Apple solution for editing JVC HD Cam

Graeme Nattress · April 19th, 2004, 12:22 PM

I've just seen Frederic in action, demonstrating LumiereHD, and it looks great. He's bang in the middle of the JVC booth and getting crowds to watch his presentations.

Graeme

Carlos Salcedo · April 19th, 2004, 04:28 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul St. Denis : Campressor now lets you output a 1280x720 mpeg2 elementary stream, I am going to see if I can put this through VLC to produce a transport stream, I'll let you know what happens. -->>>

Are you sure about this???

I just played with it and it seems that it will accept the 1280x720 file but it will only output as a SD file (720x480)...

If you know how to do it let me know cause I would love to try it out...

Paul St. Denis · April 19th, 2004, 05:47 PM

Carlos, I posted too soon on this one, if you pick MPEG-2 as the encoder and then "automatic" under "Video Format" the summary shows the width and height to be "100% of source", but the output is still 720x480 (720x404 for 16:9).
Even if we could raise the resolution, the maximun bitrate is still 9 Mbps, far too low for decent HD encoding.
Sorry about the mislead.

Thomas Ferlauto · April 20th, 2004, 02:15 PM

Has anyone learned about Apple's new codec H.264?
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/04/19/videocodec/index.php?redirect=1082466803000

Paul Mogg · April 27th, 2004, 07:22 AM

How does the output of the 1280*720 material look at MPEG2 ?
I heard this is a new feature that Apple put in, that is supposed to give much better DVD quality for HD material without having to downconvert first. Anyone tried it?

Frederic Lumiere · April 28th, 2004, 06:47 PM

Paul,

I am testing the new MPEG encoder from Apple via compressor.

I chose the 60min High Quality Encode Widescreen preset. It's taking 6:30 hours on a Dual G5! for a 17 minute film...

It better be good. 56 min to go

Paul Mogg · April 30th, 2004, 11:49 AM

Yes I'm trying the same thing on a 5 minute piece and it's reporting a 1 1/2 hour processing time, ..as you say, better be good!
So far my experiences with trying variable bit rate encodes have not been good and I've been sticking to the old constant bit rate which seemed more reliable, but maybe they've improved it.

Les Dit · April 30th, 2004, 12:07 PM

Did it finish ;)

Hows it look at what bitrate ?
-Les

Jonah Lee Walker · May 1st, 2004, 09:13 AM

Went to NAB trying to figure out a solution to edit existing JVC HD footage, but with timecode, and initially for an SD distibution, that could later be turned into an HD solution if necessary.

Using products from various developers we were able to figure out a solution to keep the resolution and add 30F Non Drop Timecode, by moving it over the new Panasonic DVCPRO HD format through an AJA convertor box. This way we could make a timecoded Digibeta for SD mastering. The thing is this solution isn't exactly what one would call inexpensive, though it would work.

Actually all my research has led me to the conclusion, that for any high end production/editing environment it is better to wait for for a HDV that includes timecode, as Sony has promissed.

Paul Mogg · May 1st, 2004, 11:49 AM

The finished result looked very good, a lot of the detail from the HD has been preserved in the downconvert to SD, very few artifacts as I had expected.
I will definitely use this setting again. I believe the bitrate was 6.8, which is pretty high, but it seems to play back without a hitch.

Cheers

Frederic Lumiere · May 4th, 2004, 08:45 AM

The quality was excellent for me as well.

6.5 hours for a 17 minute piece seems excessive however.

Paul Mogg · May 6th, 2004, 09:39 AM

Hmm I tried the same compression from within FCP and it only took 20 minutes, very strange!

Frederic Lumiere · May 12th, 2004, 02:46 PM

Paul,

Based on Apple's feedback, one of the things that could slow down the encoding is a mismatched frame rate.

How long was your piece?

Frederic

Paul Mogg · May 12th, 2004, 03:03 PM

5 minutes, I think maybe there's a bug in Compressor.

