-
can someone tell me me my online capture settings for my varicam footage? Gary Adcock?
-
Well, since I color correct with the 3-way, and it is realtime and doesn’t require rendering, then I am not recompressing. Good to know.
Shane
Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net -
I believe realtime coloring still requires rendering. You just don’t have to WAIT for it (realtime) because FCP and the G5 do it so fast. It plays it in realtime. But it’s still rendering. It still has to make a NEW file, because something has changed.
-
Nope…no rendering…no matter what render option I choose. Dark Green no render bar.
Shane
Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net -
Nope…no rendering…no matter what render option I choose. Dark Green no render bar.
The green render bar is still a render bar. It just means your computer is doing it really fast and in full quality (realtime). But, you can’t just change footage and not have a render. A complete video file must be created somwhere (either in RAM or an actual file) that your computer then “plays”.
-
But if I do not render, then there is no render file to refer to. Real time effects are effects that create no renders…dissolves, audio dissolves, 3-way color correction. I don’t render, so no render file is created. If I start with a new project and add real time effects, and look in the RENDER folder…it is empty.
If it renders them, where is it putting them?
Not trying to sound snide or incredulous…just curious as to why you say that it renders when I don’t see the render file.
Still trying to grasp compressions and re-compression…HD is too friggin complex.
Shane
Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net -
“But if I do not render, then there is no render file to refer to. Real time effects are effects that create no renders…dissolves, audio dissolves, 3-way color correction. I don’t render, so no render file is created. If I start with a new project and add real time effects, and look in the RENDER folder…it is empty.
If it renders them, where is it putting them?
Not trying to sound snide or incredulous…just curious as to why you say that it renders when I don’t see the render file.”
That’s a great question. I think they go into the RAM. But if you were to export your timeline (and hence be writing files to disk) I think you’d find it takes a lot longer to write than if you didn’t have the 3 way correcter and the grreen render bar.
Realtime means realtime RENDER, not no render. The data and calculations have to made. It just makes them fast on the fly because the filters are simple and it can do so, so the writing of a separate file to play isn’t necessary. BUt it’s still rendering and recompresing.
-
AAAhh….Now I get ya.
But I am with Walter for the quality…it looks fine. I have upconverted 720p24 DVCPRO HD to 1080p 23.98 HDCAM a couple times and both times it looked great. Even when we went in for fixes to a lower third at another post facility, the online editor, looking at it on the HUGE Sony HD CRT commented that it looked good. QC came back clean from the networks. So that is a perfectly viable workflow.
As is what you are doing. Capturing at 10-bit or 8-bit uncompressed and coloring that way will get you better results due to the compression you are dealing with. And side by side on similar monitors you WILL see a difference. BUT that is not how the viewing audience will see it. When it goes to air the footage is compressed into an MPEG-2 stream (high end, mind you) and sent out over the airwaves. Then it lands on their consumer sets and can look any NUMBER of ways. At that point you might not notice the difference in quality.
But that is not to say abandon your high standards. Making it the best it can be should be our goal. Given the budgets that many of us have to deal with, coloring the DVCPRO HD footage in its native codec with the tools at hand (or even with Final Touch) and outputting to DVCPRO HD or upconverting to D5 via a capture card is all that our budget allows. We don’t have time to recapture the footage, and we might not have the drive space. And since the workflow we use looks great and passes QC with flying colors we go with it. Given the time and budget I might do the uncompressed thing. But I can’t, so I don’t. But to call what me and Walter are doing as substandard and spreading of misinformation is going a bit far. It is a viable workflow that works well.
Shane
Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net -
“But I am with Walter for the quality…it looks fine. I have upconverted 720p24 DVCPRO HD to 1080p 23.98 HDCAM a couple times and both times it looked great. Even when we went in for fixes to a lower third at another post facility, the online editor, looking at it on the HUGE Sony HD CRT commented that it looked good. QC came back clean from the networks. So that is a perfectly viable workflow. ”
Yeah, it just depends on how anal you want to be, and what type of color correction you’re doing. It’s a good codec, and so it probably will end up looking good. But if you’re blowing up to film or showing someone on a big screen, it’s no good. BUt for most TV, it’s probably prefectly great. You do it, and your clinets are happy, so go for it.
