Cineform is a great CODEC. I use it for archiving finished projects and when I need to collaborate with Final Cut Pro editors, as the Cineform CODEC is completely cross-platform between Windows and Mac platforms.

The cheapest way to buy the Cineform CODEC is from the Videoguys.com 800 323-2325 we are the video editing and production experts (http://www.videoguys.com) website which sells Cineform NEO SCENE for Windows or Mac for $100.

Cineform Neoscene only supports these camera formats - HDV, AVCHD, Canon 5DM2/7D/T2i

Cineform NeoHD supports these camera formats - HDV, AVCHD, DVCPRO HD (P2),
XDCam HD/EX, Canon 5D/7D/1DS V-DSLRs, Infinity J2K

You also need NeoHD if you want to be able to resize to SD video

Cineform NeoHD supports these camera formats - HDV, AVCHD, DVCPRO HD (P2), XDCam HD/EX, Canon 5D/7D/1DS V-DSLRs, Infinity J2K

The VideoGuys website sells NeoHD for $400, which is a $100 off the manufacturer's price.

You also need NeoHD if you want to be able to resize to SD video

Just to clarify, if you want to be able to resize during the importing process you need NeoHD, otherwise you are free to resize using your video editor and save as SD format using the Cineform CODEC that comes with NEO SCENE.

If I was processing a lot of HD ---> SD, the NeoHD upgrade would be well worth it, as you can batch-import and down-rez at the same time.

I have found that NeoHD does a much better job with HD to SD resizing than Vegas does. That is pretty much the case with any NLE. That has always been a mystery to me, that is why do pro level NLE's do a poor job compared to other methods of resizing. Deinterlacing is another problem with NLE's. Cineform does a vastly better job with deinterlacing.

I have found that NeoHD does a much better job with HD to SD resizing than Vegas does. Cineform does a vastly better job with deinterlacing.

Hmmm... I would agree with you when I first got Vegas and used the supplied presets, but once I got used to making my own custom Vegas presets, I found that Vegas can do a great job, but there is no room for error, you get one thing wrong and the result is quite bad.

Yes, I suspect I'm going to end up with NeoHD. With a wedding a week, if not more during the busy season, time will be at a permium, and the $400 would well be worth it!

Vegas can do a great job, but there is no room for error, you get one thing wrong and the result is quite bad.

And to learn Vegas would be better than to spend 400USD for NeoHD (and learn it as well).

Anyone have a good alternative to $400 HD Link, clunky Virtual Dub and mediocre Vegas down sizing? Nero have a downscaling features?

I am using TMPGEnc express 4.0. I wonder has it stacks up against Cineform HD? Has anyone tried both?

TMPGEnc - Products: TMPGEnc Video Mastering Works 5 (http://tmpgenc.pegasys-inc.com/en/product/tvmw5.html)

Does it resize avchd video, or avi?

Download the trial and take a look around in it, but yes it does

Thanks Jim. If you happen to see any reviews, particlulary with comparisons to Cineform, please post.

I have been looking but see nothing yet. They are not in the same category of tools, but still.

This is a consumerish looking tool that I hesitate to download without knowing more about it. On the surface it looks very interesting. I appreciate the post!

Hey Jeff, I have used TMPGEnc and it does a decent job of resizing. I just found Cineform / HDLink to be a better and MUCH faster way to do things. A lot depends on a person's needs. I do a lot of weddings as well as other types of shooting and I find Cineform / HDLink to be much better from my perspective. Other methods take more time and a TON of hard disc space. I do primarily multicam weddings that result in several hours of footage per wedding. I need the fastest and most efficient way to handle this footage. That's why I use Cineform / HDLink.

Jim have you ever used ProCoder 3? I see B&H is still selling it.

ProCoder 3 | Grass Valley (http://www.grassvalley.com/products/procoder_3)

I am editing with Edius 6 which fortunately has many of ProCoder's conversion tools built in but its still not as powerful as ProCoder.

Jim have you ever used ProCoder 3? I see B&H is still selling it.

ProCoder 3 | Grass Valley (http://www.grassvalley.com/products/procoder_3)

I am editing with Edius 6 which fortunately has many of ProCoder's conversion tools built in but its still not as powerful as ProCoder.

Ouch! 400 bones.

Looks interesting but do not see windows 7 support.

I am running ProCoder 3 with Windows 7 64bit and it seems to be happy.

Jim S, like you I do a ton of weddings, so your perspective is especially valuable. HD Link is where my sights are set, unless something else is clearly superior or as good, and costs less.

I imagine ProCoder is quite good, as Canopus puts out high quality software, at least that's what I've read. But at over $400, it would have to be as good, etc as HD Link and as fast.

Jim F, have you used both?

