• Blogs
• Forums
• Tradeshows
• Partners
• White Papers
• Podcast Show Notes
• Events

Matrox RT.X2 in the Real World: Part 2

Aug 27, 2007 11:03 AM, By Jan Ozer

Old Movie

The other effect that I extensively tested was the Old Movie effect, which is interesting because Premiere has no native effects that perform this function. I found the Matrox tool very flexible, with controls over noise, dust, streaking, jitter, flicker, and color gain and addition. With particle related effects, such as dust, you could choose a specific pattern, providing wonderful flexibility. However, this is one tool that could have really used overall presets such as '70s movies, or black and white, to speed your production. Of course, you can save your own customized filter applications as presets simply by right clicking and choosing Save Preset.

Overall, Matrox has been making supplemental effects for Adobe Premiere for multiple generations of professional level products. Most users will find them very intuitive and effective.

Rendering

When it’s time to render, you simply choose Export to Matrox Media Encoder, which looks just like the Adobe Media Encoder, and even uses the same presets. To test performance, I used four different test scenarios, with results shown in Table 1.

In terms of procedure, I created each test sequence in a Matrox project using Matrox effects, then rendered using the Matrox Media Encoder. Then I created a new non-Matrox project, imported the Matrox project and substituted Adobe native effects for the Matrox effects, rendering via the Adobe Media Encoder. This gave me the closest equivalent to the Matox project that I could derive.

The first test was a four-layer production with two HDV layers, both color corrected, a DV green screen overlay and title. This simulates a project with lots of layers, both picture-in-picture and combining layers via the opacity controls. As you can see, when rendering out to an SD DVD file, the RT.X2 was more than twice as fast as Native Premiere Pro. Interestingly, however, when exporting to Windows Media Video files (at 1Mbps) the results were nearly identical.

Next I produced a four-minute multi-cam project with two HDV streams, both color corrected, which meant that neither Premiere nor Matrox needed to scale the output. Encoding to a Blu-ray compatible HD MPEG-2 stream, Premiere Pro was actually slightly faster than the RT.X2.

My last project was a mixed two-camera shoot—one DV, the other HDV—with the output scaled to HD for output to the same Blu-ray compatible MPEG-2 stream. Here, the RT.X2 was again substantially faster than Premiere Pro working alone.

What do I take from this? From a rendering perspective, it appears that the RT.X2 is most helpful when applying multiple layers, or when scaling video to higher resolutions, but only when producing MPEG-2 files. If your projects fit within these definitions, expect significant timesavings during rendering. On the other hand, for many simpler projects, or multicamera projects shot with a common format, you probably won’t see any acceleration of encoding at all.

Overall, I’m very impressed with the RT.X2. It’s the most cost-effective HD monitoring solution that I’ve seen, and the effects I tested were at least as effective as those of Premiere Pro, if not better. Though most of my multicamera projects these days use a common format, the preview capabilities and rendering time improvements afforded by the RT.X2 will definitely help me to stretch my creative wings.

I appreciate the assistance from Jeff Pulera, producer of the very helpful training DVD Matrox RT.X2 Revealed, which you can find at www.sharbor.com. The DVD saved me many hours of trial and error, and would be a big help to any first-time users of the RT.X2.

Continue the discussion on “Crosstalk” the Millimeter Forum.
© 2012 NewBay Media, LLC.