Converting .MTS files to edit in final cut pro

[Dave Farrants]

About right.

[Matt Campbell]

Sean, you might want to try converting your MTS file ProRes LT. Those camera’s don’t shoot at a very high bit rate and ProRes LT is probably the equivalent to that. Plus it will save you some storage space on file size without a noticeable difference in image quality. ProRes 422, IMHO, is just overkill for YouTube web delivery.

We often use ProRes LT for even pro-sumer level camera’s like the Sony EX3, which shoots XDCamEX footage at 35 mbps. ProRes LT is right around that bitrate I think, at about 45 Mbps. ProRes 422 is like 110 and 422 HQ is about 220. Again, you’ll save storage space.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Sean Livings]

Thanks for this information Matt.

Have now transferred all the files to ProRes 422 – in total they take up just over 300gb!!! That is a lot of storage space – way too much.

Unfortunatly, I don’t have the ProRes LT option in ClipWrap. Although ClipWap has worked brilliantly for me – great sofware.

[Dorit Grunberger]

Regarding this issue, how much bigger than the .mts files are the ClipWrap files and is it possible to edit ClipWrap .mov files in FCP 7 without transcoding to ProRes? I ask this because the transcoding inflates the files almost 10 fold!! Is there any way around it?
A friend who owns a PMW-EX3 gets great ingested XDCAM footage at a fraction of the size…

Thanks in advance,
Dorit

[Shane Ross]

[dorit grunberger] “how much bigger than the .mts files are the ClipWrap files”

About5 times larger. If you go with ProRes 422. Go with LT and they will be about 3-4 times larger.

[dorit grunberger] ” is it possible to edit ClipWrap .mov files in FCP 7 without transcoding to ProRes?”

They aren’t “clipwrap movie fies.” Clipwrap transcodes the native format to one FCP can edit with. That happens to be ProRes. FCP requires the footage be converted to ProRes. The wrapped version without converting is H.264, and FCP does NOT edit H.264 well at all. Too many potential issues to get into.

[dorit grunberger] “Is there any way around it?”

Want to edit native? Then use Adobe Premiere.

[dorit grunberger] “A friend who owns a PMW-EX3 gets great ingested XDCAM footage at a fraction of the size…”

Because the camera shoots XDCAM, and FCP edits XDCAM natively. Well, it has to be re-wrapped, but FCP edits it. It does not edit AVCHD native. Two different formats.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Dorit Grunberger]

Thanks Shane

I have Adobe Premiere and am seriously thinking of switching, or adding it to my FCP 7 workflow.
Do you think ProRes LT will be good enough to export out my final project or are you suggesting I edit with it and take my fine cut out in ProRes or ProRes HQ? In other words, will ProRes LT have all the info from the AF100 I could get from a regular ProRes transcode?
Yeah, I understand about the FCP-H.264 incompatability, I was just hopeful the ClipWrap found a way to make it palatable for FCP….
I still don’t understand why the AVCHD to ProRes transcode gets so inflated with no discernible increase in quality over the smaller XDCAM files. I guess, like you said, two different formats.

Thanks in advance,
Dorit

[Matt Campbell]

Do you think ProRes LT will be good enough to export out my final project or are you suggesting I edit with it and take my fine cut out in ProRes or ProRes HQ?.

This wouldn’t make sense because if you edit ProRes LT, you won’t get any better than that. Just a larger file. Unless your thinking about doing an offline/online edit. But with this type of footage, there is really no need. Stay online and edit PR LT. Export your master as PR LT.

I still don’t understand why the AVCHD to ProRes transcode gets so inflated with no discernible increase in quality over the smaller XDCAM files.

AVCHD is a camera codec not designed for editorial work. Its the same with DSLR’s that shoot H.264. The footage looks great, but the bitrates are not as high as the higher end cameras. No matter what codec you transcode to for editing, in any system, the footage won’t look any better than the originals. So I would transcode to a codec of a similar, but higher bitrate for editing. This won’t improve the quality, but it will prevent it from getting any worse.

ProRes files are larger, but that’s just the nature of the beast. Again, choose a ProRes codec that’s is close to the bitrate of the camera codec. I often use ProRes LT for XDCamEX footage, but use regular ProRes 422 for just about everything else. Just be glad your not working with full raster 1080 uncompressed or even larger like 2 or 4K. Remember the better the codec, the larger the file and the more CPU power and more importantly disc speed you’ll need to edit it.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Dorit Grunberger]

Thanks for your patience. I’m fast gaining a better understanding of all of this stuff.

So, looked up on Apple’s site the data rates for all their ProRes codecs. ProRes LT is 82 Mbps and ProRes Proxy is 36 Mbps.
Maximum data rate on the Panasonic AF100 is 24Mbps in PH mode (average 21Mbps).
If I understood your recommendation I could use the Proxy (I don’t know anything about it) to decrease file sizes and still get the same quality as LT?

Thanks in advance,
Dorit

[Shane Ross]

[dorit grunberger] “If I understood your recommendation I could use the Proxy (I don’t know anything about it) to decrease file sizes and still get the same quality as LT?”

Proxy is low low quality. Meant for “offline” editing only. Meaning you will go back and reingest at higher quality later. It might be fine to use if all you are doing is going to the web though…

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Dorit Grunberger]

Hi Shane

The plot thickens. Despite my best attempts at changing the ingest codec in FCP 7, it stays stuck on ProRes. I tried changing the audio/Video settings to either LT or HQ, and it completely ignores me :-(.
I also tried to change the preferences in the Log and Transfer window, hit OK and it just defaults back to ProRes. Does this sound like a corruption in FCP that would require a re-install? I sure hope not. As it stands, I’m getting transcoded files that are about 6x heftier than their AVCHD parents and I’d love to slim them down. Any ideas? Am I missing something?

Thanks in advance,
Dorit