Marco Solorio
Forum Replies Created
-
You’d probably do well using the Sheer Video codec by Bit Jazz. It can work in several different modes, but in this case, choosng RGB 4:4:4 lossless for both the FCP timeline setting and the final video export would be ideal. The difference between Sheer and something like the standard Animation codec is that Sheer takes up about half the file size space and in the case of 1080 HD, that means less bandwidth demands between hard drive and computer (although a little more CPU power will be required to decode the compressed file size on playback using Sheer, but that’s not a big deal). Otherwise, you could use two codecs you already have right now to perform some lossless RGB 4:4:4 tests: Animation and PNG.
In terms of hooking the computer to the projector, that should be done via DVI if the projector has that input (I’m sure it does). This way you get a straight RGB connection without any digital conversions in the mix.
You could have a complete RGB 4:4:4 lossless path from creation to final display. It doesn’t get better than that!
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
I guess that’s why I’m confused for the decision to go to D5 tape even though D5 is great quality. Playing back 1920×1080 HD off a computer isn’t bottlenecking like it used to be. You could literally play back a lossless RGB 4:4:4 video file at 1080p30 (non-linearly none the less).
If you’re going single-link HD-SDI, you’re going 4:2:2 that will employ some form of chroma filtering, not to mention chroma compression. A shame since your footage is motion graphics that were processed in full 4:4:4. If your client wants the best quality, they should stick with 4:4:4 lossless. I wonder why the engineers didn’t think about this. ???
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
Just curious… why is the production flow going through the hassle (and cost) of D5 tape in the first place? Why not just encode the video to a 1080 HD video format of choice and play it off a notebook computer connected to the projector via DVI?
Then everything could also stay in progressive mode, even 30p if you wish. Maybe it’s just me, but I’ve always hated tape, especially when it was on reels!
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
Sonic Solutions used to have a hardware/software audio suite called NoNoise which even back on NuBuss Macs was an amazing piece of audio gear. Today, you can buy the NoNoise software as a plugin for ProTools but I have no first-hand experience if the ProTools plugin is as good (or rather, as awesome) as the Sonic Solution tool of yesteryear. It would clean up all forms of over-modulation and peak distortions.
But at $1500 for the plugin, not even including the cost of ProTools, I doubt it’s the way you’d want to go to fix this problem, but I thought I’d throw it out there in case it saves someone else down the line.
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
[Ron Lindeboom] “We are trying to prove how lame we all are by quoting Barry Manilow lyrics (actually Will Jennings’ lyrics, to a Richard Kerr song).”
What’s wrong with Barry Manilow?
[ducks, covers and runs like hell]
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
There actually is one way to interlace a progressive video clip, but like the process of de-interlacing, it does involve interpolation.
For the most accurate control, the best tool to probably use is AE, but you can probably do it in FCP just as well. There are two main steps: Double the amount of frames (either making it 30p at twice the TRT or 60p at the same TRT) and then assign each even numbered frame to the even fields and each odd numbered frame to the odd fields (or reverse depending on your format and/or NLE hardware). The last part is tricky because you’re going to cut the vertical resolution in half and make sure you’re back in a true 60i (29.97 interlaced) rate. Again, doing this in AE allows for the best control IMO.
Maybe I can pop out a Cow tutorial on this over the weekend.
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
[KMimsey] “With the Sony HVR-V1U it was my understanding that one of the main differences between the two formats was simply that 24pA starts every shot with the A frame.”
Are you saying is places the A-frame on any frame when the record button is pressed? I know that Panasonic cameras always place the A-frame on a frame ending on zero or five. If the V1U places the A-frame on any frame when the record button is pressed, then that’s not only suprising, but a bad move on Sony’s part.
I helped out on a review with Adam Wilt a few months back on the V1U for DV Magazine. I have to say that I really like the camera even though I’m not a fan of the HDV format. I do edit in FCP, but I’ve never used V1U source footage in a real project. However people are using the camera with FCP so there must be a solution to your workflow.
When I refer to a cadence-free 24p format, I’m referring to creating 24p video files from scratch via CGI; 3D, digital compositing, etc. and not through a camera. There are only a very small handfull of [very expensive] digital cameras that can shoot in true cadence-free 24 FPS outside of a 60i “shell”.
[KMimsey] “Also, are there pros and cons of 24pA vs 24p in regards to outputting on DVD, web, large screen projection, possible TV broadcast?”
Understand that 24pA is the means to getting to 24p in a lossless fashion. Once the pulldown is flagged in FCP, it’s playing back in 24p. From there you can output the file to a true cadence-free 24p file, like a 24 FPS internet video stream or a 24p MPEG-2 file, etc.
The real question is, what are the pros and cons of shooting 24pA vs. 24pS. In a nutshell 24pA allows for a lossless transfer to 24p where 24pS typically requires a re-encode to get to 24p. However 24pS can be a “safety net” of sorts if you don’t intend on doing a reverse telecine on the footage but want the 24p look. There’s a ton of info on this if you search the Cow and Google.
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
This is something you should really ask the DVD authoring facility directly since they do this all the time.
Chances are, all you need to do is export your video directly out of FCP…
File > Export > QuickTime Movie…
Keep everything as current settings (which should be uncompressed 8-bit from what you describe) and make the movie self contained.
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
BTW, this is the “dot” I was referring to…
https://pioneerelectronics.com/pna/v3/pg/top/cat/article/0,,2076_310069579_47482,00.html
Both my recorders already had the magic dot so I didn’t need to upgrade it myself.
Looks like completed eBay auctions had it from low one-hundred area to mid two-hundreds area. Great deal if you can find one used. Definitely worth the search and waiting.
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch
-
We typically work in two forms of 24p: 24pA or true non-cadence 24 FPS. I prefer 24pA when possibe (over 24pS) since it’s a lossless transfer where 24pS usually needs a re-encode to remove the pulldown. When we’re creating 3D, digital comps or anything from scratch, we do it in true 24p.
If you’re having problems with 24pA, you could try shooting in 24pS and removing the pulldown manually. The good thing is that 24p cameras place the A-frame on frames ending on zero and five, which makes it easy to dedect and apply the removal.
Once you figure out what 24p workflow works for you, the benefits will be worth it.
Marco Solorio | CreativeCow Host | OneRiver Media | Codec Resource Site | Cinesoft | Media Batch