AVID Express DV integration with HD3

[DaveCarlock]

I'm trying to get a good overview of the advantages of integrating AVID Express DV with HD as opposed to jumping into Final Cut. Anyone want to give me the breakdown from the real world?

Thanks,

DC

[Gordon Lyon]

The first advantage to Express DV with Pro Tools is ease of interchange. If you've ever done audio/video session interchange, you know that it's not nearly as simple as it sounds.

While both FCP and Express DV can export OMF sequences, the OMF implementation in Express DV is more thorough. This makes sense if only because Avid developed OMF, and Avid and Digi work very closely to make sure the interchange is reliable (this is, after all, our bread and butter). Going forward, you also know that reliable interchange will always be a priority for Avid/Digi, regardless of what new standards come down the pipeline. Moreover, the integration is only going to get deeper with time.

Final Cut is an excellent program, and no doubt you would be able to do most if not all of what you need with it, at least initially. Not knowing what level of production you're working on, I can't say whether you'd bump into limitations or not. With Express DV, you know that if you need to take/send your work to a professional Avid suite, you'll be able to transition without any loss of time or data. Also, if you outgrow Express DV, moving to Avid Express or Media Composer won't require learning a whole new system.

To me, FCP is a consumer product that professionals can use. Express DV is a professional product tweaked for consumers. Would you rather lock yourself into a product developed by a company whose core business is cpus, or one whose only business is video? Of course, I'm biased... [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

[Chap]

Good thread Dave,
I'm looking into the exact situation to solve
a growing need in my new studio. I'll keep an eye on this. Funny how both of the programs are native
systems.
I spent the weekend with some folks from Avid and they were forced to introduce the native system because of Final Cut. They clain=m that it's more powerful. I'll let you know.
cheers!
JC

[Henchman]

Maybe it's me. But given the size of files you'll be transmitting, wouldn't it be simpler to just send a beta copy with a guide, and have the studio use that.

[twbrzkdm007]

Henchman,
Up until now, we've had to send tapes but we want find a way not to anymore.
The reasons to transmit everything electronically include avoiding the days it takes to ship to foreign countries, lost shipments, delays in customs and ultimately shipping and tape stock costs. The time it takes to track a lost shipment with Fedex/UPS etc. is staggering.
The goal (not only for me but I guess eventually for every major media company) is to go completely tapeless. As time goes by, file size will be of less and less of a concern, even when the file sizes will reach multiple gigs. Already I have successfully sent and received huge ProTools sessions on our ftp site and despite the time it might take to up-/download, it's still way faster than a physical shipment. Plus the file is available to the studio or me a minute after it's been uploaded. The next evolutionary step is to find a file format that encompasses both audio and video information.
I wanted to mention that I use Final Cut Pro with a Matrox RTMac capture card. FCP is a great product (the Matrox card is another story). Unfortunately it's OMF export only does audio. Thanks for any other suggestions. Stefan

[twbrzkdm007]

Hello,
Very interesting link. I have a problem that ties into this topic. Maybe somebody who reads this has a great idea. Here is a short description of what I'd like to achieve:
I have to find a soft-/hardware solution on the Mac platform that would allow me to transfer/digitize timecoded video material (off Betacam or DigiBeta)into the ProTools environment containing a guide audio track from the tape. Then I'd need to "stuff" all the associated media files (audio & video) plus session files into an archive (either using Stuffit Deluxe or Retrospect backup), transmit this via a ftp site to a foreign studio, where they would unstuff the file, load the ProTools session with the video, route the video out to a standard TV, have actors redub the dialog using the audio guide track supplied in the PT session and the video. After that the foreign studio would just have to retransmit their foreign dubbed audio tracks PT session which would then run in sync with the original picture back to me. Then I could lay back the dubbed tracks to picture and complete the project.
I assume the easiest way to accomplish this is by getting the AVOption XL system for both me and the foreign dubbing studio. Unfortunately at $ 10K per system this method is just too expensive.
The other method that comes to mind is using an Aurora video card which I have heard will run in conjunction with ProTools (I assume you are able to digitive video while PT is in record). A capture card like the Aurora Fuse or Igniter costs around $1000 which would be financially viable.
Another way might involve OMF between a system like Avid Express DV or other Avid product and ProTools but I read somewhere that OMF will not translate video info.
To recap: if anyone can think of a proven system that allows video to be digitized in parallel to timecode sync recording in PT, and have the video also be output to a standard TV, please give me your suggestions. Thanks a lot!