Frederic Lumiere · July 30th, 2004, 12:04 PM

Matching frame rate improved encoding speed considerably. (29.97 fps)

April 19th, 2004, 12:22 PM	#16
Graeme Nattress RED Problem Solver Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,365	I've just seen Frederic in action, demonstrating LumiereHD, and it looks great. He's bang in the middle of the JVC booth and getting crowds to watch his presentations. Graeme __________________ www.nattress.com - filters for FCP

April 27th, 2004, 07:22 AM	#20
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	How does the output of the 1280*720 material look at MPEG2 ? I heard this is a new feature that Apple put in, that is supposed to give much better DVD quality for HD material without having to downconvert first. Anyone tried it? __________________ Paul

April 30th, 2004, 11:49 AM	#22
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	Yes I'm trying the same thing on a 5 minute piece and it's reporting a 1 1/2 hour processing time, ..as you say, better be good! So far my experiences with trying variable bit rate encodes have not been good and I've been sticking to the old constant bit rate which seemed more reliable, but maybe they've improved it. __________________ Paul

May 1st, 2004, 09:13 AM	#24
Jonah Lee Walker New Boot Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 19	Went to NAB trying to figure out a solution to edit existing JVC HD footage, but with timecode, and initially for an SD distibution, that could later be turned into an HD solution if necessary. Using products from various developers we were able to figure out a solution to keep the resolution and add 30F Non Drop Timecode, by moving it over the new Panasonic DVCPRO HD format through an AJA convertor box. This way we could make a timecoded Digibeta for SD mastering. The thing is this solution isn't exactly what one would call inexpensive, though it would work. Actually all my research has led me to the conclusion, that for any high end production/editing environment it is better to wait for for a HDV that includes timecode, as Sony has promissed. __________________ -Jonah Lee

May 1st, 2004, 11:49 AM	#25
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	The finished result looked very good, a lot of the detail from the HD has been preserved in the downconvert to SD, very few artifacts as I had expected. I will definitely use this setting again. I believe the bitrate was 6.8, which is pretty high, but it seems to play back without a hitch. Cheers __________________ Paul

April 19th, 2004, 04:28 PM	#17
Carlos Salcedo Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Gilbert, Arizona Posts: 33	<<<-- Originally posted by Paul St. Denis : Campressor now lets you output a 1280x720 mpeg2 elementary stream, I am going to see if I can put this through VLC to produce a transport stream, I'll let you know what happens. -->>> Are you sure about this??? I just played with it and it seems that it will accept the 1280x720 file but it will only output as a SD file (720x480)... If you know how to do it let me know cause I would love to try it out...

April 19th, 2004, 05:47 PM	#18
Paul St. Denis Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Stony Brook NY Posts: 169	Carlos, I posted too soon on this one, if you pick MPEG-2 as the encoder and then "automatic" under "Video Format" the summary shows the width and height to be "100% of source", but the output is still 720x480 (720x404 for 16:9). Even if we could raise the resolution, the maximun bitrate is still 9 Mbps, far too low for decent HD encoding. Sorry about the mislead.

April 20th, 2004, 02:15 PM	#19
Thomas Ferlauto New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 24	Has anyone learned about Apple's new codec H.264? http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/04/19/videocodec/index.php?redirect=1082466803000

April 28th, 2004, 06:47 PM	#21
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Paul, I am testing the new MPEG encoder from Apple via compressor. I chose the 60min High Quality Encode Widescreen preset. It's taking 6:30 hours on a Dual G5! for a 17 minute film... It better be good. 56 min to go

April 30th, 2004, 12:07 PM	#23
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Did it finish ;) Hows it look at what bitrate ? -Les

May 4th, 2004, 08:45 AM	#26
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	The quality was excellent for me as well. 6.5 hours for a 17 minute piece seems excessive however.

May 6th, 2004, 09:39 AM	#27
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	Hmm I tried the same compression from within FCP and it only took 20 minutes, very strange! __________________ Paul

May 12th, 2004, 02:46 PM	#28
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Paul, Based on Apple's feedback, one of the things that could slow down the encoding is a mismatched frame rate. How long was your piece? Frederic

May 12th, 2004, 03:03 PM	#29
Paul Mogg Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Francisco CA Posts: 386	5 minutes, I think maybe there's a bug in Compressor. __________________ Paul

July 30th, 2004, 12:04 PM	#30
Frederic Lumiere Wrangler Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Point Pleasant, NJ Posts: 437	Matching frame rate improved encoding speed considerably. (29.97 fps)