New Dual Quad or 8-core MacPro

So the MacPro has also gone Octa - or octo. Eight CPUs in one Mac. Just had to happen since HP and others are already selling PCs with 8 CPUs. This is the same Woodcrest or whatever its called CPU.

The 8-core was just placed on the web site with an announcement that it would be available in a few days. No show, no fanfare. And this announcement has happened a scant 10 days before NAB. Where Apple will have a special media event on the 15th Apr.

So what does that mean for NAB and FCP? Definitely no more hardware announcements. At last year's NAB it was widely rumoured and even believed that there would be FCP 6. But no such thing came out. No new hardware, no new systems, just the new MacBook pro announced but not shipping. And FCP 5.1 shown but not shipped.

I guess Apple wanted to avoid the inevitable disappointment that this would cause if they just came up with a 8-core MacPro and nothing else. And even the 8-core XServe and newer higher capacity XServeRAIDs have already been introduced a few weeks ago.

So at NAB there might be demos with the existing FCP and Motion on the 8-core MacPro, some fast shared storage with the new XServeRAID.

And then maybe there might be bigger things around so Apple just got this MacPro out of the way so they wouldn't be diluted. Who knows? We all definitely will on the 15th Apr.

Avid Media Composer on Intel Mac

Avid announced a few days ago that the new version 2.7 of Media Composer and versions of XPress Pro will now run on Intel mac systems. MacPros, MacBook Pros and even Intel iMacs.

And I've just finished installing 3 Media Composers on Quad G5s. I even tried running the PC version of Media Composer on a Dual dual-core MacPro on the 'Windows side'. it works fine except for the serial port thing. Keyspan doesn't work under WinXP.

No more of that needed. You can run MC on the 'Mac side' of a Mac Pro just as well. But if you've bought MC ver. 2.6.4 or earlier and now want to upgrade your older G5 to a Mac Pro its not going to be free. Adrenaline users need to pay $ 1000 to upgrade to MC ver 2.7 (as the Universal Binary version is called) while MojoSDI owners need to pay $150 from what I can gather.

I don't have India pricing just yet, will get it from Real Image by and by.

Avid Media Composer on Apple MacPro

or... a whole new way of looking at this software for Mac vs PC thing.

In April last year Avid announced the new Media Composer software-only version. Later it shipped. In Mac and PC versions in the same box. Both separate. We just bought two last week.

The PC version and Mac version have Avid 'qualified' systems as OK by Avid. On the Mac front the MacPro is still not qualified and in beta. The Mac version can hence run only on a Quad G5 or at best on a Dual G5. Not a MacPro, not a iMac, not a MacBook Pro.

So I did a study on 'qualified system' spec.

Avid's qualified system is (quoting from Avid's site)

Microsoft ® Windows ® XP 32-bit Edition (SP2)
Dual Dual-Core Intel ® Xeon ® Processors 5150 2.66 GHz, 1333 FSB, 4 MB L2 cache
2 GB DDR2 ECC FBD SDRAM (2 GB minimum, 3 GB recommended for HD and complex workflows)

The 5160 3.00 GHz processors also supported
NVIDIA Quadro FX1500 256MB PCIe or the NVIDIA Quadro FX 3500 256MB PCIe

And the new MacPro is (quoting from everymac.com)

two Xeon 5150 "Woodcrest" Dual-Core processors, 4 MB of L2 cache per processor.
OR
two 3 GHz Dual Core Xeon 5160 processors
Both have
ECC DDR2 FB-DIMM and has 4 Mb L2 cache

Graphics is NVidia GeForce 7300 GT but you can optionally get an ATI Radeon X1900XT or even a NVidia Quadro FX4500, the same one that the PC is qualified with.

Further, if one considers laptops, then Avid's qualified systems are...

HP nw8440 Mobile Workstation
HP nw9440 Mobile Workstation

An nw8440, from HPs site consists of...

CoreDuo T2600 2.16 GHz, 667 MHz bus, 2 Mb L2 cache, DDR2 SDRAM. 15" screen, ATI FireGL graphics with 256MB VRAM,
OR
Core2Duo T7400 2.16 GHz, 667 MHz bus, 4 Mb L2 cache, DDR2 SDRAM. 15" screen, ATI FireGL graphics with 256MB VRAM,

and a nw 9440 from HPs site consists of...

