Hi Ed, I have a Canopus Nx card and dual 3.6 Xeons and you are right about 2 layers of .m2t and a choke down....and I saw above where someone claimed they could do 3 layers with Pinnacle....baloney. m2t is just too tough....it is an extremely hi bitrate very compressed format that just kills the processors and anyone who needs to do serious editing just can't use it with even the top of the line machines like mine...and it doesn't matter what editing app has it on their timeline. I think Joel is capturing to Canopus HQ and mistaking that for .m2t.
About Cineform....I think David Newman will agree that if you want full frame full resolution output to external monitor and not the "accelerated" version that is frankly very clever and good(but not as good as full frame full resolution) then even with aspect you are talking about dual Xeons. Both aspect and canopus have great codecs. They both use variable bit rate that has quality settings and are both 4:2:2.
Where I think Canopus has the edge is the hardware card right now does the overlay work(using aspect it is done by the processor)...more importantly the card does all the line scaling which is very important and a big burden on the processor without the card when you have mixed formats on the timeline like SD stuff with HDV or different aspect ratio material. The canopus card will also be used in the future to provide hardware acceleration of effects(new effects are in the works that will use the card) and most importantly for anyone who has had the pleasure of rendering Aspect,Canopus HQ or any other codec back to .m2t or any other usable format then the future planned hardware encoder/daughter board will be a must have....
What I find hard to reconcile is talk about 3 and 4 layers (using accelerated preview)with Aspect(which tells me RT is important to the user) and how you get to stay with the full features of PPro...the problem there is Aspect as a plugin has only a few RT filters(color correction and pan zoom) and 3 or 4 basic categories of transitions....all the native Ppro stuff has to be rendered (not including motion and opacity). Edius on the other hand has 25 plus filters and tons of transitions (including the same type wipes, fades etc as Aspect) and they do NOT have to be rendered(unless you stack too many tough ones up). Edius also comes with Inscriber title motion pro(a HD version) and just makes the native Ppro titler(which you may recall originated from inscriber) look just plain.
Edius has much lower overhead than Ppro and is much stabler. It is only in a 3.0 version and yes there are some big time features I miss from Ppro like matte handling and nested sequences but they are coming SOON!! Audio editing is way ahead in Ppro and canopus needs to do some serious catching up. I use audition to sweeten and edit audio but there are many things I wished I could do without exiting edius that you can in ppro.Don't anyone kid them selves it has a learning curve but not any worse than any professional product.

To me here is the bottom line. Aspect is great if you are married to Ppro and work with a P4 type machine. Edius without a card will do a lot on a P4 OHCI but since it is full frame full resolution editing it will not perform as well as the accelerated preview version that aspect offers....it will give you more effects that will not have to be rendered though. The wavelet technology is as good a preview for the money and is a nice way to get decent preview without stopping playback on a lower spec machine...but don't confuse that with full frame full resolution RT playback, they are different and all you need to do is some tough keying to see the strengths of Canopus full resolution benefits. Aspect is also great if you work flow does not need RT for anything more than color correction, simple Pips and transitions. The combo with ppro is great if you don't mind rendering the native full features that you use.But
If you can afford dual Xeons and a NX type card then the Edius solution can't be beat "for now". I really think once you start seeing HDV in full frames full resolution on a 1080i monitor while you edit in Rt with lots of layers, filters, titles and transitions you will know what I mean. You guys don't know what you are missing seeing this quality(HDV) in full glory. Oh BTW I can't swap between AE but I can composite inside Edius with Boris Red and do just about everything I could do in AE. In some cases more.

It would be difficult to argue that it is possible to throw a lot of money at a new PC with dual processors and a hardware accelerator and not get a better editing experience. I can picture myself getting into that one of these days perhaps.

But claiming that the software only solution is far superior to Aspect HD is just plain unreasonable. And that is what Joel is claiming.

I envy you Randy, but it just isn't time to get rid of my PC just yet. Maybe by the end of the year. And at that point I may have even more options.

"But claiming that the software only solution is far superior to Aspect HD is just plain unreasonable. And that is what Joel is claiming."
I think Joel does have some good points and here is my experiance on a P4 3.2 with Edius(no harware acccleration) and using canopus HQ. I can get 3 layers(one background and 2 pips) to play for about 10secs and 2 layers all day. The preview is full frame full resolution and you could hook a camera ohci and a monitor to that and get monitor out. I can do one filter like CC or blur and titles, and transitions and still maintain Rt playback full resolution. I have tried Aspect and if I didn't have my rig I would bottom line use both edius and PPro with Aspect. Edius OHCI doesn't carry the overhead PPro does and it also doesn't have as much keyframing(part of the reason for lower overhead) so it is a give and take. If you were to turn accelerated preview off in aspect my bet is Edius will outperform it software only....Now I agree that the preview mode that aspect has is really nice and I wouldn't turn it off unless I was keying or doing really technical CC. I think the point is edius ohci is an option with more features RT than Aspect....but on a layer stacking basis Aspect will win since it degrades preview(very cleverly) to get its RT...they are both worthy options and again if Ppro is your soulmate it is a no brainer....stick with aspect. If you want RT with more filters take a look at edius ohci....if you want the best get a dual machine and a hardware card.

Randy, you can choice not to believe, but LE 6.1 will do three layers of 1080i. I just took Kaku Ito's M2T footage (LE does not directly support transport), ran it through HDTV2MPEG, loaded it clips on line 5, 6, and 7. I applied a GPU PIP to clip 6 and 7 with the PIPs over- lapping about 25%. After a 1 minute render (where I could play it, but the frame rate was about 5 frames in each window per second), it will now play at 29fps in all the layers. The files are IPB Mpeg-2 MP@H4. I tried a capture with Windows Media Encoder, but it drops too many frames to show it.

I must have misunderstood...what I am talking about is editing the native Sony format( .M2T or TS whatever you want to call it). No way 3 layers....I can barely do two for a few secs. Now if we are talking about a mpeg 2 format with a lower bitrate I bet edius can stay step for step....in fact edius was the first NLE that let you mix mpeg 2 and Dv on the TL. It cuts through mpeg 2 like butter. What I would like to know is what type quality hit does the source take to get there....my guess is it is serious. And if you have to render that is not RT to me...but I am confused about the render and the 5,6,7 business. Are you saying with 6 or 7 layers you have to render? Also I have read where the output to the breakout box is not full resolution so what does that mean?