“As is what you are doing. Capturing at 10-bit or 8-bit uncompressed and coloring that way will get you better results due to the compression you are dealing with. And side by side on similar monitors you WILL see a difference. BUT that is not how the viewing audience will see it. When it goes to air the footage is compressed into an MPEG-2 stream (high end, mind you) and sent out over the airwaves. Then it lands on their consumer sets and can look any NUMBER of ways. At that point you might not notice the difference in quality.”
Oh yeah, totally right. Hey, DVDs look great, too, and they’re crappy Mpeg2 compression. But when your making a D5 master for someone who’s spent a looot of money on something, and they want the best, then they should get the best.
But that is not to say abandon your high standards. Making it the best it can be should be our goal. Given the budgets that many of us have to deal with, coloring the DVCPRO HD footage in its native codec with the tools at hand (or even with Final Touch) and outputting to DVCPRO HD or upconverting to D5 via a capture card is all that our budget allows. We don’t have time to recapture the footage, and we might not have the drive space. And since the workflow we use looks great and passes QC with flying colors we go with it. Given the time and budget I might do the uncompressed thing. But I can’t, so I don’t. But to call what me and Walter are doing as substandard and spreading of misinformation is going a bit far. It is a viable workflow that works well.
I NEVER said “substandard”. It is totally viable. And I never said what you’re spreading is misinformation. What Walter is spreading is misinformation because he says “there is no quality differnce. Recompressing to a highly lossy codec doesn’t lose information”. That is a lie and an untruth. The fact is there is an actual quality differnce, that may or may not be negligible depending on what you want and how deeply you want to care. No one ever said your worklfow is no good. Just that it’s not the best and the purist. And whether someone wants to do it or not isn’t the issue for me, the issue is in saying “there’s no mathematical difference” which is untrue and unscientific. Also, it’s important to learn HOW everything works, and what exacty is happening to your footage at every stage to all become better at post. So, I get upset, not becuase some choose to render back into the DVCPROHD codec, but because some claim that “nothing’s happening”. Which is wrong.
Another great discussion is the merits of different ways of up/cross converting 720p footage to 1080i. Some use Telanex, some go to HDCAM, or maybe use a Kona 3, or Blackmagic HDPRO. I personally, would never go to HDCAM, since HDcam is a 3:1:1 color space and it will shift my color timing that I did in a 4:2:2 space. Some will for a variety of reasons. And that’s cool. But, regardless, I think it’s good to talk and make sure thescientific facts of whats happening are out in the open.
-
HDCAM is 3:1:1? Well shoot, I forgot about that. OK, next time I master to D5.
Shane
Littlefrog Post
http://www.lfhd.net -
[jeremiah black] “Yeah, it just depends on how anal you want to be, and what type of color correction you’re doing. It’s a good codec, and so it probably will end up looking good. But if you’re blowing up to film or showing someone on a big screen, it’s no good. BUt for most TV, it’s probably prefectly great. You do it, and your clinets are happy, so go for it.”
How’s a 65′ screen in a movie theater? We produced our first independent film on the Varicam and cut it using the DVCPro HD codec, color corrected it in FCP, mastered it back to my 1200A and played it directly off the 1200A to a Panasonic projector to an audience of 200, mostly local filmmakers and producers. It was flawless and looked just like 35mm film. 24p production all the way and it was outstanding on the screen with all positive comments. So for all these professionals in the business it looked really really good.
Have you even worked with DVCPro HD yet? I don’t think so because you obviously don’t understand how good it looks. Our clients are broadcast networks and they are telling us the work is outstanding.
[jeremiah black] “I NEVER said “substandard”. It is totally viable. And I never said what you’re spreading is misinformation. What Walter is spreading is misinformation because he says “there is no quality differnce. Recompressing to a highly lossy codec doesn’t lose information”. That is a lie and an untruth.”
Ok, you’re calling me a liar and putting false words in my mouth? Dude, I’m completely done with this thread and really don’t care how you want to edit your footage.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
https://www.biscardicreative.com
HD Editorial & Animation for Food Network’s “Good Eats”
HD Editorial for “Assignment Earth”“I reject your reality and substitute my own!” – Adam Savage, Mythbusters
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up