going to call us 'offline' we're editors - the ultimate editing machine is definitely an Avid. And when we say 'an Avid' we mostly mean a Media Composer. Not some watered down XPress or XPressDV or something like that. Though in the past 2-3 years the low-end Avids like XPress and XPRessDV have gotten pretty close to Media Composers in features.
But still a full-blown Avid Media Composer has always been something that someone else owned and we rented. At anything between Rs. 20-30 lakhs (Rupees 2-3 million), it has definitely been out of reach for most. I mean, you can get a rather good flat at Andheri for that kind of money. Or buy two luxury cars even.
So if any of us ever owned an editing system it usually was an FCP on a PowerBook or maybe a pirated copy of XPress on a cheap PC laptop. I must say though, that almost all the editors who I've seen get a PC and a pirated Avid XPress didn't eventually do much editing on it. The FCP-PowerBook people fared slightly better.
But now, finally many of us can actually afford our very own Media Composer. At NAB last month Avid announced that the software-only version of Avid Media Composer would soon be available for US$ 5,000 (About Rs. 2.5 lakhs with some taxes). Sounds like a lot of money still, but hey, it is a Media Composer. No excuses. It can do DV, all resolutions to 1:1, multi-track, multi-cam, film, anything a Media Composer can.
To be able to capture from Beta/Digi, you can buy the new Avid Mojo SDI for US$ 2,700 (About Rs. 1.8 lakhs with some duties and taxes). You'll need some fast storage for that, though. Mojo SDI has SDI, component analog, composite, S-video, AES and analog audio, all in and out.
So any of us can now finally own an Avid Media Composer. For about 2.5+1.8 lakhs=Rs 4.3 lakhs plus the cost of a good Mac or PC and some fast storage. A real Media Composer, a brand new one, that can open any old project even open old Meridien media.
And a dream system would be, a new Apple Mac G5 Quad, Avid Media Composer Software, Avid Mojo SDI, and some fast storage and a good monitor and speakers. Under Rs 8 lakhs. Add a bit more and maybe you can even run FCP on it. Of course you can get a PC instead of a Mac, but then you can't run FCP on a PC.
And by the way, this Avid Media Composer ships for PC as well as Mac in the same box. You can use either PC or Mac. No need to commit yourself to Mac or PC. Even have both and run it on either, one at a time.
One slight snafu is that this Media Composer will not run on the newest Intel Macs - The MacBook Pro, the iMac , or the MacMini. But Avid will be out with a Universal Binary version of Avid Media Composer in a few months, maybe end of the year.
And then, if the new Intel desktop Macs are available who knows... you can even get a Mac that runs Avid Media Composer, and FCP on a Mac partition and also boots in Windows in another partition so you can run Avid Media Composer, and other PC apps on the Windows partition, even play PC-only games. Mac and PC, Avid and FCP in one box. Now how about that?
Tuesday, 16 May 2006
Sunday, 14 May 2006
8k Camera, 8k Projector, 8k Digital Cinema.
I visited NAB at Las Vegas this year. 24th to 27th Apr 06. Some of the biggest companies in broadcast, post production, audio, video and other film/video related disciplines exhibit there. For us Post guys, there's Discreet, Apple, Adobe, Avid, Sony, Panasonic, Thomson, Cintel, DaVinci and loads of others. Great if you're a techie or even if you're somehow connected to this business.
At one corner of the exhibition in the Central hall, just behind the LED lite panels, was an interesting display.
An 8k presentation. This was by NHK, the Japanese broadcasting company. A projection, at 8k. Yes 8k. Not 2k, not 4k, but honest to God 8k. There were two projectors. Something like one showing red/green and one doing blue. Both 8k. Maybe a Sony special edition by the looks of it.
There were shots of New York, Japan and other places. All on a large screen. And all the footage shown had been shot on 8k, digitally, and projected with music to match with an 8k projection.
Outside there was also the camera that shot it all. And the high speed storage, compression and transmission systems. These are installed at some museums and other such institutions in Japan.
Mind you, this is not some prototype, releasing in some summer or fall or spring. It is for real. Not that you can go out and buy any of this, but you can see and enjoy the results nevertheless.
And since none of the stuff shown seemed to be originated on film, one wonders... what if it had been? I doubt if film, scanned as 8k and then shown on that gigantic screen would have the clean sharp - maybe what some might call a 'digital look' - that these images showed.
If anyone is concerned about the done to death proclamation, 'Film is dead' then after seeing this 8k demo, I can assure you that neither HD nor even 2k film DI will kill off film. No sir, as long as you shoot film, you are bound by its limits. And yes these limits are for all to see when one sees an 8k DCinema demo.
Sort of like if one were to shoot on still 35 mm film and use the best possible scanner to get a high resolution image vis a vis shooting with the best possible digital still camera. Not too many will disagree that digital still cameras have more or less done away with film cameras.
By simply surpassing 35 mm film not trying to imitate them. I believe now that movie film will also be done for, by exceptional quality digital cinema cameras. But at the present time there's probably not one single camera that can honestly do that as easily as a film camera can. But it will be there surely in the next 1-3 years.
And oh yes. Just outside the theatre, was showing was a large 3D HD projection. Using cross polaroids. And a 3D display on LCD TVs as well. Both awesome. HD in 3D. What an amazing way to view it. SD in 3D probably would be a strain to watch because of the low res, but HD3D is something else.
At one corner of the exhibition in the Central hall, just behind the LED lite panels, was an interesting display.
An 8k presentation. This was by NHK, the Japanese broadcasting company. A projection, at 8k. Yes 8k. Not 2k, not 4k, but honest to God 8k. There were two projectors. Something like one showing red/green and one doing blue. Both 8k. Maybe a Sony special edition by the looks of it.