"After a 1 minute render (where I could play it, but the frame rate was about 5 frames in each window per second), it will now play at 29fps in all the layers. "

That's not a very informative statement, since any editing program should be able to play back complex video after rendering it. When people talk about how many layers of video they can play simultaneously in real time, that's supposed to be a reference to what you can do *without rendering*.

With Canopus Edius you can reportedly play 3-4 layers of HDV video (using the HQ codec) without pre-rendering on a sufficiently powerful computer, with true full-quality playback. With Aspect HD you apparently get about the same effective result on less powerful computers, but that's largely because the playback is really preview quality and not the full 1080i resolution. With Pinnacle Liquid Edition it would be impressive to get two layers of HDV playback in real time without rendering, because the reliance on the native HDV format causes a huge hit on processing power compared to other HDV editing solutions. When discussing "real time" editing performance, it's important to be specific about what you're describing.

OK, with my video card, it cannot play back 1080 in real-time then except at 5fps with 3 layers (and A:M open). Also note that the two upper layers were 16:9 PIP (with an aqua frame - did not mention that.) I had the full render on (PCLE breaks them in to "red" and "yellow" slices - "red" compares as a clip with a time acceleration of 200% just applied where "yellow" would be a cross-fade on two established clips.) If I try this again, I should turn of render "yellow" slices and see.

It could play at least 2 with a X800, but I did not test three. My 9600XT does not have enough video memory according to PCLE to handle 1080 effectively. Not sure that I could play 3 with the X800, which is about 20% faster than a nVidia 6600GT.

Sorry about the lines ref. When LE opens, I get 4 timelines (1-4) at the bottom for audio, video goes in a 5th. By default, there are 7 or 8 timelines on the display. I dropped the additional video clip in timeline 6 and 7 over a clip in line 5.

Not sure that LE could claim "software only". Unlike other NLEs, Pinnacle is also scheduling processing through the GPU using DirectX 9 calls. The GPU is even better at creating display operations than the CPUs. That is also why PCLE specifies 256MB of memory for LongGOP editing at 1080. I may need to retry this too (thinking about it today), as I had Animation:Master running. In XP, there is no memory management for the graphics card, so first in wins (Longhorn's Avalon engine adds memory management and a thread scheduler for the GPU).

I would like to try Edius 3.x. It does some things I really like.

The use of the GPU intrigues me as some other respected companies are working using the gpu to render effects. The memory issue with the vid card is different and I have run into this using open Gl in other apps....hdv, since it is so big data wise will eat up the vid cards ram using it for open gl and has caused me problems with lockups do to vid card resources being depleted composting in Boris Red...and I have a FireGL 7100 with 256 megs. The biggest point that those who are switching from DV to HDV MUST understand is this stuff is 6X more data than DV and the only way to attack it is with hardware IMHO....any solutions that claim to do it in software only are cutting a corner somewhere. I am sure in time machines will get to the point where soft only solutions will work without cutting corners but not now....or rather not now without giving something else up like full frame full resolution out to monitor.

Joel,

If you like Premiere Pro, but you want to edit M2T, then try out the MainConcept plugin. That is how it works.

<<<-- Originally posted by Steven Gotz : Joel,

If you like Premiere Pro, but you want to edit M2T, then try out the MainConcept plugin. That is how it works. -->>>

i also tried the mainconcept plugin it would be perfect but the playback is nowhere near real time.


j

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly : <<<-- Originally posted by Ed Szarleta :

Preimier Pro 1.5.1 with Aspect HD 3.0 works just fine on a P4 3.4. Pushing almost 4 layers of 1080i with transitions and color correction. -->>>

Actually, you are not editing HDV, you are editing a proxy file. You are also not able to view the HDV signal on a broadcast monitor in Real Time.

Cineform is a great application, but for pro edit suites you need to see the output in RT on an HDTV screen - preferably a broadcast monitor.

Hope this helps

DBK -->>>

Actually, this is incorrect. With Aspect HD, you are editing the high quality HD file, there is no "proxy" file...only "proxy" playback. For Canopus users, the workflow is similar to editing everything in Canopus HQ codec...except as CineForm is a full screen wavelet and Canopus HQ is still a macroblock DCT, I suspect there may be a slight quality edge in CineForm's favor.

As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB...

<<<-- Originally posted by Randy Donato : ....hdv, since it is so big data wise will eat up the vid cards ram using it for open gl and has caused me problems with lockups do to vid card resources being depleted composting in Boris Red...and I have a FireGL 7100 with 256 megs. The biggest point that those who are switching from DV to HDV MUST understand is this stuff is 6X more data than DV and the only way to attack it is with hardware IMHO....any solutions that claim to do it in software only are cutting a corner somewhere. I am sure in time machines will get to the point where soft only solutions will work without cutting corners but not now....or rather not now without giving something else up like full frame full resolution out to monitor. -->>>

A few points...

1. HDV is the same size as DV data-RATE wise...that's how you get it on a DV tape...25 megabits per second in the Sony's case.

2. The "choke" portion of the program comes from the sheer torque it takes to compress MPEG vs. decompress it. You can play back lots of RT layers of MPEG Transport Stream, but once you add some effects, how many layers can you preview? PIP is always used as the benchmark, but frankly, all hat does is make the display raster smaller, use some screen keys or partial opacity and then report back on how much RT MPEG any app editing native MPEG will give you.

3. The data stream does get larger when you convert the HDV MPEG stream to something else...Canpus HQ or CineForm HD. However these codecs speed up the preview of effects because they are symmetrical...they take the same amount of energy to compress as decompress.

4. I'm curious how many HDV users have an HD-SDI monitor?

5. The preview mode in all CineForm products is excellent and the same RT preview mode is used in Prospect HD, Aspect's big brother and that preview was apparently good enough to color correct for a feature film...

6. As far as editing native MPEG being somehow higher visual quality than converting to either Canopus HQ or CineForm HD, it's just simply not the case. Period. MPEG is a very lossy format at the profile used for HDV and applying that codec repeatedly to footage vs. a full screen wavelet like CineForm or even a production-quality DCT-based codec like Canopus HQ will cause more compression artifacts than either one of the mentioned high quality codecs.

7. With the computing power available today, software will take over the HD post production niche much faster than it did SD production. This is proven with Canpus' Storm Daughter card for compressing MPEG in realtime. I demonstrated in the Canopus both at NAB three years ago on an AMD dual 1800 or possibly a 2400...(I can't remember which one I was standing at at that moment) that Canopus SoftMPG encoder actually smoked the real-time MPEG encoder card in compressing the same file. Again, this was three years ago...look at how far processor power has progressed.


I find some of the discussion over what's necessary for "professional" work very interesting...I suspect a "professional" is still the secret ingredient...

Hey Tim....good to see you over here. Yes you are right that the data rate is the same but the compression isn't and the bitrates are very high....and that is what chews up the processor. You have to do something to the 6x more pixel data. I would disagree that you can play back multiple layers of TS since two layers doesn't on my machine....just too much for my dualies to decode.
"As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB..." David and I have talked a bit about this in another forum.....right now if you turn "accelerated preview" off that will give you full frame resolution while scrubbing only. I will be very interested to see if they go to full frame full resolution out not just on scrubbing but playback whether they can maintain the RT claims on a P4.....my guess is we are talking dual Xeons or amds but if they can pull it off and get 4 layers on a P4 with full frame full resolution out to monitor then my hat is off.....if they will get more than color correction and pan and zoom. Software will have its day no doubt and Cineform is ahead of the software only game right now.....but the Canopus hardware/software solution is here and now and not limited to a couple of filters.

Hi Randy,

I find it interesting you can't play back two streams of TS, but then I don't work with the MPEG files so I have no point of reference...

It's true that the pixel raster of HDV 25 is 4.5 times the pixels of DV, but with the temporal compression of MPEG, there is only 1 full frame being loaded every 6 frames, so the raw data rate on playback should still be relatively manageable.

I do agree that multiple stream MPEGTS is a little improbable on a modest system in software...despite claims to the contrary by multiple manufacturers.

Right now I can run about 1 stream full res CineForm HD on my P4 laptop (3.2 GHz/2 Gig)...the preview mode enables 2 streams off a FireWire drive with titles and filters in RT. That was on a P4 2.8 (non-HT), I used that system for my TV Technology review.

You can use the PNY board to monitor the Aspect HD output in analog component High Def right now...so it's not like there's no way to monitor the output, but yes, the RT output does decrease with full res with a modest system.

As far as filters go...it's an interesting comparison. Canopus has a good selection of RT filters, but everytime someone talks about any of the multiple ways that the capabilities of Pro more extensive, the common response is that the user can use Boris with Edius.

Any one who talks about speed can't possibly talk about Boris in the same sentence... Even the stuff you have to render in PPro is far faster than Boris...

And Randy, I'll be more than happy to go head to head with you using Inscriber and I'll use the "plain" Ppro Title Designer. Go to Steven Gotz's website and download my typestyle library for PPro and the "DooDad" template...then talk to me about what a Titler can do...

:-)

<<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb :

Actually, this is incorrect. With Aspect HD, you are editing the high quality HD file, there is no "proxy" file...only "proxy" playback. For Canopus users, the workflow is similar to editing everything in Canopus HQ codec...except as CineForm is a full screen wavelet and Canopus HQ is still a macroblock DCT, I suspect there may be a slight quality edge in CineForm's favor.

As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB... -->>>

As I understand it to output back to HDV, you link back up with the original files. This means it is a proxy in my view, but I could be corrected.

The Canopus HQ codec, like their DV codec is a stand alone codec you can complete your edit in, view in real time on a broadcast monitor or HDTV, add multiple FX, transitions, etc. The system outputs back to the camera or deck and transcodes back to HDV in RealTime.

If you want to edit in native HDV, you can do it, but due to HDV's increased CPU requirements (transcoding in RT is CPU intensive, epecially when you add FX and transitions, etc) it is easier and faster to edit in their HQ Codec.

On my desk is a $25K Ikegami broadcast HD monitor. I have captured the same stream in native HDV and their HQ codec and done a split screen. It is impossible to see the line between the two files. I'll putmy monitor up against anything out there including Sony's Cinealta line of monitors.

On the software experience, I want you to look at Apple's FCP. Even at version 4.5, FCP realtime dies if you add a drop shadow. Doesn't matter how much CPU power you have, whether your file is DV, uncompressed, HD or WHU.

Yes, as CPU's and now GPU's get faster we may one day do without cards in our edit suites, but right now that time is not here especially for HD editing.

I've had an HD suite for 18 months now. I have used FCP(Aja Kona HD and KONA 2), Cineform's Aspect HD, Vegas Video, Ulead MSP with HDV and now Canopus Edius NX, and I must tell you the fastest and easiest is the Canopus system. I still have all those systems in my computer as I am working on a new HDV DVD. I have state of the art computers and graphic cards. The only system I don't own is the Pinnacle system and the reason for that is I tested it at DV Expo West last year, and it has an annoying chroma shift when it renders a transition. The same bad render the Fast Video Machine had 10 years ago (some will know Pinnacle bought Fast software and that liquid is based on Fast's code)

Your other question about who has an SDI HD monitor on their desk....why's that significant. There are a tremendous number of good quality LCd and CRT based HDTV's available today. No they don't touch my Ikie, but they do give better color correction than the RGB world of computer monitors.

I trust this helps

DBK

VERY NICE :)

J

"It's true that the pixel raster of HDV 25 is 4.5 times the pixels of DV, but with the temporal compression of MPEG, there is only 1 full frame being loaded every 6 frames, so the raw data rate on playback should still be relatively manageable. "

Tim: this doesn't sound right. Isn't the point here to be able to display your editing output in real time with editing effects incorporated? Seems like that inherently requires being able to process all the necessary calculations for all of those pixels, which is 4.5 times as many at native HDV resolution or 6 times as many at 1080i monitoring resolution. And even if we somehow get past that, there appears to be universal agreement that rendering HDV projects to available HD output formats is extremely processor intensive. So like I said earlier in this discussion, if you really want to do significant HDV video production effectively, it just makes sense to buy the most powerful base hardware you can afford to back it up. Doesn't mean you *have* to have a super-duper computer to work with HDV, but it clearly helps.

