Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 MKV support?

[_David_Kozar_]

Is there any way to get Adobe Premiere to support MKV files or it simply just doesn't support it?

[the_wine_snob]

But why support a crappy container like Microsoft's AVI, outdated MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 containers...

I wanted to address this separately. Let's take a look, shall we?

• DV-AVI is still the basis for SD editing in Adobe NLE's, and is directly supported in Encore.
• MPEG-1 support is very limited, as it IS an older spec. Some bemoan the lack of complete support, but not many.
• MPEG-2 is still the CODEC for DVD. Encore authors those. They are still viable. A variation, MPEG-2 HD is one of the only two approved formats/CODEC's for BD. Not sure that I'd write that one off any time soon.

Any more points to contest?

Hunt

[qmunikate]

No one on earth should be still using AVI or Mpg2!!

[the_wine_snob]

One last one:

Matroska has existed for almost 9 years. Despite all the newer commercial containers, MKV is still the best option for storing multimedia video/sound/extras in a single file (it even supports DRM if need be!) in a potentially lossless export file format, because MKV supports technically lossless video+sound codecs, which MP4/M4v/F4V don't.

I feel comfortable in stating that after surveying the install-base of PrPro, Adobe has just not hit the number necessary to implement the MKV format/CODEC's. When they do, they will.

Remember, AVCHD was first supported in PrElements, as it was a "consumer format" with the H.264 CODEC. PrPro added it about 18 mos. later. Same for the Import of MPEG-2 in the VOB container. PrE had that 3 years before PrPro added it. It is about the numbers.

This is not an indictment on a format, a container, or a CODEC. It is about the numbers, and profitability.

The ongoing lack of support for this format-unlimited, content-unlimted, streaming-friendly, HD-fit container reminds me of the industry's unwillingness to support the MP3 format back in the 1990s, because it was just a format

... "for teenagers illegally ripping and sharing their music across P2P networks."

Not quite so quick here. PrPro does support MP3, though many can cause problems. Still, and in general terms, PrPro (and PrE) supports MP3, and with the right MP3's, many have zero issues. If PrPro supports MP3, what's your point here?

IMHO, you are joisting at "windmills," and using invalid, or partially invalid points to support your biases.

You state that MKV is a great "streaming media" format/COODEC. Fine. Streaming media is a delivery design, and is not meant to be edited. Just like WMV, and others. Why would an NLE, aimed at the pro/pro-sumer market add support for the editing of material, that is not designed to be edited?

Can you name any consumer, pro-sumer or pro cameras, that shoot in MKV?

Good luck,

Hunt

[HS1979]

I suppose no one tried changing the file extension from .MKV to .AVI, right?

It worked for me.

It took awhile for the video to conform (after importing the video to PP, check the status bar on the bottom right corner to view the status of PP conforming the file).

[the_wine_snob]

Good to know, and thanks for reporting.

Unfortunately, the thread deviated very soon from the original question, which should have been Importing/editing MKV footage. There is another similar MKV thread around, and it too deviated into an "Adobe should, or should not, support every format." Or, they became an argument on how good/bad MKV was.

Your comments and suggestion are appreciated,

Hunt

[NetBuzz]

I could suggest a "MKVExtract" to extract the video and audio stream so

you could remerge them in a MP4 format.

[EuroSiti]

Well. I've sent two official requests/suggestions to Adobe now.

(I had to create seperate accounts for Premiere and Flash Player, of course)... I wonder how many MKV requests they've received during the last couple of years?

HS' and NetBuzz' discoveries (I'm assuming that you could also import MKVs if you change the extension to MP4 just like HS said you could do with the AVI extension) just makes Adobe's MKV "ban" even more absurd. It reveals that there might not even be any technical reasons at all for - officially - not supporting Matroska!

Once again, when you look at the list of video container formats supported in PrPro, some of them are extremely hard to justify, because those formats have absolutely no relevance whatsoever for professional video editors (for instance, 3GP, FLV etc. are just crappy mobile end user and/or streaming formats unable to contain high quality video).