There were shots of New York, Japan and other places. All on a large screen. And all the footage shown had been shot on 8k, digitally, and projected with music to match with an 8k projection.
Outside there was also the camera that shot it all. And the high speed storage, compression and transmission systems. These are installed at some museums and other such institutions in Japan.
Mind you, this is not some prototype, releasing in some summer or fall or spring. It is for real. Not that you can go out and buy any of this, but you can see and enjoy the results nevertheless.
And since none of the stuff shown seemed to be originated on film, one wonders... what if it had been? I doubt if film, scanned as 8k and then shown on that gigantic screen would have the clean sharp - maybe what some might call a 'digital look' - that these images showed.
If anyone is concerned about the done to death proclamation, 'Film is dead' then after seeing this 8k demo, I can assure you that neither HD nor even 2k film DI will kill off film. No sir, as long as you shoot film, you are bound by its limits. And yes these limits are for all to see when one sees an 8k DCinema demo.
Sort of like if one were to shoot on still 35 mm film and use the best possible scanner to get a high resolution image vis a vis shooting with the best possible digital still camera. Not too many will disagree that digital still cameras have more or less done away with film cameras.
By simply surpassing 35 mm film not trying to imitate them. I believe now that movie film will also be done for, by exceptional quality digital cinema cameras. But at the present time there's probably not one single camera that can honestly do that as easily as a film camera can. But it will be there surely in the next 1-3 years.
And oh yes. Just outside the theatre, was showing was a large 3D HD projection. Using cross polaroids. And a 3D display on LCD TVs as well. Both awesome. HD in 3D. What an amazing way to view it. SD in 3D probably would be a strain to watch because of the low res, but HD3D is something else.
Sunday, 7 May 2006
The new iMac. First-hand info.
I've just got my new iMac. Its 1.83 GHz, Dual core Intel with 512 Mb RAM and a 160 Gb hard disc.
You take it out of the box, connect power, keyboard and mouse, turn it on and it starts up. Everything is already installed, you just need to put in your name and other details and it starts.
I had already downloaded Boot Camp and the drivers for Windows. And had a WinXP DVD ready. So the first thing I did was to install Windows - on my Mac.
I set aside a 32 Gb partition. The WindowsXP installation took about an hour. Then I went on to install an anti-virus and anti-spyware software. AVGFree and SpyBotSD. Then Quicktime, and Adobe Acrobat. All this took another hour. O still have to put Winzip and other stuff.
But the windows 'side' works just like a PC. I could use USB sticks, listen to music, watch DVDs burn CDs - everything. And pretty snappy too.
Anyway, why exactly did I install Windows on my Mac? The main reason was to be able to browse on certain sites that are just not Mac-friendly yet. For instance. The Indian Railways reservation site, that simply doesn't go past the password screen. And you can't book tickets on. The HDFC bank site that doesn't show icons. The Indiatimes briefcase and e-mail site. And lots more that simply don't work fine with Safari. And there's no one to complain about.
Most sys admins and webmasters at these sites aren't even aware that the Mac has a different operating system When you call or write, their replies usually start with a "Go to your start menu, select Control panel and...". Even if you interject and say you have a Mac, they simply continue "Yes I know, just go to your start menu, select Control panel and..."
Actually, come to think of it, I once showed a movie on my PowerBook to this young MBA from IIM who had also studied Computer and Software Engineering and was working as a software person in NY. And her reaction was... "No start menu and the menu always stays on, where did you get this theme?". She thought it was a clever question till I told her I was running Unix with a proprietary GUI. And she shook her head as though I was just masquerading a good looking Linux build. But she had no clue about the fact that this was the classic MacOSX interface for nearly half a decade.
Now one doesn't have to face all this anymore. If it doesn't work on your Mac, and the world doesn't understand, just try it on your Mac - with Windows this time.
You take it out of the box, connect power, keyboard and mouse, turn it on and it starts up. Everything is already installed, you just need to put in your name and other details and it starts.
I had already downloaded Boot Camp and the drivers for Windows. And had a WinXP DVD ready. So the first thing I did was to install Windows - on my Mac.
I set aside a 32 Gb partition. The WindowsXP installation took about an hour. Then I went on to install an anti-virus and anti-spyware software. AVGFree and SpyBotSD. Then Quicktime, and Adobe Acrobat. All this took another hour. O still have to put Winzip and other stuff.
But the windows 'side' works just like a PC. I could use USB sticks, listen to music, watch DVDs burn CDs - everything. And pretty snappy too.
Anyway, why exactly did I install Windows on my Mac? The main reason was to be able to browse on certain sites that are just not Mac-friendly yet. For instance. The Indian Railways reservation site, that simply doesn't go past the password screen. And you can't book tickets on. The HDFC bank site that doesn't show icons. The Indiatimes briefcase and e-mail site. And lots more that simply don't work fine with Safari. And there's no one to complain about.
Most sys admins and webmasters at these sites aren't even aware that the Mac has a different operating system When you call or write, their replies usually start with a "Go to your start menu, select Control panel and...". Even if you interject and say you have a Mac, they simply continue "Yes I know, just go to your start menu, select Control panel and..."
Actually, come to think of it, I once showed a movie on my PowerBook to this young MBA from IIM who had also studied Computer and Software Engineering and was working as a software person in NY. And her reaction was... "No start menu and the menu always stays on, where did you get this theme?". She thought it was a clever question till I told her I was running Unix with a proprietary GUI. And she shook her head as though I was just masquerading a good looking Linux build. But she had no clue about the fact that this was the classic MacOSX interface for nearly half a decade.
