-
Advice on docu workflow with SD tape footage, FCPX or not?
-
[Bill Davis] “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.”
Maybe, but in a Broadcast workflow, no visible difference doesn’t necessarily mean it will pass a tech check
-
Hello again, sorry, been busy…
Bill, thanks for the input,
but I tend to agree with the others
as to codecs:[Bill Davis] “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”
Even though this is most certainly true, and you will not gain
any quality on your original image by going with a larger/better codec
such as Prores, what you WILL gain is more latitude
for grading, meaning 10bit space and 4:2:2 chroma sampling
will give you the possibility to grade in a smoother way,
even if of course you won’t be getting back info
that was lost already from the beginning…
So if you won’t be grading the footage it’s
probably just about the same, but if you do
better codecs will probably yield better results,
at least they should, as I say this without having done proper testing.
Also, I agree with Michael that although handling
of H.264 files has gotten a lot better over the years,
having long timelines full of them is a good recipe for major headaches.
As far as using them for archiving it may very well be a very sensible solution. -
[Michael Gissing] “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.”
Michael,
if I understand you correctly you’ve had
lots of problems with DV mainly
because you’re mixing it with other codecs
that have upper field priority, right?
I could really see the trouble there…
But would you still recommend staying away from DV
if all material was the same?
I remember editing that way a long while ago
and don’t recall any issues…
I’m asking because I got the chance to talk some more
to the director and it seems that after all
almost everything is on DV PAL,
most HI8 having been transferred to DV many years ago.
So I would be tempted to stay on DV,
although I know for grading Prores would still be better.
What would you say about going Prores LT
if I should transcode?
It’s the same bitrate for SD as DV but I would gain
10 bit and 4:2:2 sampling, so I’m guessing it would be fine,
although I still wonder if it wouldn’t be better going Prores 422,
but that would entail a lot more storage space…
Thoughts?
Also, the blackmagic card he has has no SDI,
so I don’ know yet if blackmagic’s software will
change field priority when ingesting/transcoding to Prores,
will ask them… -
[Bill Davis] “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.”
It may, after processing and re-compression. Input H.264, process, re-encode to H.264 for delivery (which maybe gets re-encoding as MPEG-2 or H.264 at some point for transmission)… that could easily exaggerate the initial compression artifacts.
I’d want to test the whole workflow, including grading and output with lossy compression, before committing.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
Yeah, I always thought it was odd that I had to learn and meet all sorts of “broadcast standards” with station folk telling me that the ENGINEERS were in charge of all that – then the moment the the crappy Rodney King vs the Police video surfaced it ran on every conceivable network despite its awful tech quality – and nobody blinked. As outside vendors we have to make sure EVERY pixel meets specs some engineer probably wrote for broadcast in the 70s that even the stations themselves don’t use anymore. Sheesh!
I’m all for quality standards. I just like ones that apply to everyone for valid technical reasons.
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.
-
I must be wording things very badly here. I am not now nor have I ever advocated for using h.264 as an EDITING codec. I’m using it as a STORAGE codec for digitized low rate signals such as those coming off VHS or DVCAM tapes. If I was going to EDIT with it, I’d digitize it, I’d let X wrap it in a nice edit-friendly ProRes hug. My comments are about not needing to second guess the workflow already built directly into X. If X sees s file that needs transcoding, it will indicate that. If not, just leave things alone. I read all the time about people using outboard steps to rewrap this and pre-transcode that before import to X – largely, I think because that’s how they’ve always done things. If you’re downrezzing higher quality footage fine, have at it. But if you’re handed some grandmas VHS-C cassette and néed to get it into X, you just don’t need an expensive Terenex encoder to do that properly. Yeah, you may want or need similar high end gear to handle other types of files – but not captures from low Rez sources. Simple as that.
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.
-
[Mauricio Lleras]”I’m asking because I got the chance to talk some more
to the director and it seems that after all almost everything is on DV PAL,
most HI8 having been transferred to DV many years ago. So I would be tempted to stay on DV,”If everything is already DV codec then there is the possibility of having a lower fields project and converting to upper on the final graded output. But as soon as you mix upper and lower in the sequence you will need to shift fields. By capturing via firewire you are doing a direct data transfer and nt transcoding.
In the old days where the show was entirely DV I would still use an Uncompressed 10 bit 422 timeline and then ProRes 422 when it became available to do the grade in FCP4.5 or 5. That meant adding a shift fields filter to everything but grading and outputting uncompressed (or ProRes) upper master. The problem with using shoft fields on every shot was only a problem if a shot was slo mo. I would have to render the slo mo in a DV timeline and output as prores and drop the shot in.
DV usually needs chroma smoothing processing. I used to use Nattress filters to do that but I haven’t seen DV in Resolve so I don’t know how it grades. It has been so long since I used DV codec. In PAL I really disliked it for the fields issue alone and the blockiness.
If there are not other codecs but DV then firewire is a valid option.
-
The last project I needed to digitize VHS Hi8 & 3/4″ tape was many years ago. I was able to enhance these legacy formats using a Digital Rapids encoder. It has filters that greatly reduced interlaced artifacting and noise. Some of the tape was dubs of Betacam to VHS and I was amazed at jump up in quality. It was a bit more work to set it up but the results were much better than the Matrox RTX card I was using then. I was editing in an early version of Premiere Pro and created 422 MPEG2 files. MPEG2 files work well with PP CS6 and they are easy to scale the 4:3 to HD time lines. I can color correct in PP and can achieve a close enough match to the XDCAM videos saturation and contrast. I still have the Digital Rapids encoder with a DR1500 card ready but rarely use it. Possibly, the Digital Rapids HD encoders would upscale better?
-
“B – It’s super easy to go from tape into X. Just get a digitizer. I’ve used the simple Black Magic Video Recorder unit that costs under $200 and have gotten great results inside FCP X directlly to h-264.”
Even if you did not mean to edit using this transcode, I don’t get the point. If all you are doing is storing the original media then hard drives are a lot less reliable long term than tape. And why would you want to do two transcodes instead of none? X has no problem with SD DV. If the tapes are HDV, or a a mix of different codecs, then pro res 422 would be a better choice than h-264.
To follow your advice above, just get one of these: https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MD464LL/A/apple-thunderbolt-to-firewire-adapter. (assuming you have one of the newer Macs that does not have a firewire port.
Instead of asking Adam if it’s true that you won’t see much difference between h-264 and DV videos, you should have asked him how best to archive DV tapes, assuming you want another copy of them. The tapes themselves will outlast hard drives.
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.
-
At the risk of over-simplifying – and since we’re all visual people – here’s a diagram of what I want.
I’m tired of dragging hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of nearly obsolete historical tapes around. I want the tapes GONE, yet important content preserved in case I need to revisit it later.
I asked Adam – who is an expert in DV formats – to help me understand if doing the transcode to h-264 would be inferior to capturing it as something better – like ProRes 442. He explained that it won’t in any practical sense and told me why.
That is precisely what I wanted to know. And now I do.
If you guys want to keep your old DV tape libraries active – knock yourselves out. I don’t.
Simple as that.
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.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up