The software industry is shoe-horned into a mould that it just doesnt fit. Software is unlike any other 'product' and yet software developers have trundled along for decades selling software like they'd sell shoes. Pay your money get a box - software as tangible product.... Only there's a catch, printed manuals aside software ISNT a tangible product, its not something you can hold. Its not a physical thing. Its not a commodity. The irony is that despite the fact that its sold like a commodity it doesnt legally fit any of the ownership traits of a commodity. You dont own the software when you buy it, you have licence to USE it with permissions and restrictions. Give with one hand take with the other. Sold like a commodity but without any of the benefits of Ownership that belong to every other Commodity.
The fact that because you only own a licence to us the software you cant legally modify it, alter it, change it, apply it in different ways and contexts is the equivalent of buying a Toyota and wanting to paint it green and Toyota suing you if you do because it breaches the Licence you purchased.
The truth is that software is not a commodity and should never have been bought sold as if it was. A significant proportion of the worlds software developers are starting to see the light in this regard and hence we have the rise in open-source solutions or hybrid, service-based economic models. Software more readily fits the mould of being a Service tool rather than a Product Commodity and it seems that creative software giant Adobe have begun to see the light in this regard.
Adobe are now offering Creative Suite3 Design Premium (the bundle that includes Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator, Flash and Dreamweaver) as a Subscription service. No big upfront commodity product fee but rather a software service you subscribe to by way of annual or monthly fees.
Its a very bold and forward thinking step form the Adobe monolith that is obviously serving as a test case to ultimately be rolled out across their product line. In considering the ramifications outside of economics I cant help but see big wins for users.
The first is that youre only paying for what you need when you need it. Heading into post production for a 3-month period; subscribe to get Premiere, After Effects and Audition. Got a 6month gig thats going to need Flash, subscribe only for that period, dont pay for software youre not using.
Second, youre always up to date with the latest version, no more saving up the big outlay for a new version or being a version behind. Subscription would include always being the latest version without the upfront outlay.
Third, much more regular updating and improvements. Under a subscription based development model developers could be making changes, additions and fixes constantly to the core application without having to roll out a huge release or a new version every 2 years.
This, I believe, is the beginning of the avalanche. From this point forward over the next 5 years were going to see the Product/Commodity structure of current software sales dissolve to a much more flexible, efficient and adaptable Subscription/Service based model. Pay for what you need, when you need it, only for as long as you need it.
Now there's headlines to grab you attention.... Could it be true? It was a rumour masqurading as informed opinion that floated my way recently. Its not a new idea. Over the past 5 years I have heard all manner of Apple take-over / sell-off rumours. - Apple being bought by Sony - Apple breaking into two - software and harware - Apple being bought by Dell - Apple moving out of selling computers all-together And of course this isnt the first time the Apple Buying Adobe boat has been floated.
An argument could be made for all of the above - perhaps not a strong or water-tight case, but a case none the less. But Apple buying Adobe? My repsonse. Not bloody likely.
Perhpas what is more likely is that which Bob Cringley floated in his weekly column. That Apple would sell off it's ProApps - FCP, DVDSP, Logic, Motion, Aperture. Apparently Apple have been 'shopping around' for a buyer of late. is there merit to the idea?
Selling off Pro Apps has been on the cards for a long time - a rumour with more probability than most. The reasoning is simple economics - Apple is a
public company and share holders are only interested in what makes big
money. I-phone's i-pods, i-tunes and now, to a growing extent, laptops
make big money. ProApps do not. The running joke for many years has been that
a MAC is a giant dongle for ProApps. :)
If ProApps were availible cross platform would we all bother paying twice as much for a MacPro as for a custom build PC of the extact same components that come form the eact same assembly lines (Intel, Western Digital, nVidia etc)? Sure many love the neat lovely package that is the Mac, its OS and ProApps but in the end its the software not the operating system that the digital media producer has to deal with day to day - if you could run that same software on the same hardware at half the cost could it be considered anything but a no-bainer? It would for a significant part of the digital creative community - perhaps not the diehards but its not the diehards that make business finacial decsions for a production company or a post-house.
That aside, sooner or later the Apple shareholders start asking questions about why their
company is pouring big resources into products that are a VERY small part
of its overall business and a very small share of its income generation.
Selling ProApps off to a company focused on a more dedicated creative market makes a
lot of sense. Apple plays in a big pond and ProApps dont sell in big pond volume like I-phones and I-pods do. ProApps dont make sense for a company focused on the big public pond. But for a dedicated company who only have to compete in a small pond of creative fish, ProApps make a lot of sense.
In any such sell-off Apple of course would retain a share; perhaps even a majority share. that would be the smart move; hive it of to a company who a more singularly focused, keep a big finger in the pie to ensure that the Mac remains the Dongle for ProApps. best of both worlds, reap the same benefits as they crrently do without the development of finacial burden for keeping ProApps competitive.
With the recent posts and discussions on the importance of BackUp its worth mentioning some efficient and free ways to backup project files remotely. Its one thing to have your NLE Project Files and EDL's, not to mention screenplays, treatments and outlines backed-up in multiple periodic versions on your hard drive and external backup harddrive, but what if your hard drive(s) is stolen? Dropped in a swimming pool? Eaten by piranah?
The only sure solution is to have a secondary backup to a remote location - ie. in a different city/state/country. There are number of very simple ways you can do this. And The first, best and simplest is CELTX.
I assume you're all using Celtx for your screenwriting, project management, breakdown and scheduling of productions (and if you're not WHERE HAVE YOUY BEEN....? get with the program. Celtx is where it is at. No other software system on the market can do what Cletx does, nothing else is as efficient, flexible, powerful or functional. And its FREE!) )
But even Celtx users may not have yet used the Online Hosting and Collaboration features. In simple terms this allows you to upload your Celtx project to the Celtx server (which is deep in the wilds of Canada in an underground silo protected by polar bears and very fierce moose).
This upload can be viewed online from the Celtx Project Central site (http://pc.celtx.com)
The Project Central service allows for both public or private hosting of your project and is built for collaboration and exchange between writers and filmmakers remotely. But Project Central has some hidden gem features they may not be obvious at first glance. By being a remote host for your project it is also a secure remote backup of your project should your house burn down taking your creative life with it.
But thats not all. Within the local Celtx Project you can not only create screenplays and various text documents but you can also attach outside documents as well - this is most often Word or Xcel documents, PDF, videos, pictures and sound files. These files are zipped up inside the Celtx file and are uploaded along with the rest of the bundle to Project Central.
So it shouldn't take a genius to work out that this is a perfect way to backup your editing software project files (Premiere *.pproj or Final Cut *.fcp or Vegas *.veg), EDL's, XML, AAF and OMF files. All these can be attached as outside files to a Celtx Project and subsequently backed-up remotely with a click of a button, and retrieved at will by simply downloading your Celtx file from Project Central if you need to restore lost projects..
As if you needed any more reasons to love CELTX...?!
That said, if you want more dedicated online remote storage there are a number of services that provide free storage. Size limitations and bandwidth constraints make this kind of storage not suitable for full-res video media itself but if you have large amounts of document data - scripts, writings, project files and so on - an online hosted remote back-up might be a very good idea. X-Drive offers 5gb of free storage and a very efficient local application that enables you to drag and drop from your desktop directly to the online server.
Likewise I-Drive offers a similar service with both Mac and Windows desktop clients for transfer.
And MediaMax tops them all for sheer size with a very generous 25gb of free online storage.
These services are great for storing moderate amounts of data but in truth for sheer simplicity and functionality of project management with the EDL/AAF/XML/ProjectFile, you cant go past using Celtx; keep your edit backup with your script and all your pre-production documenttation. One File to Rule them All.