Now one doesn't have to face all this anymore. If it doesn't work on your Mac, and the world doesn't understand, just try it on your Mac - with Windows this time.
Sunday, 9 April 2006
Mac does Windows too.
Even CNN reported it as news. Yes, an Apple Mac can now run Windows. Would have sounded like sacrilege to the faithful some years ago. But the entry of an Intel chip inside a Mac has made this inevitable.
But before you go thinking the MacOS is dead, think again. First off there are currently just three models that can run Windows and only WinXP. They are the Intel iMac, the MacBook Pro, and the Intel MacMini.
Not the G5 new or old, not the G4, the PowerBook, the iBook, the iMac G5, the MacMini G4, not any other Mac but just the three new Intel Macs.
You need to have a licenced copy of WinXP. And this Boot Camp as Apple calls it, is just an 'experimental' thing that Apple will not technically support. And you better get a good anti-virus software since now your Mac can get a virus or spyware anytime - just in the Windows partition.
Speaking of which, you can only run Windows on a partition. Meaning this is a dual boot operation. You boot Windows when you need to run Windows applications, games anything. And when done you boot MacOS when you need to get any work done.
If you get a virus, just delete the entire Windows partition and start over. What about your data in the Windows partition? Hey this is just Windows right? You aren't supposed to use it for anything you can't delete. Anyway the virus won't touch the Mac part of your Mac.
To know the exact procedure head over to Apple's Boot Camp page. Follow the instructions and it should work.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
I haven't done this myself (yet) but I know of folks who have. And who are running Tally on an iMac.
But before you go thinking the MacOS is dead, think again. First off there are currently just three models that can run Windows and only WinXP. They are the Intel iMac, the MacBook Pro, and the Intel MacMini.
Not the G5 new or old, not the G4, the PowerBook, the iBook, the iMac G5, the MacMini G4, not any other Mac but just the three new Intel Macs.
You need to have a licenced copy of WinXP. And this Boot Camp as Apple calls it, is just an 'experimental' thing that Apple will not technically support. And you better get a good anti-virus software since now your Mac can get a virus or spyware anytime - just in the Windows partition.
Speaking of which, you can only run Windows on a partition. Meaning this is a dual boot operation. You boot Windows when you need to run Windows applications, games anything. And when done you boot MacOS when you need to get any work done.
If you get a virus, just delete the entire Windows partition and start over. What about your data in the Windows partition? Hey this is just Windows right? You aren't supposed to use it for anything you can't delete. Anyway the virus won't touch the Mac part of your Mac.
To know the exact procedure head over to Apple's Boot Camp page. Follow the instructions and it should work.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/
I haven't done this myself (yet) but I know of folks who have. And who are running Tally on an iMac.
Sunday, 26 February 2006
Watch DVDs on your iPod video.
or...
there comes a time when one finds oneself saying. "I wish I could watch DVDs on my iPod video."
Far too many people I know are getting themselves an iPod video. And there's no ITunes store here in India where one can download videos or episodes of TV serials for 2 dollars per epi. Imagine what it would do to the store if one could download the saas bahu serials.
For those who came in late there is and has been an iPod video for some months now. This looks just like any iPod but the screen a bit bigger and can show video films. Not a very large screen, but then when held at arm's length, it looks just as big as my 25" TV across the hall when I sit on my sofa.
So, for the rest of us, after the novelty of the iPod wears off, there comes a time when one finds oneself saying. "I wish I could see DVDs on this thing." Hey, why not, after all you always have the iPod handy when you have lots of time on your hands. At airports, inside aircraft, at boring meetings, wherever.
Here's how to watch DVDs on your iPod. The process below is for an Apple Mac. If you have a PC, write to me and maybe I'll find a way.
The process consists of the following steps.
1. Converting the DVD tracks into MPEG-2 movies. .m2v for video.
2. Converting the DVD tracks into corresponding audio. .ac3 for audio.
3. Converting these .m2v into a Quicktime with, say, DV-PAL.
4. Converting the .ac3 into .aif
5. Merging the DV-PAL Quicktime video with the .aif audio into a 'merged' movie.
6. Converting this 'merged' movie into iPod video.
For step 1 and 2, load the DVD, let it mount and launch DVD Player on its own. Then quit DVD Player without seeing the movie. This steps is cometimes nbecessary for the system to 'register' the DVD.
Get an app called 0Sex from MacUpdate or versiontracker. This makes DVD tracks into m2v for video and .ac3 for audio.
Else use Mactheripper.
0Sex - http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/9830
MacTheRipper - http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/14414
Either of these make DVD tracks into .m2v and .ac3
For Step 3 use MPEGStreamclip or DivA, both free and from the aforementioned sites.
MPEGStreamclip - http://www.alfanet.it/squared5/mpegstreamclip.html
DiVA - http://diva.3ivx.com/
Either of these convert .m2v to Quicktime .mov
For step 4 use mAC3dec.
mAC3dec - http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/10381
This converts .ac3 into .aif
For step 5 use Quicktime. Open the video, then open the audio. Keep both open simultaneously.
Then do Edit > select all or cmd-A to the audio to select all. Then do Edit > Copy or Cmd-C to copy all audio. Go the the video QT, and do Edit > Add to movie or opt-cmd-V.
Save this married video either as self-contained or as a reference movie.
Use this to convert to iPod. File > Export. And 'movie to iPod (320x240)' in the export dialog.
Then with iTunes 6.0.3 or above you can send it to your iPod.
More on how to convert movies to iPod here...
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/tutorials/creatingvideo.html
and on how to send it to your iPod here...
http://www.apple.com/support/ipod/tutorial/ip_gettingstarted_t12.html
All the links I've mentioned may have to be copied and pasted in your browser to make them work.
Happy movie watching. This is positively a defining moment in the history of cinema.
there comes a time when one finds oneself saying. "I wish I could watch DVDs on my iPod video."
Far too many people I know are getting themselves an iPod video. And there's no ITunes store here in India where one can download videos or episodes of TV serials for 2 dollars per epi. Imagine what it would do to the store if one could download the saas bahu serials.
For those who came in late there is and has been an iPod video for some months now. This looks just like any iPod but the screen a bit bigger and can show video films. Not a very large screen, but then when held at arm's length, it looks just as big as my 25" TV across the hall when I sit on my sofa.
So, for the rest of us, after the novelty of the iPod wears off, there comes a time when one finds oneself saying. "I wish I could see DVDs on this thing." Hey, why not, after all you always have the iPod handy when you have lots of time on your hands. At airports, inside aircraft, at boring meetings, wherever.
Here's how to watch DVDs on your iPod. The process below is for an Apple Mac. If you have a PC, write to me and maybe I'll find a way.
The process consists of the following steps.
1. Converting the DVD tracks into MPEG-2 movies. .m2v for video.
2. Converting the DVD tracks into corresponding audio. .ac3 for audio.
3. Converting these .m2v into a Quicktime with, say, DV-PAL.
4. Converting the .ac3 into .aif
5. Merging the DV-PAL Quicktime video with the .aif audio into a 'merged' movie.
6. Converting this 'merged' movie into iPod video.
For step 1 and 2, load the DVD, let it mount and launch DVD Player on its own. Then quit DVD Player without seeing the movie. This steps is cometimes nbecessary for the system to 'register' the DVD.
Get an app called 0Sex from MacUpdate or versiontracker. This makes DVD tracks into m2v for video and .ac3 for audio.
Else use Mactheripper.
0Sex - http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/9830
MacTheRipper - http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/14414
Either of these make DVD tracks into .m2v and .ac3
For Step 3 use MPEGStreamclip or DivA, both free and from the aforementioned sites.
MPEGStreamclip - http://www.alfanet.it/squared5/mpegstreamclip.html
DiVA - http://diva.3ivx.com/
Either of these convert .m2v to Quicktime .mov
For step 4 use mAC3dec.
mAC3dec - http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/10381
This converts .ac3 into .aif
For step 5 use Quicktime. Open the video, then open the audio. Keep both open simultaneously.
Then do Edit > select all or cmd-A to the audio to select all. Then do Edit > Copy or Cmd-C to copy all audio. Go the the video QT, and do Edit > Add to movie or opt-cmd-V.
Save this married video either as self-contained or as a reference movie.
Use this to convert to iPod. File > Export. And 'movie to iPod (320x240)' in the export dialog.
Then with iTunes 6.0.3 or above you can send it to your iPod.
More on how to convert movies to iPod here...
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/tutorials/creatingvideo.html
and on how to send it to your iPod here...
http://www.apple.com/support/ipod/tutorial/ip_gettingstarted_t12.html
All the links I've mentioned may have to be copied and pasted in your browser to make them work.
Happy movie watching. This is positively a defining moment in the history of cinema.
Sunday, 12 February 2006
What's all the fuss on DI resolution?
It's been over 3 weeks since I posted. Just what I feared the most about maintaining a blog.
Anyway, while speaking to a film director the other day a colleague mentioned that there was no point doing a film digital post-production (called Digital Intermediate or DI) at a resolution of 4k because with conventional means when one finishes a film optically, one has a print that has a resolution of barely '1k'. The Director was aghast and I was apalled at this comment.
Later I discussed this with the DOP (Dir of Photography, or Cinematographer) of this forthcoming film. I explained that there is no real inherent resolution of 35 mm film that can be expressed as pixels, since it is an analog medium. It is generally assumed that scanning a film at '2k' or 2048x1556 yields a digital picture that captures all that the film 'contains'.
The later digital correction and compositing stages do not reduce this resolution like the conventional optical process can - the act of making prints or dupe negatives. So going digital may induce some losses at the initial conversion stage, but further work does not add losses.
And incidentally, on projection, '1k' doesn't look sharp enough, while '4k' doesn't seem to look vastly better than '2k'. In part because we don't really have any viable 4k projector or monitor yet.
Further, to put this '2k' and '4k' thing into perspective, I mentioned to this DOP that 2k while seeming like a lot, isn't much when you consider that it amounts to '3 megapixels'. And most any cheap digital camera can match that. And now, 5 and even 8 megapixel cameras are getting quite common. Even mobile phones have 1-2 megapixel cameras - which is nearly the resolution of HD. Suddenly HD which stands for 'High Definition' seems puny. Right?
Well, not quite.
While digital cameras can easily do 3 Megapixels or 2k, they cannot do it 24 times each second. And even if they did, they would run out of memory in seconds. They store images on memory cards, maybe a hundred to a thousand images to a card. Film digital post needs 24 each second, 1440 each minute and 86400 each hour of shooting. And all these images have to be uncompressed, not jpeg. And they have to be held securely for as many months as the post production takes. A tall order.
But when you come to think of that, this storage and access is the current bottle-neck in the progress of truly digital cinema. By digital cinema I mean 'filming', storing, editing, finishing, and releasing digitally. At full resolution, uncompressed, with full 16-bit (sort of like 16 stops) latitude, just like 35 mm film can do right here right now. And hey, HD does not come close to this, yet. Probably never will. I mean, just look at a 2k image projected on a large screen side by side to an HD image and you'll know what I mean.
It was a scant 3-5 years ago that people spoke the same about still photography going digital. They said, it didn't have the latitude, how would you store images, how would you process them? etc etc. And now, we have very few photographers, even pros, fashion and industrial photographers using still cameras with 35 mm film. I too have my Canon A-1 with a variety of lenses, locked up in a cupboard.
