To transcode, or not to transcode DV?

[David Bogie]

When you place a .motn file in the timeline of FCP, FCP send the file back to Motion, one frame at a time, and Motion sends it back. That’s really intensive and only works well with supercharged machines running certain cards. So, unless you render out of Motion, which Apple calls “export” even though every other motion graphics application in the universe calls it a render, FCP has to manage the render. That means your render settings in FCP must be set to Best. And most of us miss that little detail.

If you export from Motion, the clip will probably be in the Animation codec and will need to be scaled and rendered to DV anyway so you gan little except having the clean version out of Motion.

bogiesan

[Sean Oneil]

As you learned you never want to re-compress anything, especially not DV.

Capturing everything as ProRes from the beginning is generally a good idea.

You don’t use Animation for capture or editing. Motion exports Animation because of the alpha channel, but for regular video stick with ProRes.

Sean

[Andy Schroeder]

If you export from Motion, the clip will probably be in the Animation codec and will need to be scaled and rendered to DV anyway so you gan little except having the clean version out of Motion.

Firstly, thanks for your input. But – I also tried this on that last project (as well as having the quality settings in FCP set to “Best”) and found that when FCP goes to render it back into DV I once again get that heavily compressed look (which worsens when you recompress for DVD) and that leaving the motion clips unrendered (and in animation) gave me a less compressed looking final output to DVD and Quicktime. The “exporting” method essentially looked the same as the unrendered .motn file and played choppy on unlimited RT.
If I do transcode the DV to a different format, I thought I might get better looking compression (for the effects and color correction), along with non-choppy playback since the file compressor will then match the sequence compressor. Or does that logic not hold up? And if it does, is there a codec you would suggest using? I think ProRes might be a bit much for my CPU from what I understand of it.

[Chadwick Chennault]

Here’s how I like to handle DV and HDV in Final Cut: I edit everything in it’s native Codec. Once I have picture lock, I change the sequence settings to a higher quality codec (such as ProRes). Thus, when I render everything out, it basically renders everything to ProRes. If you have the ability to capture ProRes, do that. But if not, this work around produces pretty descent results without all the hassle of transcoding all your raw DV footage to something better.

[Rafael Amador]

I agree with Chadwick.
I edit DV and XDCAM native.
When the sequence is ready for export, change the codec to Proress.
Set “Render all YUV material in High Precision” and “Motion Effects Render: BEST”.
Rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com

(and here some clips for the friends: https://www.vimeo.com/2694745 )

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Vimeo framework” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[David Bogie]

[Rafael Amador] “I agree with Chadwick.
I edit DV and XDCAM native.
When the sequence is ready for export, change the codec to Proress.
Set “Render all YUV material in High Precision” and “Motion Effects Render: BEST”.
Rafael”

I have a list of FCP experts with whom I communicate regularly and the advice for HDV is binary: Use it natively. Never use it natively. The reasons for both positions are equally rational and compelling.

The OP’s response to my first response leaves me wondering what the OP is doing that you guys who like to use HDV natively are not doing but it mostly just points to the luxury of my current workflows. I am exclusively DV and increasingly glad of it.

bogiesan

[Andy Schroeder]

Thanks for the response. This sounds like the answer I needed for my problem. Of course I won’t get to try it out till I wrap shooting in a couple weeks, but that’s one less thing I need to worry about now.

[Andy Schroeder]

Thanks for the advice, as I also said to chadwick, this sounds like the right solution for my issue. The extra pointers you added on are also on a post-it on my monitor now.

[Sean Oneil]

[david bogie] “I have a list of FCP experts with whom I communicate regularly and the advice for HDV is binary: Use it natively. Never use it natively. The reasons for both positions are equally rational and compelling.”

Never say “never” and never say “always.” It all depends on the nature of the job, delivery requirements, what kind of equipment you have, and how much disk space you have. Native can have advantages for some projects. But if I were hiring a $1200 a day creative editor to work on a big budget project, I would not burden him or her with the sluggishness of working with HDV.

Codec aside, one should always capture at the native resolution and frame rate. Those things should be converted at the end of a project, if needed.

Sean