Ok, so now you have absolutely NO BLOODY EXCUSE WHATSOEVER for EVER having a crash or technology meltdown cause the end of the world! Between periodic project file backups, EDL backups, XML and AAF backups, and remote server backups to Celtx or Xdrive, there really is no excuse.
Take a professional approach to your work, manage your workflow carefully, plan your process and backup daily and you cant go wrong.
FCP may be a great visual editor but its got some major short-comings when it comes to audio. The Mixer is clumbsy and often inaccurate, there's no real-time fx adjustment, there's no surround sound, doesnt properly handle mixed sample rates, no VST support, no bus-to-bus routing, no track-level effects and so on and so on. Where once these where the domain of dedicated DAW's they are now standard on virtually all other NLE's. Apple have some serious catching up to do in the audio department but the most glaring and most absurd of all is that FCP is the only editing system on the market that needs to Render MP3 files before you can hear them or play them back on the timeline !
FCP is, in many ways, a rather old-fashioned editing system. By virtue of it having copious options for visual arrangement and a scarcity of functional audio tools, it saids that the designers of FCP still see the role of the Editor as one focused on the visual rather than a combined and more flexible approach that involves both visual and aural elements. FCP's audio is designed to be able to prep audio for production outside of FCP (soundtrack, proTools etc) All other NLE's on the amrket have moved to a more integrated approach as a 'finishing system' whereby full audio options are availible right on the timeline. You can still move outside to a DAW if you want, but you can also complete full mix in the NLE. Vegas and Premiere for example are both DAW's as much as NLE's. FCP is still in the traditional, seperatist aporoach. Most of the rest of the NLE market is moving the other way.
The other element that may be the reason FCP cannot work with Mp3 files, is that Mp3, as a compressed audio format, isnt traditionally considered a proper format for production. Its almost like FCP is declaring to you that you shouldnt be using mp3?. (a very snobbish attitude i reckon)
Mp3 is indeed a compressed and lossy audio format but its a very good and clever one. It discards aural information that human ear cannot hear anyway so most of the data mp3 throws away has no effect on the quality at all. Of course the more the mp3 is compressed the more the quality loss does become noticeable.
This is where bitrate comes into play. Mp3 audio is measured in a bitrate expressed in Kilo Bits Per Second:
64kbps is considered FM Radio quality
128kbps is considered CD quality
192kbps+ is considered aurally Lossless
256kbps is considered to be Transparent. (ie has a bitrate so high that it is impossible to tell the difference)
So FCPs approach that all MP3 is BAD is simply old-fashioned and stupid. (hopefully something Apple will rectify sooner rather than later) MP3 is a very viable production audio format at high bitrates, indeed all the major field recording units such as those from Marantz can record in both Uncompressed WAV or high Bitrate Mp3. A 192kbps or 256kbps MP3 will still be considerably smaller in file size than the WAV with longer record times but the same quality.
When using online sound resources such a the FreeSoundProject you will also often come across MP3 files (and other formats) that youll need to use in FCP. To avoid the pain of rendering everytime you make an edit its best to convert (aka TRANSCODE) these MP3s to Uncompressed WAV or AIFF files.
The simpliest way to convert an MP3 to a WAV or AIFF file is to use Quicktime.
Open the Mp3 file in Quicktime and select FILE > EXPORT. Then where its says Export: and has a drop down list select SOUND TO WAV (or SOUND TO AIFF, they are both the same) Then click the OPTIONS button choose LINEAR PCM as the format and 48.000khz as the Rate. The Sample Size should be 16 BITS.
This will make a professional standard 48k, 16bit Uncompressed audio file from your Mp3, ready for render-free editing in FCP. A simple solution but really Apple, why should be have to double handle to use a common mp3? What in your core engine of FCP is so inefficient that it cant playback mp3; soemthign all other NLE's can do....?