CoreDuo T2600 2.16 GHz, 667 MHz bus, 2 Mb L2 cache, DDR2 SDRAM, 17" screen, NVidia Quadro FX1500M with 256 MB VRAM.
OR
Core2Duo T7400 2.16 GHz, 667 MHz bus, 4 Mb L2 cache, DDR2 SDRAM, 17" screen, NVidia Quadro FX1500M with 256 MB VRAM.

On the Mac front,

And the older CoreDuo 15" MacBookPro is
2 GHz Core Duo T2600, 667 MHz bus, 2 Mb L2 cache, PC2-5300 DDR2 RAM and Radeon X1600 graphics,

and the newer Core2Duo 15" MacBookPro is
2.16 GHz Core2Duo T7400, 667 MHz bus, 4 Mb L2 cache, PC2-5300 DDR2 RAM and Radeon X1600 graphics, 128 MB VRAM

So the specs match. Desktops and laptops.
As for iMacs, they are T2600 and T7400 so they 'count' as laptops, more or less.

So if I load up the PC version of Avid Media Composer on the Win partition of a MacPro, MacBookPro or an iMac Intel...

Will Avid Media Composer 'see' the Mac as a PC? I'm trying to find out if anyone has actually tried this. I have access to all these systems and am waiting to pinch a free Avid MC MojoSDI to try. If it does then that opens up new way of looking at this Mac vs PC thing for us creative professionals.

We no longer need wait for the Mac version of anything. Just Boot camp to Windows and run the PC version. What a coup!

Incidentally, the www.everymac.com, that I've mentioned above is a great web site which has exact specs of each and every Apple Mac ever made. You can look up your old 9500s and 8100s and the first PowerBook or even, if you're as old as me, a MacSE (which my parents used).

Shoot HDV release in a theatre

Some months ago we completed the entire digital post-production for a film called 'Shoonya' (literally meaning zero). This movie has been shown at festivals overeas, Rotterdam for one.

What made Shoonya different and probably unique is that it was shot not on film, but tape, Sony HDV tape. And using a Sony Z1 camcorder too. on small DV sized tapes.

When we first saw the footage on tape we were sceptical about how it would look. Particularly considering that the producers wanted to grade it and finally record it out to 35 mm film to show in theatres. Very challenging. Fortunately we were involved right from the beginning so we could specify a correct workflow.

I first tried out native HDV editing, which was then possible in FCP 5 (the producers chose to edit with FCP - Final Cut Pro). But the 'conform' process discouraged me as it was way too slow. For a 2 hr plus film it would be a drudgery. So I advised working with an 'intermediate codec' - Apple Intermediate.

Working with AIC assured discrete frames instead of B and P frames but it had two down sides. One, time code was not preserved after capture. And two, AIC takes up much more space than HDV-native's 12 Gb/hour.

Yet, we eventually went with AIC. We did small trials and viewed them in theatres to be convinced about the quality. The final result, though not exactly like film was definitely better than shooting SD (DV/Beta/DBeta)

After editing was complete, we collected the edit on a disk. We broke it into reels corresponding to 2000 feet in 35mm film. The maximum length most cine projectors can show at a stretch. Remember they shot 1080i50, that is 25 fps.

After that, I applied a 'secret sauce' to get it into a Lustre grading system. I created DPX file sequences from their media since Lustre is happiest working with DPX. I experimented with 8bit and 10bit and came o the conclusion that since the acquisition process worked at 8bit, there was little to gain witn 10bit.

Grading in Lustre was a bit challenging since the material lacked the latitude that 35mm film has. Here's where on-set monitoring plays a crucial role. Because if your on-set monitoring is correct in black and white levels, you'd set your exposure just right and so any exaggerated correction would be unnecessary.

If you plan on shooting HD in a big way, invest in an HD monitor of your own. Worth it.

We found HDV originated footage is less tolerant to exposure correction than 35mm originated film. Shoonya was shot pretty precisely so this kind of correction wasn't necessary.

