Export edited video

You got a point, but on the other hand you are totaly missing the point.
Most people want to make Quicktimes for sending them to the client by email.
Which means that, when adding uncompressed audio to a 30" commercial, the size of the video (including audio) will be too big to be send by email. Or at least you’ll have the risk that it is blocked by a server which doesn’t allow big attachments. Most agency accounts avoid at all cost ftp and other delivery method, simply because their clients don’t want to deal with it.

You could also argue that the sound department is the last person who should be fiddling with video.
It is our responsability to provide audio which is in sync with the video provided.
It’s up to the video editors to merge the audio & video and present it to the client.
Point period.

And then there is -probably- the majority who works “somewhere inbetween”.
And that “inbetween” usergroup all have different needs and wishes. Which brings me back to my earlier point.

Quicktime pro costs $30. Open video, add audio, export to desired format. Done in 30".
And talking of QT. This format is declared dead and will be burried within a few years.
There is absolutely no point in putting effort into that.

Fredo

I can’t speak for a usergroup that can create exports that are small enough to attach to an email.

I am of a usergroup that sends a link to the file in Dropbox/Google Drive/SkyDrive or sends via WeTransfer or similar.

I believe I am part of a usergroup that doesn’t really worry about the audio file size - audio is always just sent as 2 channel 48kHz 24 bit. It’s always done by links and never attached to an email. This is how I receive cuts from editors and it’s how I deliver files to directors/editors/sound tracklayers/dubbing mixers. (Obviously I wouldn’t want to be passing high quality video back-and-forth as that would be pointless. I work with sound, so that is what needs to be high quality for directors to review, and the video can be low quality.)

And yes - I have QT Pro as the approach you describe is what I do currently. It takes more than 30 seconds and I want to remove it from my workflow like my lucky Pro Tools and Logic friends.

I’m not worried if QT dies, I still need to export video.

I need this simple export to video capability and I’ve needed it for a long time. If you don’t need it that’s fine. I’m airing my need for it.

Well yes, indeed the point is that there are many uses.
And many uses requires many needs and many options.

And please don’t reduce this discussion to “you don’t need it, so you don’t get it”.
I would like this as much as you do.

If size doesn’t matter … why don’t you use the replace audio in videofile function?
That does it in less than 30".

Fredo

Maybe it didn´t sound that way but I am very much in favor of having an “export to video” function, as I used to have it in Digital Performer. Mark region you want, export, done.
So,
+1 for the suggestion

(although I´d rather have it rendered as mp4. Quicktime is almost dead )

But as we know this would need a complex video render engine added, and I would be very surprised if that happens.

Like many of you I will also be very happy to have that feature in Nuendo. It’s true that the existence of that feature in ProTools and Logic would cause the expectation that Nuendo should have it too.

But let’s face it: ProTools is Avid, and Logic is Apple, both manufacturers of the most comprehensive and demanding video editing software around, so they know how to include such a feature in their audio software without messing them up. Again, the feature is new to both apps (not sure about PT) but at least it’s new to Logic. Before Logic X we couldn’t even cut a video clip in Logic 9, a feature that was there in Nuendo for as long as I can remember, and we have used its advantages in situations like when the director calls in the middle of the night to inform us that he has decided to add 46 frames at time blah blah, so that we can cut the video, insert 46 frames and re-sync our sound/music to the picture before he sends us the new edit.

So my point is, as I’m sure you have guessed by now, that expecting Steinberg (with no experience in video editing software) to add an Export Video feature to Nuendo is a bit unfair. SB already have a lot on their hands to satisfy disgruntled customers with audio features that may not be working as expected. IMHO, let them deal with their major problems first. Let them lick their wounds when after each release/update/hot-fix they receive lots of complaints that this or that issue is not fixed yet. Let them concentrate on what they do best. It’s hard to stay in the competition with all those big names.

Cheers

I do see your point about the video skills within Avid and Apple. However, MOTU seem to manage very well and they have no video software pedigree. Digital Performer also allows the export of video with pops and streamers if you wish, which is beyond just encode.

Of course - not like a video editing suite - just the basics for previews to clients and in the case of Digital Performer’s pops and streamers, recording scoring sessions to picture.

And even if the skills were the issue at Steinberg, the capability could be provided through an OEM arrangement. Steinberg already do this with Nuendo and Cubase. For example, encoding MP3s. Steinberg haven’t developed there own codec. It appears they must have and OEM arrangement with Fraunhofer. And, albeit in a more loosely integrated way, instead of developing their own upmixing/downmixing capability the Anymix VST is included with Nuendo; and the UV22HR plugin packaged as a Steinberg plugin but iZotope under the covers and branding when you open it; and the Voxengo CurveEQ plugin included in Cubase and Nuendo; and the bespoke Oxford restoration plugins in Wavelab. These are bought-in capabilities.

All I’m saying is if they don’t have the skills or desire to develop in-house, there are other ways to integrate the capability. And judging from the numerous threads asking for basic video export this is not a minority need.

I do hope we get video export soon.

I swear I had a feeling somebody would bring up Digital Performer. :laughing:
Granted, some film music composers can benefit from the video export feature in DP which is very nice. However, I think we all agree that DP is not among the professionally acclaimed choices (like PT and Nuendo) for sound editing studios worldwide. DP is nowhere close to Nuendo as a sound editing tool at least with regards to sales. I have nothing against DP, but facts are facts. So it’s apples and oranges again.

So you are basically saying that they have already done everything in their power to add features to Nuendo when it comes to what it does best: audio. And when they needed help, they asked for it.

Maybe for the time being, they are reluctant to add the video export feature because it is not a strategically beneficial move on their part, in terms of company policies, financial considerations, political relations with other companies who may be able to help them, etc. Who knows what’s happening inside? I don’t know much about economics, but I remember better days.

At the risk of repeating myself, I’d love to have that feature as well. All I’m saying is that we’ve asked for it, and they’ve seen our request. Hopefully they will do something about it in due time. If DP can have it, there’s no reason why Nuendo can’t. But Steinberg has a lot to deal with before that happens. The way I see it, it’s just not way up on their list of priorities, but it will come up someday to keep up with the competition (I don’t mean DP :laughing: )

Cheers