[DigiTechSupt]

From the sounds of these posts, Avid Express DV could be the answer. Here's the workflow...

- Digitize video and audio into Express DV (with or without window burn, as you choose).

- Edit picture and audio in Express DV (or not).

- Export the video as a Quicktime Reference file. The resulting exported file is similar to a Pro Tools session document, it's small, does not contain any media itself but references the original video media in the Express DV sequence.

- Import this Quicktime reference file into Pro Tools. You will get the video track at it's proper timecode location. You have to make sure that you copy the appropriate video files from the Express DV system to the Pro Tools system if the two are on different computers. This is easy to do in Express DV (or any Avid system) and not always easy to do in FCP.

There are several cool things about this workflow:

- Changes. If there are any pictures changes that occur, you can easily go back to Express DV, make the changes and do a Quicktime Reference export again. Exporting a Quicktime Reference is very quick and does not involve any rendering or bouncing to disk. This is not possible with FCP, you would have to bounce the video track (a real time process that uses up alot more disk space) before importing it into Pro Tools.

- Picture Quality. You can use full DV resolution so the picture quality may be better than a Quicktime video card.

- No load on the PCI bus. DV picture wont' hit the PCI bus so it won't affect your Pro Tools performance. This used to be a potential problem with Quicktime cards.

Jon Connolly
Digidesign Product Specialist

[vudoo]

Gordon,

Whether what you're trying to achieve is practical or not, will all depends on the quality/length of the video you need to send to other studios.
I own a small music/post facility and we use Media 100 and have recently added FCP and Avid.
As far as video quality is concerned Media100 and top of the line Avid station is much better than FCP and Avid Xpress DV, as both of the latter uses Native DV CODEC wich is not bad as long as you don't do any compositing, FX etc...but this probably is not a concern for you, since you mostly need it for audio post.
I usually digitize my analog footage at on-line 60 kb or online in FCP for DV sources ( version 3 alouds you to work off line as well )...the picture quality is excellent ( way above S-VHS standard ) but your files will be quite big. Unless you have huge transfer bandwith over the net it will take forever. For short footage i have no problem sending them over the net but anything above 10 minutes, we still send the tapes via overnight Fedex.
Now regarding OMF compatibilites and wich soft to get !!! To be honest, i must say that Avid Xpress DV is nothing like their high end stuff that they are known for, other than a few similar user interface so don't beleive too much into this whole hype of " Avid is pro and FCP is consumer ". Both are excellent and very capable softwares and for the price, it's a steal. It all boils down to wich interface you prefer and is familiar with so test drive them both. They both offer you very similar video quality because they both use the same CODEC ( Native DV wich is 5:1 and 4:1:1 ). Of course, if you work with other Avid studio, it makes sense to go with the Xpress DV.
I have not finished testing the Avid Xpress DV but the OMF transfer on FCP works really well so far..i just finish two 60 min film for an independent producer who edited his whole movie on FCP and the OMF transfer to our PT MIX and PT HD room was flawless.
I also run my movie with a seperate G4 synced to the PT station via Virtual VTR. I LOVE this set up. PT runs much smoother when it does not have to playback QT movies, even if it's DV. Good luck.

[john1192]

jon, how will they then output video to an external monitor??? i saw that they needed that in the post...are you saying that you would have DV express running alongside PT??? please clarify...thanks john

[vudoo]

The version 5.3.1 for PT HD alouds you to ouput DV native movies via the firewwire port so all you need is a DV-analog converter plug into the firewire port of your Mac. There are tons of these devices out on the market, Digi officially supports the Canopus but many other boxes work fine. This feature will be implemented on the next PT release for the Mix users ( that's what i heard anyways )....until then, Mix users can use Echo Fire to ouput their DV movies.