[opendtv] Re: Production Codecs

  • From: dan.grimes@xxxxxxxx
  • To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:06:20 -0700

Good to know, especially since Avid, and possibly Sony, products will be 
so prevalent in our facility.

You are quite right that I need to join SMPTE.  I also need the 
specifications.  Together they are major dollars and I am trying to save 
up for them since the university will not pay for them.

Dan




"John Willkie" <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
07/16/2008 08:54 AM
Please respond to
opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


To
<opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc

Subject
[opendtv] Re: Production Codecs






Dan;
 
MXF works just fine, between and among vendors.  And, I suspect that you 
are not going to engineer an MXF system from source documents.
 
There is a problem with the latest reworkings of the spec.  It seems that 
two major vendors (Avid and Sony) made some technically non-compliant 
changes that didn’t seem to affect anything until the new changes were 
proposed, and ALL HELL BROKE OUT.  Some of the changes were good, others 
seemed to have been intended to cause chaos.
 
I have suggested to you time and time again to join SMPTE.  The battle was 
“fine fun” last fall.  People who aren’t on the WG email reflector only 
got this in a small dribble, and EVERY article I’ve read about the 
controversy was slanted, ill-informed or ignorant.  Basically, customers 
like PBS, like NBC, were doing the log-rolling for Avid and Sony, who 
never commented on the reflector.  At one point, the AAF acted like they 
should have a veto on SMPTE specifications.
 
I have it on good authority that the changes wouldn’t break much on the 
Snell & Wilcox side, but that’s not exactly by design.  The intellectual 
author of MXF is Bruce Devlin of Snell.  At one time, they had a microsite 
on MXF, but this is what they have now http://www.snellwilcox.com/mxf/.  I 
wonder where my archive of the applications formerly there are …
 
Before you ask someone hereabouts concerning something as technical as 
MXF, it’s important to ask how their employer supports MXF.  In the case 
of Harris, I believe that’s about zero.  Harris has been the big driver 
behind BXF, but aside from a similar moniker, they are quite different and 
have distinct domains within TV plants.
 
It’s also important to ask about their personal experience with the 
technology, not “what they’ve heard.”  MXF’s major problem is 
widely-deployed non-standard vendor-specific implementations, the 
inability or lack of a desire for vendors to fess up on what they’ve done, 
and how that will be dealt with in future upgrades.  It’s close to a 
nightmare.
 
What I wrote in the third paragraph above is actually news: you won’t have 
read it anywhere, at least anywhere I’ve seen.  (Other than the original 
posts to the SMPTE WG.)
 
John Willkie
 
 

Other related posts: