workflow from FCPX to..

Discussion in 'Digital Video' started by josh.b, Nov 2, 2013.

?

Which do you prefer?

  1. Apple Compressor

    9 vote(s)
    75.0%
  2. Adobe Media Encoder

    2 vote(s)
    16.7%
  3. Mpeg Streamclip

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. HandBrake

    3 vote(s)
    25.0%
  1. josh.b macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2013
    #1
    I have just gotten into video editing and going well but I have come across an issue that is a little overwhelming. After I am done editing I have the option to export to compressor which is all great but now I am reading that compressor is mega slow compared to competition such as HandBrake, Mpeg Streamclip and Adobe Media Encoder.

    Can anyone please steer me in a fail safe and speedy solution or list pros and cons of each listed above?

    Thanks in advance.
     
  2. Johnsyounger macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #2
    It depends...

    I guess the answer is it depends. You left off one I use all the time, QuickTime.
    Compressor is initially slower, but it can be configured to use more cores of your machine. Especially handy if you have 8+ cores. I use MPEG streamclip but I've noticed that it can knock colors around. Not sure if it's a gamma setting or what. Handbrake is speedy but it only does h.264. If all your doing is h.264 then you could get an elgato h.264 turbo. I Don't mess with Adobe media encoder, we'll just because I've never needed to. So the question is, are you making home movies or sending stuff to post production?
     
  3. josh.b thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2013
    #3
    hey mate, thanks for the reply. Quicktime. Do you mean Quicktime X or 7? Also I didn't realise I had to configure Compressor so thanks for that info! I tried out the Media Encoder (latest update today) and it is very fast.

    The one thing that is making me lean on compressor is the fact I can export my timeline straight from FCPX to compressor. Is it possible to do similar with Quicktime, mpeg stream clip, media encoder etc?
     
  4. HobeSoundDarryl macrumors 603

    HobeSoundDarryl

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Location:
    Hobe Sound, FL (20 miles north of Palm Beach)
    #4
    1. Edit it to taste in FCPX
    2. FCPX Export to ProRes
    3. Select that ProRes file in Handbrake, click the desired preset, let it render a final, compressed file.
    4. Tag it with a tool like MetaZ and/or Subler.

    Tried Compressor but found the above just about optimal for all of my own needs. If you will be happy with h.264 output, it's a great way to go.
     
  5. Johnsyounger macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #5
    The "correct" workflow is make everything prores, edit, and send out as prores, then convert. This however may be overkill for you.
    Here is how to set up multiple cores: http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/compressor_multi_cores_stitzer.html
    I would do tests depending on your machine. Both Quicktime 7 and X can be valuable. X is more "preset" now, which sucks, but hey Apple trying to make that $$$$. 7 can export whatever, but it may only be 32 bit, I'm not sure. I would set up multiple cores with compressor and see whats fastest...
     
  6. josh.b thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2013
    #6
    Thanks for the replies. I have used compressor with 8 cores now and it is a lot faster but still not as fast as Adobe Media Encoder, handbrake or mpeg streamclip. Hopefully Apple updates compressor soon because I quite like the way it works despite what other people think about it. I will be using Handbrake until then :)
     
  7. josh.b thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2013
    #7
    What is the advantage of using compressor vs just using the compressing options inside of final cut pro x?
     
  8. gdeusthewhizkid macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2008
    Location:
    NY|NJ
    #8
    just curious why do you send to compressor. I just export video directly from fcpx..
     
  9. josh.b thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2013
    #9
    more flexibility with compression
     

Share This Page