So it looks lik a matter of time before film will be truly dead. Which it surely will, but nowhere near when it was supposed to be. Like in 1986 when I first heard this 'film is dead' thing when U-matic machines were introduced for TV production. Seems really funny now. Its 2006 and film is still doing roaring business - in India at least.
But finally, when film is really dead, along with it will go the film scanners, the conforming and grading systems, colour management systems, processing labs, and all that paraphernalia. Don't count on it happening in 2006 though. I would say the process will be probably start by 2010 and happen gradually till 2015.
Just in case this word Digital Intermediate or its short form DI has you wondering, head over to my DI pages, the link to which is in the margin to the right 'My DI pages'. Or you can go here
www.sadwelkar.com/DI.htm
you may have to copy and paste this link in your browser.
Anyway, while speaking to a film director the other day a colleague mentioned that there was no point doing a film digital post-production (called Digital Intermediate or DI) at a resolution of 4k because with conventional means when one finishes a film optically, one has a print that has a resolution of barely '1k'. The Director was aghast and I was apalled at this comment.
Later I discussed this with the DOP (Dir of Photography, or Cinematographer) of this forthcoming film. I explained that there is no real inherent resolution of 35 mm film that can be expressed as pixels, since it is an analog medium. It is generally assumed that scanning a film at '2k' or 2048x1556 yields a digital picture that captures all that the film 'contains'.
The later digital correction and compositing stages do not reduce this resolution like the conventional optical process can - the act of making prints or dupe negatives. So going digital may induce some losses at the initial conversion stage, but further work does not add losses.
And incidentally, on projection, '1k' doesn't look sharp enough, while '4k' doesn't seem to look vastly better than '2k'. In part because we don't really have any viable 4k projector or monitor yet.
Further, to put this '2k' and '4k' thing into perspective, I mentioned to this DOP that 2k while seeming like a lot, isn't much when you consider that it amounts to '3 megapixels'. And most any cheap digital camera can match that. And now, 5 and even 8 megapixel cameras are getting quite common. Even mobile phones have 1-2 megapixel cameras - which is nearly the resolution of HD. Suddenly HD which stands for 'High Definition' seems puny. Right?
Well, not quite.
While digital cameras can easily do 3 Megapixels or 2k, they cannot do it 24 times each second. And even if they did, they would run out of memory in seconds. They store images on memory cards, maybe a hundred to a thousand images to a card. Film digital post needs 24 each second, 1440 each minute and 86400 each hour of shooting. And all these images have to be uncompressed, not jpeg. And they have to be held securely for as many months as the post production takes. A tall order.
But when you come to think of that, this storage and access is the current bottle-neck in the progress of truly digital cinema. By digital cinema I mean 'filming', storing, editing, finishing, and releasing digitally. At full resolution, uncompressed, with full 16-bit (sort of like 16 stops) latitude, just like 35 mm film can do right here right now. And hey, HD does not come close to this, yet. Probably never will. I mean, just look at a 2k image projected on a large screen side by side to an HD image and you'll know what I mean.
It was a scant 3-5 years ago that people spoke the same about still photography going digital. They said, it didn't have the latitude, how would you store images, how would you process them? etc etc. And now, we have very few photographers, even pros, fashion and industrial photographers using still cameras with 35 mm film. I too have my Canon A-1 with a variety of lenses, locked up in a cupboard.
So it looks lik a matter of time before film will be truly dead. Which it surely will, but nowhere near when it was supposed to be. Like in 1986 when I first heard this 'film is dead' thing when U-matic machines were introduced for TV production. Seems really funny now. Its 2006 and film is still doing roaring business - in India at least.
But finally, when film is really dead, along with it will go the film scanners, the conforming and grading systems, colour management systems, processing labs, and all that paraphernalia. Don't count on it happening in 2006 though. I would say the process will be probably start by 2010 and happen gradually till 2015.
Just in case this word Digital Intermediate or its short form DI has you wondering, head over to my DI pages, the link to which is in the margin to the right 'My DI pages'. Or you can go here
www.sadwelkar.com/DI.htm
you may have to copy and paste this link in your browser.
Wednesday, 18 January 2006
PCIe cards for the PCIe G5 Macs
Its been a few weeks since the launch of the new G5s. The PCIe ones with the Dual Core CPUs. In case you don't know about it yet, these new Macs have expansion card slots called PCIe which is different from the slots that earlier macs used - called PCI and PCI-X. And different means that if you have a Mac with PCI cards line Blackmagic, Kona, or even plain Firewire or some other card, you can't put them into a new Mac G5.
So what are the cards available so far with the new Mac G5. PCIe cards that is?
1. Firewire cards - Aaxeon
2. Video capture cards - Kona 3 from AJA
nothing from BlackMagic or Aurora yet (18 Jan 06)
3. SATA cards - RocketRAID 2320 PCI Express SATA II adapter
4. SCSI cards - none
5. Fibre Channel cards - Apple
6. Ethernet Cards - none (why, the new G5 has 2 GigE ports)
So really, not a very wide choice, but not really a show-stopper. So go ahead and get that G5 Dual Cure. Maybe this is the last Mac G5 ever.
And I just checked. The new MacBook Pro (Intel laptop from Apple) does not have a PCMCIA or PC-Card or CardBus slot. It does have an ExpressCard slot. This is not compatible with your PC-cards. So if you have some of those, time to look for an ExpressCard version.
On the flip side this ExpressCard will be a faster serial bus -PCIe. So expect some innovative new cards like memory, video I/O, hard disks, flash readers etc.
And fianally even if, at first sight, many experts opined that these new Intel Macs won't run Windows because there's no BIOS or something, on second thoughts, opinions are emerging that it might just be possible to run Windows on a Mac. Why would you want to do that? To have the best of both worlds, I guess. Let's wait and see.
So what are the cards available so far with the new Mac G5. PCIe cards that is?
1. Firewire cards - Aaxeon
2. Video capture cards - Kona 3 from AJA
nothing from BlackMagic or Aurora yet (18 Jan 06)
3. SATA cards - RocketRAID 2320 PCI Express SATA II adapter
4. SCSI cards - none
5. Fibre Channel cards - Apple
6. Ethernet Cards - none (why, the new G5 has 2 GigE ports)
So really, not a very wide choice, but not really a show-stopper. So go ahead and get that G5 Dual Cure. Maybe this is the last Mac G5 ever.
And I just checked. The new MacBook Pro (Intel laptop from Apple) does not have a PCMCIA or PC-Card or CardBus slot. It does have an ExpressCard slot. This is not compatible with your PC-cards. So if you have some of those, time to look for an ExpressCard version.
On the flip side this ExpressCard will be a faster serial bus -PCIe. So expect some innovative new cards like memory, video I/O, hard disks, flash readers etc.
And fianally even if, at first sight, many experts opined that these new Intel Macs won't run Windows because there's no BIOS or something, on second thoughts, opinions are emerging that it might just be possible to run Windows on a Mac. Why would you want to do that? To have the best of both worlds, I guess. Let's wait and see.
Tuesday, 17 January 2006
What's your resolution?
No, this isn't about your new year's resolution but something a bit more technical.
It's like this. I went to see a movie in a theatre some days back. Before the main movie there were, as usual, commercials. All, absolutely all the commercials that were played were commercials I'd seen on TV. On closer inspection, I noticed they were identical to their TV counterparts.
Now, I know for a fact that ad agencies that make commercials for TV release them in theatres as well because theatre releases cost vastly less that TV releases. But wait, there's more. The commercials that play in theatres play out as 35 mm movie film in a projector, just like movies do. But they are converted from video to film. They call it 'reverse telecine'.
So here's how it works.
Ad films are shot on 35 mm film. After processing they run the negative in a telecine. Here they grade the shots to give the commercials a definitive look and mood. Often times, a graded commercial looks very different from what was actually filmed.
Anyway, after grading it is edited, then mastered to a Digital Betacam tape for submission to channels. So, what started out as 35 mm film with a resolution of at least 2k - meaning a frame size of at least 2048x1556 pixels - goes through the entire post cycle with a frame size of 720x576. Good enough for Television but coarse for film.
The actual process of telecine converts 2048x1556 pixels to 720x576 pixels. So a full three fourths of the picture resolution is thrown away. Then, for the film version, the very same 720x576 frame from a video cassette, is 'blown-up' to 2048x1556 pixels. This is called 'reverse telecine'.
No wonder ads in theatres look a bit fuzzy like the focus was out of whack or something. But strangely enough, I asked the people who went with me to the movie if they noticed something wrong with the commercials. Even after pointing out obvious lack of sharpness and strange artifacts, they simply couldn't see it.
The next time you go to the movies take a good hard look at the commercials. See if you can see what I'm saying.
What's your resolution?
It's like this. I went to see a movie in a theatre some days back. Before the main movie there were, as usual, commercials. All, absolutely all the commercials that were played were commercials I'd seen on TV. On closer inspection, I noticed they were identical to their TV counterparts.
Now, I know for a fact that ad agencies that make commercials for TV release them in theatres as well because theatre releases cost vastly less that TV releases. But wait, there's more. The commercials that play in theatres play out as 35 mm movie film in a projector, just like movies do. But they are converted from video to film. They call it 'reverse telecine'.
So here's how it works.
Ad films are shot on 35 mm film. After processing they run the negative in a telecine. Here they grade the shots to give the commercials a definitive look and mood. Often times, a graded commercial looks very different from what was actually filmed.
Anyway, after grading it is edited, then mastered to a Digital Betacam tape for submission to channels. So, what started out as 35 mm film with a resolution of at least 2k - meaning a frame size of at least 2048x1556 pixels - goes through the entire post cycle with a frame size of 720x576. Good enough for Television but coarse for film.
The actual process of telecine converts 2048x1556 pixels to 720x576 pixels. So a full three fourths of the picture resolution is thrown away. Then, for the film version, the very same 720x576 frame from a video cassette, is 'blown-up' to 2048x1556 pixels. This is called 'reverse telecine'.
No wonder ads in theatres look a bit fuzzy like the focus was out of whack or something. But strangely enough, I asked the people who went with me to the movie if they noticed something wrong with the commercials. Even after pointing out obvious lack of sharpness and strange artifacts, they simply couldn't see it.
The next time you go to the movies take a good hard look at the commercials. See if you can see what I'm saying.
What's your resolution?
Friday, 13 January 2006
Final Cut Pro 6 (rumoured)
and the future of Digital high-end post.
OK that sounds like a really pompous title for something that is not even official ... yet!. Just up at rumour sites and being debated in forums. "Avid should be worried...", "Discreet should be worried ..." etc etc. Well, past history has shown that no such thing really happens. To Avid, Discreet etc, that is.
In brief, the rumour says ... (it's just a rumour, folks)
1. FCP 6 software will have a Final Cut Extreme version that will be US$ 10,000. About Rs. 4.5 lakhs in India - just the software. System, monitor, storage extra.
2. FCExtreme will enable 2k and 4k editing. Meaning it will handle film res scans like it does quicktime now.
3. Will work with a new, as-yet-unreleased nVidia card.
4. Will use a new super-huge monitor. 42" or 52" which will be able to show full 4k. At the moment Apple's 30" display can show full 2k at 1:1 resolution. I work with three. They're staggering.