Jim S, like you I do a ton of weddings, so your perspective is especially valuable. HD Link is where my sights are set, unless something else is clearly superior or as good, and costs less.

I imagine ProCoder is quite good, as Canopus puts out high quality software, at least that's what I've read. But at over $400, it would have to be as good, etc as HD Link and as fast.

Jim F, have you used both?

All else being equal, the Cineform solution seems like a lot more value since it can do a lot of other things.

But $400 could buy me a lot of Virtual Dub Love.

No I have not. Seems to be Cineform HD link is the favorite and gets great reviews here. I only have ProCoder 3 because I had 2 and got an upgrade.

Jim S, would you kindly review my settings? I'm unsure here.

In addition, I'm unsure of the workflow. I've been on Cineform site, but it is crawlingly slow today, at least for me.

The attached image shows what my settings are as of now. My purpose is to convert 1080i footage for the end result of an SD 16:9 video. Thanks in advance for any assistance you can offer.

By the way, it is fast, and it looks like a no-brainer purchase for my wedding work!

Hi Jeff,

Those setting will do the job. When you load the converted files into Vegas, you may need to set the file properties to the proper aspect ration of 1.2121. Also set your project properties to NTSC DV widescreen 720 x 480, Deinterlace method - None (since your footage was converted to progressive), best rendering quality and you're all set.

Thanks Jim, I'm trying it out now. Is is best to deinterlace, or to leave it interlaced?

Jim, the files are coming out squished, 4:3 size.

As I indicated above, go to Project media and right click on the file(s) and select properties and set the aspect ratio to 1.2121 on each file and that will take care of it.

I mean that the avi files produced by HDLink are squished, when played in Windows media player.

Some players like VLC allow you to set the aspect ration for playing a file. I just look on these files as intermediate work files and don't bother with playing them.

No settings I have changed will produced the correct dimensions for playback in windows media player, which is how I'm testing the files. Since Windows 7 will play most any avi files including AVCHD files correctly, I'm assuming my settings are wrong, or there's a bug. I've not had issues with avis before....hmmmm weird.

I render out to avi for transcoding to flv for my website, and preview with WMP to double check before putting in flash...so I need to fix this. In addition, the avi being produced are noisy as well...I'll play with it more later, I have lots of urgent projects that need my attention.

Thanks for your attention, Jim.

There isn't a 'hook' to define the PAR (pixel aspect ration) with the intermediate files. As intermediate files, they really aren't intended as 'player' files. If you set the aspect ration to 1.2121 in the file properties in Vegas under Project Media, you won't have any problem.

Jeff,

I would recommend using the free GSpot v2.70a utility to examine the format of your final rendered files, as GSpot provides a fair bit of information about the formatting of a video file.

As for the unsatisfactory results you are seeing, can you publish a step-by-step list of exactly what you are doing to convert your HD files down to SD format, this way we can spot where you might be messing up.

Thanks for the suggestion Jim, but still no joy. As I expected, the files are squished in Vegas. The default properties for all new projects as I have it set is as you suggested, so I don't need to change project settings....I always edit in 16:9 with 1.2121, since up to now I've always shot in SD widescreen.

Darn it. I had NeoScene installed (the trial) and uninstalled it, maybe something is screwed up.

I've checked and unchecked a few things, no change...I'll check in at the cineform forum to see if this is me or the software later....I've tried it with about 6 combinations of settings changes just for kicks, not working out so far.

You only did part of what I suggested. ALSO go the "Project Media" and select properties on each file and set the aspect ration to 1.2121. These intermediate file don't contain the PAR (pixel aspect ration). They are intermediate editing files, not viewing files.

Well, Jim, you've been most patient, and it is fine now, thank you. I might have seen project and properties in the same sentence and figured I already knew what you meant; I didn't of course.

Wow, looks pretty darn good! Jim who's the man? You are!

I'm glad you got it worked out. I'm happy that I could help. I have received help many times on this forum. It's the least I could do to return the favor. ;-)

Jim, I've tried changing the properties of the clips all at once, but it doesn't take. Please don't tell me this has to be done one clip at a time....

I've read through this and I don't think it answers my problem.
I have just shot my first footage with a GH2 but when I put the clips into my CS5 timeline there is pronounced moire patterning.
Here is a clip that illustrates what I mean, it can be seen in the railings.

Lumix GH2 -moire disturbance in clip on Vimeo

It was shot at 1080i 50fps at high quality. It shows when played in the Premiere monitor when native AVCHD and also when de-interlaced. It is also there when I put it on DVD either interlaced or de-interlaced.

What I really want to know is if this is a characteristic of this camera. I have shot this same format: AVCDH 1080i 50fps on a sony CX550 and have never seen such patterning.

I hope someone is able to answer this otherwise the camera is going back. I've spent sometime researching this camera and I've never heard it mentioned; until I saw this thread.

George, I am the original poster of this thread. It has been told to me, and confirmed, that the problems with my video were in the conversion.

If you read the beginning I didn't have problems with the original footage. My problems occurred after processing. The problem was the result of my not knowing how to convert and resize HD footage to SD.

My problem has been resolved.

If your "moire" is present in original footage, you would have to adjust your shooting, settings, or try a different camera. I wish I could suggest what you could do to eliminate your problem, but I don't know.

Off the top of my head, moire when shooting something like the fence you were shooting wouldn't be surprising. Try your Sony on that exact same scene, if you haven't already, from the same distance.

I have limited experience with the GH2, and have shot nothing like you did, but I love the camera.

Consider looking at the lens you're using as well. The 14-42 is a relatively poor performer, as all the kit lenses are. I have the 14-140, and it would certainly win no contests.

Thanks Jeff. I have read through the thread but noticed that most of the solutions were to addressed to the problem occurring during down-sizing whereas you notice that I see this in the original clip, even when deinterlaced.
I was using the 14-140 kit lens. I'm now in a dilemma, I can return it tomorrow for a refund but I do like the camera.
My main shooter is a JVC-HM700 which shoots 50fps 1080i and I support that with a tiny Sony CX550 shooting AVCHD 1080i 50fps. They work together well so I guess that the GH2 just isn't going to fit in with my style then. Most of my output is still to DVD so it will only exacerbate the problem. I don't want to shoot SD as I am archiving on Blu-ray.

I'll just mention that I'm not just being picky about this. The same problem was obvious in shots with trees and other fine detail as soon as there was any movement in the frame , I used that clip as it showed it best (or worst).

George, what can I say, fences are a big problem. You might have better luck with 24p High quality. But fences are always tough, especially chain link.

I agree, Brian. Using a pan of a fence as an example of poor performance by this camera is nonsensical UNLESS compared to another camera in the exact same situation for comparison purposes.

I posted to ask those here with experience of this camera if the patterning was something I should expect from this camera as I'd never heard mention of it during my research. The answer seemed to be yes in certain circumstances but not as bad as some other stills cameras that shoot video. That's interesting to know but wasn't really what I was after, I'm not doing a comparison or evaluation to decide which to buy. I had done that and had decided that this was the only stills camera that would suit my work practice. I tried it and didn't like the result, I might be quite alone in this but there you are.

I wasn't out to prove a point or criticise the camera, or say that there is a better one.

If you will go shoot that fence with the GH2 set to EX TELE mode, you won't see any moire. It may not be as much fun as recreational equivocation on a forum but it will be an effective demonstration of the benefit of doing so. The GH2 is the only DSLR camera (with or without a mirror) that has a mode to eliminate moire in problematic shots - and you want to send it back for moire! That doesn't make any sense.

A good question might be, NOT which DSLR (with or without mirror), but which video camera can handle a chain link fence without some sort of artifacting. How high up the food chain does one have to go?

The GH2 is the only DSLR camera (with or without a mirror) ...

Once again: if it doesn't have a mirror then it's not a DSLR, by definition.

Sorry to keep harping on this, but the distinction is important.

The GH2 is *not* a DSLR.

If you want to assign a type to it then it should be called EVIL (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens).
Or if you don't like how that sounds, call it ILEV (Interchangeable Lens Electronic Viewfinder).
But not a DSLR, which it cannot be, since it doesn't have a mirror. Hope this helps,

Well George, you aren't the only one sending your camra back. Many are finding out this is not the camera for them.

I have friend who was totally sold until he used them for wedding work last week. They are too much work for many folks. The lenses required, the need for complete manual operations, the menus, are too much.

When you put the effort into it, the results are stunning. Proof is everywhere. For ease of operation, compared to other similar, it is a walk in the park. For a traditional videographer, particularly those not experienced in manually operating a camera, it is a nightmare.

I know, because I am a "traditional" videographer, with a smidgen of photography experience. Saturday was the toughest shoot of my life, and the results were extremely disappointing. The reason? I have not yet mastered the camera I own.

A good question might be, which video camera can handle a chain link fence without some sort of artifacting. How high up the food chain does one have to go?

It would be a camera that has a 1 to 1 sensor array versus image size. Resizing in the camera causes moire. It's an unavoidable aspect of resizing. The benefit of the EX TELE mode in the GH2 is that it does a 1 to 1 sensor map. That's why it is able to shoots these difficult shots without moire. As they say in the commercial, "Try it, you will like it."

Sounds like it's better suited for controlled narratives rather than unrepeatable events.

It is an interesting feature, Jim. As Chris pointed out not useful for run and gun, but for run and gun moire is not an issue 99.999% of the time. Moire is not usually a problem when shooting speakers, wedding ceremonies, and the like.