Video University: Video University Forums: HDV: input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns

VideoUniversity.com
Home	Free Library	Store
Free Catalog Please support VU by making your B&H purchases and links through this B&H ad. Doesn't cost a penny more.

See The New VU Postcard Catalog

To post in the forums see the Forum Guidelines.

Join or Renew Today.
New Benefits for all VU Members

Forum Guidelines and FAQ
Main Index	Search Posts
Who's Online	Log In

Home: Video University Forums: HDV:
input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns

BrianMacKenzie
User

Mar 26, 2006, 6:06 PM

Post #1 of 9 (1420 views)
Shortcut

input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns	Can't Post

Hey everyone, I need some advice on how to best go about this.

I currently do not have a computer capable of editing HDV, but I am planning on a Mac, as i already have 2 PC's. (I was under the impression that I didn't need a super-computer until I was to put out the HDV version, but now I am not sure)

I am releasing a second extreme unicycling DVD, and have so far been filming in HDV, and down converting through the camera to SD, the frist release of the movie will be in SD for the majority of people, then I am planning a 'special edition' available in HDV when the players and more importantly, the target audience will be more available.

I am using a PC and Premiere Pro 1.5 (as I did with my first release)

When I play the video from the camera onto the TV (non-HDTV), the quality is MUCH better than the product I export from Premiere Pro using down converted footage and exported to DV-AVI and then Encore'd into a DVD. (using the High quality transcoding in Encore)

Where does this quality loss appear? If I were to have a capable machine, would I (and the end product) be better off capturing in HDV and then exported as DV for use on a standard DVD?
I am certainly 'going to' get a Mac for this, I just thought it wouldn't be neccessary until the HD-DVD market was there, is this not the case?

My computer (P4 2.2GHZ) seemed to put out a similar end result from my Panasonic SG-120 as from my Sony HDR-HC1, and I cannot figure out why? I realize that downconverted stuff is still SD, but the fact that it looks incredible from the camera and mediocre from a DVD leads me to belive that capturing in HDV will be better?

If you were making a DVD for global consumption (thank the unicycle forums for this!!) what would you do if you were offering a SD-DVD now, and a HD-DVD later?

I am hoping to make this as clean as possible, as Glidecam has sponsored it!! (And you thought that hands-free segway and steadicam dealy was neat? unicycling while Glidecamming will blow it away on EVERY level!!) (stay tuned for some footage)

.
Unicycling Glidecam-ist
Balance Productions
http://www.balanceproductions.ca

Filming on a unicycle through the streets of Manhattan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ck8bM97Hh3I

KevinShaw
Veteran

Mar 28, 2006, 2:26 PM

Post #2 of 9 (1378 views)
Shortcut

Re: [BrianMacKenzie] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

Brian: the short answer is that it's better to capture and edit at full HDV quality until it's time to render the final output. When you play HDV footage directly from the camera, you're taking a high-quality source and converting it in one step to something your TV can display well. In the production process you described, you're taking HDV and downsampling it to DV (which makes it no better than good DV source), then rendering that again to SD MPEG2, then playing that to your TV. Along the way you lose both resolution and color depth, plus add imperfections relating to two transcoding steps. By the time that's done it's no surprise this doesn't look nearly as good as connecting your camera to your TV, even a non-HDTV display.

The best thing you could do right now with your current setup is to buy the Cineform Aspect HD plugin for Premiere Pro and use that to capture and edit HDV at full resolution. You'll need a big hard drive to store HDV material converted to the Cineform format, but other than that it should work okay on your computer. Edit at full resolution and you can output both HD and SD versions of the finished project now, so you don't have to come back and redo it when new delivery methods become available.

See this link: http://www.cineform.com/...cts/AspectHDPPro.htm. Buying a Mac won't solve your current problem any better than just buying the Cineform plugin, but the Apple HDV solution is also a decent one.

BrianMacKenzie
User

Mar 29, 2006, 11:48 AM

Post #3 of 9 (1361 views)
Shortcut

Re: [kwshaw1] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

thanks for that info, much appreciated! (very descriptive)

2 more questions:

1. what is the HDV footage going to take up, in terms of size) as rendered video? (searching these forums brings up debates on the matter, will it be 10GB/minute?)

2. during video editing, what would benefit from more RAM, and what would benefit from a faster CPU? I currently only have 1gb of RAM, but am cabale of adding more

(buying the Mac was a solution to I need a computer full of higher powered components anyways...)

.
Unicycling Glidecam-ist
Balance Productions
http://www.balanceproductions.ca

Filming on a unicycle through the streets of Manhattan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ck8bM97Hh3I

BrianMacKenzie
User

Mar 29, 2006, 11:53 AM

Post #4 of 9 (1360 views)
Shortcut

Re: [BrianMacKenzie] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

wow, i replied before checking out that link, that sounds absolutely fantastic, i'm definetly going to try this out as a first option!!

.
Unicycling Glidecam-ist
Balance Productions
http://www.balanceproductions.ca

Filming on a unicycle through the streets of Manhattan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ck8bM97Hh3I

KevinShaw
Veteran

Mar 29, 2006, 7:44 PM

Post #5 of 9 (1347 views)
Shortcut

Re: [BrianMacKenzie] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

1. what is the HDV footage going to take up, in terms of size) as rendered video? (searching these forums brings up debates on the matter, will it be 10GB/minute?)

HDV in "native" form is ~12-13 GB/hour, same as DV. When converted to something like the Cineform codec it should run around 3-4 times that amount, so ~40-50 GB/hour. I typically get 40 GB/hour with Canopus HQ.

In Reply To

2. during video editing, what would benefit from more RAM, and what would benefit from a faster CPU? I currently only have 1gb of RAM, but am cabale of adding more

For any HD editing and encoding you'll want all the processing power you can reasonably afford: two dual-core processors wouldn't be excessive. 1 GB of RAM may be adequate but 2 GB could help keep things running smoothly, especially if you like to run other programs while editing.

MSDowney
Veteran

Mar 29, 2006, 7:48 PM

Post #6 of 9 (1346 views)
Shortcut

Re: [kwshaw1] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

Brian kwshaw1 is right on the money. 1 Gig of RAM will do but two is much better... that aside your CPU power is the most important (other than drive speed if you need lots of layers).

I agree that if you can go with a double Dualcore setup you will be on the right track. :)

Mike

Thomson/GrassValley

rmw
Novice

Mar 30, 2006, 11:54 AM

Post #7 of 9 (1325 views)
Shortcut

Re: [MSDowney] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

Currently, the AMD Athlon 64 X2 processors (specifically, the X2s with Manchester cores) should give you the best bang-for-the-buck (in the PC world - I don't know Macs at all).

Robert M Wright

MSDowney
Veteran

Mar 30, 2006, 12:03 PM

Post #8 of 9 (1324 views)
Shortcut

Re: [rmw] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

Agreed :)

Mike

Thomson/GrassValley

KevinShaw
Veteran

Mar 31, 2006, 11:28 AM

Post #9 of 9 (1281 views)
Shortcut

Re: [rmw] input needed to plan workflow, quality concerns [In reply to]	Can't Post

In Reply To

Currently, the AMD Athlon 64 X2 processors (specifically, the X2s with Manchester cores) should give you the best bang-for-the-buck

The Pentium D 830 works pretty well for me and is currently selling for about $40 less than the cheapest X2. AMD is getting a lot of good publicity lately, but check their prices before drawing any conclusions about "bang for the buck."