Using Compressor w fcpx

Wondering how others are using Compressor. I find - as I did with 7 - that it's actually faster to export files as QT movies and then bring those files into Compressor. Do any of you export directly from X via Compressor? Not sure why it's quicker my way. It really shouldn't be.

As in FCS still quicker to export media first. A good choice and compromise is export using Compressor settings, if you have our preset already to go. This is better than the Send to Compressor function.

Yup still faster to export a quicktime from FCP X then open compressor. The other choices didn't work to well with the first versions of FCP X. It could be just as fast using, use compressor settings, but apple crippled it. Using compressor settings won't do cluster compression which is a big benefit to render speed.

Under The Hood:
Send To Compressor has compressor reading the project file, and FCP hands it raw frame data, one frame at a time, to assemble itself (renders are ignored). This was slower, yes, but gave you optimum quality. Compression has always been like that, a balance between speed and quality. Exporting a QT and opening in Compressor is faster as Compressor has all the frame data at once available.

Transcoding to/from Long-GOP formats adds time, which is one reason to use ProRes in your edit, faster export and transcode times.

BenB wrote: Exporting a QT and opening in Compressor is faster as Compressor has all the frame data at once available.

Transcoding to/from Long-GOP formats adds time, which is one reason to use ProRes in your edit, faster export and transcode times.

Newb question: Is there any quality difference between exporting full-res MOV vs ProRes, when then using compressor to downgrade the file?

Is ProRes a better format for long-term storage?

ProRes is an all I-Frame format, which is "normal" file size, meaning 100% of the data that makes up that frame is stored for that frame.

Long-GOP means "Group Of Pictures" and mega highly compressed files. They are not "normal" file size, but super compressed file size. I usually runs 8-15 frames long. The "group" starts with an I-Frame. The rest are B (bi-directional) and P (previous) frames. Those have to read other frames (plural) as each only holds pixel data unique to itself. Thus the CPU/GPU has to read the other necessary frames to rebuild a single frame for playback. Thus the need for more powerful computers.

That explained, ProRes retains the full resolution of it's original and is all I-Frame and holds up better for color correction and transcodes faster.

If you are transcoding to or from a Long-GOP format, to or from an all I-Frame format, it's going to take longer. To or from another Long-GOP format, it's going to take way longer. Since multiple frames have to be read a couple of times to read/write each single frame.

Long-GOP formats are prone to generational degradation over mulch-generational transcodes. ProRes and other all I-Frame formats, such as the robust DVCPRO-HD codec, do not have this issue. Especially ProRes.

On top of all of that, if you're transcoding to different frame sizes and rates, there's more work the system has to do, which increases the time to transcode anything, but especially Long-GOP formats.

ProRes would be a better format for long term storage as more devices and software can read/write it than any single proprietary Long-GOP format.

Long-GOP is usually considered Lossy. ProRes is Lossless.

Ben, thanks for this excellent explanation!

Sorry to be asking so many newb questions lately, but, well, I'm a newb after all. (g)