5. 10Gig ethernet interfaces might be added to Mac Quads. This will enable transfer of 2k material over the network at near real time speeds or faster.
6. Storage will be new XRAID Extreme using dual infiniband. This is all frontier technology stuff. The as-yet-unreleased version of Lustre will use infiniband. At the moment it takes two XRAIDs RAIDed together to ensure 2k playback.
7. Some more features like 1080/24p DVCProHD, 5.1 audio native etc.
8. And I hope they fix the capture tool and media management.
So, at a very rough guesstimate, we're talking about Rs 35-40 lakhs for a system that can edit and online anything DV, SD, HD right up to 2k/4k. A poor man's DI system. Yes, I said poor man. Because rich-man's DI is done on a Lustre that runs Rs 1.7 crores, or Baselight for a little less Rs 1.2 crores, or Nucoda about the same, or even Quantel iQ for Rs 2.5 crores.
These figures are just top-of-the-mind Dollar/Pound plus Customs duty calculations. I seriously invite anyone who knows exact figures to comment.
Anyway, getting back to FCP 6 (rumored), this will have a definite impact. May take some time, especially in India, but it will happen. We are a film country still, for mass entertainment. meaning we still shoot film, post in film and show film in tens of thousands of theatres. And only a handful are finished digitally. So the market is open for systems at the mid and low end. FCP 6 (rumoured) can change that.
Feature film DI or digital intermediate, that costs (er... I cannot say it publicly) a certain amount per film, can now be done for a third or so. Yes sure it can.
But don't go running believing anyone and everyone with 35-40 lakhs and an FCP 6 system will be able to do it. Now way sir. The system setup is tricky at best. Performance of disk systems has to be tuned. Conform has to be skillfully handled. And grading. The actual grading is not something most editors are equipped to handle. You need a "real" colourist for that.
But it's doable. And one can start off with trailers, promos, teasers and such like. Small 60 sec to 2 min jobs. No big DI house really wants to touch those and will gladly farm them out to a small house. And gradually take up a small-time feature that doesn't really have the budget for DI.
So there is some scope here in the near term at least. And if film is outmoded as a distribution format, and DCinema is used at all theatres... no problem. FCP and Compressor can do compression to MPEG-2, MPEG4, H.264 even now.
I'd love to get my hands dirty and make this work. Anyone with deep pockets, a sense of adventure working with frontier technology, and a desire to make money do let me know.
OK that sounds like a really pompous title for something that is not even official ... yet!. Just up at rumour sites and being debated in forums. "Avid should be worried...", "Discreet should be worried ..." etc etc. Well, past history has shown that no such thing really happens. To Avid, Discreet etc, that is.
In brief, the rumour says ... (it's just a rumour, folks)
1. FCP 6 software will have a Final Cut Extreme version that will be US$ 10,000. About Rs. 4.5 lakhs in India - just the software. System, monitor, storage extra.
2. FCExtreme will enable 2k and 4k editing. Meaning it will handle film res scans like it does quicktime now.
3. Will work with a new, as-yet-unreleased nVidia card.
4. Will use a new super-huge monitor. 42" or 52" which will be able to show full 4k. At the moment Apple's 30" display can show full 2k at 1:1 resolution. I work with three. They're staggering.
5. 10Gig ethernet interfaces might be added to Mac Quads. This will enable transfer of 2k material over the network at near real time speeds or faster.
6. Storage will be new XRAID Extreme using dual infiniband. This is all frontier technology stuff. The as-yet-unreleased version of Lustre will use infiniband. At the moment it takes two XRAIDs RAIDed together to ensure 2k playback.
7. Some more features like 1080/24p DVCProHD, 5.1 audio native etc.
8. And I hope they fix the capture tool and media management.
So, at a very rough guesstimate, we're talking about Rs 35-40 lakhs for a system that can edit and online anything DV, SD, HD right up to 2k/4k. A poor man's DI system. Yes, I said poor man. Because rich-man's DI is done on a Lustre that runs Rs 1.7 crores, or Baselight for a little less Rs 1.2 crores, or Nucoda about the same, or even Quantel iQ for Rs 2.5 crores.
These figures are just top-of-the-mind Dollar/Pound plus Customs duty calculations. I seriously invite anyone who knows exact figures to comment.
Anyway, getting back to FCP 6 (rumored), this will have a definite impact. May take some time, especially in India, but it will happen. We are a film country still, for mass entertainment. meaning we still shoot film, post in film and show film in tens of thousands of theatres. And only a handful are finished digitally. So the market is open for systems at the mid and low end. FCP 6 (rumoured) can change that.
Feature film DI or digital intermediate, that costs (er... I cannot say it publicly) a certain amount per film, can now be done for a third or so. Yes sure it can.
But don't go running believing anyone and everyone with 35-40 lakhs and an FCP 6 system will be able to do it. Now way sir. The system setup is tricky at best. Performance of disk systems has to be tuned. Conform has to be skillfully handled. And grading. The actual grading is not something most editors are equipped to handle. You need a "real" colourist for that.
But it's doable. And one can start off with trailers, promos, teasers and such like. Small 60 sec to 2 min jobs. No big DI house really wants to touch those and will gladly farm them out to a small house. And gradually take up a small-time feature that doesn't really have the budget for DI.
So there is some scope here in the near term at least. And if film is outmoded as a distribution format, and DCinema is used at all theatres... no problem. FCP and Compressor can do compression to MPEG-2, MPEG4, H.264 even now.
