HD possibilities on Final Cut Pro

[Mrvideo]

The F900 is uncompressed HD while the Panasonic cameras are somewhat compressed footage.

To do uncompressed HD you are going to need a FiberChannel RAID with 4Gb channels. Theses files are coming in at over 200 MB/sec each stream.

Depending on what version of FCP you are using but back to FCP 4, it was called FCP HD, which means there are codecs to handle those formats.

You metion a Decklink card; is it an HD 4:2:2 capture card?

[Steve Eisen]

They all work VERY well with the right hardware. As far as storage, it depends on what format you want to edit. For Uncompressed HD, you will need a fibre channel RAID. For DVCPro HD, you can get away with FW800 or SATA HD’s. You did not specify which BM card you have.

Steve Eisen
Eisen Video Productions
Director-At-Large
Chicago Final Cut Pro Users Group

[David Battistella]

Mr. Video is FLAT OUT WRONG!!! WRONG WRONG!!!. The F900 is NOT uncompressed. It records to the HDCAM format which is a 3:1:1 compression and color scheme. The signal recorded to tape is compressed.

Here are some things to think about:

F-900 HDCAM records the same size picture as HDV 1440×1080 (with a different compression scheme) It records 1080 24 P images
Varicam Records 4:2:2 720P 24P (smaller frame size (1280×720) but progressive image)Varicam allows you to shoot true(film style) vari speed footage
HDX-900 records 720P (1280×720) or 1080P (1920×1080) 24 frame material.

Consider the following factors
1. HDCAM deck rental charges (1500perday) or dubbing charges vs a Panasonic 1200a or 1400A for capturing.
2. HDCAM means traditional OFFLINE/ONLINE workflow (no native HDCAM support in FCP).
3. HDX-900 means you can edit on firewire drives and deliver that same FULL QUALITY sequence to a digital house for a film out.
4. PS: you could also record that same sequence to HDCAM or D5 if you want to.

if you want, you can contact me off board (click on my head for my e-mail) and I will explain this in more detail.

Thanks,

David

Peace and Love 🙂

[Sean Oneil]

[David Battistella] “Mr. Video is FLAT OUT WRONG!!! WRONG WRONG!!!. The F900 is NOT uncompressed. It records to the HDCAM format which is a 3:1:1 compression and color scheme. The signal recorded to tape is compressed.”

I wouldn’t say he’s flat out wrong. He’s speaking in pragmatic terms that reflect the workflow. He’s saying that to work with that format you must capture it as uncompressed and thus need bigger faster drives. But yes, as far as compression on the tape, HDCam is far from uncompressed.

[David Battistella] “3. HDX-900 means you can edit on firewire drives and deliver that same FULL QUALITY sequence to a digital house for a film out.”
That’s only true if you use the right workflow. Any transitions, filters, opacity, size change or CC (basically any alteration of the picture other than cuts only editing) will not be full quality if you render back out to DVCProHD (or print to DVCProHD tape). If there are any effects, you need to render the final output on an uncompressed sequence to maintain full quality.

As for some other posts in the thread, you do not need a Fiber Channel array for uncompressed HD. You can use an 8-disk external SATA array which will work great and cost a lot less.

Sean

[David Battistella]

Sean,

I see this qualty arguement often when it comes to DVCPRO HD. DVCPRO HD is an 8 bit codec. If you come in or go out firewire it is lossless (it’s a digital stream. You are saying that the 8 bit codec that runs at a native 5.5mb/sec, needs to be bumped to a 10bit UC timeline to be rendered. I think this is overkill. You are introducing data that can not be improved upon. Rendering in the native DVCPRO HD 4:2:2 codec is clean and no where near the artifacting of HDV (which really does need to be converted to a usable for mat for post).

I know that my post to Mr. Video was strong, but it is this kind of misinformation that confuses people when making workflow choices. He stated the F900 is uncompressed and it is not.

It also depends on the finsish. For instance Walter Biscardi who does Good Eats shot on Varicam does not convert every show to a 10 bit uc sequence for CC, it stays natively in Varicam 720 until output back to tape. If you have a Kona card you are can actaully output this as an 8 or 10 bit stream, the conversion is done right there.

This is why the Panasonic codec workflow for post is so great. Small file sizes, working in the native codec with 4:2:2 color space, the hold up very well to first generation tests. If you see issues on specific shots or graphics you can render them out seperately and bring them back in. Most programs are very image based and less graphics intensive now.

For a commercial shot on Varicam maybe the choice could be make to work in Uncompressed 10 bit, because of a lot of image processing that is going to go on, that’s a great idea, but the orginal post was asking for a workflow for a documentary with many hours of footage. (this is why I described the real costs associated with shooting HDCAM over DVCPRO HD). I would not be surprised to see the HDX-900 replacing the F900 on some feature film shoots in the coming couple of years. Maybe DOP’s will go for the look of thiis camera over SONY. With a 12-bit UC stream coming off the side of it, maybe peaple will record 4:4:4 to a Viper with a tape back up with matching TC for dailies.

Sometimes people like to say “you need to do this”, “you need to do that” when it just isn’t nessesary and it doesn’t make sense and it’s based on a notion.

Good thread!

Cheers,

David

Peace and Love 🙂

[Gary Adcock]

[MrVideo] “The F900 is uncompressed HD while the Panasonic cameras are somewhat compressed footage.”

this is not true
ALL HD formats in recorded camera are compressed. WHile Panasonic allows you to use the native 1’s &0’s from the tape in FCP you need Sony Xpri or a Quantel system to use the Sony native format.

[MrVideo] “To do uncompressed HD you are going to need a FiberChannel RAID with 4Gb channels. Theses files are coming in at over 200 MB/sec each stream.”

