-
import ACVHD
I have a ACVHD handycam and when I import the streams into Finalcut, the .mts files transcode into ProRes 422. Could this transcoding get worse the quality of the mts files? I read that Premiere CS4 import native mts files. Does this mean that Premiere doesn’t change the files quality? or simply means that Premiere transcodes on-the-fly? This question is based on the fact that I read that mts file “have to” be converted because ACVHD is not a frame-based codec. Is it true?
-
6 Replies
-
Yes. What this means is that Premiere works with the native crappy MPEG-4 H.264 media that’s horrible to edit or composite or do anything will, while FCP converts the media to a high resolution codec that can be used for any effects and edits and responds easily.
All the best,
Tom
Class on Demand DVDs “Complete Training for FCP7,” “Basic Training for FCS” and “Final Cut Express Made Easy”
Author: “Final Cut Pro 5 Editing Essentials” and “Final Cut Express 4 Editing Workshop” -
Thanks Tom!
So, if you had to choose between mts-in-CS4 or prores422-in-FCP, you’d choose FCP (even if preres422 is an “added step”), right? So in your opinion the FCP “re-encoding” (into prores) doesn’t get worse the quality of mts, right?
Infact… I have the last question: using FCP7 with intel-mac, I see that the encoding from mts to prores is very fast! So, perhaps FCP7 doesn’t really “encode”…perhaps it simply re-pack the video file (without changing the video quality with an encoding step)?
Thanks. -
Yes. No. It transcodes it to a different codec and format both video and audio. Speed depends on the speed of your computer.
All the best,
Tom
Class on Demand DVDs “Complete Training for FCP7,” “Basic Training for FCS” and “Final Cut Express Made Easy”
Author: “Final Cut Pro 5 Editing Essentials” and “Final Cut Express 4 Editing Workshop” -
Thanks a lot, Tom!
-
ClipWrap may be another option.
John
MacPro 8-core 2.8GHz 8 GB RAM OS 10.5.8 QT7.6.4 Kona 3 Dual Cinema 23 ATI Radeon HD 3870, 24″ TV-Logic Monitor, ATTO ExpressSAS R380 RAID Adapter, PDE enclosure with 8-drive 6TB RAID 5
FCS 3 (FCP 7.0.1, Motion 4.0.1, Comp 3.5.1, DVDSP 4.2.2, Color 1.5.1)Pro Tools HD w SYNC IO & 192 Digital I/O, Yamaha DM1000, Millennia Media HV-3C, Neumann U87, Schoeps Mk41 mics, Genelec Monitors, PrimaLT ISDN
-
As with anything there are trade offs.
Premiere Pro offers native editing with the idea that touching your pixels is always a bad thing. It’s also faster since you can edit your media immediately as opposed to waiting for a transcode. For codecs such as Panasonic’s P2, there are no downsides. Since AVCHD is a temporally based codec, as Tom pointed out, editing on a less than amazing system may show a sluggishness in scrubbing and editing that you really don’t want now.
Transcoding or rewrapping is generally good for something like AVCHD, H.264, or other temporally based codecs. Pixel loss is negligible if at all and the resulting editing experience is more in line with what you expect. The only downside is that it takes time to accomplish this. With non-temporal codecs, this is a waste of time but necessary if your NLE doesn’t understand the codec.
Bottom line – it’s always your choice and both approaches have merit.
For the future, Premiere Pro will have some enhancements that will make editing temporal codecs as easy as any other. The link below will point you to it.
Enjoy,
Dennishttps://blogs.adobe.com/genesisproject/2009/11/technology_sneek_peek_adobe_me.html
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up