The truth is that just like FLAC has made practically every other high quality audio format obsolete, MKV has basically made every other quality/HD video storage container format secondary. But if you're making huge profits on hardware license fees from some of these technically inferior containers, you're probably not very interested in promoting MKV. Not at all, in fact.

Just like the ongoing lack of support for the - even professionally used - FLAC audio format, there simply doesn't seem to be any reasonable explanation as to why these open standards remain unsupported by the - shall we say "most established" - companies like Apple, Microsoft and Adobe, but NOT a whole lot of other (younger or less "high end") companies who have generally begun supporting MKV during the last 3 years.

All of this is merely suspicions, of course.

But I haven't yet been able to find any official explanation anywhere as to why Adobe still doesn't support MKV in any of their software (they're not even hardware producers!) products... No public demand? Compared to some of the other supported formats? I find that very hard to believe! 😉

[the_wine_snob]

Though I might have missed one over the years, I can only recall two MKV threads here. This one, and one other that got way off-track quickly too.

As for FLV, well we see several per month. The 3gp, less often, but two in the last few weeks. I will never defend either as worthwhile containers/CODEC's for editing, apparently many feel the need.

While there could always be an evil conspiricy afoot, I would think that it's the "many [who] feel the need."

With several ways of handling the footage, I do not really know how directly Adobe needs to provide additional support, but if the numbers are there, I feel that they will.

Good luck,

Hunt

[excited_Genie16B8]

MKV has basically made every other quality/HD video storage container format secondary.

Apparently, the developers of Matroska have forgotten to tell anyone about that, because it seems that no one's really using it very much.

[EuroSiti]

I don't think Matroska.org needs to tell the world about their container format. Most people who doesn't solely depend on paid high end software already knows about this container. Anyone who want to HDD-backup their DVD collection in space-optimized but 100% lossless quality are using free software like MakeMKV, Freemake, FairUse, AnyDVD or VirtualDub. They always use Matroska whenever they want to preserve their in full quality and preserve all additional media elements from the source disc.

The only reason why they sometimes pick MP4 instead is when they need to be able to play their movies on other hardware devices.

I did some fairly neutral word searches at one of the most illegal online file sharing portals on the Internet, Filestube.com.

I searched for two common words associated with video: "clip" and then "movie". These are the results:

"clip" / "movie"

AVI 66197 / 327747

3GP 3189 / 23690

MKV 4278 / 58466

MP4 20148 / 35287

MPEG* 10500* / 11000*

RMVB 931 / 10221

WMV 89679 / 99630

*) Extensions "mpg" + "mpeg"

Yes. Suspicion confirmed: MKV and AVI are indeed the most popular formats when it comes to illegal distribution of feature films (not just animé, as some people like to claim). But the reason why MP4 and MKV are becoming more and more popular is because these containers are much better suited for quality video storage purposes than all the other containers (except WMV).

The fact that MKV is more common than MP4 also shows that Matroska is better supported on the software market than any other MPEG4 container, except WMV (due to the fact that this is the native Windows video recording format, of course).

A couple of years ago, the figures would have been even more in favour of the AVI container (DivX, XviD, not MS). Most free programs used for movie compression only support AVI, MKV and MP4, and AVI is likely to disappear within a few years. The "market share" for Matroska will only increase as it has been doing during the last 3-4 years since the Blu ray / HD became the new movie standard.

And as I said. MKV support is very common. Of course, people would use it if Adobe supported it in both PrPro as well as in their Flash Player.

[the_wine_snob]

Well, to say that AVI is one of the most used illegal formats, is almost like saying that a car is on of the most used modes of transportation.

One should look beneath the hood, and then they would find that DivX and Xvid are the most used CODEC's, within the AVI container/wrapper.

