[Jakob Mortensen]

Hey Allan

Thanks a bunch for your very usefull reply. It gives me lots to work with which i really appreciate.

Now I will follow your advice and include more information in my next posts here. You are right that I was frustrated in the first post, but I wouldnt call it a rant ;0).

It can be difficult to be very specific when describing the issue, being a bit green on the topics since I propably need some lingo and some knowledge to nail the issue very precisely. Thats part of the explanation for the unprecise description of the problem.

Anyhow thanks for a very usefull post.

Best wishes

Jakob

[Jakob Mortensen]

Hey Andy

Thanks for the info, that made the decision easy, I will upgrade to the newest version :0)

Best wishes

Jakob

[Jakob Mortensen]

Ok, the material is HDV 1080i, i have used FCP quicktime eksport option, chosen the H264 codec in highest quality setting. Lat looked awfull. I will try and have a look at compressor.

Thanks for the info about blueray, I actually thought that blueray automatically meant H264 encoded material, and mpeg2 was standard DVD compression, but thanks for the information.

Best wishes

Jakob

[Jakob Mortensen]

Well i would assume that Apple has some possibility to offer a crossplatform codec rooted in the quicktime player if they really wanted to support cross platform portability, so I dont really buy that argument of yours.

I have actually tried your suggestions before posting, and I am aware of the differences in editing codec and codecs for displaying the end result. BUT the quictime formats i have tried all looked terrible on a pc. The H.264 i tried from FCP also looks terrible on a Mac and PC. I have tried to convert to WMF with visualhub, terrible result, for some extremely odd reason FCP doesnt support flash, even though this is web standard, a very odd move from Apple. So yes I have tried.

What I need is a format that the end user can use to easily display the file via a standard pc in high quality. I have now relied on web hosting, but its not very convenient.

When that is said I dont realy get your kind of offended attitude. Its something often seen in web forums when newbies ask a question in groups where a close nitted community spends there coffee break. “How dares those newbies ask a basic question like that”. I imagine you with eyes rolling back, and that makes me smile a bit.

Lighten up, I might not have your knowledge in fact thats the very reason why I spend a lot of time searching information about those programs, and I learn every time. I do find a lot of people to be extremely helpfull in sharing, and moving the community and users like me forward. I do help where i can.

Jakob

[Jakob Mortensen]

Ahh dam. :0).

I am thinking about upgrading anyway but not sure. Those codecs looks interesting though since a specific problem i have is editing hd on a macbookk in multicam mode so a codec with a light footprint for editing, and then reconnecting to original files would come in very handy.

Do you know if this is possible with those 422 l codecs ??

Best wishes

Jakob

[Jakob Mortensen]

Hey

Thanks for your help.

Your post made me realize that I actually didnt work with HDV it was in prores422 didnt know there was a difference in how hard the files are to work with though.

My processor is a 2.4 GHz core 2 duo so if you can with a 2.66 i should be able to do the same the speed differences in those are marginal..

BUT I cant so there must be a difference in how its configured. BUT if you run with a set of raid disks that is maybe the explanation.

Thanks for your help

Best wishes

Jakob

[Jakob Mortensen]

Hi

Thanks for the answer. I just realize that I actually DONT edit in HDV but in prores422. Didnt know that made a difference.

Anyway the Prores422 didnt work at all either.

Best wishes

Jakob