Having Second Thoughts About AVID?

(From The Avid Yahoo Users Group)

QUESTION 1
Isn't native DVCPRO HD much less compression than DNxHD?

ANSWER 1
No, much more.
But DNxHD is designed to hold up to compositing and multiple renders.
DVCPRO HD = 100mb/s
DNxHD = 145-220 mb/s

QUESTION 2
What happens when DVCPRO HD camera tapes get further compressed to DNxHD? Are most folks on ADRENALINE and XPRESS digitizing DVCPRO via FIREWIRE to DNxHD CODEC? We load DVCPRO tapes via uncompressed SDI into NITRIS. The only time we really use DNxHD is if we are editing in NITRIS at HD RESOLUTION and we need tons of storage. In this situation, the uncompressed signal looks much better than DNxHD, however, for many situations, the DNxHD, when digitized via SDI looks fine, and by the time it gets broadcast, no one can tell the difference.

ANSWER 2
The reality seems to be that HD shows are cut in SD, because both HDCAM and DVCPROHD have low-ish cost decks with SD downconvertors built-in. There is NO NEED TO EDIT HD, any more than there is TO EDIT ON FILM just because something was shot on film.

So DNxHD comes into play at ONLINE TIME. The question then is, do you go with ADRENALINE, and RENDER ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING using a COMPRESSED CODEC, or do you use AN UNCOMPRESSED HD SOLUTION for "the best quality", on a machine such as DS NITRIS.

At the moment HD SHOWS seem to be conforming on top-end machines, not ADRENALINES. When SYMPHONY NITRIS comes that may change the picture, but presumably people will still want to use UNCOMPRESSED HD.

The other thing to bear in mind is that FINAL CUT PRO (FCP) can offline cheaply in SD, then conform cheaply in uncompressed HD today. So where does that leave a more expensive compressed solution like ADRENALINE (now the uncompressed card has been dropped), or the even more expensive SYMPHONY NITRIS?