Now, I could be very wrong in this speculation, but it seems that MKV, like DivX and Xvid, is a streaming media, delivery format, and, as it is most commonly used, not really intended for editing, which is what PrPro does. Am I wrong there?

Hunt

[excited_Genie16B8]

MKV and AVI are indeed the most popular formats when it comes to illegal distribution of feature films

And there's MY point.  While AVI is the standard video container for Windows platforms the world over, MKV remains largely limited to teenagers ripping and illegally sharing their video collection.  It's just not widely used for much else, including video production.

[Todd_Kopriva]

If you want to request that Premiere Pro add support for importing or exporting a specific format, submit a feature request. The more information you give in the feature request about why you want a specific feature, the better we are able to consider it.

[EuroSiti]

In terms of professional video production, only uncompressed video formats (video where every frame is a keyframe) are useful for editing.

Matroska can contain both compressed AND uncompressed video formats (and almost any other container supported in PrPro (apart from AVI) can't do that. They are restricted to contain i.e. MPEG2, MPEG4 or VC-1 compressed video streams, which are lossy formats).

From a technical and professional perspective, I would argue that it is totally irrelevant what MKV or any other container is primarily being used for on the Internet. The only interesting fact is whether the container is being used "out there" or not, and whether or not it is a technically attractive storage and export format. And unlike almost any other container, MKV fully supports both indexing, multiple audio streams, multiple subtitles and online streaming (smaller header than most other video containers, meaning that videos will start playing faster).

We have just learned that PrPro will in fact import MKV files, if only you change the file extension (suffix). MKV is also useful for both pre production and post production storage purposes unlike any other video container, because it can contain both compressed and uncompressed video formats - including MPEG4 (which AVI can't).

The primary video container in MS Windows isn't AVI but WMV. Neither WMV or AVI fully support the predominant H.264 codec, and neither of them properly support B-frames either. In other words: These containers are technically inferior.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_container_formats

The only credible argument for not supporting Matroska that remains is this: "We don't like it - for political and economic reasons".

I have already sent an official request/suggestion form.

[excited_Genie16B8]

The only interesting fact is whether the container is being used "out there" or not

And the answer is, apart from those ripping teens, it's not.  And that is not an argument against supporting MKV, it is simply an explanation.  I and probably most others on the apologetic side here really don't care whether or not MKV ever gains support inside of Adobe suites.  We have nothing against such an inclusion.  Out point is only that MKV support is currently lacking because MKV use is equally lacking.

Convince camera makers, post houses and broadcasters to start using it in numbers, and I'm quite sure Adobe will jump on that bandwagon.

[EuroSiti]

As far as i know, no quality hardware video recording devices record in SWF, FLV, 3GP, MPEG-1, ASF or WMV either.

Furthermore, I really don't know who would use a high end piece of editing software like PrPro to edit video in those outdated and somewhat crappy container formats. So again: I fail to see the logic in your arguments.

I just gave you a whole bunch of technically (and as such: professionally) valid arguments for supporting Matroska, and before that I also tried to provide some hard facts about the rapidly increasing use of the MKV container.

But it seems to me like you simply chose to ignore the whole thing and just repeat your personal aversion (teenage rippers). I'm not sure there's any point in continuing this discussion, if that's your primary concern.

But once again: Any video-related media element (menu, subtitles, audio tracks, index, metadata etc.) can be stored within a Matroska video container, and the whole thing can be unpacked again later without any quality loss (depending on the selected video format, of course). No other video container can do that. When an even better video codec is invented in the future, video encoded with this codec will also fit within the MKV container, while it probably won't work with other containers.

... And that is indeed why Adobe should provide official import + export support for MKV. Period.

[Todd_Kopriva]

EuroSiti,

Why are you arguing with Bill---who is not an Adobe employee---about what Adobe should include in its products?

If you've submitted a feature request and explained your reasons in the feature request, you've done what you need to do to affect this decision.

[NetBuzz]

Man i am tired of this thread, and the forum just wont let me

unsubscribe no matter what i do i still keep receiving this pointless

arguing!!