"And Randy, I'll be more than happy to go head to head with you using Inscriber and I'll use the "plain" Ppro Title Designer. Go to Steven Gotz's website and download my typestyle library for PPro and the "DooDad" template...then talk to me about what a Titler can do"

Already got them and for those that don't you are missing out on a great freebie.....but 3d text and animation and TM pro has it hands down....if you need those features which not everyone does. And I know where you go to do that and it is AE(kinda like RED in Edius):)And am I wrong that a coder for inscriber wrote the adobe titler?

"Any one who talks about speed can't possibly talk about Boris in the same sentence... Even the stuff you have to render in PPro is far faster than Boris..."

Apples and Oranges but we can agree that Red is slow....bout like AE. Some task ok some just slow. But it does composting so it is expected. I think it has improved since you last used it but it isn't going to win a rendering race for sure.


And I don't think you can have it both ways, meaning touting the RT of Aspect then defend the lack of filters(it is a plugin right) by saying you get all the Ppro stuff which isn't RT. But yes right now Ppro is more feature laden than Edius....right now.But since this thread is about RT then Edius has Aspect beat hands down on the features that perform RT.A good example is if you do any keying(and Tim you know canopus has a good keyer) that is RT in Edius plus Nx....render time with Aspect. Did you know nested sequences are coming along with mattes and full alpha support? Don't forget the new hardware accelerated effects with full key framing.


"Right now I can run about 1 stream full res CineForm HD on my P4 laptop (3.2 GHz/2 Gig)...the preview mode enables 2 streams off a FireWire drive with titles and filters in RT. That was on a P4 2.8 (non-HT), I used that system for my TV Technology review"

Is that the Aspect that the users here have or is that Prospect?....last I heard full res preview was only available with scrubbing....and that is from David. I hear of good things to come though at a performance cost...it has to. If it is the 10 bit version then I am impressed...if it is full res. I wonder what the Canopus 10 bit HD codec will do in comparrison....out of my league anyway since 10 bit is way to rich for me.

On the MPEGTS ask your friends at Cineform the why....it is a beast and you are right with codecs like CineForm and Canopus HQ it just doesn't make sense to use it. Joshua can get a few secs of playback with 2 layers on their dual 3.4 turnkeys so it is not just me....I am pretty sure the decoding just kills the processors.

Personally I hope Cineform does go to more features since I have more than once admitted to my closet Ppro use. Like all NLEs there are advantages to each....if nothing else it will prompt Canopus to get even better and competition is all good for us.


"I'm curious how many HDV users have an HD-SDI monitor?"

My 1080i LCD that takes component works just fine for me....and if it wasn't important (monitor out) then why all the fuss now by Cineform to get it (and in full resolution which I have seen David argue blue in the face is not needed). I have been enjoying it for months now and it is fine.

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly : <<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb :

Actually, this is incorrect. With Aspect HD, you are editing the high quality HD file, there is no "proxy" file...only "proxy" playback. For Canopus users, the workflow is similar to editing everything in Canopus HQ codec...except as CineForm is a full screen wavelet and Canopus HQ is still a macroblock DCT, I suspect there may be a slight quality edge in CineForm's favor.

As far as using a monitor while editing...check out CineForm Aspect HD at NAB... -->>>

As I understand it to output back to HDV, you link back up with the original files. This means it is a proxy in my view, but I could be corrected.


DBK -->>>

Actually, to output back to HDV from Aspect right now, you would process back to MPEG TS using the Media Encoder, but no, you don't relink to any HDV files...you would typically dump them after conversion. The CineForm HD codec and the Canopus HQ codec exist for exactly the same reason...to create a higher quality online file to edit and preserve image quality. Canopus uses hardware to play back that material in RT on an external monitor, and Aspect uses a specially designed decode mode to play back a half res "proxy" from the full quality clip...there is no "proxy" file at all.

BTW, there is no question in my mind about the quality of the Canopus HQ codec, or the speed of the system, I just find it frustrating to see things asserted about Aspect that contend that somehow it's illegitimate next to the Canopus solution...and what's being asserted is incorrect.

As far as monitors go, I'm with you 100% on the Ike monitor. My point was the SDI, not the HD. Aspect will output video to an analog component HD monitor now with the PNY 450 board, it was shown at SIGGRAPH last August...

As far as LCDs go...don't they image in RGB? That and the high black levels might seem inadequate to purists...however I agree that there are other types of monitors and that the key advantage that the Canopus system has is SDI, so basically you and I are in agreement, there are many other ways to monitor output and some of those already work with Aspect.

Are there advantages to the Canopus system? Absolutely. Does this mean that Aspect can't be used for "professional" work? ...that may be an overstatement.

<<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb : Does this mean that Aspect can't be used for "professional" work? ...that may be an overstatement. -->>>

I'm sure it can be used for professional applications.

The output from the PNY videocard will be RGB. As to whether all LCD's image in RGB, I believe some do - the computer monitor type, while the HDTV versions immage in YUV. Once again, I could be corrected.

Any application can be used for professional applications, but when my time is worth money, I need to go with the fastest solution.

Fastest is taken into consideration with regards to

1. Speed of editing
2. Reliability of the system
3. Least hassels.

That's my short list. While Cineform provides an inexpensive solution, I'm not sure it wins as the fastest.

To each his own though

DBK

<<<-- Originally posted by Randy Donato : but 3d text and animation and TM pro has it hands down....if you need those features which not everyone does. And I know where you go to do that and it is AE(kinda like RED in Edius):)And am I wrong that a coder for inscriber wrote the adobe titler?

And I don't think you can have it both ways, meaning touting the RT of Aspect then defend the lack of filters(it is a plugin right) by saying you get all the Ppro stuff which isn't RT. But yes right now Ppro is more feature laden than Edius....right now.But since this thread is about RT then Edius has Aspect beat hands down on the features that perform RT.A good example is if you do any keying(and Tim you know canopus has a good keyer) that is RT in Edius plus Nx....render time with Aspect. Did you know nested sequences are coming along with mattes and full alpha support? Don't forget the new hardware accelerated effects with full key framing.
-->>>

True...I do go to AE for that sort of thing, though I don't do a lot of the XYZ rotation/flying text type stuff outside other compositing so Inscriber itself probably wouldn't help me much. And, yes...Inscriber expatriots did code the Title Designer.

