HDV editing--transcode or not? at DVinfo.net

Mike Chandler · August 11th, 2009, 04:48 PM

I have a friend who wants to edit while out of the country on his laptop and asked if he should capture his tapes as HDV and then convert to SD for faster editing. I suggested keeping the files HDV and editing on a Pro Res Proxy or LT timeline, as he'd have to conform later and it seemed like wasted work, but I'm not sure about that. Anticipated distribution is for broadcast. Don't know if he's shooting 1080i or 720p.

I presume you'd transcode the files in Compressor. But...

1. If you don't convert your files to Pro Res, are you constantly rendering in a Pro Res timeline?
2. If you don't convert, and edit in Pro Res, what happens when the edit is finished? Simply export as HDV? Has anything happened to the original files by downscaling and then upscaling?
3. Is there any reason to transcode at all, since HDV is the same size as DV?

Floris van Eck · August 13th, 2009, 01:51 AM

Good questions.

Mike Chandler · August 13th, 2009, 11:59 AM

Any answers?

Ryan Morey · August 13th, 2009, 12:06 PM

I really wish I could help out but I just don't have the answers. I would love to know as well.

Joachim Hoge · August 13th, 2009, 02:34 PM

3. first, it takes quite a lot of computing power to edit HDV compared to SD because of the long GOP nature of the beast. So if he has an older machine, editing HDV can be a hassel.
I used an iMac 2,16ghz core 2 duo for a while and had no problem editing HDV.
Printing to tape in the end takes quite a while though, because FC renders every single cut when editing in HDV.

One trick is to edit HDV and set you render to prores, saves some time, AND space.

If hard disk space is no issue for him, Prores LT could be the way to go.

2. Every time you upscale or downscale something does happen to your footage. The less you do it, the better

1. I´m not exactly sure what you mean

It also depends on what the broadcasters want for delivery format. It will most likely NOT be HDV. Either DVCAM or digibeta if it´s SD i suppose.
It would be good to know what.
If DVCAM is ok, then a very easy and good way to this is edit in a HDV timeline, then open a new sequence in the format you want (DVCAM)
Then mark all your cuts in your final edit and copy (apple+c), click/open the other SD timeline and paste (apple+v) your edit into the new timeline and render.
You have yourself a very good SD sequence very easily.

PS I have used this technique for broadcast programs for nationlal televison here in Norway. NRK, our equivalent to the BBC

Good luck

Mike Chandler · August 13th, 2009, 04:21 PM

Thanks, Joachim, what I meant by 1. is : You come in with HDV native files (not transcoding them to a pro res codec), and instead of Sequence settings or Easy Setup set to HDV, sequence is set at Pro Res setting. Ignore the box when it says do you want to change sequence to match clips, and edit.

Question is , when you drop the HDV clips into the Pro Res sequence, are you stuttering or hitting "not rendered' all the time? (let's say on a laptop or the setup you were working on.)

And, if you were able to edit this way, is anything gained?

Jiri Fiala · August 13th, 2009, 04:34 PM

It's simple really. Do you do lots of color correction, compositing, titling and transitions? If so, go ProRes. If you do cuts-only, you can stay in HDV. Except for saving disk space, I don't really see any advantage of staying in HDV, though. You cannot batch-recapture HDV transcoded to ProRes, but that is rarely an issue these days.

August 11th, 2009, 04:48 PM	#1
Mike Chandler Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Moab, UT Posts: 264	HDV editing--convert to SD? I have a friend who wants to edit while out of the country on his laptop and asked if he should capture his tapes as HDV and then convert to SD for faster editing. I suggested keeping the files HDV and editing on a Pro Res Proxy or LT timeline, as he'd have to conform later and it seemed like wasted work, but I'm not sure about that. Anticipated distribution is for broadcast. Don't know if he's shooting 1080i or 720p. I presume you'd transcode the files in Compressor. But... 1. If you don't convert your files to Pro Res, are you constantly rendering in a Pro Res timeline? 2. If you don't convert, and edit in Pro Res, what happens when the edit is finished? Simply export as HDV? Has anything happened to the original files by downscaling and then upscaling? 3. Is there any reason to transcode at all, since HDV is the same size as DV? __________________ www.packcreekproductions.com EX3, Mac Pro, FCP Last edited by Mike Chandler; August 12th, 2009 at 06:32 AM.

August 13th, 2009, 11:59 AM	#3
Mike Chandler Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Moab, UT Posts: 264	Any answers? __________________ www.packcreekproductions.com EX3, Mac Pro, FCP

August 13th, 2009, 12:06 PM	#4
Ryan Morey Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Wildwood Crest, NJ Posts: 140	I really wish I could help out but I just don't have the answers. I would love to know as well. __________________ www.rhmphotography.com What you talkin bout Willis?

August 13th, 2009, 04:21 PM	#6
Mike Chandler Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Moab, UT Posts: 264	Thanks, Joachim, what I meant by 1. is : You come in with HDV native files (not transcoding them to a pro res codec), and instead of Sequence settings or Easy Setup set to HDV, sequence is set at Pro Res setting. Ignore the box when it says do you want to change sequence to match clips, and edit. Question is , when you drop the HDV clips into the Pro Res sequence, are you stuttering or hitting "not rendered' all the time? (let's say on a laptop or the setup you were working on.) And, if you were able to edit this way, is anything gained? __________________ www.packcreekproductions.com EX3, Mac Pro, FCP

August 13th, 2009, 01:51 AM	#2
Floris van Eck Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 993	Good questions.

August 13th, 2009, 02:34 PM	#5
Joachim Hoge Major Player Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 402	3. first, it takes quite a lot of computing power to edit HDV compared to SD because of the long GOP nature of the beast. So if he has an older machine, editing HDV can be a hassel. I used an iMac 2,16ghz core 2 duo for a while and had no problem editing HDV. Printing to tape in the end takes quite a while though, because FC renders every single cut when editing in HDV. One trick is to edit HDV and set you render to prores, saves some time, AND space. If hard disk space is no issue for him, Prores LT could be the way to go. 2. Every time you upscale or downscale something does happen to your footage. The less you do it, the better 1. I´m not exactly sure what you mean It also depends on what the broadcasters want for delivery format. It will most likely NOT be HDV. Either DVCAM or digibeta if it´s SD i suppose. It would be good to know what. If DVCAM is ok, then a very easy and good way to this is edit in a HDV timeline, then open a new sequence in the format you want (DVCAM) Then mark all your cuts in your final edit and copy (apple+c), click/open the other SD timeline and paste (apple+v) your edit into the new timeline and render. You have yourself a very good SD sequence very easily. PS I have used this technique for broadcast programs for nationlal televison here in Norway. NRK, our equivalent to the BBC Good luck

August 13th, 2009, 04:34 PM	#7
Jiri Fiala Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Brno Czech Republic Posts: 453	It's simple really. Do you do lots of color correction, compositing, titling and transitions? If so, go ProRes. If you do cuts-only, you can stay in HDV. Except for saving disk space, I don't really see any advantage of staying in HDV, though. You cannot batch-recapture HDV transcoded to ProRes, but that is rarely an issue these days.