Only as when brought in as 4:4:4 uncompressed RGB files. 1080 24psf @ 8 bit is closer to 100 mgs a second. I ahe been doing Uncompressed 10bit 1080i on 2G fibre for years now.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

[Gary Adcock]

[David Battistella] “I see this qualty arguement often when it comes to DVCPRO HD. DVCPRO HD is an 8 bit codec.”
Actually David and Sean– all tape formats recorded in camera are 8bit. Both the Varicam and HDCAM 9XX models can output greater bit depth (10 or 12 bit depending on model) when sending out HDSDI rather than recording to internal tape- recording to \the tape incamera is always less.

[David Battistella] “If you come in or go out firewire it is lossless”
only if you have not changed anything- render in FCP can ( and will) change the bit’s making the output lossy.

[David Battistella] “You are saying that the 8 bit codec that runs at a native 5.5mb/sec, needs to be bumped to a 10bit UC timeline to be rendered. I think this is overkill.”
this one depends on the materials – Often 8bit is fine for most uses. Many times it is not.

gary adcock
Studio37
HD & Film Consultation
Post and Production Workflows

[Walter Biscardi]

[MrVideo] “To do uncompressed HD you are going to need a FiberChannel RAID with 4Gb channels. Theses files are coming in at over 200 MB/sec each stream.”

Not anymore. The CalDigit S2VR HD can handle this with a 5 drive SATA array. We own one now and it tops out at 230MB/s. Standard 4:2:2 uncompressed HD is actually around 150 – 175MB/s, 4:4:4 comes out much higher.

[MrVideo] “The F900 is uncompressed HD while the Panasonic cameras are somewhat compressed footage.”

Both the Panasonic and Sony cameras are uncompressed before they record to tape. If you send the HD-SDI feed to a hard drive recorder or to an uncompressed NLE system then you have true uncompressed HD. If you record to tape with either, then you have compressed HD.

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

[Sean Oneil]

David, I never said anyone NEEDS to do it. I said they need to do it to preserve full-quality. Big difference. Is preserving the full quality always necessary? No. Is the loss from 2 generations of DVCPro HD compression bad or noticeable right away? No. Obviously it’s better than any SD or HDV workflow. But the fact is it is NOT full-quality when you re-render it. It goes through another round of lossy compression. This may not even be visible on your monitor when it leaves your shop, but the damage is there and can potentially show up later on (like MPEG compression for DVD or broadcast). This is a good website regarding the issue:
https://codecs.onerivermedia.com/

So the only way to preserve everything is to render on a 8 or 10-bit UC timeline. But if someone can’t afford the disk requirements for an uncompressed finishing workflow then I would hardly worry about it. When working with that small of a budget, no client should ever complain about a lossy DVCProHD workflow. It’s certainly 10 times better than what the same money would get them from an Avid shop. And if the plan is to deliver on DVCProHD tape, then it makes no difference either way. But you can’t just call it “full quality” when it isn’t.

Sean

[Walter Biscardi]

[Sean ONeil] “So the only way to preserve everything is to render on a 8 or 10-bit UC timeline. But if someone can’t afford the disk requirements for an uncompressed finishing workflow then I would hardly worry about it. When working with that small of a budget, no client should ever complain about a lossy DVCProHD workflow. It’s certainly 10 times better than what the same money would get them from an Avid shop. And if the plan is to deliver on DVCProHD tape, then it makes no difference either way. But you can’t just call it “full quality” when it isn’t.”

I just feel I have to step in here for a moment. To say “if someone can’t afford the disk requirements for uncompressed finishing workflow then I would hardly worry about it” does not apply in our case. We currently have about 6TB of storage in the shop and about to order another 4TB next month. When we receive that last storage, we’ll have at least 6TB of storage easily capable of 4:2:2 10 bit uncompressed and some at 4:4:4 speeds.

Despite that, I choose to work in the DVCPro HD codec for all our broadcast HD work. Why? Because I consider it a waste to capture DVCPro HD at anything higher than it’s native format. I can’t “add quality” to what has been recorded on tape, that’s just not possible. That’s like capturing DV at 10bit uncompressed and somehow thinking you’ve “increased the quality” of your footage. It doesn’t happen. What you’re really doing is increasing the quality of your graphics by going to an uncompressed workflow. With DVCPro HD, the graphics quality is pristine so we don’t have a need to go uncompressed.

Now we have some amazing contributors to this forum who have pointed out the plusses and minuses of DVCPro HD vs. uncomprssed. How Marco ever has the time to keep up with that codec comparison I’ll never know and Graeme Nattress has more technical knowledge than any human being should be allowed. Their points and arguments are completely valid and if you really go in and look at the scopes, zoom way in on footage samples, it’s all right there to see.

In my case, I don’t have any viewers at home who have scopes next to their TV’s nor do they zoom the picture in about 500 – 600% to see all the shortcomings of the codecs. What I see by simply looking at my 20″ Sony brodcast monitor and my 50″ Panasonic professional plasma screen is no difference, to my eye, between original captured DVCPro HD footage and the completed, color corrected episode. My clients sitting in the room see no difference.

As I’ve noted on this forum in the past, the first thing we did was side by side test of 10bit captures and DVCPro HD captures. We also did completed sections of shows with full color correction and graphics. None of us could see the difference on the screen and to me that’s all that matters. Zooming in on the scopes and all of that is fine if you really want to get into the technical nitty gritty, but at the end of the day, what it looks like on the screen, sitting back in your chair is all that matters.

Quality Control at two networks have told me we’re delivering the best looking HD they are getting. That tells me from an engineering / broadcast quality standpoint, the DVCPro HD workflow is valid and is not a “cheap way out.”

So if you really want to work in uncompressed HD, by all means go for it. But for our worfklow here, DVCPro HD is a matter of choice, not a matter of budget.

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