Ok, so here is the big question for me. Do I stick with liquid, continue trying to edit HD footage on it and waiting for 'the new product' which will be out in god knows how many years or do I give in and buy a mac and get FCP like everyone else seems to be doing? I know all the pros use Avid MC but I hate the Avid interface! Everytime I try and use it I just cry out for liquid! I really like liquid but they got to hurry up with whatevers coming out. Theres only so long I can wait until I need to move on...... 

And the problem of editing HD in Liquid would be what??

The main problem for me is wheater or not to update to chrome when there is something else coming out. It furstrates me not having a proper output to a monitor when editing in HD. I also find it furstarting that I have to render a project before it will go back to HDV tape. (Maybe this has to happen with other systems also?) Apart from that it does the job, although it can feel a bit clunky sometimes.

I don't mean to have a go at liquid, I have been using it for the last 4 years now without many problems and it has been, and still is, great. I just feel that it has been forgotton about and that other products are taking over. For example I recently read about a plugin that was available to sync audio files easily but it's only available for FCP or Avid MC. I'm just wondering, and hoping, that the new product will be 'up there' with what seems to be the 'big boys'.

Well, both FCP and Chrome use essentially the same AJA board for HD input and output. I would say that both have about the same capabilities but the difference is that FCS is a current product that will see more development and the future of Chrome is very cloudy. So, as much as I hate to say it, you are probably better off going with FCS at this moment. However, the cost is going to be significantly more than Chrome when you consider the hardware cost (you will need a high end MAC, plus the AJA board plus FCS). I would guess you are probably looking at about $10K for a reasonable FCS system. You can probably do Chrome for much less. But yes, much of the world is moving to FCS and if you make your primary living from editing, it would be a good choice. That said, Chrome is really a very good product.

I just wish I knew, as I'm sure a lot of other people do, what direction avid/pinnacle are going regarding liquid. I really don't want to go down the road of getting a mac, I have never really liked them to be honest. I also have many work collegues who use liquid and it is very helpful all being on the same software and being able to swap projects around. I have also installed 4 liquid edit suites in my old school for the media studies department which are great. I really do want to stay with the product if I can - it's a hell of a lot easier to use than MC!!!!! I'm hoping we can hear something about NexGen soon....:) 

 I'm hoping we can hear something about NexGen soon....:) 

I think all of us feel this way.

Lew, did you mean FCP in all the areas you used FCS?  I'm confused...?

FCS = Final Cut Studio which is the current product. It contains FCP plus the rest of the suite.

Ah!  the confusion departeth...thanks!

Hey Tim I heard from someone in Florida that you were the kid in that ballon in CO.

 

 

 

Aster a bit of thought I think I have come to a conclusion. I am happy with liquid as it is but would like the options that chrome gives me. Therefore I should get chrome! To get HD I/O in MC would cost a hell of a lot more than chrome whith the AJA card and I would have to give up liquid!? Whats the point!!!!!!!

Do you have to have a HD-SDI output?  The reason I ask is because Liquid does offer some pretty good options for full screen output.  It isn't perfect but it is HD and it can look very good.  If you really must have a hardware system to record to tape through HD-SDI you could always add on another HD-SDI card and export your video from Liquid and use another simple tool to play the material out to your HD deck.  I used to use Chrome and it is great and by far one of the most solid and straight forward uncompressed HD systems out there.  I don't use it anymore because I just don't really need to.  I find Liquid already handles a single monitor fairly well which opens up the option of using the second 1920x1080 monitor for full screen HD playback.

There are two ways to do this.  There is the use second video head output thingy which works fairly well.  I actually prefer just blowing up second monitor to full screen mode and keep the timeline on the other monitor.  This allows me to quickly switch back and forth from full monitor output to a larger layout when I need it.  I have really learned to love working this way and no client ever has had an issue with the quality of the output.  Of course this method does have two issues.

First you don't really have any decent interlaced video playback support.  What I mean is that you will not be able to see interlaced video playback at 60 hz.  I sometimes use my Pro BOB when I absolutely need true interlaced playback.  Yes it isn't HD but it allows you to check how your material will look in terms of motion characteristics.  You still have your second LCD to check video quality.

Second this doesn't help if you need to dump video through HD-SDI into a deck.  Of course if you happen to have a HD-SDI deck I'm not sure the cost of a FCS or Chrome system would really be that much of a concern.

 You may have one solution for interlaced playback but I have never tried it so I don't know how well it would work.  If your computer monitor is exactly 1920x1080 you in theory could use a cheap DVI to HDMI adapter to run out to your HDTV.  I'm not 100% sure but I think as long as you keep both fields displayed in Liquid your HDTV may interpret it as real 1080i video and display it properly.  Again I have never tried this and you have to make sure your computer monitor is 1920x1080 and not 1920x1200.  Some video cards also have a special 1920x1080 interlaced display mode to support older HD component outputs and you may be able to use that as well.  In this case both monitors may have to be set up this way which means you may have to use a small full 1080p HDTV monitor with HDMI as your computer monitor as well.  Again this is all in theory.  Personally I never really had an issue with displaying interlaced material.  I already know it is interlaced and how it will look and I don't need to be reminded of it every time I play the timeline.  In the end all that really matters is what I output for the client.

Saylur:

Hey Tim I heard from someone in Florida that you were the kid in that ballon in CO.

Did you like my landing?  

(I can't believe it took me a week to see your note!)

 

 

 

Thanks for this smetvid. I will look carefully at the different options before buying anything. I have never got the HD down convert to work properly on my main system but I think that is down to the graphics card. It would be nice to have an HD output but whats the point if I can see it interlaced in SD anyway? I know it will look better when it is output. Is there any system that will allow you to go back to HDV without rendering down the firewire? I'm guessing not and if you wanted to do this you would have to use an HD SDI HDV deck?

Thanks

Ok I'm back again!

One thing I do need to do right now is upgrade the nvidia card in my system. It's a quadro FX1400 128mb. Might be why I have problems in HD! I am running dual 3.4Ghz Xeon processors, 2Gb Ram on windows XP. The graphics slot on the MB is PCI express.

I have just been looking at cards and see that I can now get a 1Gb graphics card! Do you think this will help me for HD  or do I not need to go as high as that? If I do will I gain more streams etc?

I am happy to really spend money in this. If I can get liquid working perfectly then I will not change NLE software for a long time!

Thanks

Nick

A 1 GB video card is a bit overkill.  full HD does need a 256 MB video card however.  Any 256 MB or 512 MB video card should do the trick.  I have a ATI 4670 1 GB video card and to be honest it doesn't seem to have any real advantage due to the 1GB.

 Also note that you don't really need a Quadro card or even a beast of a card to edit HD in Liquid.  As long as it is PCI Express x16 and has 256 MB of ram you should be good to go.  I even managed to edit full HD on a Nvidia 8400 256 MB video card that I picked up for $40.00.  You may want to go a bit higher then that however.  Usually the $60.00 to $100.00 price range on Newegg is the sweet spot for a Liquid GPU.

Agreed, the performance of $100 cards today is sufficient for Liquid. Any more is a case of quickly diminishing return. It will be interesting if the ?replacement product? alters this in the way of open GL, CUDA, or one of the other strategies. 

Well i managed to pick up a new gforce today at a good price. It is a 1Gb one but to be honest there wasn't much choice in the shop!

It certainly has made a difference. I can now edit HD properly and see SD output at same time. I can also do realtime chroma keying and slow mo which I couldn't before. I'm happy :)