Which HDV editing program do you use? - Page 3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Cross-Platform Post Production Solutions > High Definition Video Editing Solutions

High Definition Video Editing Solutions
For all HD formats including HDV, HDCAM, DVCPRO HD and others.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 31st, 2007, 05:05 PM   #31
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,666
HDV -> HDMI -> capture into a new codec

HDV on tape -> HDV on disk -> software transcoding to new codec

Both involve 1 transcode. I guess there is an extra step in terms of time, but not in terms of quality.
Graham Hickling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 31st, 2007, 05:20 PM   #32
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: .
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Hickling View Post
HDV -> HDMI -> capture into a new codec

HDV on tape -> HDV on disk -> software transcoding to new codec

Both involve 1 transcode. I guess there is an extra step in terms of time, but not in terms of quality.
Indeed. If I can do it in real-time and use that same interface for monitoring it's a win win.

-gl
__________________
http://www.motoxpress.com
George Loch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 2nd, 2007, 10:41 AM   #33
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 25
What are some codecs that can be used with the BMD Intensity card?

I know it comes with a JPEG codec, but I am not sure if that is the bast way to go.

If you had the choice between Cineform and BMD, which would you choose?
Jacob Carter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 01:48 PM   #34
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NY, NYC
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harm Millaard View Post
There still is a lot of confusion about the value of HDMI. Look at the following figure to help you understand this. Double click it to get a readable size.

Pardon my confusion here – but is everybody talking about exporting via HDMI *after* being recorded to DV tape?

As far as I understand, once the signal is record to tape, it is compressed – and there is no going back. How then can you get an uncompressed signal (from the recorded tape) via HDMI if it has already been compressed?

Or perhaps I don’t understand this correctly.

Thanks --
James Binder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:05 PM   #35
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: .
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Binder View Post
Pardon my confusion here – but is everybody talking about exporting via HDMI *after* being recorded to DV tape?

As far as I understand, once the signal is record to tape, it is compressed – and there is no going back. How then can you get an uncompressed signal (from the recorded tape) via HDMI if it has already been compressed?

Or perhaps I don’t understand this correctly.

Thanks --
You have it correct. The idea here is to take it from such a highly compressed codec (HDV) into a better post production codec in preparation for all the processing that happens in post and a codec that is easier to work with in terms of CPU overhead and accuracy.

Ideally, you would avoid HDV all the way but, next best option is to at least avoid it in post where there is a lot of work done to it.

-gl
__________________
http://www.motoxpress.com
George Loch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:53 PM   #36
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: .
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacob Carter View Post
What are some codecs that can be used with the BMD Intensity card?

I know it comes with a JPEG codec, but I am not sure if that is the bast way to go.

If you had the choice between Cineform and BMD, which would you choose?
Think of BMDs Jpeg option as the windows equivalent of the DVCProHD codec on the mac. It's very close in terms of data rate and quality so for most it will be very acceptable. OTOH the Cineform codec is a solid performer and since you can capture directly into Cineform via the BMD Intensity card you may be better off working in that space.

-gl
__________________
http://www.motoxpress.com
George Loch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:04 PM   #37
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NY, NYC
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Loch View Post
You have it correct. The idea here is to take it from such a highly compressed codec (HDV) into a better post production codec in preparation for all the processing that happens in post and a codec that is easier to work with in terms of CPU overhead and accuracy.

Ideally, you would avoid HDV all the way but, next best option is to at least avoid it in post where there is a lot of work done to it.

-gl
Thanks George.

So why not capture (from DV tape) via firewire with something like CineForm Intermediate codec?

What is the advantage of using HDMI?

Thanks
James Binder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:07 PM   #38
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Binder View Post
What is the advantage of using HDMI?
There is none.
Harm Millaard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:29 PM   #39
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: .
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Binder View Post
Thanks George.

So why not capture (from DV tape) via firewire with something like CineForm Intermediate codec?

What is the advantage of using HDMI?

Thanks
The Intensity/Mjpeg codec offers a few advantages:

-You *can* bypass HDV compression by capturing directly to the computer via HDMI in either Cineform, BMD's utility or even PPro.

-In post, you can capture full-frame video (1920x1080) directly (Prospect HD can do this but at a higher cost).

-You can monitor via HDMI output to an HD Set in PPro.

I think the advantage is certainly greater for PPro and FCP users. For Vegas users, tell Sony to open up a standard architecture.

-gl
__________________
http://www.motoxpress.com
George Loch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 08:28 PM   #40
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NY, NYC
Posts: 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Loch View Post
For Vegas users, tell Sony to open up a standard architecture.

-gl
From a Vegas user: amen to that...

We're seemingly SOL in regard to BMD until Sony does so.
James Binder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 09:09 PM   #41
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
Posts: 133
Final Cut Studio

I use FCS and it's great. I've never used HDV on my MacBook Pro, but I've done it on Mac Pro's and it works perfectly. It looks great to. If you have a mac or you can afford one, get FCS.
Nick Royer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 06:31 AM   #42
Trustee
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 1,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by George Loch View Post
The Intensity/Mjpeg codec offers a few advantages:

-You *can* bypass HDV compression by capturing directly to the computer via HDMI in either Cineform, BMD's utility or even PPro.

-In post, you can capture full-frame video (1920x1080) directly (Prospect HD can do this but at a higher cost).

-You can monitor via HDMI output to an HD Set in PPro.

I think the advantage is certainly greater for PPro and FCP users. For Vegas users, tell Sony to open up a standard architecture.

-gl
Can you explain HOW you can bypass HDV compression, when that is all you have on tape? On tape it is already HDV compressed, so it seems impossible to bypass it.
Harm Millaard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 10:21 AM   #43
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: .
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harm Millaard View Post
Can you explain HOW you can bypass HDV compression, when that is all you have on tape? On tape it is already HDV compressed, so it seems impossible to bypass it.
I didn't explain it well enough...sorry. I meant before it is recorded to tape. Capturing a live stream from HDMI.

-gl
__________________
http://www.motoxpress.com
George Loch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 10:44 AM   #44
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bothell, Washington
Posts: 195
My question would be then for field and nature videography is there a recommendation for a field hard drive that would record all this info? it is economical, uncompressed and better quality
William Boehm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 02:37 PM   #45
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Boehm View Post
My question would be then for field and nature videography is there a recommendation for a field hard drive that would record all this info? it is economical, uncompressed and better quality
So far the most realistic option for capturing something less compressed than HDV in the field would be to use a Panasonic HVX200 with a Firestore hard drive, but that may not be realistic if you're recording many hours at a time.
Kevin Shaw 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 > Cross-Platform Post Production Solutions > High Definition Video Editing Solutions

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:31 AM.


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