[the_wine_snob]

NetBuzz,

Take a look at this ARTICLE on Forum E-Mail Notifications. There are several ways to subscribe to notification from the forum. This should show you where each is, and how to change your settings, so that they stop.

Good luck,

Hunt

[the_wine_snob]

I have to agree with Todd. You have made good cases for the inclusion of MKV, and have given a lot of detail on its merits. However, that is something that you need to take up with Adobe, via the Feature Request.

I have never had anything bad to say about MKV, and have never maintained that it was not a good format/CODEC. I have only tried to give one side - a different side - of a discussion on why it is not included directly in PrPro.

How MKV might be used most commonly, is of no direct concern to me. One could argue that a certain amount of MP3 conversions are for pirating and sharing audio. While pirating is one thing, and should be addressed directly, I am not sure that a ban on but one possible container is a big convern for Adobe, but could be wrong?

Good luck, and who knows, maybe enough Feature Requests will come in, to tip the scales.

Hunt

[excited_Genie16B8]

I fail to see the logic in your arguments.

That's because we're not really making any arguments against MKV being included in the future.  We're only trying to explain that as of yet, the number of people who use PP and require MKV support is insufficient to warrant Adobe's spending resources on developing that support.  When (or more likely, if) the numbers ever make sense to Adobe, they will likely spend those resources.

It's really not that difficult a concept to grasp.

[EuroSiti]

Since you chose to quote me for that particular sentence, I till repeat it once more:

"I fail to see the logic in your arguments"

"We're only trying to explain that as of yet, the number of people who use PP and require MKV support is insufficient to warrant Adobe's spending resources on developing that support."

According to this logic, there must be a substantial number of PrPro users who require support for SWF, FLV, 3GP, MPEG-1 and ASF? If that is not the case, maintaining support for these formats in PrPro seems to be a waste of time and software resources... according to your argument.

Furthermore, we've just heard that PrPro does in fact import MKV files (just not officially), if only you change the suffix into AVI or MP4, so what's your point when you keep talking about "spending resources on developing that support"?

- And my question (the one that makes you talk about UFOs and conspiracies) is simply:

If PrPro can already import Matroska files (camouflaged as AVIs or MP4s without conversion), why won't Adobe officially support MKV?

[the_wine_snob]

- And my question (the one that makes you talk about UFOs and conspiracies) is simply:

If PrPro can already import Matroska files (camouflaged as AVIs or MP4s without conversion), why won't Adobe officially support MKV?

I cannot answer that, being but a mere user. Only Adobe can address the question. Perhaps Todd is in a position to make a comment, but perhaps not. With no official response from Adobe, we can only speculate on what could be the issue here.

As for those other, listed formats, I agree with you - do not see the need for full support in PrPro, and I feel that Jim Simon would agree too. However, just given the number of requests for help with 3gp files, in the PrPro forums lately, I'd say that there is obviously a market - just not one, that I am interested in.

Good luck,

Hunt

[Todd_Kopriva]

A huge majority of the work to support a format (or any feature) is actually testing, not programming. To officially support any format, we need to test it thoroughly. Just because something appears to work on the surface when you use some sort of hack like change a file-name extension, this doesn't mean that it will work as well as it needs to for us to officially support it. This is true in many areas.

[excited_Genie16B8]

According to this logic, there must be a substantial number of PrPro users who require support for SWF, FLV, 3GP, MPEG-1 and ASF?

Exactly, yes.  Now you're getting it.

If PrPro can already import Matroska files (camouflaged as AVIs or MP4s without conversion), why won't Adobe officially support MKV?

OK, maybe not quite yet.  One more time.

The reason Premiere Pro does not officially support MKV files is that not enough people need that support.  If the format ever gains sufficiently in user base, then it is likely that Adobe will do whatever programming needs to be done for files with an MKV extension to work fine inside of PP (assuming a compatible codec inside the MKV file, which is the bigger issue here).