So in the final analysis, is it really a good idea to not shoot film and yet aspire to have film as the final exhibition format?

No, I'm not about to deliver a final judgment on this. I'll just put forth some issues to keep in mind.

Not shooting film can (or could) definitely save money.
Shooting 'prosumer' HD like HDV is better than shooting SD - Beta/DBeta/DV. HDV at least has the resolution.

Shooting 'advanced' HD like HDCamSR/Varicam/Genesis can actually be more complex than shooting film. And these may actually even be costlier than film. Yes!
Avoid HDV camcorders with average lenses. The Canon XL-H1 and JVC HD250 producer much better mages than Sony's Z1 and such like just on account of their lenses.
The Z1's lens 'performance' has to be seen to be believed.

The Red camera. Keep a close watch on this.
Sony HDCamSR over Panasonic DVCProHD. Varicam shoots on highly compressed DVCProHD so its half-way between the highly compressed HDV and the relatively uncompressed HDCam-SR. HDCamSR rules. Period.

HD tapes (except HDV and DVCProHD) arent's exactly cheap. How's 25 grand for 90 mins?
For post noone's giving you an HD recorder at less than 7k and hour. Yes you'll need to factor that for editing.
Shooting film means processing delays. Shooting HDCamSR or DVCProHD also means transfer delays. You need to transfer to DV so you can edit at your place.

If you want a 'film look', currently only film will give it to you.
Not one single HD format looks exactly like film. But that's missing the point completely. Do a trial and convince yourself that the 'not-looking-like-film' really affects your story. For some stories, it might just not make a difference.

Most editors have not equipped themselves with the finer nuances of technology that HD working necessitates.
A final post-production workflow has to be worked out before you begin post production. Do yourself a favour and please hire a consultant just for this. It can save you a lot of time and money. And keep you sane.

Did I mention that Shoonya was shot with sync sound mostly. And it was shot as 1080i50 meaning 25 fps. Yet, the theatrical film version is 24 fps 35mm film. And the TV version is tape at 25fps. Both same length. And sound gave no trouble.

Now you know why you need a consultant.

The 24-25 issue in PAL film editing

There is this '24-25 thing' that crops up every now and then, in film post in PAL countries, especially India.

I was at the Institute last weekend. The Institute in the Indian film industry refers to the Film and Television Institute of India. Its at Pune and many of India's finest Film and TV personnel and artistes passed out of there. Along with my partner Anand Subaya we did a short workshop on editing.

One of the things that came up with the students one evening was this '24-25 thing'. The students there have some rather interesting issues, some I'd never thought of.

Anyway, this '24-25 thing' comes about because...
1. Film is shot at 24 fps.
2. Sound is recorded separately on Nagra/DAT/disk
3. Film is edited on a computer.
4. But it needs to be transferred to a tape to be transferred a computer.
5. Tape runs at 25 fps in PAL countries.

So...
6. Film is transferred to tape at 25 fps.
7. Because an accurate relationship has to be set up between film and tape.
8. So that in the end a cut list can be made to cut the negative accurately.
9. This transfer from film to tape is at 25 fps
10. That speeds up the film. (by 4%)
11. But editing systems need to run (play back) at 24 fps to stay in sync with sound.

So where's the problem?

As long as you're editing the film, and making cut lists, there is no problem. It works and we've been doing it for over a decade now.

But you need to pass on the edited picture as video on a tape for sound track laying and mixing. Since in Avid or FCP (computer-based) editing, you don't cut the negative till after the sound is done.

This transfer from computer to tape needs to be at the right frame rate so that after mixing and recording to optical neg, the optical neg matches the cut picture neg.

So that's the problem. Most people, especially editors from the video world simply don't handle this correctly.

And to make it worse, no system except telecines, Avid Film composers (and new Media Composers), and FCP systems - only these systems are capable of playing a 24 fps video source to a 25 fps video monitor or tape recorder (Beta/Digi/DV whatever) while keeping the duration intact.

Smoke, Quantel eQ, etc. nothing at all can do this.

What's the problem again?

1. Film is shot at 24 fps. So 10 sec of time is recorded to 240 frames on film.
2. Film is transferred to tape at 25 fps. So all 240 frames of film are transferred to 240 frames on tape. But since tape runs at 25 fps, these 240 frames run in 240/25 that is 9.6 sec.
3. Avid and FCP systems capture this at 25 fps. But they convert captured footage to the frame rate of 24 fps. So the original 240 frames are transferred to Avid/FCP.
4. And these (Avid/FCP) machines play them back 24 per sec. So 240 frames now play out in 10 sec.
5. That's how they sync with sound that was recorded.
5. But if after capture and editing, you play them back on an Avid or FCP and record that to tape, you'll get a 10 sec shot on tape which will be 250 frames.
6. So 10 sec on a timeline is 10 sec on tape. 10 sec on video tape is 250 frames.

So where do these extra 250-240=10 frames come from?

Avid and FCP systems repeat one frame every second so they add 1 frame each second. 10 secs = 10 frames. So 240 frames become 250 frames.

As an aside, the problem that students at FTII have is more complex.

They shoot at 24 fps. Process and print. Then cut these rush prints on a flatbed or Steenbeck. Steenbeck runs picture and sound (on mag film or sepmag) together at 24 fps.

But - and this is interesting - budding film-makers there shoot this edited rush film off the Steenbeck screen to a Handycam. They then capture these Handycam DV tapes to a sound software to do sound sweetening, over-dubbing, and other sound post.

And - this is serious stuff - their sound software outputs a wav or aiff file that doesn't sync with the visual. On the face of it, this seems more likely to be an issue of the Steenbeck not playing back at a tight 24 fps rather than a '24-25 thing'.

Anyway, this FTII 24-25 Steenbeck telecine issue is just an aside.

Even seasoned film-makers don't have much of a clue about this 24-25 thing. At a trial screening for a forthcoming feature someone noticed a small part of a scene being 'out-sync' At the interval, he promptly asked me if it was the '24-25 thing'

One thing to get very clearly. The '24-25 thing' invariably creates a mis-match between video and audio which is perfectly 1 frame per sec. So after 5 secs you're 5 frames out-sync. After 20 secs you're 20 frames out-sync. And if a 2000 feet reel is mis-matched because someone messed up the '24-25 thing' you'll be out-sync by a whopping 1 minute! Meaning at the end of the reel, picture will end a whole minute after sound or vice-versa.

So what's the best solution to this '24-25 thing'?

Things to remember

1. Understand how each stage of the film was handled.
2. Convert from 25 to 24 and vice versa if necessary (only possible in FCP)
3. Never capture an Avid or FCP dump back for editing.
4. Prefer handing out Quicktime movies rather than tape dumps for sound post.
5. Sound has no fps. It has a duration in seconds only. (Read this twice)
6. EDLs have no fps. They generate timelines of the fps of the source fps. (Read this thrice)

And if all this fails and you're completely stuck with a picture and sound that doesn't match, then I'm available for consulting. I've figured that so much time and energy has been spent on this '24-25 thing' that there's some commercial value in helping out. So write me and we can talk.

Else figure out who's gonna pay for the stock and studio time if you mess up.

I'm still available.

MacWorld 2007 for pros - nothing new

And iPhone FAQ for India

On the eve of the Macworld 2007 keynote, I'd written about predictions and rumours. Quad-core Macs, dicplays etc. But all that ws announced was the Apple iPhone. Just an hour and a half of that and Apple TV and the new Airport Extreme.

Apple's web site has the details on this iPhone and everyone in India's excited and some have even postponed buying a new phone to get an iPhone. So here's an India centric view on the iPhone.

