Advice on docu workflow with SD tape footage, FCPX or not?

[Bill Davis]

I think you both are missing the primary PURPOSE of my post.

It Addresses best practices when you ONLY have access to a VHS or DV dub. Nothing better. If that is your inescapable starting point – and you need to use that AS your master source – you gain little to nothing if you capture it as ProRes 444 for your mezzanine codec – rather than just using, say, h-264 before you bring it into your NLE. Adam explained that AFTER the hit to analog VHS or DV25 – digital encoding has little preservable data left that warrants using a beefier codec for storage. That’s what I wanted to know. I can use my Black Magic Video Recorder dongle to archive without worrying that I’m tossing out MORE useful information. This addresses NOTHING about how to encode or store files when you have better masters available.

That’s all.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Bill Davis]

I see that the cow text processing stripped away the color data on what I said verses Adams responses. After his ID’d paragraph, it’s back and forth paragraphs. (Can’t edit them now that replies have been posted.)

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Michael Gissing]

[Bill Davis]”I think you both are missing the primary PURPOSE of my post. ”

I am considering the PURPOSE of the original post asking advice about formats and NLEs to use on a long form doco. My advice is intended to offer a best practice workflow.

What you chose to do with your old tapes is entirely your business. I don’t consider it appropriate advice for the original poster. It seems your purpose is to justify a decision you made but that is not really relevant to the workflow being discussed.

[Michael Gissing]

[Bill Davis] “you gain little to nothing if you capture it as ProRes 444 for your mezzanine codec – rather than just using, say, h-264 before you bring it into your NLE.”

ProRes4444 is not what was being recommended so keep the strawman out of it. I have already explained the limitations of h264 in professional workflows. I don’t care whether you agree with me but please don’t offer advice on complex workflows unless you are doing them or you end up at the end of them trying to get the best grade and avoid tech rejection by broadcasters.

[Craig Alan]

Bill, unless I missed something in his answer, the question is not whether you can see much of a difference between DV and H-264 when played back, but rather would he suggest ingesting DV footage into a NLE for editing.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Andrew Kimery]

[Bill Davis] “It Addresses best practices when you ONLY have access to a VHS or DV dub. Nothing better. If that is your inescapable starting point – and you need to use that AS your master source – you gain little to nothing if you capture it as ProRes 444 for your mezzanine codec – rather than just using, say, h-264 before you bring it into your NLE. Adam explained that AFTER the hit to analog VHS or DV25 – digital encoding has little preservable data left that warrants using a beefier codec for storage.”

I totally, 100% understand what you are saying. My remaining question doesn’t have to do with the amount of detail left in the image though. My question has to do with the amount of the image that changes from one frame to the next because big changes from one frame to the next (say flash bulbs at an event or a roaring fire in the foreground) can break inter-frame codecs. Those codecs get their small file size by basically assuming that not a whole lot in the image changes from one frame to the next.

Intra-frame codecs (like ProRes) compress each frame as a stand alone image (for lack of a better term), but inter-frame codecs will basically (and this is a really superficial description) compress a whole frame, then interpolate the next 12-15 frames (typically whatever makes up a 1/2 second), then compress another whole frame, then interpolate the next 12-15, etc.,. If a lot of change happens during those interpolated frames (such as a camera flash) there is a good chance the image will turn into macro blocks because the codec doesn’t retain enough image information to recreate such a big change. You can crank up the bit rate to help alleviate those problems, or add more key frames (which reduces the number of interpolated frames) but then the file size goes up which starts eliminating the smaller file size advantage of going with an inter-frame codec to begin with.

I’m also not saying to go to ProRes 4444 (I actually specifically mentioned thinking even HQ was overkill), but just going with a quality, inter-frame codec (which is why I gave ProRes LT as an example) or conducting tests on potential problems areas in the footage to see if they will break whatever ‘flavor’ of H.264 one is using.

So, in a nutshell, inter-frame codecs have potential problems that intra-frame codecs do not so do some tests with the specific inter-frame codec you intend to use (settings, encoder, etc.,) before converting a ton of footage and getting neck deep into the edit.

[Michael Gissing]

[Craig Allen] “Bill, unless I missed something in his answer, the question is not whether you can see much of a difference between DV and H-264 when played back, but rather would he suggest ingesting DV footage into a NLE for editing.”

I am not sure why this has become a post about Bill’s workflow. The original poster indicated a mixture of Hi8 and DV PAL. Now the question of a suitable codec to edit is really simple in this case. Hi8 needs to be captured. Codecs best suited to editing are ProRes 422 or DNxHD depending on the NLE of choice.

DV PAL is a special case because it is the only codec in the PAL world with lower fields interlacing. This is a major problem and so it is best solved by taking the DV footage via a deck with SDI and capturing it ProRes or DNxHD upper field so it matches everything. It might be tempting to capture it as DV via firewire but years of experience with this approach led many to convert to ProRes and fix the field order.

H264 isn’t a wise choice for the edit codec on a long form doco. If you ever find a post supervisor who thinks it is then run. Leaving the DV as DV also isn’t a wise choice because of the fields issue which constantly plagues me in post with SD archive material. I am doing a 23.976 progressive feature doco at the moment with lots of archive from DV codec and the fields order issue is a nightmare.

[Bill Davis]

[Michael Gissing] “What you chose to do with your old tapes is entirely your business. I don’t consider it appropriate advice for the original poster. It seems your purpose is to justify a decision you made but that is not really relevant to the workflow being discussed.”

I disagree. If the OP (or others reading this thread) encounter historical legacy VHS or DV material and need to incorporate it into a higher rez program – this thread addresses EXACTLY information that could well be useful to them.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Bill Davis]

[Andrew Kimery] “So, in a nutshell, inter-frame codecs have potential problems that intra-frame codecs do not so do some tests with the specific inter-frame codec you intend to use (settings, encoder, etc.,) before converting a ton of footage and getting neck deep into the edit.”

Andrew, I’m in full agreement with this.

As I’ve tried to reiterate, my post has marginal value in a case where you have an OPTION about what kind of source files you will be ELECTING to encode – or about the codec you should choose IF the source footage has information you wish to preserve.

My narrow example only addresses circumstances where you have NO CHOICE – AND wish to employ analog historical footage in modern digital workflows.

I’m encouraged that if THIS is the situation an editor finds themselves in, they do not have to worry overmuch that further mezzanine transcoding will damage – or might enhance – what video quality is already on your tapes.

And further, unless they have some OTHER compelling need to mezzanine to a more robust encoding scheme – they will lose little (and possibly gain some ease of file handling) if they just store and use old analog transcodes in something data thrifty and manageable like the extremely widely supported h-264 formats.

I’ve learned something. And am happy to have shared it with others. That’s all.

.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Bill Davis]

[Michael Gissing] “I am not sure why this has become a post about Bill’s workflow.”

Sigh, Michael, It’s NEVER been about that.

I wanted a question answered that sprung from this discussion. To wit; Someone hands you a legacy tape to include in your DOCUMENTARY – is there a chance that encoding it in a higher level codec, say ProRes 444 – will yield a better preserved signal than simply capturing it to an h-264 file. And the answer appears to be NO. It will NOT make a visible difference.

And to address your “I don’t now Adam from Adam” comment. I suggest you do a simple Google search.He’s the very first Adam Wilt Listed. His credentials as someone who’s been intimately involved with the technical aspects of DV data streams are widely known as he’s been writing about precisely that – both on-line and in magazines for 20 plus years now.

IIRC Andrew brought up his name first as a authoritative source. I just happen to know him from the press room from NAB’s past.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.