Assessment of the HF10 vs the SR12 - Page 3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > High Definition Video Acquisition > AVCHD Format Discussion

AVCHD Format Discussion
Inexpensive High Definition H.264 encoding to DVD, Hard Disc or SD Card.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 4th, 2008, 01:30 PM   #31
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Apple Valley CA
Posts: 4,866
As Ron says, just put both on a Vegas timeline - I ran multicam for switching, render was a bit slow, but final out SD 24P to DVD was great!
Dave Blackhurst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2008, 03:00 PM   #32
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Traverse City, Michigan
Posts: 416
Thanks for the replies. Another question: How would one go about putting some kind of wind screen/wind sock on the SR11?

Respectfully,
Mike
Mike Burgess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2008, 07:37 PM   #33
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Plainview, N.Y.
Posts: 1,944
Ron, I use Edius extensively for work and find the HQ codec to be excellent.
Ken Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 4th, 2008, 09:54 PM   #34
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,942
Yes Ken, Edius is my main editor and I agree HQ is good except my old PC cannot capture and convert at the same time so end up having to convert to HQ after capture and with three, two hour tracks at roughly 2.5 times realtime( and even more for AVCHD) it just isn't worth it. Edius 4.6 is able to use multicam with two HDV tracks and one DV track just fine. Even though video is an addictive retirement hobby time is still important as well as HQ demands much bigger disc space and speed!!!!! When I upgrade PC later in the year I will likely capture straight to HQ but for now raw files are the way for me. I normally use Vegas for audio ( have done from when it was just an audio editor) as well as Sound Forge but for video Edius is better. However at the moment for a single track edit mixing HDV and AVCHD Vegas is faster and easier to use.

Ron Evans
Ron Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 04:04 AM   #35
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 80
I've just tried Edius a few days ago.. No way you can do smooth AVCHD editing without a quad-core :/ Vegas handle the files quite nicely on the other hand.
Robin Lobel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 08:10 AM   #36
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Traverse City, Michigan
Posts: 416
Is there any adverse effect to editing, and rendering in a lower setting, like HD HQ or HD SP? Will your final product still be like it would've been had you done everything in HD FH?

Thanks,
Mike
Mike Burgess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 08:36 AM   #37
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Plainview, N.Y.
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Lobel View Post
I've just tried Edius a few days ago.. No way you can do smooth AVCHD editing without a quad-core :/ Vegas handle the files quite nicely on the other hand.
But when you convert to Edius' HQ files, you're good to go. The bigger issue is not having export to AVCHD capability at this point. I'm sure they will upgrade the program before too long. I'd much rather use Edius since it's a much more full-featured real-time program. It's been gaining a tremendous amount of support in the professional network arena...especially since Grass Valley took charge.
Ken Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 08:39 AM   #38
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Plainview, N.Y.
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Burgess View Post
Is there any adverse effect to editing, and rendering in a lower setting, like HD HQ or HD SP? Will your final product still be like it would've been had you done everything in HD FH?

Thanks,
Mike
Mike, a friend of mine is absolutely convinced we'd lose nothing by going to the Canonpus HQ codec. Since I've done that many times with HDV, I've never seen an observable loss. Canopus codecs are probably the best there is. Since I've done so many A/Bs between my SR12 and Canon HV20, I'm pretty convinced there isn't any significant difference in resolution between the two, so I doubt you'd lose it on that end. But to me the issue is exporting. If I went to this trouble to go 'tapeless', why do I want my final AVCHD product to go back to tape?

