What is better for editing HDV

[Blast1]

A high end card is a waste of money unless you are going to use it for gaming or other high-end display purpose, a 8600 will suffice for most editing purposes, HDV is processor intensive so its best to use a intermediate codec of one flavor or another.

[Joe Cinquina]

I am considering getting a Dell XPS overclocked Quad-Core processor with 4 gb of memory. It comes with a Nvidia 8800 Ultra Video Card with 768MB of memory. It is expensive, but according to what you are saying is probably a good way to go as long as a use Aspect HD codec versus a middle of the road PC with a Matrox RT.x2 card?

Joe

[Jerry Waters]

Aspect is a good way to go. Cineform replaces the preview engine in PP and runs their codecs in real time – very valuable in editing HDV. And it will do it with 3 or 4 video tracks up. The codec is very editable and produces good results. (I run Prospect.)

[Joe Cinquina]

Is there any quality difference if you use PP preview engine versus Aspect / Prospect, when you encode the final output? Is Aspect/Prospect only used for editing the project? Which by the way is very important to me…

How does the codec hold up in After Effects?

Thanks.

Joe

[Jerry Waters]

I have used only the Aspect/Prospect preview engine but before that used Cineform in Sony Vegas, back when HDV began. Cineform was far superior to using proxies. It edited like using DV footage. Where Vegas was deficient was in previewing high resolution in HD and in real time. It just didn’t and often you couldn’t tell if you were in sync. Premiere does with the Cikneform engine. It is like daylight and dark better in Premiere with Cineform.

Quality is generally higher in all cases with Cineform because it puts a higher color wrapper around the m2t files, creating a 4:2:2 instead of a 4:2:0 and effects are better. So I would say you do get better quality. I do not know how using just the Adobe preview engine would be. I would never do that because I’ve used previews that can’t run the preview real time and it sucks and I doubt Premiere can do it (otherwise Cineform wouldn’t have written the preview engine, transitions and effects it wrote).

Basically, Cineform is, in my opinion, a very inventive company. They created RAW footage in video for the Silicon Imagining camera over two years ago. Red is trying to do this now but the Red camera is very slow in developing. Several movies have been shot with the SI camera already. It came out at NAB in 2006 with a complete workflow for 2k with Premiere and the ability to process RAW and the ability to swing 11 f stops.

I am prejudiced but I’ve been through 3 levels of program with Cineform and they have never let me down, and they are virtually lossless. There are not many codecs that stand up to several reencodes with virtually no loss of quality. I just completed a 96 minute full feature that took most of two years shot with my 3 different HDV cameras. All of it was done in Cineform, Vegas, Premiere and After Effects.

[Joe Cinquina]

Jerry – Thank you for taking the time to share your experiences and your practical application of the product. To me that speaks volumes! I am pretty much convinced that Aspect is the way to go for me. I have been blessed in the sense that my company has bought me everything that I have asked for: CS3, Canon XH-a1, lighting, etc.. I am now asking for a PC that is going to allow me to edit HDV like I am use to editing DV. I want to make the right decision. So far I am leaning in the direction of a Dell Quad Core with 4 gb mem, a nvidia 8800 Ultra that comes with the PC and Aspect from cineform.

Will I be able to use Aspect here at work and at home with the same license?

Thanks.

Joe

[Eric Jurgenson]

A couple of nice things about the Matrox RTX2:

It plays multiple streams of native HDV. No transcoding means the highest quality and no conversion during capture. File sizes are small, and file management is simplified. Plus you can see your video in the capture window.

You get a comprehensive set of real time effects that work in After Effects as well. The chroma key is superb.

A DVI output allows you to use a 1920×1200 computer monitor (#2 monitor) to monitor full screen (with no A/D conversion – super quality).

Renders and exports are greatly accelerated by the Matrox hardware.

You get analog SD and HD I/O.

[Joe Cinquina]

Wow! I hate to be fikil, but those are some extreme strengths. Can the captured files be used in partical illusion and what about the work flow with in AE. Re-render?

Thanks

Joe

[Eric Jurgenson]

AE is not crazy about long GOP MPEG (HDV), so typically I would convert HDV source material destined for AE to a frame based codec, like Matrox I-frame MPEG, or DVCPRO HD. You could also do uncompressed or TGA/TIF/BMP sequences. I imagine it’s the same story with Particle Illusion.

The great thing about the Matrox effects working in both Premiere and AE is that you can import (copy and paste) from one to the other without losing filters. For example, I frequently use the Matrox DVE and Chroma Key in PPro; import into AE with effects intact; then replace keyer filter with Keylight (which requires a heck of a lot more tweaking, but ultimately will pull a better key). I have real time effects control for setting things like mask, size and positioning in PPro, and I dont have to reinvent the wheel when I bring the material into AE.

[Joe Cinquina]

Thank you for your input. My question now is; To me it seems almost impossible to Roto or do anything that requires frame by frame percision using an “I-Frame” codec. Every frame counts… Dosen’t it?

Joe