One of the difficult areas for student filmmakers (as well as low budget indie productions) is sourcing music. Composers can be expensive and may fall outside of budget, time or logistic restrictions; and sourcing copyright on music can be a painful and slow process when dealing with major record labels. In the same vein, its very common to need small sections of music, aural bridges and motifs, to work into the edit but which would seem too small to demand the attention of a dedicated composer. In both these cases there are alternatives to breeching traditional copyright and goign through the tedium of seeking copyright releases.
OpSound is a fantastic resource of free Creative Commons music. In much the same vein as StockXchang, OpSound provides a vast library of audio resourses that do not require permissions or fees to use in your projects. All Music on OpSound is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 2.5 copyright.
CC Share Alike simply requires that the creator of the music is credited (thats the Attribution part) and, more importantly, that any derivative works that use the music (ie a film using the music as part of the score) use the same Creative Commons copyright (thats the Share Alike part)
In other words, you cannot use music copyrighted as 'CC Share Alike' and then use traditional restrictive Copyright on the resulting combined work. If you use the CC Share Alike material you must 'pass on' the same freedom.That freedom is the right for anyone to to Share to copy, distribute and transmit the work and to Remix to adapt the work.
Some may baulk at this idea, it goes against the grain of the inbuilt 'copyright' culture we have grown up in. But Creative Commons is becoming an increasingly popular and viable way to make more open creative projects that retain some legal rights and protections but do not automatically restrict further use and distribution. For more info on Creative Commons check out their website www.creativecommons.org
MacVideo has conducted a two-part interview with Walter Murch which explores a broad range of topics overviewing both the past and the future of cinema editing.
As always, Murch is eloquent and thoughtful. Parts 1 and 2 are well worth the watching. Part 1 is HERE
In light of recent releases from Sony and much discussion here on DigitalBasin about solid-state workflows and formats; its well worth putting in a link to this superb (as always) article from Simon Wyndham.
On his site, Simon goes into solid detail comparing and doing the pros and cons of all the major tapeless cameras, formats, codecs and workflows. Its absolutly indespenable reading. I started writing my own such article and then gave up when I read Simon's - I was never going to do it better so why try :)
Another solution for dealing with MAC/PC hard drive issues
Of late I've written about workign corss-platform and dealign with hard drive format issues of Read/Write permissions between NTFS and HFS+. The freeware HFS Xplorer is one solution which allows for Windows computers to access and copy files from Mac HFS+ format hard drives. It works very well but if you?re willing to cough up a few bucks there is a better solution available.
NTFS for Mac by Paragon software will set you back about $45 and when installed allows for a Mac to natively read AND write to NTFS formatted hard drives. So you can format your external hard drive as NTFS for PC and then be able to work with it natively on your Mac as well Windows machines. If you need to work cross-platform and particularly if you?re using Bootcamp this is a great solution at a bargain price.
For all the power, flexibility and efficiency that computer technology
delivers us as filmmakers in the digital age, there are certain
unavoidable truths - computers sometimes stuff up. Crashes, lockups,
freezes and file corruptions are sadly the obstacles we will face at
some point. But whilst these issues are often unforeseeable and you
can?t prevent them entirely you can prevent them from being total
disasters with simple workflow and backup procedures.
So here are 4 Tips to prevent a crash/lockp/freeze/corruption from
being the end of the world that I advise my students of and which
should stand for any editor at any level. They are not rocket science
but I'm consistentl surprised at how often they are neglected.
1. Save
Save and Save often. CTRL+S (Apple+S). You should be in the reflex
habit of pressing these keys every few minutes without thinking about
it. It takes a spit second an updates your NLE project file
immediately. There?s no excuse not to perform these saves constantly
while working.
