Nate Weaver
Forum Replies Created
-
I wouldn’t ever recompress to the HDV codec, unless I had no other choice. Or the quality didn’t matter.
-
Not so smooth edit? What? Man, there is a lot of misinformation out there on MPEG2 editing. HDV codec is FCP works just like DV for the most part.
Conforming is what you do if you need to lay back out to HDV tape or, if the urge struck you, XDCAM disc. The thing is though is that not so many folks will take a final product of HDV tape and even fewer will take an XDCAM disc. So I wouldn’t base a decision on working in HDV codec on that.
In FCP, if you cut in HDV codec natively, apply your effects and graphics, and then render out a final uncompressed 10-bit 1080p24 Quicktime, and then lay THAT to HDCAM or DVCPRO HD tape, you’ll have the best possible flow period. This path incurs absolutely no recompression of the HDV, and keeps it as pristine as humanly possible.
All the flows that require ingesting via DVCPRO HD, incur at least one recompression, and if you’re not careful, 2.
-
That would be to throw away all the advantages of XDCAM, and introduce a recompression of the footage. Not very desirable, but if all else failed it WOULD solve the problem.
The XDCAM HD/Sony software flow works in FCP, I’m using it now. If he just troubleshoots correctly he can get it working the way it’s supposed to.
-
Couple things:
-XDCAM HD is MPEG-2, 1440×1080, a variant of HDV. For all intents and purposes to Final Cut, XDCAM HD *is* HDV. Except without oll the hassles HDV tape capture entails.
-Try the Sony software to bring in the clips. The Flip4Mac plug was buggy when I tested it, and I did have issues with audio tracks with it. The Sony software, which I’ve already used for a paying job, seems to be very solid.
The Flip4Mac software also manipulated the reported clip resolution to Quicktime, but not the actual resolution itself.
In short, reimport using the Sony software and get back to us.
-
I’m about ready to purchase a 350. The decision isn’t so hard, the differences between the two are pretty simple to list:
-350 does overcranking
-350 has better viewfinder
-350 has TC in AND out, not one or the other
-350 has XLR audio out as opposed to RCA for 330
-350 has HD-SDI out (a bad thing for me, means I have to spend money on HDSDI adapter for my field monitor)Might be one or two other things I’m missing, but thats the bulk. I think the criteria for most people is the overcranking and the viewfinder.
-
The 20 and 14L5s are multiformat monitors that accept HD and display a good deal more resolution with an HD signal. For an HVX user’s intents and purposes, it is a proper HD CRT monitor.
The 20M4U is just an SD monitor with component inputs.
Counting lines of resolution out of the Sony specs does not paint the entire picture…
-
“Does anyone know if 720×480 MiniDV can properly carry the Line 21 CC track?”
The answer is no. Only higher end formats that carry more lines like Digibeta, BetaSP can carry Closed Caption data.
The plug-ins for any computer based solution require that your media be of the 720×486 variety. It’s those extra 3 lines on the top and bottom (which are not active lines) that carry the CC data (among other things). This then requires also that your interface card will pass those lines to the output deck.
New website, new work online:
https://www.nateweaver.net -
Multicam with uncompressed media is probably a bad idea. I myslef would never expect that to work.
I’m in the middle of a 9 camera cut that I did with DV24p source, and then recompressed to Offline RT media. Works great. I’ve also bounced back and forth between the offline and online media about 20 times to make approvals…