59.94 frame conflicts for film out -workflow?

[David Battistella]

Why would you ever go into the 59.94 woorkspace at all?

My suggestion.

Capture the JVC via Firewire.

Transcode the footage to DVCpro HD 23.98P
Transcode the footage to 10 bit uncompressed HD 1920×1080 23.98P (store this for later use)

Edit in the DVCPRO HD codec with the KONA 2 or 3.

When you have finished, media manage the project and reconnect the cut to the 10 bit UC media.

Export a Targa sequence to a hard drive for the film out.

Stay away from transcoding anything between 59.94 and 23.98.

These HDV camera’s are creating awful workflows and they have serious compression issues.

David

Peace and Love 🙂

[Bob Zelin]

david of course is correct.
You want to FILM OUT at 24. You shoot in 24. The AJA works at 24. When you are ready to dump, you can rent a Sony HDW series VTR to record at 24, or take your hard drive to a place that can print to film from it. Why on earth would you want to do the pulldown to 59.94 when you shot on 24, and you need to release on 24. You are getting stepping because you are putting a 59.94 clip into a 23.98 timeline.

Here I rant about how people should only work in 59.94 because 99% of us finish for TV – but you are finishing for film – stay in 24. And since you need a film out- because this is for theatrical release – I know that you can afford to rent a HDW-F500 or HDW-M2000/10 for at least one day to dump out before it goes to a tele-kine.

Bob Zelin

[Gary Adcock]

[Bob Zelin] “Here I rant about how people should only work in 59.94 because 99% of us finish for TV – but you are finishing for film – stay in 24.”

sorry GUYS
NO NO NO NO Video is edited at the frame rate it was shot

the post production process is built around the concept of video and audio matching in sync and all of the camera you are working with DOES NOT support 24.O fps on tape —your content is 23.98 ( the JVC camera shoots a 59.94Hz signal NOT 60 Hz)

the only way to get the 23.98 video out of the JVC camera is either over FW ( bad) or by using the JVC deck with serial control (BRU-50????) and then capturing the content as 23.98/ go to https://aja.com/pdf/support/AJA_whitepaper_HDV.pdf to see how to handle the content correctly in this workflow.

The smear you are seeing may be the motion “compensation” a setting that is on by default in the JVC camera and may appear as tearing when looking at content in a frame by frame fashion. The other thing you may be seeing is interframe compression of the 59.94 video stream.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

[Stuart Ferreyra]

We have a similar issue. Content was shot with the JVC HDV 24P codec wich FCP did not support
until just a couple of weeks (and it still has issues). The client decided to shoot his indie movie
with the JVC to be able to change camera lenses and keep the costs of HD down.

Anyway, the only way to ingest the material and keep the progressive feel was to do a component
HD out of the JVC deck through the Kona card for DVCPro HD 720 59.94 coversion. I contacted
JVC, AJA and even Nattress to come up with the workflow.

It worked GREAT! The ditor has done a great job, but the issue now is that even though most of the
ilm is 95% cuts, theer are some dissolves and titles which shift the field (I guess) of the 59.94 material
and it becomess jagged until play back gets back to normal picture.

I have to do some tests to figure out what we will do. We will be in charge of the CC with FinalTouch
and the mastering. The client will not go back to film, but we do need to figure this out. It has become
a problem…

Any ideas?

Stuart C Ferreyra
Timecode Multimedia
President
Santa Monica, CA 90025

[Gary Adcock]

[Stuart Ferreyra] “he issue now is that even though most of the
ilm is 95% cuts, theer are some dissolves and titles which shift the field (I guess) of the 59.94 material
and it becomess jagged until play back gets back to normal picture.”

You need to tell FCP to render at full quality not Dynamic.
My guess is that the render settings are for speed and not for quality. what does the the footage look like if you render out a QT file.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

[Bob Zelin]

Gary says –
NO NO NO NO Video is edited at the frame rate it was shot

Well, please correct me here Gary, but the Sony JH-3 (for example) does a 2:3 pulldown so you can input your 23.98 footage at 59.94, and the Panasonic AJ-HD1200 and 1400 does the same thing. This is the “common knowlege” way of working for TV production – I am not saying that it is right – but this is what everybody does. Since almost everyone shoots HD at 23.98 for the “film look”, please tell me the reason why someone would not want to edit this 23.98 footage at 59.94, if it going to wind up on TV (or a training video, or conference room, or DVD or web video). Sony charges $10,000 for the SR5500 option board, just to get the pulldown option so you can input at 59.94.

Bob Zelin

[David Battistella]

Gary,

Is there no way to get the 23.98 footage from this camera, without going 59.94? What is the point of shooting 23.98 then? Isn’t it best in a “filmout” workflow to stay in 23.98.

As an example, if I shot a film in SD 23.98 (24P advanced) with either an SDX series or HVX or DVX series camera, would it not be wiser to stay in these progressiev frame rates when editing and ouputting a TGA sequence to a lab for the filmout?

Is it this particular camera (HDV based) that requires the move to 59.94? They JVC shoots at 24P, can this not be translated by FCP, lumierre?

Next month at the TORFCPUG we will be having a presentation on this camera and workflow and this is why I am so interested.

I like the idea of coming in via SDI and the DVCPRO HD codec but at what poiint does it become 23.98 again for the filmout?

David

Peace and Love 🙂

[Stuart Ferreyra]

You may be right I’ll check on it. But why would the dissolves (or any render) do the jagged video
if we are fully rendering and not relying on FCP’s RT feature?
We did change the render to high-precision YUV.

I do not really like this HDV codec. There are too many issues; and the fact that all manufacturers
are putting out their own version; and therefore, changing the position of their MPEG frames, it
is just creating massive incompatibility. What they should do is come up with a universal codec
like they did with DV. I much rather not use it (but what can we do – is out there and there is
business for it).

Stuart C Ferreyra
Timecode Multimedia
President
Santa Monica, CA 90025

[Stuart Ferreyra]

When I was doing research, the conclusion was that it is specifically a JVC’s issue.
All the other manufacturers seem to be ok, but it is precisely the JVC 24P 23.98 HDV
codec where the problem is. All other JVC HDV frame rates seem to be ok.

Even FCP could not work with it until 2 weeks ago when a new patch was released,
but even now there are still issues with it.

Stuart C Ferreyra
Timecode Multimedia
President
Santa Monica, CA 90025

[David Battistella]

Stuart,

You are so right about HDV. I sort of call it “pretend HD” is really is prosumer and was not designed for a pro workflow. There is an enormous amount of time added in Long GOP streams. It is a fantastic playback medium, but the 4:2:0 color space and the long GOP means the best thing to do it get the media into a “friendlier format/codec” (like DVCPRO HD) and let your post workflow happen from there.

The JVC camera does not even shoot 1080 and the Chroma abberations on the stock lense is awful. Not to mention it has taken forever for anyone to want to deal with JVC’s propritary version of HDV (from now on I think the “H” in HDV should stand for Hoax).

That all said, I know that budgets and other factors mean we will have to deal with this codec in post. I wish someone would invent the happy medium between the convienience of HDV and the quality of DVCPRO HD (minus the impractical, over priced P2 media)

David

Peace and Love 🙂