2. Project files
The project files from FCP, Vegas and Premiere (*.fcp, *.veg and
*.pproj) and any other NLE, are the road maps to how your edit is
assembled. The project files themselves do not contain your footage,
they simply connect to it. This means you can save multiple project
files connected to the same footage and the project files themselves
are tiny in file size and will not weigh down your hard drive.
This system provides a great way to manage your progress through
editing and provide yourself with a safety net of backups. Save a new
project file (named by date) each day. When you start editing for the
day open the previous project file and then immediately SAVE AS and
create a new project file with the new days date. Repeat this each day
of your edit.
The benefits of this process are two-fold; first you are easily able to
track back through your progress, to see the evolution of your edit day
by day and return to a previous days version at any time. Secondly this
process allows you to avoid file corruption. Unfortunately sometimes
project files can become corrupted (very often from reasons unknown),
if you only have one project file there is no recourse. But if you have
multiple previous project files you can simply step back to a previous
project file and rebuild fro there. This is a whole hell of a lot
better than rebuilding from scratch.
3. EDL
Where the project file for an editing system is a complex file keeping
track of every element of your edit, the EDL (edit decision list) is an
extremely simple set of text that instructs the editing system of the
basic cut-only assembly of your timeline. But whilst it is very simple
and minimal the EDL is also very robust and difficult to corrupt.
Saving a daily EDL as a backup takes just a few seconds and provides
some disaster proof security of your project
If using FCP you also have the option of creating an XML project file.
XML is a universal file format for saving all kinds of data. FCP uses
XML to create a simple but detailed project file assembly. You can use
FCP?s XML save in place of an EDL to create a non-corruptible backup
file for your project files.
4. Secondary Backup
Apart for creating backup project files you will need to ensure you
also have backups of your project files in a physically separate
location to protect against loss, damage or theft of your hard drive or
any other major physical disaster. This may be as simple as saving a
copy of your Project file and EDL to a different hard drive, memory
stick or server.
If you have shot to tape (DV, HDV) then the tapes themselves are your
source master backup. Store the tapes in a cool, dry, secure place away
from direct light and if worst comes to worst you can rebatch capture
from the tapes using the project file or EDL.
If you have shot solid state tapeless formats such SxS or P2 (XDCAM EX
or DVCProHD) then you will need to backup all your footage to a
separate hard drive so that there is a physically separate copy of your
entire media set.
If you follow these simple procedures and take a careful and
professional approach to managing your project and workflow there
should be no reason to ever be caught in a total disaster. If you?ve
read these notes and don?t implement them then you?ll only have
yourself to blame if the sky falls in :)
It was a matter of time before the Ex1 got a big brother but it seems
Sony have wasted no time in attempting to establish XDCAM EX as more
than a just a camera, but rather has an holistic production platform.
Panasonic attempted (and had much success) with P2 in the same vein -
an integrated system of format, codec, camera, hardware. But as I have
argued previously, Panasonic, in moving first into solid-state, picked
the wrong horse with P2, a quickly outdtaed technology base. They were
also misguided (in my judgement, though not everyone's) in the chocie
for trading expanded colour space (422 rather than 420) at the expense
of Resolution and file format efficiency (record times are two short
and file sizes are way too big).
This where Sony
have gained much by waiting and watching what happened in the
solid-state sphere - they've got a firmer more advanced and broadly
accepted technology base for the cards themselves (Express Card 3/4
SxS), they've got a highly efficient 35mbps full raster HD Mpeg2 based
format allowing long record times, and they've got an excellent
workflow system of software browsers and import utilities up and
running with all major NLE's and utlizing a full range of metadata.
So now with one camera, the EX1, out in the wild
Sony now add a second, some extra hardware and software workflow
updates.
The
EX3 wont be shipping for 3-6 months or so. But with interchangeable
lenses... This camera could be the Solid-State bomb! Apparently comes
with an adapter to allow any 1/2" sensor HD lens to fit using B4 mount - which means Canon and Fujinon lenses are open slather. Also means
huge possibilities for a P+S and Redrock extensions. Not to mention a
REAL viewfinder built over the already awesome LCD screen. that the Ex1
has.