As I've said many times on the Canopus forum, Edius is VERY fast, as long as it does everything you need it to do. Rt is faster than rendering, but I use multiply, screen, and other types of keyers on a daily basis, and once we all go to editing and extended special effects, Edius users will always answer that they can do everything that PPro can do with Boris. All I'm saying is that it kind of blows the "all RT" argument for Edius as once you fire up Boris to do something that PPro can do on the timeline, even rendering it's speed advantage:PPro. Even relative to AE, Boris seems pokey to me when I've seen it working...

The Chroma keyer is incredible and the Luma keyer is good in Edius...but these aren't the only form of compositing I use...they're not even the main ones. I think I can count on one hand the times I've actually used a PiP in my professional career, which is close to 18 years now. Bottom line is what I've told Hiro Yamada every time he's asked me what I think of Canopus products over the years..."Don't give me more RT layers until you give me some ways to USE them." Mattes and better alpha support? Wonderful. Nested sequences will be great. Keyframing will also be great, but they've all been a long time coming and PPro isn't standing still.

As far as running the one stream, I'm using Windows Media Player to play back the one stream so it plays full res, and yes, at this point I'm running Prospect and the clip was actually 1920x1080-10 bit, so 1920x1440-8 bit would theoretically run better. I'll have Aspect loaded in a week or so and I guess I'll investigate a bit more later.

I'm not sure that any true LCD is technically "interlaced" as it really doesn't "scan" so much as refresh...

The fuss about monitors is the customer's fuss about monitors...no secret plot there. I think it's important, but with most users not ready to invest in a really high quality CRT for HD, I suspect a LOT of this content will be played back via DVI or some other connection to LCD panels, which are simply not that great to color correct on. If they're properly adjusted, they're OK, but I think some of the huge monitor-out concerns are sort of offset by the idea that relatively few Aspect users who are clamoring for this feature because of color correction, etc. will lay out the serious money for a monitor that will actually make much of a difference once they have it...

I think that may be where David Newman was coming from...

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Shaw : "It's true that the pixel raster of HDV 25 is 4.5 times the pixels of DV, but with the temporal compression of MPEG, there is only 1 full frame being loaded every 6 frames, so the raw data rate on playback should still be relatively manageable. "

Tim: this doesn't sound right. Isn't the point here to be able to display your editing output in real time with editing effects incorporated? Seems like that inherently requires being able to process all the necessary calculations for all of those pixels, which is 4.5 times as many at native HDV resolution or 6 times as many at 1080i monitoring resolution. And even if we somehow get past that, there appears to be universal agreement that rendering HDV projects to available HD output formats is extremely processor intensive. So like I said earlier in this discussion, if you really want to do significant HDV video production effectively, it just makes sense to buy the most powerful base hardware you can afford to back it up. Doesn't mean you *have* to have a super-duper computer to work with HDV, but it clearly helps. -->>>

The quote you picked out of my post was talking about playback only. What you're referring to is the re-encoding necessary to preview your edit progress, and we agree that this is very, very processor intensive, and it seems in many cases, impractical.

The point of this is that the systems that offer an intermediate codec that is designed to be symmetrical, whether Canopus HQ or CineForm HD, have a significant speed advantage because of reduced processor load, not a smaller filesize. The file size of HDV is small.

<<<-- Originally posted by Darren Kelly :

The output from the PNY videocard will be RGB. As to whether all LCD's image in RGB, I believe some do - the computer monitor type, while the HDTV versions immage in YUV. Once again, I could be corrected.

Any application can be used for professional applications, but when my time is worth money, I need to go with the fastest solution.

Fastest is taken into consideration with regards to

1. Speed of editing
2. Reliability of the system
3. Least hassels.

That's my short list. While Cineform provides an inexpensive solution, I'm not sure it wins as the fastest.

To each his own though

DBK -->>>

The varied display colorspace of these different monitors is part of the point for me...even with monitor out, are you truly getting a huge advantage from the computer screen if the outboard monitor also is not imaging YUV?

Your Ikegami monitor is beautiful, I'm sure. I'm concerned that some might think an Apple Cinema display (or worse) is equivalent to that broadcast monitor simply because it's external...

Your points are well taken and I am not criticizing your choice in the least. Canopus makes very solid products.

I'm just trying to interject a bit of clarification to some of the things that some users may have heard, but are not correct about the CineForm product...and throw in a little list of my own.

:-)

Tim: I wouldn't describe the Aspect HD solution as "illegitimate" or unprofessional, but it does appear that there are meaningful functional differences between the Canopus HDV solution and the Cineform one. The most important issue for me at the moment is whether Cineform supports a full range of editing features in real time, because if it doesn't then it's not equivalent to Edius in this regard. With Edius there's support for HDV built into the application across a wide range of filters and effects; with Aspect HD it appears only a limited range of editing features are fully supported. With Edius there's an out-of-the-box option for full-quality real-time HD monitoring; with Aspect HD you have to buy a separate video card and probably compromise your real-time performance if you want full quality output. This doesn't mean Aspect HD isn't useful; it's just not as comprehensive as Edius in its approach to working with HDV. Both appear to be fine tools for some purposes with limitations for others, so it's important to understand the differences between them.

It's worth noting that this discussion has largely ignored one of the original topics proposed, which was a comparison between Edius and Liquid Edition. Looks like hardly anyone is using LE for HDV work, with Edius and Aspect HD being more practical solutions.

Unfortunatley LE6.0 was not handling the HDV footage form the Sony HDV cams well. The new 6.1 update has addressed these issues and now it is a very good solution for editing HDV 1080i footage.

Liquid Edition leverages your graphics card and you must have a powerful 3D gaming card with 256 megs of RAM in order to handle the workflow and deliver the best real-time performance.

Edius software alone can edit HDV, especially if you use their HQ CODEC. I prefer the full Edius NX for HDV solution. Teh extra hardware allows you to get the most realtime performance of any HDV solution currently available. The HD component output is full res, and it looks spectacular.

Aspect HD is a tool that allows Premiere Pro users to easily migrate to HDV. While you are not editing native HDV files, the workflow is stable and productive. You get a wide variety of realtime filters and effects. More will come with each release.

One of the bi-prodcuts of this discussion is quite interesting:

We don't yet have an easy way to deliver our HD content to our customers. We can encode and author WM9 on a standard DVD, but you need a computer to play it back. WM9 set top DVD players are expected this holiday season. So for now, as far as "what is real-time with HDV goes", it's all about the workflow and not the final output.

Other then for backup & archiving I see no reason to go back to HDV tape.

All of the NLE apps being discussed in this thread, plus Vegas give you a very productive workflow while editing.

Overall I think this has been one of the best discussions to date on HDV editing - on any message board or user group. Lets keep in mind that we are only at the very early stages of teh HDV revolution!

Gary

I already own a WM9 set top player. It works great. But for some reason they have not made it available to retailers as far as I can tell. I don't know why. It is a great box for only $249.

Check this out:

http://shop.iodata.com/shopping/products.php?cat=HNP&sc=AVEL&pId=AVLP2%2FDVDLA

Maybe Videoguys should contact these people and get the rights to sell it? Seriously.

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Shaw : Tim: I wouldn't describe the Aspect HD solution as "illegitimate" or unprofessional, but it does appear that there are meaningful functional differences between the Canopus HDV solution and the Cineform one. The most important issue for me at the moment is whether Cineform supports a full range of editing features in real time, because if it doesn't then it's not equivalent to Edius in this regard. With Edius there's support for HDV built into the application across a wide range of filters and effects; with Aspect HD it appears only a limited range of editing features are fully supported. With Edius there's an out-of-the-box option for full-quality real-time HD monitoring; with Aspect HD you have to buy a separate video card and probably compromise your real-time performance if you want full quality output. This doesn't mean Aspect HD isn't useful; it's just not as comprehensive as Edius in its approach to working with HDV. Both appear to be fine tools for some purposes with limitations for others, so it's important to understand the differences between them.

It's worth noting that this discussion has largely ignored one of the original topics proposed, which was a comparison between Edius and Liquid Edition. Looks like hardly anyone is using LE for HDV work, with Edius and Aspect HD being more practical solutions. -->>>

"Meaningful functional differences" may be one of the most intelligent things said in this thread.

It comes down to this in my mind: Edius IS completely RT. However, it's feature set is not as rich as PPro's. Aspect does a small subset of PPro's functions in RT, but PPro has a wealth of features.

Which system is truly best depends a bit on how you work. When I say "If you can get done what you need to get done in Edius, use Edius." What I'm trying to say is that Edius is very fast with its list of features. I use many other features that are, or have been until a very recent Edius update, only in PPro. Real Time only matters to me if I can do what I need to do. In the end, I'd rather have the capabilities that I personally use, regardless of RT or not.

Also "full range" of editing features means something different to each person. Some users use features everyday that I never touch. It's a combination of style and the type of work you do. I happen to do corporate and broadcast work and I can't remember the last time I used a page turn transition or 1,2, or (for crying out loud) 3 PiPs... We go the extra mile to shoot the best possible footage and most "specialty" elements are done in AE.

AE is the only place to go to get a chroma or green screen keyer that can touch Canopus, and I like Canopus blurs as well. I also move footage in and out of Edius because sometimes that Old Movie effect is just the ticket for a specific project... However when it comes to general editing of our material, we use serious color correction, audio capabilities, multiple layers of alpha channel (footage and GFX), and heavy duty keyframing....all things where Edius (at least as it applies to what I do...) is lagging right now.

As Darren stated, you need to understand what your needs are and get the system that is the best match for you. You've seen me post around the various forums. I can't remember challenging anyone who says how much they like a particular solution (unless I have some technical questions about what they're claiming), but I really dislike it when in order to compliment one product a user feels like they have to shoot another one down, and particularly using information that's simply incorrect or hearsay.

As far as Liquid Edition goes...I just don't have a good feeling about the continued existence of that product. Avid's track record just doesn't justify a ton of optimism in this regard.

<<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb :As I've said many times on the Canopus forum, Edius is VERY fast, as long as it does everything you need it to do. Rt is faster than rendering, but I use multiply, screen, and other types of keyers on a daily basis, and once we all go to editing and extended special effects, Edius users will always answer that they can do everything that PPro can do with Boris. All I'm saying is that it kind of blows the "all RT" argument for Edius as once you fire up Boris to do something that PPro can do on the timeline, even rendering it's speed advantage:PPro. Even relative to AE, Boris seems pokey to me when I've seen it working...-->>>

Tim before we drift off too far I thought we were comparing what Edius will do RT as compared to what Aspect will do RT? Somehow that has turned into a feature comparison between Ppro and Edius without regard to RT and somehow those features in Ppro are morphed now as a part of the Aspect feature set. I agree and so do many others that Edius because it is designed for RT editing just lacks certain tools that Ppro has....the philosophy being if it stops playback do it in a composting app. I also think the gap is much narrower today and will get to a negligible point SOON(those who frequent the Canopus boards will get that one) The fact is there is one Rt filter in Aspect and that is color correction which is limited (and I don't know much about it or whether "Dust to Glory" used it or whether you use it or the native Ppro tools instead)when compared to the SET of RT color correction tools(white balance with luma ranges , YUV, color wheel,color balance and monotone....all of which offer split screen!!) you get with Edius. Sorry but since I did not count the layout tool(great for working with mixed sources) in Edius I will likewise not count the pan and zoom in Aspect as a filter since in apps like AE they don't call a camera a filter. Also what the heck is the "force render" filter that adds a red line....heck who needs a tool that forces a render.....unless you need to render to see the work properly I guess:-). When Aspect can claim they have blend, blur, soft blur,focus ,chroma, luma,chrominance, region, old movie/film, matrix and about 16 more filters working in Rt then we will continue the debate. The one about RT I hope.I forgot the blending modes but even though there are 16 of them I will count them as one.

Your point is well taken though that others who don't mind renders can get more features in Ppro....I prefer to do it all in one app like Edius and hope the gap closes...but I can get it done.

"I'm not sure that any true LCD is technically "interlaced" as it really doesn't "scan" so much as refresh..."