1. Can I go out and buy an iPhone
- No, its coming to US in June.
2. Can I get it in June then?
- No even if you got one to India, it won't work with a Hutch, Airtel, Idea or any other SIM except Cingular.
3. What if I already have a Cingular SIM from a previous visit to the US?
- Still won't work, you have to buy the new package, iPhone and new SIM.
4. So when will iPhone come here from Hutch/Airtel/whatever?
- Indications are that this will be in Jan-Mar 2008 maybe even later.
5. iPhone runs MacOSX. Can I run my favourite MacOSX apps and widgets on it?
- No, Apple has locked out the phone for any new apps. Think of an iPod, only Apple updates it, you can't add anything new to it yourself.
5. Can I use my music as ring tones?
- No. For anti-piracy reasons this has been locked out too, unless you acquire the music in an unlocked form (not from CDs)
6. Won't the screen get scratched with continuous 'fingering'?
- People who've seen and felt it say it has some protection for this.
7. Can I see movies on the iPhone?
- Yes. with whatever restrictions you've had with the present iPod. This screen is larger and sharper though.
8. Can I actually put iPhone to my ear and talk like a normal phone?
- I can't find a single source that says you can. So maybe it only works with a headset. There is a speaker and a mic at the bottom, so it will work like a speakerphone. At the keynote, I don't remember Steve holding it to his year, do you?
9. Is there a wireless headset?
- Yes there is, but no data on if it can be charged by the iPhone or some other way. Also, no data on if you can hear music on the wireless headset. Probably not.
10. How will we do Internet with iPhone in India?
- Only by Wifi if you are in a Wifi hotspot. It dosn't do WAP or 3G.

More as it 'comes out'

Macworld 2007 scoop!

For many days now Apple have posted a sign on their home page which says...

The first 30 years were just the beginning
Welcome to 2007

Rumours have flown thick and hard. Among other things here's what many expect
iPhone or iPod Phone
Leopard features and announcement
iTV
bigger monitors, maybe with camera and HDMI
8-core MacPro
bigger and better iPod video
iPod with Bluetooth headphones
etc etc

No, I don't have any insider story, no scoop. But if you want to get the scoop as it happens and you're in India, then here's how.

Steve Jobs, head of Apple will address MacWorld in a keynote address. This happens at 9 am Pacific time. My Dashboard tells me that is 10.30 pm on Tuesday 9th Jan.

Apple will not have a live keynote streaming video, Instead, you can watch the recorded video on Wednesday morning India time.

For those who can't wait, log in to www.macrumors.com for a live text commentary. Meaning they have someone sitting there with a laptop (maybe a Mac) typing away as Steve speaks and this goes out via some kind of a wireless internet IRC chat or something. And you get to read as it happens.

A word of caution. There are plenty of rumours. And that leads to a lot of expectations. More often than not, rumours are only partly true. So if you went by rumours and postponed buying a iPod or MacBook or MacPro for the past 3 months, and none are announced, you will be very disappointed.

My advice. Get a good night's sleep on the 9th night and check out Apple's web site on Wednesday morning.

Editing systems - how open are they.

A lot gets written and said by editing software and systems manufacturers about how open their systems are. How easy it is to import and export, and work with external media. And in todays shared post production environment it becomes really critical for one to be able to share a job on multiple systems and platforms. This needs systems to be as open as possible.

But working on various systems, here's a report card on openness of various systems based on simple, common-sense criteria.

Avid XPress/MC
1. OS - WinXP, MacOSX
2. Media format - .omf
3. Media openable in other apps - No except Avid apps.
4. Media disk format - NTFS, MacOSX extended.
5. Media disk visible and R/W to other apps - Yes
6. Other media formats can be imported directly - Yes
7. Other media formats can be used directly - No, none

Final Cut Pro
1. OS - MacOSX
2. Media format - Quicktime, and others.
3. Media openable in other apps - Yes
4. Media disk format - MacOSX extended, maybe others.
5. Media disk visible and R/W to other apps - Yes
6. Other media formats can be imported directly - Yes
7. Other media formats can be used directly - Yes, some.

Autodesk Smoke/Flint/Flame/Fire/Inferno
1. OS - Linux, Irix
2. Media format -Proprietary
3. Media openable in other apps - No
4. Media disk format - StoneFS/proprietary.
5. Media disk visible and R/W to other apps - No
6. Other media formats can be imported directly - Yes
7. Other media formats can be used directly - No, none.

Quantel eQ/iQ
1. OS - WinXP
2. Media format - Proprietary
3. Media openable in other apps - No
4. Media disk format - Proprietary.
5. Media disk visible and R/W to other apps - No
6. Other media formats can be imported directly - Yes
7. Other media formats can be used directly - No, none.

