How to fill SD dvd with as much information from HD project

[Eric Pautsch]

What frame rate did you shoot? What frame rate did you edit?

[Grant Strac]

29.97 and timeline 29.97 non drop for both

[Eric Pautsch]

Ok….then you export out a 720×480 16×9 Anamorphic ProRes file and use that to encode in Compressor using a bitrate of around 7.5 mb/s

Make sure your field order is the same throughout the entire process.

[Grant Strac]

I did several different tests.
1. Straight from timeline to compressor transcoded straight to dvd
2. Pro res SD 720*480 transcode to sd dvd7.5
3. Po res to hd 1440*1080 and transcode that to sd 7.5
4. Even, completely pointless, uncompressed 16bit to dvd 7.5
5. Un-Self contained to pro to sd
6. Un-Self straight to dvd

I found that Pro HD to dvd gave best quality even though longer process but I need full res print anyway

I went back to transcode the hd to sd and then to dvd several ways and still pro hd to sd dvd was best quality.

I even slapped deinterlacing filter on it but that made worse on both odd & even.

I feel like somethings missing when I do this because I’ve never seen this bad of output

[Eric Pautsch]

Your timeline is 1920×1080 29.97 (60i)correct?

Export out from that a 720×480 16×9 anamorphic file and encode from there. Its as simple as that.

[Jeff Meyer]

We can help you get a better product, we just need to know details. Knowing you’re having interlacing issues makes it a lot easier to give relevant, on-topic advice than hearing you want to use more space on a DVD or hearing that you’re Apple certified. If you feel like I’m insulting your intelligence asking simple questions I don’t intend to, I just need to make sure we’re talking on the same level. When troubleshooting issues with your students I’m sure you start at the basics.

Knowing we have an interlacing issue at hand, let’s start at the source. You say the project was shot on HDSLR at 29.97. If it were 23.976 we would know it were progressive, but with 29.97 we can’t be certain. Let’s dig a bit deeper so we know if the footage was sourced interlaced or progressive.

If the project was shot on a Canon DSLR (T2i, 5D Mk2, 5D Mk3, 7D, 60D, etc.) or Nikon HDSLR the footage was shot progressive – no field dominance. These manufacturers do not shoot interlaced footage with their HDSLRs.
If the project was shot with Panasonic (GH2) it could have been acquired interlaced or progressive. You’ll have to look into that with the DP, or check the original, unconverted files.

With the info above do you know if was the video interlaced or progressive?

You have SD files living on your timeline it sounds like. The standard HDSLR practice is to edit HD, then convert SD at he end. This produces an HD master and involves less time converting footage. Converting to SD up front for an SD deliverable is a perfectly fine workflow choice, and it saves disc space, but it needs to be done with care.

When you converted the footage to SD, did you convert to interlaced video at that point? If so what field dominance did you establish – lower or upper? Does your timeline have the same dominance?

[Grant Strac]

Well ok maybe this is my problem. The final cut timeline has mixed order. Sd is low and HD high as it should be. When I am outputting to pro hd it’s upper then get converted down to sd lower. That’s why I’m wondering should I transcode all my hd source footage to lower because that’s where it’s going to end up. Because right now this is mixed up&low, to up, to low

This was my most likely thought to what was going on but does it cause problem because hd is supposed to be upper. Or should I transcode the sd footage to upper for, which i tried and the pro res looked better but then same on sd output. OR, haha, should I transcode the sd final to upper?

That is the question. Gets confusing and couldn’t find any literature on it.

Due thanks for taking the time out

[Grant Strac]

well I appreciate your assistance. The question of getting more room on dvd is different topic. I was just trying to see if there was a different way to open up the dvd encode than I’ve been taught to get more space used on disc since it’s there. I wanted to run test on it for my own personal quest.

I’ve now moved onto completely different question, I should of posted different forum but Eric was assisting me.

The project was not shot on DSLR. Sorry for confusion I was using that as an example for the difference in quality when I do dslr pro res & sd compared to what I was working with now. I can’t say what the source footage was filmed in because I was hired after a prod house failed to deliver.

I do know that the hd was captured in HDV 1080 60i 1440*1080 29.97 upper field, the sd was captured as Pro res 720*480 lower field. HD & SD in interlaced. My final output is desired to SD 720*480 dvd. I then transcoded the hd to pro res after the fact trying to figure out the interlacing.

When I output I get this look. I’ve never had this low quality with my cameras. I know dslr is way more information than the 1440 hdv tape but still I can’t settle with myself that this is the output. It looks like dog ****.

[Eric Pautsch]

Then you need to recapture some footage since all field orders need to match

[Adam Taylor]

Wow !

I hope you don’t mind, Grant, but i thought i might just respond in a little more depth than my initial comment, as i am quite impressed that two words asked merely to illicit more information could cause you so much pain.

You Preface your request for assistance by telling all and sundry how much of an Apple certified expert you are. Then proceed to outline a problem that most people do not see as a problem, with stated aims that make little sense (i want to fill a dvd with 28mins of SD, regardless of whether it adds any quality??).

Then because i have the bare faced cheek to ask why? you start off on an abusive rant wrongly aimed at the one person who had taken the time to respond in more detail. Thats fair enough i suppose. I could have spent more time expounding on why i had the nerve to ask such an offensive question, but as i’m busy editing, i felt that the one word was sufficient.

Perhaps i should have explained my thinking in asking the question WHY? It was not to upset or piss you off, but merely to discover the reason for your question, in the belief that many solutions to problems are solved with lateral thinking. Approach from a different angle and you may find an answer that suprises you.

Other very knowledgeable and helpful people have gone out of their way to help you answer the problem you posed, and you continue to abuse them, with constant reminders of your lofty status as an Apple Certified Trainer and the one person in the world who has to mop up the problems of the inxperienced being savaged by forum posters, and by your demands that only the answers you see fit should be given.
Even at this point i was willing to remain out of this discussion, as many of the answers you were dismissing were giving the information you need to solve your dilemma had you bothered to apply some thought yourself.

Then you had to go and post this…”This project i’m working on is about bullying how it’s causing people all around to go to the extreme to try and stop their tormentors and how bad the outcome gets. Perfect for you. I’m sure you treat your employees famously”

Really? Having read your posts to those who have been trying to help you solve this issue, its blatantly obvious that the bully in this school yard is you.

The great thing about the Cow is that it is not anonymous. That goes a long way in making people think twice before dishing out abuse. People can see your name and know who is being brutish to them. Prospective employers can even use the posts people make on the cow to guage the suitability of a candidate.

I suppose what i am saying is that civility costs nothing, but can pay off in ways far more beneficial than being abusive can.

adam

Adam Taylor
Video Editor/Audio Mixer/ Compositor/Motion GFX/Barista
Character Options Ltd
Oldham, UK

http://www.sculptedbliss.co.uk
My YouTube Animations Page