PC Peripherals Video Editing Cards

[ibm_jennifer]

Avid Xpress Pro System Requirements

Avid actually don't need a Quadro Fx card at all. I have Quadro Fx 4500 (why 4500 not listed in Avid?) in my main PC and Geforce 7600 in another one, running MEDIA Composer on both. Don't trust on theory. Realtime Open GL effects is now possible with a higherend Geforce or Mojo.

Yes, I know Quado is perfect for Avid Softimage and for Avid 3D. And AVID guaranteed that Guadro works perfectly with Avid. That not means other don't work!!! For personal use, no need of a Quadro. Yes, I highly recommend to buy a Quadro 1500/4500 for business use. It will worth for the money!!!!

Check this: Editing Systems : Avid Xpress Pro Editing Workstation

Have you worked in Avid before?

 

[AK3D]

Quadro is generally used when you're working with some 3D software. For NLE software you can get by with any decent display card.

This has turned out to be a very interesting discussion on NLE software. Some great opinions too!

 

[ibm_jennifer]

For NLE software you can get by with any decent display card

True, as for as OpenGL (atleast 2.0?) is supported in the display card.

But Quadro Fx is definitely better than GeForce when working with Avid and After Effects, as they use more OpenGL Effects and Multiple Display (Fullscreen Playback-Yes AE too supports with 3rd party plugin). But not affordable for personal use!

 

[AK3D]

For sure - the expense is the criteria. As I pointed out to the OP, if he has a larger budget, he can go in for some better quality software+hardware package.

Since his interest points to wedding videos as well, I suggested the AV/DV - it makes sense as a relatively cheap capture and edit solution .

 

[ibm_jennifer]

wedding videos

I agree with you. For wedding videos Pinnacle AV/DV + Studio 11 + Hollywood Fx is a good choice.

The alternatives are

1. Avid Liquid + Avid HFX+RTFS
2. Matrox RT.X+ Premiere + Prodad
3. Canopus 110 + DVStorm/Edius + Canopus Video FX

 

[ashr]

Yes, I know, Guys who like FCP usually like Vegas, Shake, Combustion, Sound Forge, Logic...Its a track...

The other track usually on Avid, ProTools, AE, FL, Premiere... Its my personal exp. What you feel?

I personally like CineForm than Raylight.

But Vegas is not really Bad like ulead, pinnacle, Liquid (???).

i'm actually a mix of things. LOVE Vegas, HATE Premiere. More experience with FCP but Avid can obviously produce the same stuff so i don't have a preference between those. also, AE over Combustion and Pro Tools over Sound Forge.

of course, the software only matters to a certain extent. i'd use any tool that can do the job but i've only had problems with premiere in the past so i'm not willing to go near it again when there's something at stake.

 

[ibm_jennifer]

Avid can obviously produce the same stuff

I don't agree anymore. You can compare Avid Xpress Pro with FCP. But not Avid MediaComposer.

Realtime Uncompressed HD, Live SpeedRamp, Secondary ColorCorrection, Avid 3D, Realtime keying..Sorry Man, FCP is a Sh*t. I used FCP for 5 years and switched to Avid recently when joined LVP. Yes, there was a 'GREAT' Mac, but it died when it switched to 'Intel' Processor. I don't TRUST 'Mac' anymore. (Again it's my persona.....)

Avid Media Composer Features

Pro Tools over Sound Forge

Good Choice, Start a thread for PROtOOLS. We will continue our FIGHT (????)

 

[pcstore]

Good topic here. Me too want to find out what i need to edit a Wedding Video out from my 3CCD camera. I attempted with various settings/software never managed to get what I want.

Pro's please share your knowledge. We are here to learn.

thanks to every one who contributes to this thread.

 

[tracerbullet]

What is wrong with all you people! Editing, just like Anish said, requires a powerful CPU, ample RAM, and a fast hard-drive subsystem. Graphics cards have nothing to do with entry-level video editing. Out of the hundreds of standard effects and transitions, only a few are GPU-accelerated. Doing a lens flare for instance, might take a couple of seconds quicker to process on a graphics card. Big deal!

Next, Pinnacle and the rest make video-capture cards. High-end video capture cards basically allow MPEG2-based (or more advanced) real-time encoding while capturing. But it's nothing you can't do without. When you're done editing, you can choose in the final render what you want your output format to be. The CPU will do the job for you, albeit a little slower.

In which case, Firewire should so just fine. Redscorpion, check whether your motherboard has Firewire built in. If it doesn't, pick up a Firewire card, it shouldn't cost you more than 600-700 bucks.

 

[ibm_jennifer]

Graphics cards have nothing to do with video editing.

We are waiting for OPENGL 2.1, Why?

MPEG2-based (or more advanced

Do you mean MPEG-2 is an advanced CODEC for Editing?

Firewire should so just fine.

I agree with you.

 

[tracerbullet]

We are waiting for OPENGL 2.1, Why?

Do you mean MPEG-2 is an advanced CODEC for Editing?

I agree with you.

I understand 3D effects might be required in video-editing. In which case, a Quadro or Matrox card will probably be needed. But, and I might be presumptuous, Redscorpion has no such requirements. So, he doesn't need a dedicated graphics card.