I really don't plan on doing much editing with my personal stuff...I never have. I guess I do enough editing for work and don't get overly enthusiastic about doing it on my personal stuff. Maybe once I retire I can make that one of my projects. ;)
Ken Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 09:17 AM   #39
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I'd much rather use Edius since it's a much more full-featured real-time program.
Much more full-featured in what ?
Robin Lobel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 09:50 AM   #40
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Plainview, N.Y.
Posts: 1,944
The ability to do real-time for almost all of your work, the more extensive use of filters, multi-cam and others.
Ken Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 10:18 AM   #41
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 80
Vegas works realtime for any operation/filter too, is bundled with several filters and has multicam support.. In fact, from the Edius feature list I don't see something you can't do with Vegas as well.
Robin Lobel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 10:36 AM   #42
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Plainview, N.Y.
Posts: 1,944
Robin, there are more filters within Edius, but if you prefer Vegas that's fine. I'm not here to convince you to use Edius. I thought you had Edius since you mentinoned you used it a few days ago. I've tried all of the programs and for me Edius is what I use professionally and wouldn't switch.

I've tried Vegas and didn't like the interface and did not find it handled AVCHD particularly well on my computer. In fact there was really no difference in how Vegas handled AVCHD as opposed to Edius Pro 4.5. Renders take forever with Vegas and most that have tried it say the same thing. I would probably use Edius and convert to the lossless (at least to the eye) Canopus HQ codec.

The fact is that AVCHD is a bear to edit and taxes even the most powerful computers out there.

Hopefully software and hardware will catch up with the very demanding AVCHD compression.
Ken Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 10:49 AM   #43
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Robin, there are more filters within Edius
like ? Don't get me wrong, I'm just trying to figure what could miss in Vegas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I thought you had Edius since you mentinoned you used it a few days ago
Indeed I have, since I said I used it a few days ago.. What's wrong in my sentence ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
]In fact there was really no difference in how Vegas handled AVCHD as opposed to Edius Pro 4.5.
That's the point you missed: Vegas has several preview mode that handle any complex operation realtime (while I did not find that in Edius, that's why AVCHD can't be played back realtime and need to be converted in another format).

I'm not here to convince you to use Vegas, that's your right not to like it... But I don't see how Edius would be more professional or more full-featured. Especially when it comes to what matters here, AVCHD.
Robin Lobel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 11:39 AM   #44
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Plainview, N.Y.
Posts: 1,944
Robin, it seems you and I just go round and round on every subject. If you have both programs then simply go into both and check out all the filters. That's all. If you like one over the other stick with it, that's fine. I'm not here to jot down each and every filter, effect and transition in each program to compare for you. The major reason aside from features that people choose editing programs is how well they like how it handles. For me nothing handles like Edius....for ME. You may feel differently and that's perfectly fine. There is no right or wrong answer.

I asked you whether you had Edius because in your sentence you could have seen someone else's and played with it, you could have downloaded a trial version etc. It didn't mean you still had it or owned it. Make sense?

Now where did I say that Edius is more 'professional' than Vegas? I DID say that Edius is being used by more and more broadcasters, but that's all I said.

As to previews in Vegas, it's one thing to 'preview' and it's an entirely different thing to render to a final product. It is this rendering that takes forever in Vegas.

Again, choose what you like, I like Edius and have used it for years and have no intention to switch.

Each to his own. I think we've beaten this one to death now and let's remember this is a thread for camcorder discussion not editing programs. So for me this subject is now closed so as not to bore everyone to death and not hijack this thread from its intended purpose.
Ken Ross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2008, 12:01 PM   #45
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
Robin, it seems you and I just go round and round on every subject. If you have both programs then simply go into both and check out all the filters. That's all. [...] I'm not here to jot down each and every filter, effect and transition in each program to compare for you.
So, there's no reason you say Edius has more feature than Vegas. That's all I wanted to know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
I asked you whether you had Edius because in your sentence you could have seen someone else's and played with it, you could have downloaded a trial version etc. It didn't mean you still had it or owned it. Make sense?
Make sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post
let's remember this is a thread for camcorder discussion not editing programs. So for me this subject is now closed so as not to bore everyone to death and not hijack this thread from its intended purpose.
Agree too, I was just asking on your statements. But this subject is closed for me too. Back to the HF10 vs SR12 fight...
Robin Lobel is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > High Definition Video Acquisition > AVCHD Format Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:41 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network