I'd love to get my hands dirty and make this work. Anyone with deep pockets, a sense of adventure working with frontier technology, and a desire to make money do let me know.
Wednesday, 11 January 2006
What can you do with the new Intel Macs
... right now.
Should you rush out and buy one of the new Intel Macs? Can you edit a movie on the new Intel Macs? Right now?
I did a bit of reading up on this and it turns out that Safari, Mail, and most other apps will run just fine on the Intel Macs. Like a lot of the shareware or freeware you own. Even amongst these though, some will work some may not. These systems use Rosetta, which is an underlying technology built into the new Intel Macs, which translates all the code to the Intel processors so they do their stuff. And the user doesn't have to bother with any settings or anything.
But if you plan on running Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Motion, Compressor, Soundtrack, LiveType, Aperture, Logic Pro, Logic Express, Final Cut Express and any other Pro application from Apple ... THEY WILL SIMPLY NOT RUN ON AN INTEL MAC !!! the new iMac or the new MacBook Pro.
To run these, you will need a 'Universal Binary' version of these. And they will be available only after March 31st 2006. In India, that means mid-April if you're lucky.
Here's what Apple says ...
quote --------
If you already own Final Cut Studio 1.0, Aperture, or Logic Pro 7.1, these applications are not supported to run on Intel-based Macs with Rosetta, but a Universal version will be available for $49. Logic Express will be $29.
If you own a Final Cut Studio application that used to be available individually, you can upgrade to Final Cut Studio for these prices.
If you own... Get Final Cut Studio for...
Final Cut Pro 5 $99
DVD Studio Pro 4,
Motion 2,
or Soundtrack Pro $199
Final Cut Pro 4/4.5
or Production Suite $199
Final Cut Pro 1/2/3 $699
To get these deals, come back to Apple.com after February 1, 2006. Apple expects Universal application availability by March 31, 2006.
------ unquote
In other words you just cannot do any editing, titling, DVD authoring, professional sound on the new imac or MacBook Pro till the 1st week April. And further, after that date, there will be no such thing as plain Final Cut Pro, or just DVD Studio Pro or any app separately. You just have to buy the full Final Cut Studio.
Hmmmm. Looks like one needs to wait and see. Or, if one just has to start off now, then buy the existing PowerBook G4 or iMac G5, both of which are available and will be totally outclassed in performance by April 2006.
As far as desktop desktop G5s are concerned, there's a gotcha there too. The new G5s all use PCI-E slots, so your existing capture cards, SCSI cards, and other PCI or PCI-X cards won't work in the new Mac G5. And these desktop systems will also be replaced by Intel-based desktop Macs anytime in he second half of 2006. So if you buy one of these now, they'll become totally outclassed within maybe half a year or less.
And if you're setting up a system from scratch, then too, very few card manufacturers have PCI-E versions of their cards available now. HD and SD capture cards, SCSI cards, Fibre-channel cards (except Apple), sound cards for ProTools, none available for a video professional wanting to set up an editing setup right now.
Neil
Should you rush out and buy one of the new Intel Macs? Can you edit a movie on the new Intel Macs? Right now?
I did a bit of reading up on this and it turns out that Safari, Mail, and most other apps will run just fine on the Intel Macs. Like a lot of the shareware or freeware you own. Even amongst these though, some will work some may not. These systems use Rosetta, which is an underlying technology built into the new Intel Macs, which translates all the code to the Intel processors so they do their stuff. And the user doesn't have to bother with any settings or anything.
But if you plan on running Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Motion, Compressor, Soundtrack, LiveType, Aperture, Logic Pro, Logic Express, Final Cut Express and any other Pro application from Apple ... THEY WILL SIMPLY NOT RUN ON AN INTEL MAC !!! the new iMac or the new MacBook Pro.
To run these, you will need a 'Universal Binary' version of these. And they will be available only after March 31st 2006. In India, that means mid-April if you're lucky.
Here's what Apple says ...
quote --------
If you already own Final Cut Studio 1.0, Aperture, or Logic Pro 7.1, these applications are not supported to run on Intel-based Macs with Rosetta, but a Universal version will be available for $49. Logic Express will be $29.
If you own a Final Cut Studio application that used to be available individually, you can upgrade to Final Cut Studio for these prices.
If you own... Get Final Cut Studio for...
Final Cut Pro 5 $99
DVD Studio Pro 4,
Motion 2,
or Soundtrack Pro $199
Final Cut Pro 4/4.5
or Production Suite $199
Final Cut Pro 1/2/3 $699
To get these deals, come back to Apple.com after February 1, 2006. Apple expects Universal application availability by March 31, 2006.
------ unquote
In other words you just cannot do any editing, titling, DVD authoring, professional sound on the new imac or MacBook Pro till the 1st week April. And further, after that date, there will be no such thing as plain Final Cut Pro, or just DVD Studio Pro or any app separately. You just have to buy the full Final Cut Studio.
Hmmmm. Looks like one needs to wait and see. Or, if one just has to start off now, then buy the existing PowerBook G4 or iMac G5, both of which are available and will be totally outclassed in performance by April 2006.
As far as desktop desktop G5s are concerned, there's a gotcha there too. The new G5s all use PCI-E slots, so your existing capture cards, SCSI cards, and other PCI or PCI-X cards won't work in the new Mac G5. And these desktop systems will also be replaced by Intel-based desktop Macs anytime in he second half of 2006. So if you buy one of these now, they'll become totally outclassed within maybe half a year or less.
And if you're setting up a system from scratch, then too, very few card manufacturers have PCI-E versions of their cards available now. HD and SD capture cards, SCSI cards, Fibre-channel cards (except Apple), sound cards for ProTools, none available for a video professional wanting to set up an editing setup right now.
Neil
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)