JVC100 & Final Cut Pro... Questions - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems
GY-HD 100 & 200 series ProHD HDV camcorders & decks.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 8th, 2008, 05:22 AM   #16
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia (formerly Winnipeg, Manitoba) Canada
Posts: 4,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher Glavan View Post
My understanding is that capturing via component using ProRes you get a true 4:2:2 colorspace from the HD100.
You get 4:2:2 colour space if capturing live from the camera, not from tape playing back. Once it hits tape, you're at 4:2:0. Well, TECHNICALLY when it captures from tape, FCP places 4:2:0 colour into a 4:2:2 colour space with padding so no colour resolution is gained, you just have more latitude to make colour adjustments in post.
__________________
Shaun C. Roemich Road Dog Media - Vancouver, BC - Videographer - Webcaster
www.roaddogmedia.ca Blog: http://roaddogmedia.wordpress.com/
Shaun Roemich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2008, 09:18 AM   #17
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 2,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Vincent View Post
So why would any one need clip wrap?

john
Simply because FCP sometime messes up HDV capture with tapes that have minor problems. ClipWrap fixed two tapes that I couldn't capture at all with FCP in any codec or transcode with MPEGStreamclip. Plus it treats the footage better than MPEGStreamclip.

I've only had problems with JVC 720 HDV never Sony HDV, can't say why.
__________________
William Hohauser - New York City
Edit/Camera/DCP production/Animation
William Hohauser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2008, 09:46 AM   #18
Trustee
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,063
For those who have used Premiere/Vegas for a PC and also used FCP, is FCP easier to use, at least in terms of system stability?

The reason I ask is that most of the FCP problems you guys have talked about seem minor compared with some of the nightmares I've been having.

john
John Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2008, 12:27 PM   #19
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Larkspur, CA
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Vincent View Post
For those who have used Premiere/Vegas for a PC and also used FCP, is FCP easier to use, at least in terms of system stability?

The reason I ask is that most of the FCP problems you guys have talked about seem minor compared with some of the nightmares I've been having.

john
That's a tough question but VERY generally speaking the consensus is that FCP is more stable mostly because Apple makes the hardware and software, thus tighter integration. Before I started my own company I used to be a free-lance editor. To this date my own FCP system is light years more stable than any other systems I worked on. On the other hand there were many people working on those other systems who would always mess something up for the next person!
Justin Ferar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 8th, 2008, 06:54 PM   #20
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Seattle, WA USA
Posts: 83
John-

What version of Premiere are you using? And what are your problems? I have CS2 at home and run into problems of sync with 24p. Those issues seem to have gone away with the CS3 version I have at work. If you have CS2, try to keep your captures around 7-10 minutes or less and it seems to keep sync...sometimes. If sync goes out, try capturing again. One issue I have with large projects is that it takes a long time to load the project, sometimes 10 minutes, but afterwards it works. Cineform captures well and works, but I've only used the demo. I've had issues capturing 24p with HDVsplit and bringing it into any editor as it seems to write 60fps into the m2t header. Best results have been by capturing within premiere. One thing we did on a pilot I shot this summer, was to slate every scene and take and we captured our audio separately.
Tup Wright is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2008, 10:24 AM   #21
Trustee
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,063
Mostly issues - I believe - dealing with hardware and software compatibility. Problem is that, b/c it's a full length film, we have a terrabite's worth of footage.

Some of the problems: Can no longer digitize sound from my in/out box. Unrendered footage will not play; crashes when you try to render. Just not very stable even for the most mundane tasks. We've split the time-line up in to 3 30 minute long chunks, which helped for a while, but not so much no.

Just did a total re-install with all the latest stuff...

When Justin spoke about Apple making the hardware and software (thus tighter integration) it really stuck a cord with me. Getting the PC to do what I want has been just a nightmare.

We digitize in Vegas, then transcode it with Cineform to import into Premiere. Not even sure if we have to do it this way anymore, but that's how we're doing it. I'm sure if I was a PC tech a lot of these problems could be solved, but I'm not.

Thanks for all the words of help/advice guys...

john
John Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2008, 11:21 AM   #22
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 431
John I have experience in Vegas and FCP though I use FCP mostly.

I would have to say that Vegas is equally or more stable than FCP, this
with about 4 years of real world experience. Forget about premiere at least
in its current versions, its been highly unstable for a very long time, but
I'm hearing that CS4 will be much much better.

experiment with Vegas though before you jump into a fcp system, I think
you'll find it very stable and it does a lot of things that fcp doesn't
do that it should, like resizing bicubically so that a downconvert actually
looks good and not horrible for one.
Mark Silva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2008, 01:34 PM   #23
Trustee
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,063
We actually tried Vegas first, based on mostly on we heard it was the most stable. It proved any thing but. Perhaps on shorter stuff it is, but we soon had major problems with stability - simply unusable for this length of project.

Like I said, we actually still use Vegas to digitize the footage - as Premiere won't - then use cineform.

All which makes for a lot of steps.

john
John Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2008, 11:42 PM   #24
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Redding, CA
Posts: 260
Exactly what do you mean by 'all the latest stuff'? Keep in mind that, even though many components in your PC are interchangeable, even some of the high-end pieces are not best used for working with video. For example, AMD makes Phenom processors with quad-core technology, but AMDs run hotter and are not designed with multitasking as a top priority like Intel's Xeon line. Also, some motherboard chipsets handle audio and video much better than others.

I think Apple and FCP are wonderful, but I switched over from Premiere after having shot a short film that I was having trouble ingesting. Let me tell you on a tight schedule trying to learn a whole new system and interface was rough. If you're going to switch I would suggest either waiting for a lull in post projects when you have plenty of time to get familiar, or get a lot of video tutorials like Lynda or VASST and get ready for some long nights.
Christopher Glavan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2008, 03:05 PM   #25
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 431
john what kind of long form are you talking about here? full feature length 90+ minutes?

there are not really any NLE's that handle long form well including Avid's if you don't set the project up properly, basically having timelines no longer than 20-30 minutes long (break up the edits into acts etc...)

even fcp on an sd timeline on a quad core system can be sluggish after the 20 minute mark.
Mark Silva is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2008, 03:08 PM   #26
Trustee
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,063
Yeah, it's about 90 minutes long.

We've broken it up into 1/3's, but still problems. I just want to make sure - before I jump into FCP - that the "Instant Edification" promised by JVC (regarding FCP) on the back of all the trade mags are ture.

john
John Vincent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2008, 03:11 PM   #27
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 431
sounds like a good plan.
Mark Silva 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 > JVC ProHD & MPEG2 Camera Systems > JVC GY-HD Series Camera Systems

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:55 PM.


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