Its got all the hallmarks of being
THE indie digital cinema camera of the next few years: full raster
1920x1080 progressive, variable frame rate, 1/2? sensors,
interchangeable lenses, full-size viewfinder, Genlock, solid-state
XDCAM. All in a sub 15K price tag
This
video walks you through the differences between the EX3 and the Ex1 and
some of the key features. It has a throughly verbose opening but when
it gets down to the nitty gritty is very
informative.
At the heart of every movie is
performance; the interpretation of the words on the page into living
breathing characters. But how do you write for performance? How do
actors think? How do you construct a movie that actors can sink their
teeth into? Miranda Otto (Lord of the Rings, The Thin Red Line,
Cashmere Mafia) and Jeremy Sims (Fireflies) lend their views to this
episode, which explores the relationship between the script and
performer.
There was time when it was unthinkable but the unthinkable, it seems, has become a reality - Windows on a Mac. But aside from the novelty value, the revelation of a dual operating system opens up new possibilities for video and digital media producers and rises above the traditionally application restricted and insular Mac platform.
For far too long the great computer platform debate has centered on the operating system but the truth is that the OS is the least significant part of the video maker's toolkit. It's not the operating system that is the focus of the editor's work, its the applications, the software tool interface that will be center of attention. It's the NLE where the editor will spend most of their time, not the elements of the OS. Choosing your computer system based on the operating system and then forcing yourself to be restricted to the software native to that OS is plainly silly. Logic would dictate that choosing the software tools that best fit your workflow, and which best match your creative style, first and then getting the OS to match that software is a far more functional perspective.
Of course the computer platforms themselves get in the way, enforcing software restrictions and preventing video makers from choosing the right combination of tools to suit them. That is of course until BootCamp.
A new category of software tool that derives from new genres of the moving image is a rare thing but this is exactly what we have seen in recent years with Machinima and real-time 3D. Whereas NLEs and DAWs are, despite their sophistication, really just digital replications of analog processes and digital animation tools are built off the same frame-by-frame concepts of traditional animation, the real-time 3D environment of Machinima and Pre-Vis is something quite unique.
Born from the DIY ethic of gamers using the engines of computer games to 'film' in virtual real-time, Machinima is quickly evolving dedicated toolsets that cover a diverse range of applications - Machinima itself, animation and pre-visualization for traditional cinema.
The past few years have seen a host of such dedicated software systems for Machinima-based production and while many of these are in very early or beta stages of development, Antics has forged ahead and appearing to present a significantly broad and well developed toolset that includes Machinima but is more broadly about 3D pre-vis and animation in all its forms. Sensing the ever widening appeal of real-time 3D systems to a wide spectrum of creators well beyond the instigating Gamer community, Antics steers its perspective into broad territory, not afraid to defy traditional classifications of whom its toolset is for.
For those working in video and digital media production, it's very easy
to get carried away with the technology. Faster CPU's, more RAM, bigger
monitor screens, the latest software suites - these are all very nice
but so often it's not these things that really make the difference in
our day to day work. Very often it`s the little things that make for
greater efficiency in production. It's this concept that a device such
as Contour Design's ShuttlePro seeks to invoke.
I have recently been planning the introduction of my students at the International film School Sydney to Solid-State workflow with the Sony EX1.
One issue fundementally driving the contemporary cinema industry of late is its diversity - diversity of acquistion, diversity of process, diversity of delivery. And in this evolution we are at last beginning to shake off hierachical perceptions in favour of parralel ones. In simple terms, there's no Best choice, only the Best choice for the project. The idea of developing a Workflow for the project is now a crucial creative process because the diverse array of options can all impact upon creative outcomes.