Avid DS Nitris
1. OS - WinXP
2. Media format - .omf
3. Media openable in other apps - No except Avid apps.
4. Media disk format - NTFS
5. Media disk visible and R/W to other apps - Yes
6. Other media formats can be imported directly - Yes
7. Other media formats can be used directly - No, none

I don't have data on Premiere, Vegas, Liquid, and other apps.

But from these you can see that the top-end editing systems are almost completely closed. Discreet has made some efforts via third-party utilities like XStoner, and other Wiretap utilities but these are not quite as convenient as directly sharing over the network. Quantel systems don't even let you check how much space you have available in terms of Gb and Tb. And Avid use their own file-naming conventions so you can't really meddle with their app even when things are broken.

FCP is almost like a Quicktime Player that edits as far as open-ness is concerned. But the flip side to this open-ness is that there is still no real multi-resolution support, and lots of rendering, which is the same as having to import as far as time is concerned.

Film restoration with PFClean

I just saw a demo of a film restoration software callede PFClean. And I can't wait to get my hand on an eval version.

PFClean is a software made by Pixel Farm, a UK based company. It runs on a Macs and is ready for the Intel Macs. Pixel Farm sell it as software (really pricey) or a turnkey system complete with render processors. If you get the software-only, you need a really beefy new MacPro and fast hard disk arrays. And separate XServes or MacPros to render as well.

PFClean can open a variety of file formats but it really feeds of DPX. It can resolve time code as well as preserve directory tree structures so it integrates well in a DI pipeline.

What PFClean does is to open a set of DPX file sequences directly or via an EDL. It then analyzes these images for the usual scratches, dust, and other marks. It then repairs them and shows you the result. But it does this non-destructively. Meaning you can go over the corrections and choose to implement ot commit them or to tweak them and then apply. Or you can even choose to ignore them and do your own manually.

Apart from the obvious marks and blemishes, PFClean can also work on warps and shakes caused by sprocket damage or joints. It does this manually or can be set to do it automatically.

I didn't get a chance to actually measure how fast PFClean works. Maybe with an eval one can make it go through an entire jumbo reel and see how it does. Also, whether it works faster in HD or SD mode compared to native 2k files.

In the months and years to come, film restoration is set to become another important fact of the film and video post business, along with CGI/Graphics and VFX. Who knows, if we do it correctly we can actually be a worldwide centre for film restoration.

Apple Final Touch

No there's no such product just yet. So this is just a collection of three English words till now. But some weeks ago, Apple bought Silicon Color the company that makes Final Touch. There's no word yet on whether Apple will re-release this as their own product, or merge it with one of their own.

But ever since, Silicon Color have issued one update, so the product seems to be alive for now. But speculation is rife on what this acquisition means to us in video and film post.

Silicon Color had three colour correction or grading products - FinalTouch SD ($ 1000) to grade SD video projects, FinalTouch HD ($ 5000) to grade HD and SD video projects, and FinalTouch 2k ($ 25000) to grade HD/SD as well as 2k film projects. All three were closely integrated with Apple's Final Cut Pro editing system. So one could export a timeline as XML an import that into FT to grade from there.

So maybe Apple will re-release this as their own Apple Final Touch, just like they did with Apple Shake, and Apple Logic. Or they may change the name to something else like they did with DVD Studio Pro (I've forgotten what it was called) or Film Logic (now CinemaTools). Or they may merge it into their own products like they did with Astarte and Compressor.

There's speculation that the ability to work with DPX files and conform them against XML from FCP may be merged into FCP, and the grading technology might make it into a composiiting app that will replace Shake. If Shake is to be replaced and not just merged with Motion.

So interesting wait ahead. Especially for editors. And we move one step closer to the inevitable. Editing systems which develop the ability to grade. So far we've had most of the reverse - grading systems that have editing features added. Something that's drying up as most grading systems at their core don't have abilities that editing systems had for over ten years now.

Because ultimately the audience will always accept a well edited if averagely graded film over a well graded but poorly edited film. Which is what todays grading systems often result in.