What’s best way to ingest then Export BETA SP footage for archiving as Quicktimes

[Shane Ross]

I’d capture as PRORES. That’s a darn good codec. And now Avid MC5 supports that format, so that might be the most universal one. And it has a lower data rate than Uncompressed, so you can fit more on less space.

As for the QT/FCP discrepancy…that is just the way things are. QT lightens the gamma. In the QT preferences you can set them to FCP COLOR COMPATIBILITY. But that is the LAST PLACE to judge your color and quality.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Rory Keenan]

The image difference between Quicktime-player & FCP is not a color issue.
The problem is the Aspect ratio is stretched… it doesn’t look 4:3 in QT…. It’s stretched horizontally.
The image also breaks up a little (in the form of horizontal lines) if a subject does any quick movements (like hand gestures when he speaks)

Thanks for the Pro Res suggestion.
I often use that codec…. but will there be any quality loss if i use ProRes instead of Uncompressed (that’s an important issue to the director)???

Also would you recomend ProRes for ingest & output… OR Ingest uncompressed then export ProRes… OR could I ingest in ProRes then simply use those QT files that FCP creates in the Capture scratch folder???

[Shane Ross]

[Rory Keenan] “The problem is the Aspect ratio is stretched… it doesn’t look 4:3 in QT…. It’s stretched horizontally.”

Yeah, QT doesn’t always play back the proper TV aspect ratio. It will change it. TV aspects and QT aspects are different.

[Rory Keenan] “The image also breaks up a little (in the form of horizontal lines) if a subject does any quick movements (like hand gestures when he speaks) “

That is INTERLACING. Looks fine on tape as the format is interlaced, but computer monitors have a tough time playing back interlaced and having it look good. It simply can’t. Progressive is what computer monitors need. But you aren’t archiving for computer monitor playback, you are archiving for…TV playback. Right?

[Rory Keenan] “I often use that codec…. but will there be any quality loss if i use ProRes instead of Uncompressed (that’s an important issue to the director)??? “

Yes. ProRes is a compressed format. But it will be minimal loss. BUT, if they want less lossy, and they have the drive space, go for Uncompressed.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[John Christie]

Shane is right, prores is a great codec for archiving. Remind the director that beta sp is also a compressed format. Some people here the word compression and think it’s bad. Every video format in existence has used tricks, analog and digital to reduce the amount of information being recorded.

[Bouke Vahl]

Since when is a proprietary codec “universal” ????

(and when i read ‘best’ in a subject header, i don’t feel like responding…)

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Rory Keenan]

Actually these are being archived for Computer monitor playback

An ethnic studies institute wants the footage.
They want two main things:

1) They want to be able to upload low-res versions of the clips on to the internet (so scholars can reference for research)….they will convert the Quicktimes to whatever low res format they need.

2) They want to be able to sell high quality clips to people who want to use the footage in other documentaries.
(anyone buying this footage will likely be editing on a Computer monitor in FCP or Avid)

Either way I think the clips need to look good in Quicktime playback on a computer monitor?
The aspect ratio can’t be distorted on the Quicktime computer monitor playback.

(Shane) “Yeah, QT doesn’t always play back the proper TV aspect ratio. It will change it. TV aspects and QT aspects are different. “

So what formats (for ingest & Output) would you recomend for archiving these as High Quality Quicktimes for playback on a computer monitor???

(Shane) “That is INTERLACING. Looks fine on tape as the format is interlaced, but computer monitors have a tough time playing back interlaced and having it look good. It simply can’t. Progressive is what computer monitors need. But you aren’t archiving for computer monitor playback, you are archiving for…TV playback. Right?”
Yes, these need to look good on computer monitor playback.
Is there a way to capture these as progressive??

So basically I need these to look good in Quicktime playback on a computer monitor.
Is there a way to capture in a format that will do that?…. then I can just use the Quicktimes from the Capture-Scratch folder??
OR do I need to capture… THEN EXPORT or use Compressor to out put Quicktimes in a different format???

[Rory Keenan]

For you I’ll rename the Subject 🙂
“What’s a good quality way to ingest then Export BETA SP footage for archiving as Quicktimes??”

As for the the recomendations on codec… Thank You.
ProRes is the codec I like to use most, and I think I can convince the director to go with ProRes 422

BTW What is the difference between ProRes422 & ProRes422 (HQ)

[Bouke Vahl]

[Rory Keenan] “BTW What is the difference between ProRes422 & ProRes422 (HQ)”

If you ask a question like this, have you even tried both and looked at the difference or tried to measure it?
Probably not.

My advice, step out and let someone with at least a bit of know-how handle this, or get a crash course in basic video technology.
That will set you back a couple of weeks and a couple of thousands bucks. Look on the bright side, the crappy betadeck you are using costed some 15K back in it’s days. (good ones were about 40K)

You have no idea about what you are doing, that won’t be good for your client and will backfire at a time.

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[John Christie]

If the source material was 16 mm you can use Cinema Tools to remove the pulldown and create 24fps QT files. That will get rid of the interlace issue. Any codec digitizing interlaced source material will have problems playing back on a computer, not just pro res.

[Shane Ross]

[Rory Keenan] “1) They want to be able to upload low-res versions of the clips on to the internet (so scholars can reference for research)….they will convert the Quicktimes to whatever low res format they need.”

Then compress as H.264…and deinterlace when you do. Compressor has presets for various data rates.

[Rory Keenan] “2) They want to be able to sell high quality clips to people who want to use the footage in other documentaries.
(anyone buying this footage will likely be editing on a Computer monitor in FCP or Avid) “

Photo JPEG is the format that most stock footage companies compress their footage. So you will have to capture it, and then convert it.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def