So it's in this light that we have introduced solid-state workflows and have to teach to our students to make informed and considered decisions about their workflow in concert with its creative imperatives. What follows are some of the notes Ive been putting together on the basic Pros and Cons of solid-state.
---
Overview: The digital recording of moving images to memory cards rather than traditional digital tape represents the future of digital cinema for great many forms of production. This type of recording is known as 'solid-state' as it involves no moving parts and the 'footage' is written directly as digital files immediately readable by a computer.
Solid-State is not just a different way to record cinematic media but rather it represents an entirely new way of conceiving and managing the production process.
There are many advantages to Solid-State recording but there are also significant drawbacks. The resistive impact of these Pros and Cons will be determined by the needs and demands of the particular production in question.
There is no 'best' format, only the best for the needs of your particular production. So it is important to weigh up carefully what your production requires before deciding on a format. Solid-State may be the prefect format or it may bring significant obstacles
The XDCAM EX Format: XDCAM EX is a new variation of Sony's long standing XDCAM format. Where as XDCAM records to optical disc media (known as ProDiscs which are effectively BluRay discs in a hard case) XDCAM EX is designed specifically for Solid State memory.
XDCAM EX is recorded to special memory cards known as 'SxS'. These cards use the ?Xpress Card 3/4' slot which is common on most higher-end laptops such as MacBookPros.
XDCAM EX is capable of supporting a range of HD resolutions and frame rates: 1280x720 - 24p, 25p, 50p 1920x1080 - 24p, 25p, 50i
What is most significant about XDCAM EX is that it shoots 'full raster HD' 1920x1080. This means there is No anamorphic stretch on the pixels unlike HDV which shoots 1440x1080 and stretches the Pixels by a Pixel Aspect Ratio (PAR) - of 1.333:1. The advantage of this is an image with greater fidelity and sharpness.
XDCAM EX uses the same Mpeg2 codec as HDV but at a much higher bitrate of up to 35mbps to HDV's 25mbps. This results in a much richer and sharper image that is more robust for post production manipulation.
PROS of Solid State on the EX1:
- Non-Linear file access Each individual shot can be accessed, reviewed and played back in camera. Likewise individual shots can be deleted without effecting any others. There is no continuous timecode as there is with tape so there is no such thing as broken timecode often cased by in-camera reviewing. Shots can also be individually tagged and managed in camera.
- Fast Transfer The SxS memory cards have very fast transfer speeds meaning footage can be copied from card to computer in 1/4 time (1 hour of footage takes approx 15mins to transfer)
- XDCAM Browser A dedicated piece of software for XDCAM formats allows for individual shots to be efficiently tagged, logged, annotated, and managed much more effectively than traditional tape logging.
- No tape Problems No tape wear, no spooling issues. No mis-aligned recording heads. No timecode breaks.
- Immediate recording Solid State recording starts immediately the moment you press the REC button. No delay as the tape spools or the recording head is engaged; recording starts immediately with almost zero delay.
CONS of Solid State on the EX1:
- There is no source master With XDCAM EX there is no tape to put on the shelf as a backup of your footage. SxS cards are too expensive and not designed as a long-term storage media. After shooting all footage must be copied to hard drive and the cards erased to be used again. This means the only copy of the footage is on hard drive which is more fragile than a tape. It is crucial that you engage careful and thorough back-up procedures of your footage to guard against data loss.
- Short Record Times Where as digital tape is cheap and plentiful, SxS memory cards are expensive and limited in number and capacity. The EX1 can take 2 memory cards at a time. At 8gb per card this will allow for approx 50mins of record time together. However having two cards means one can be removed and its footage transferred to a laptop computer on location whist continuing to shoot with the other card.
- NLE compatibility Currently not all editing software systems are compatible with XDCAM EX. Final Cut Pro is fully compliant but Premiere Pro is not; you will not be able to import or work with XDCAM EX footage in Premiere. This should only be short term and it is expected Premiere will be XDCAM EX compatible in the coming year.