Tim you are right about the prohibitive cost of a true 1080i professional crt versus an LCD but I think you will agree that going from yuv to rgb is fairly accurate and it beats the heck out of doing it on a computer monitor that is scaled down. Also I would add as food for thought....where do you think consumer displays for HD are headed?....I think LCDs

<<<-- Originally posted by Randy Donato :
Tim before we drift off too far I thought we were comparing what Edius will do RT as compared to what Aspect will do RT? Somehow that has turned into a feature comparison between Ppro and Edius without regard to RT and somehow those features in Ppro are morphed now as a part of the Aspect feature set.
Sorry but since I did not count the layout tool(great for working with mixed sources) in Edius I will likewise not count the pan and zoom in Aspect as a filter since in apps like AE they don't call a camera a filter. Also what the heck is the "force render" filter that adds a red line....heck who needs a tool that forces a render.....unless you need to render to see the work properly I guess:-). When Aspect can claim they have blend, blur, soft blur,focus ,chroma, luma,chrominance, region, old movie/film, matrix and about 16 more filters working in Rt then we will continue the debate. The one about RT I hope.I forgot the blending modes but even though there are 16 of them I will count them as one.

Tim you are right about the prohibitive cost of a true 1080i professional crt versus an LCD but I think you will agree that going from yuv to rgb is fairly accurate and it beats the heck out of doing it on a computer monitor that is scaled down. Also I would add as food for thought....where do you think consumer displays for HD are headed?....I think LCDs -->>>

Consumer video is headed for Windows Media as well...I'm not ready to edit in it yet. I never considered using VHS for production either.

Going from YUV to RGB really ISN'T fairly accurate, at least when it comes to color correction...that is why all these people are screaming for an external monitor. My point is that if you decide to use an external RGB monitor, it's like using a VGA monitor to make color judgements about your standard def work instead of an NTSC monitor. You do gain a size difference vs. the overlay, no question, but the whole point of doing color correction on an external video monitor is to use the 709 (or 601 depending on if you're using JVC or Sony...) colorspace of HD video instead of RGB...otherwise everything but the size argument is moot on the external monitor question.

As far as RT goes...as I've said, Edius is fast, but at the end of the day I need to get done what I need to get done. RT everything is great unless "everything" doesn't include the capabilities that I need.

What I will say is that you can count ALL the blend modes as far as I'm concerned. They are fantastic and exactly what Edius needed to work with all those layers of RT that it can do and they are what I wanted Canopus to add to the RT feature set that worked inside Premiere once upon a time.... On the Rt side of things, I currently have Prospect loaded, so I'm not sure if there are less RT transitions in Aspect, but I show 41 RT transitions and 4 RT effects. Far less than Edius...but I never claimed otherwise.

If we restrict the discussion to what is RT, then we aren't evaluating anything as an editing tool. If the only thing anyone wants to know is what is fastest...absolutely Edius is... However, I don't get paid to play pictures back instantly, I get paid to make a program work to the best of my abilities. At that point you have to balance out all the factors associated with speed. I happen to be editing some CineForm HD footage tonight on my laptop. I think that is fast as I don't have to sit in my office and do this...I can go home and see my kids.

The NX card, which requires dual processors to run Canopus HQ doesn't work with a laptop, so I guess this is faster for me.

Again, if the thread is only about RT...the discussion was over a long time ago. However, the thread evolved to where we're talking about what each system can do as far as editing, and then there are factors that shift back and forth.

"I happen to be editing some CineForm HD footage tonight on my laptop. I think that is fast as I don't have to sit in my office and do this...I can go home and see my kids. "
Whatever you are doing it is requiring a render if you are using Ppro native effects....It can't be color correction because I don't think you are relying on rgb and that is all I know of besides transitions....... I forgot to mention there is a plugin for the NX card into PPro that gives full frame full resolution out from Nx to monitor using Canopus HQ .....and like Aspect the native Ppro effects need to be rendered. Now there is a place I hope canopus goes and that is developing the Ppro plugin further....then we can talk apples to apples.

<<<-- Whatever you are doing it is requiring a render if you are using Ppro native effects....It can't be color correction because I don't think you are relying on rgb and that is all I know of besides transitions....... -->>>

I AM using RGB...my point has obviously been lost here.

What I've been saying is that RGB works...unless you have a YUV video monitor on your output...you're still in RGB with an LCD. So, what exactly are you gaining besides sheer size?

I think an NX plugin for PPro is a great idea...however, there are one or two Storm owners out there who might be skiddish about trying the Adobe/Canopus combo again. It may be an uphill marketing battle...

"I suspect a LOT of this content will be played back via DVI or some other connection to LCD panels, which are simply not that great to color correct on."
Yes I am lost now.....

Tim, I wonder if you would mind spending a moment to help a newbie by outlining the issue of RGB versus YUV.

Am I right in thinking YUV is what you get on a TV and has a wider dynamic range than RGB which is the basic PC monitor color space. So if you balance colors intended for final use on a TV by looking at a PC monitor, whether the monitor is CRT or LCD (and recognising that LCD does not yet match CRT for color rendition), then you are likely to get some unpleasant surprises when you try the resulting output on a TV / Video display.

There was a stage when I tried to edit some SD video using the PC instead of a monitor and when I eventually tried it on a TV the colors were blown right out (ie highlights blown out and sometimes taking on a color cast as well). After that I always used the external TV montior - which I take it is the problem right now with HDV.

Andrew Hall

<<<-- Originally posted by Andrew J Hall : Tim, I wonder if you would mind spending a moment to help a newbie by outlining the issue of RGB versus YUV.

Am I right in thinking YUV is what you get on a TV and has a wider dynamic range than RGB which is the basic PC monitor color space. So if you balance colors intended for final use on a TV by looking at a PC monitor, whether the monitor is CRT or LCD (and recognising that LCD does not yet match CRT for color rendition), then you are likely to get some unpleasant surprises when you try the resulting output on a TV / Video display.

There was a stage when I tried to edit some SD video using the PC instead of a monitor and when I eventually tried it on a TV the colors were blown right out (ie highlights blown out and sometimes taking on a color cast as well). After that I always used the external TV montior - which I take it is the problem right now with HDV.

Andrew Hall -->>>

YUV has a "different" dynamic range would probably be more accurate...as you found out, some color saturation issues actually find RGB with the bigger range...luminance, in a sort of over-generalized way, goes to YUV.