I guess I wasn't clear about the MPEG2 bit. What I meant was that RAW DV footage offloaded from a camcorder needs to be encoded before being viewed on a player. A high-end video capture card will let you convert the DV footage, on the fly, when you're offloading it onto the computer. The advantage being, you save a lot more space on the hard drive, for an hour's worth of uncompressed DV footage is 20+ GB. And you save a lot more time during the final render as there will be no conversion of format required.

Sorry for the nit-picking, but, don't you mean you're waiting for OpenGL 3.0?

 

[ibm_jennifer]

Matrox card will probably be needed

I agree with you.

uncompressed DV footage

There is no uncompressed in DV. Its already a compression of 5:1

And cheap Hardware based MPEG2 encoders are useless, better you can trust software based like Cinemacraft. Or you need to spend some $***** for hardware based.

Editing MPEG-2 is a hell, Capture in DV, Edit in DV, Just make it to MPEG-2 when authoring on DVD.

OpenGL 3.0?

No, currently Quadro 370, 570 & 1700 supports 2.1. I am waiting for 4700 to suport OG 2.1 with DX 10/10.1. If we are waiting for 3.0 now, its not a good idea.

 

[ashr]

I don't agree anymore. You can compare Avid Xpress Pro with FCP. But not Avid MediaComposer.

Realtime Uncompressed HD, Live SpeedRamp, Secondary ColorCorrection, Avid 3D, Realtime keying..Sorry Man, FCP is a Sh*t. I used FCP for 5 years and switched to Avid recently when joined LVP. Yes, there was a 'GREAT' Mac, but it died when it switched to 'Intel' Processor. I don't TRUST 'Mac' anymore. (Again it's my persona.....)

How can you say its shit when its good enough for someone like Walter Murch to cut something on the scale of Cold Mountain? 300 was cut on FCP as well. Final Cut Studio has the same stuff and it now comes with Color which seems great for grading and secondary CC. Its also much cheaper than a full fledged Avid. I'm not saying its better than Avid. IMO, they're both really good but FCP has proven to be good enough for Hollywood features so its not shit by any means.

 

[ibm_jennifer]

Walter Murch to cut something on the scale of Cold Mountain?

Walter doesn't even needed FCP Man. Hollywood effects nothing to do with NLE. A simple 1MB Editor which support EDL is enough if you have good 3rd party optical plugins.

Film needed the EDL from FCP, its nothing to worry about the quality of FCP. For CC they are using Davinci and 4K effects they can't even use AVID/FCP. You are speaking about Offline Editing, I am speaking about Online Edit for TV/HD.

 

[ibm_jennifer]

300 was cut on FCP as well.

My God! Cutting a film is like typewriting in computer. You can cut in any stupid software...The output of the cut is not even VIDEO an, its a Paper!!! How do you say FCP is good by seeing the paper. (Its the quality of the printer!!!!) And again 300 is finished in Avid Symphony.

AVID Symphony & Autidesk Lustre is the best for Online Film grading/Color correction.

Davinci is the best for Optical Film Grading & CC

AVID MediaComposer & Autodesk Fire is the best for Film/Broadcast/HD Online Edit.

AVID Xpress pro & AutoDesk Smoke is the best for Film Offline Edit/SD/HD

FCP tried to paly all the above roles. It's impossible, I spoke with all my seniors in Prasad Studio and confirmed, Yes its s Shit, if you are running on 'INTEL MAC'! Believe it or not, I used FCP over many years and still I have a MAC for FCP. (I was a real FAN of FCP, even now). But I don't recommend anybody to learn/move to FCP anymore as its dying in Film Industry. (Protools on MAC is diffrent!)

 

[ashr]

i know all about EDLs don't worry. That was my point.. I was gonna type that of course Walter Murch can cut on anything and make it look good.. it's his skill not the software. However, if it was truly shitty, he's not gonna bank on it for a feature film. There's gotta be some reason why he chose to use it. Was it convenience? Was it pricing? Was it the workflow? Whatever it was, it was chosen. It's not like he's stupid or pigheaded enough to use Final Cut just to prove a point. I know all about Digital Intermediate through Da Vinci as well. All I'm saying is Final Cut is definitely a viable option for cutting (cutting alone, not DI, grading, compositing and FX) any kind of production... especially in the future when film will get replaced by video. that's pretty much my only point. Why wouldn't they just cut 300 on Avid if they were gonna finish it in Symphony anyway? David Fincher shot Zodiac entirely on video, converted to DVCPRO-HD and used FCP on it since it did exactly what he needed. Watch Apple - Final Cut Studio 2 - Final Cut Studio in Action
I'm assuming you're talking about the Indian industry. I'm talking about what FCP does for filmmakers all over the world. I'm very well aware that Avid is the standard but I'm not sure if that is because its really better or only because Avid editors don't want to switch (which is of course a very valid reason). It's always been that way. The Avid guys love Avid while the FCP guys swear by it. I'm a post grad from one of the best film schools in North America so I know how the scene is with Avid vs FCP there as well as here. You're missing my point. I'm only saying Final Cut Studio is still a very good bang for the buck. Even Hollywood is noticing so it won't die anytime soon. While Avid will continue being the way it is, FCP will also grow.

Also, I'm not getting you quite clearly. Why is it shit if you're running an Intel Mac?

Anyway, forget about this... our opinions are different. What are you doing at Prasad Studios? Studying or working there? If its studies, how is the course? I'm asking because Mr.Hariharan, the director is my cousin's wife's dad. He was telling us about the courses a year ago.