I guess I'm in a little different world than most of you guys. I've been told I open my mouth when I shouldn't - but I will anyway.

My first editing of HD10 material was with the JVC (KDDI) software. This is all native format. It is very obvious that the only frames that are re-compressed ar those with changes in them (effects, titles, etc.). Rendering is very fast (just copying frames) until modified frames appear. Because of this, no additional degradation of the signal will occur unless modifications are made. So if you go back to color correct a scene in a previously edited master, the only frames affected at all are the frames that are color corrected. It seems to me that the advantages of native format editing in HDV are the same as DV. The difference is scrubbing and previewing become more difficult because of MPEG.

I recently upgraded to 3GHz P4 and to Ulead MSP with HDV plug-in - still native format. Scrubbing is not the ultra-snappy I get with DV, but it's not a dog either. I just did a test with full-res preview of a complex effect between two clips, with color correction on second clip, and a title bridging the effect into both clips. It was perfectly smooth, with no rendering. I find the experience with the JVC 720p editing very workable. Maybe the 1080i is tougher?

Just an aside! I just tried re-rendering an animation (in Cool3d) that I made sometime back. Rendered to 720p AVI, then brought it into HDV project. Cool!

"I find the experience with the JVC 720p editing very workable. Maybe the 1080i is tougher?"

Most definitely. 720p is 1280x720 = 921,600 pixels per frame while 1080i is 1920x1080 = 2,0736,00 pixels, so there's essentially twice as much data involved in editing 1080i. (Unless you're talking about 720p at 60 frames per second, but that's not what the JVC records.)

FYI, the FX1 and Z1 is 1440x1080i and I believe 1.1 million pixels, like the JVC. For more, visit this page:

http://www.hdvinfo.net/articles/sonyhdrfx1/compare.php

heath

Heath & Kevin,

The data is somewhere between the two numbers you offer. Although the FX1/Z1 only has 1.1M pixels for CCD, these are offset to generate slightly higher resolution data. These cameras meet HD2 spec of 1440x1080, and therefore have 1555200 pixels per frame in the compressed image. JVC has 921600 as Zevin suggests. There are 68% more pixels in the Z1 image, making it harder to edit.

Note: The number of pixels doesn't mean the HD2 spec has a 68% better image as we a comparing an interlace image to a progressive one. It teams of resolved spatial detail they are very similar.

David definitely is in the know.

heath

Thanks David. I knew about the Z1 numbers but not the JVC, so I figured I'd just reference the format definitions. By the way, when using Cineform to edit HDV footage and output to an HDTV display using the latest video cards, where and how are the calculations done to convert 1440 x 1080 pixels to 1920 x 1080 pixels? If any of that hits against the processor, wouldn't that also increase the performance requirements for 1080i editing?

Kevin,

Note a subject for this thread, but the quick answer is no CPU impact, GPU does all the work to scale 1440 to 1920 (whether you are on the Mac or PC.) So this is no system performance hit or requirements change. For CineForm particular questions please post in the CineForm forum.

I have an important question.

Does FCP5 include HDV capture and export or do you have to use LumiéreHD?

Does FCP5 include HDV capture and export or do you have to use LumiéreHD?
It will support it.

Which? LumiéreHD or FCP5?

P.S: What I meant by export was to print to tape in native HDV in FCP5

Just look at the info on Apple's website:

http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/finalcutpro/

Native HDV Support
Unlike other solutions, Final Cut Pro 5 acquires HDV media via FireWire and keeps it in the original format, transferring it into the system without any generation loss. Output via FireWire back to an HDV camera or deck

Thanks, never saw that!

The Apple statement( ...Unlike other solution...) is amusing from a company that is in fact close to last in bringing HDV editing to its product and obviously hasn't bothered to find out what their competitors on the PC are doing. To my knowledge Premiere Pro 1.5.1 is the only NLE that transcodes to an intermediate format on capture. Edius Pro3, Ulead, Pinnacle Edition 6 all will give the option of editing in native m2t or are that way by default. IF they had said editing on the MAC then it would have had more credibility!!!


Ron Evans

The Apple statement( ...Unlike other solution...) is amusing from a company that is in fact close to last in bringing HDV editing to its product and obviously hasn't bothered to find out what their competitors on the PC are doing. To my knowledge Premiere Pro 1.5.1 is the only NLE that transcodes to an intermediate format on capture. Edius Pro3, Ulead, Pinnacle Edition 6 all will give the option of editing in native m2t or are that way by default. IF they had said editing on the MAC then it would have had more credibility!!!


Ron Evans
Well, to be fair it doesn't say Unlike all other solutions...

It may be crappy maketing speak, but it is a legit statement.

I'd wait until FCP 5 ships and people are using it. Lumiere HD is nice, but my experiences (it's probably been fixed) is the video looks slightly darker and fuzzier. iMovie HD and Final Cut Express HD use the Apple Intermediate Codec (AIC) which introduces artifacts in the footage.

heath

I'd wait until FCP 5 ships and people are using it. Lumiere HD is nice, but my experiences (it's probably been fixed) is the video looks slightly darker and fuzzier. iMovie HD and Final Cut Express HD use the Apple Intermediate Codec (AIC) which introduces artifacts in the footage.

That is a very good idea. All pros should wait for FCP5!