The point I was attempting to make, then it got pretty lost in the discussion is that that same external monitor that you learned you needed with SD video, is the exact principle that most users on this forum are referring to when they say they need an external monitor. However, why would you have used an external monitor with your SD that was VGA? That would've been RGB just like the display that you eventualy determined wasn't accurate... Therefore my point was why is an exernal monitor so important to these people if all they're going to do is put an RGB LCD panel on it anyway?

I use the desktop overlay to do a lot of editing and the nice thing is that PPro has a waveform and vectorscope built in so I can see if I'm creating a problem with color, but I still often need to tweak on a television monitor if it will be shown on a normal television...

As I said in a private email to someone in the thread...I never said RGB was necessarily unacceptable for viewing...but for those who say that an external monitor is absolutely necessary, but put an RGB display on it...I ask why?

...the only thing I can think of is a size increase and I can understand that of course. It's just hard to make a solid case for an external RGB monitor being vastly different than the desktop monitor as far as color rendition is concerned.

Tim: what would be your opinion of using a consumer-grade HDTV set for external monitoring of an HDV editing project? Would there be any particular brand or type of set you would recommend if you wanted a reasonably decent monitor but didn't want to break the bank to buy it?

<<<-- Originally posted by Kevin Shaw : Tim: what would be your opinion of using a consumer-grade HDTV set for external monitoring of an HDV editing project? Would there be any particular brand or type of set you would recommend if you wanted a reasonably decent monitor but didn't want to break the bank to buy it? -->>>

I would think that would be fine for 1080i output...and again, RGB sources aren't "awful"...it's sort of the principle of the thing.

Anyway...I've always had sort of a thing for the venerable Sony monitors...but I've seen some very nice flat screen CRTs in the stores these days. One non-Sony that seemed to look surprisingly good to me in the store the other day was a Samsung 32" TX-P...something something, but when I asked the guy about picture formats, I found out it won't do 720p...and it's 4:3 format...but maybe the picture raster can be compressed to 16:9 like a Sony Q series monitor...I've also seen one Philips that I thought was pretty decent...32" or maybe larger...widescreen, also not 720p compatible. The catch with most of the consumer monitors I've seen is that very few handle 720p...

Sony has other professional HD capable monitors...I'm sure that the Ikegami that was very expensive mentioned earlier in the thread is absolutely gorgeous...but there are smaller production monitors out there for under a couple thousand dollars if you are feeding analog component HD. (The SDI interfaces are more expensive than the monitors...).

That is funny because LCDs are growing into the most popular "consumer-grade" HD TVs...and your question is a good one Kevin because this really isn't any different from a monitoring standpoint than SD....you can still spend a fortune on a broadcast quality SD monitor or you can get like I think most do(that aren't doing all broadcast) a simple Sony 400-600 lines monitor with a blue gun or even a TV. The same is true for HD, take a look here. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=262238&is=REG
Its not broadcast quality but it is yuv and does 1080i,720p and Sd with component in....it does 16:9 and 4:3 both HD and Sd.....and I know of some folks who brag about using big Ole consumer HD CRTs.
I also think if I dig deep enough I will find Tim admitting in the SD days that a cheap TV was better than nothing.....oh well....that was back in the good old Canopus days before he found his new love...Actually being fair to Tim it was Canopus who left him without a date to the Premiere ball:)

<<<-- Originally posted by Randy Donato :
I also think if I dig deep enough I will find Tim admitting in the SD days that a cheap TV was better than nothing.....oh well....that was back in the good old Canopus days before he found his new love...Actually being fair to Tim it was Canopus who left him without a date to the Premiere ball:) -->>>

It was a good question...unfortunately CRTs are getting more and more difficult to find.

And yes, I would say that getting a peek at what you're doing on even a basic TV is better than editing on the desktop only for color rendition. I know some editors who actually have both an expensive broadcast monitor AND an 89 dollar Capehart (or whatever) cheapo in the system together just to get a feel for the lowest common denominator viewability.

Canopus has some plans and they're carrying them out...rather well at this point by the looks of things. I'm pretty committed to the Adobe family of software and that was my ultimate direction...it was time to part, but we're still friends, Randy...

:-)

<<<-- Originally posted by Tim Kolb :

Canopus has some plans and they're carrying them out...rather well at this point by the looks of things. I'm pretty committed to the Adobe family of software and that was my ultimate direction...it was time to part, but we're still friends, Randy...

:-) -->>>

Also...ProCoder and Imaginate rock...and I do crack open Edius from time to time...my ADVC-100s travel with my laptops everywhere and our ADVC-500 serves faithfully to this day.

For SDI/FW/analog I/O we've moved to the SD-Connect box on one system though...

<<<posted by Tim Kolb: The point I was attempting to make, then it got pretty lost in the discussion is that that same external monitor that you learned you needed with SD video, is the exact principle that most users on this forum are referring to when they say they need an external monitor. However, why would you have used an external monitor with your SD that was VGA? That would've been RGB just like the display that you eventualy determined wasn't accurate... Therefore my point was why is an exernal monitor so important to these people if all they're going to do is put an RGB LCD panel on it anyway?>>>>

Unless I have misunderstood - the external 'monitor' (my poor language) was a TV ie YUV not VGA (or RGB) - is that right?

If so then yes I can see that using external LCD is the same problem as using an ordinary PC monitor only worse since the colors are lesss accurate.

Is it possible to improve the calibration of a PC monitor to make it render closer to YUV - I calibrate for my photography using ColorVision Spyder (measures the colors on the screen and creates a profile), so the RGB is pretty good but I take it that's not what is required.

Andrew

<<<-- Originally posted by Andrew J Hall :

Unless I have misunderstood - the external 'monitor' (my poor language) was a TV ie YUV not VGA (or RGB) - is that right?

If so then yes I can see that using external LCD is the same problem as using an ordinary PC monitor only worse since the colors are lesss accurate.


Andrew -->>>

It's awkward to keep the terminology straight, but yes when I'm talking about an "external" monitor, I'm attempting to refer to a monitor to view just the video stream...external from the computer fed by the video output.

LCDs have gotten better as far as accuracy, but since all of them that I'm aware of are based on some form of VGA, they aren't YUV.

An RGB LCD isn't really a total waste of time as there is a picture size advantage, but you are correct, it's the same colorspace for the most part as the computer's desktop monitor(s) and therefore really is more a really nice thing to have vs. a YUV monitor, which would be the "native" colorspace of the video signal...unless you're using HDcam SR.