Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy HDV rendering sucks!

  • HDV rendering sucks!

    Posted by Tom Von doom on July 10, 2008 at 6:59 pm

    Hello again,

    I’m back in HDV rendering hell. I have a documentary project on my dual-core 3 gig mac pro with 12 gigs of RAM, a kona 3 card, 4 TBs of fibre-raid storage and FCP 6.03. I have a lot of smoothcam effects, and I have read about the difficulties. I’m trying to export the picture to send to the sound mixer. If I try to export without rendering, it crashes. If I render more than 5 mins at a time, it crashes. When I finish one set of renders and move on to the next, the previous clips come unrendered. It’s infuriating. Do I really have to export every smoothcam shot and reimport it as a new clip? Or export the movie minute by minute? It’s only 109 mins. Shouldn’t take long… aaargh! Any advice?

    Tom Von doom replied 17 years, 10 months ago 3 Members · 10 Replies
  • 10 Replies
  • Walter Biscardi

    July 10, 2008 at 7:01 pm

    Yes, HDV rendering is terrible.

    On the Smoothcam shots, are they short master clips or did you bring in very long reels and just cut down from there. Smoothcam will analyze and entire piece of media, not just the In/Out points.

    Walter Biscardi, Jr.
    Biscardi Creative Media
    HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.

    STOP STARING AND START GRADING WITH APPLE COLOR Apple Color Training DVD available now!
    Read my Blog!
    View Walter Biscardi's profile on LinkedIn

  • Tom Von doom

    July 10, 2008 at 7:17 pm

    I exported just the footage I wanted and made new master clips for smoothcamming. If I’d known about the rendering issue, I would have re-exported/re-imported the clips when I was working on them. Sigh. I guess I just want reassurance that the problem is FCP, and not something I’ve overlooked or done incorrectly.

    Thanks.

  • Jeremy Garchow

    July 10, 2008 at 7:35 pm

    Why don’t you change your rednering settings to ProRes in the sequence settings? Then if you put a filter on every clip and render, your timleine will then be in a ProRes intermediary.

    I think this would be much more preferable than rendering to HDV native, but then again, I’ve never worked with HDV so this is just an educatued guess.

    Jeremy

  • Tom Von doom

    July 10, 2008 at 7:54 pm

    I am rendering in a prores sequence. Didn’t mean to imply I was using the HDV native codec, just that the footage originated as HDV. Like I said, I just want to confirm that I’m not suffering needlessly.

  • Jeremy Garchow

    July 10, 2008 at 8:07 pm

    You don’t have to render in a ProRes sequence, you can render to ProRes in an HDV sequence.

    Command-zero > Render Control > Codec > Apple ProRes 422 for HDV/XDCam

    You can then go to VIdeo Processing and set it to render 8bit if you want to speed stuff up even more, but I’d suggest rendering out 10bit for your final.

    Also, there’s a bug with SmoothCam stuff that I have noticed too. It does come unrendered which really really blows. I don’t know of a fix.

    Jeremy

  • Tom Von doom

    July 10, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    Hey Jeremy,

    Thanks for taking time to respond. I’m in a ProRes 422 sequence, using the ProRes compressor. What’s the difference between that and trying your suggestion? Isn’t it rendering to ProRes 422 already? If I switch to the Apple ProRes 422 for HDV/XDCam selection, of course, everything comes unrendered, not just the Smoothcam clips. I’m not worried about taking the time if I have to, but do I have to?

  • Jeremy Garchow

    July 10, 2008 at 11:21 pm

    No, you don’t have to do anything.

    I only suggeted it as it’s an option and everything won’t have to get transcoded and stretched as your method is doing now. HDV will stay HDV and everything that needs rendering will get rendered to ProRes in the same HDV aspect ratio. Your method, abolutely everything needs to get rendered as your are transcoding your entire sequence.

    It’s up to you, you should test and see what you like better.

    Jeremy

  • Tom Von doom

    July 10, 2008 at 11:45 pm

    So, the way I’m doing it, the image stays 1440 x 1080 and is stretched on output. If I use your method, it is resized when rendered in the timeline to 1920 x 1080. Is that what you’re saying?

  • Jeremy Garchow

    July 11, 2008 at 12:25 am

    I’m saying the opposite.

  • Tom Von doom

    July 11, 2008 at 3:16 am

    Right. I knew that…

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy