Avchd camcorders video quality

I have read that avchd camcorders often suffer from a sort of visual stuttering when doing a pan or tilt, especially at their highest quality settings.
Does anyone with these camcorders see this effect in filmed material?
I am interested in getting a good consumer level camcorder that uses memory cards rather than tape, hard drives or dvds, and has manual exposure and audio level controls and hopefully 3 sensors rather than one.
But if these camcorders are going to be problematic in achieving top quality video then it might be better to go for another type format.
Thanks for any advice.

Hi there,
Not sure if you bought anything yet, this post is a bit old, but I own the Panasonic HDC-SD100 and have mixed feelings about it...
Regarding the stutter: I experienced this a while back, and investigated it quite thoroughly, speaking at length with somebody at Panasonic as well as doing some research online. Panasonic said that AVCHD support in FCP just wasn't that great... that it was buggy. The fact that the stutter was eliminated when I transcoded the files via Voltaic HD (i.e. outside of Final Cut), and that the footage played back on-camera didn't have a stutter, indicated that it was some kind of FCP log and transfer issue.
I should note, by the way, that I no longer experience this problem in FCP, so maybe in one of the recent software patches they beefed up their support for AVCHD. Stuttering no longer a problem.
The HDC-SD100: It's tiny, which I love. I'm filming people on the street and in the hood, and I need to be low-key. Anything bigger draws too much attention.
LOW LIGHT: the low-light performance is awful. Really. You get these ghosty trails when the sun is just beginning to go down... and forget about indoors. It's really very bad, unless you have a bunch of assistants and lights. I believe this has to do with sensor size...
MANUAL CONTROLS: another disappointment, at least for me. I mean I know I can't have everything I want, but I thought that having a focus ring would allow me to smoothly adjust iris/focus/zoom, but when you turn it, whatever you have the ring set to adjust bumps up or down in INCREMENTS, just like it would if you were pushing a button.
Hmmm....

Similar Messages

Comparing video quality of AVCHD BluRay discs using Final Cut Pro Share vs Compressor

Up front, I will admit to being a newbie when it comes to using Final Cut Studio 3 and would appreciate some feedback from the Apple forum experts.
I have spent a lot of time trying to determine how to achieve an optimum group of Compressor 3.5.2 settings so that the playback video quality of an AVCHD BluRay disc is equal to or better than one created by using the simpler auto settings of FCPro Share, version 7.0.2.
When using Compressor’s auto/default maximum settings, I experienced the same error message reported in:
Error MessageDuring Creation of Blu-ray Disc in FCP and Compressor 3.5
https://discussions.apple.com/message/12073794#12073794
I have since made some Compressor AVCHD Discs with smaller bit rate settings and compared video quality with a single FCP Share AVCHD disc. Both seem to be equal in providing a very good video when viewed on my new Panasonic DMP BDT 310 BluRay player. However, the Compressor AVCHD discs show some motion artifacts not present with the FCPro Share version, especially when scrolling text or when objects are moving through the field of view, and visible artifacts are seen from a stationary chain link fence and other lattice work in the background of the video sample.
My sample video used for the comparisons between Compressor and FCP Share discs is a 21 minute duration home movie, originally captured from a mini DV, Canon HV30 1080i camcorder using ProRes HQ encoding(1440x1080), and dragged into FC Pro 7.0.2 timeline where 10 chapter markers have been inserted.
To create an AVCHD disc using FCPro Share, Markers are used to set the IN and OUT points, Select IN to OUT from the timeline, pull down File Menu Share, Select Create BluRay from options in pop out Share pane, and designate output device along with picture files for Background, Logo, and Title options. When these are completed, click on Export. My 21-minute video required almost two hours for encoding including about 10 minutes for burning. This accomplished on an iMac 3.06 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo.
To prepare this same 21-minute video for use with Compressor, I again Select IN to Out from the FCPro timeline, but this time use File Export as a QuickTime Self Contained movie including Chapter markers. Then Open Compressor, choose Create BluRay from Template pane, right click on the down arrow in the Batch window and load the QT self contained movie file. From there I went to the Inspector window and tried various combinations of bit rate settings along with Frame Encoder options such as Better or Best motion parameter controls.
I have tried the following combinations of Bit rate settings along with varying Frame Encoder controls and burned an AVCHD disc for each example:
Example A
Compressor set to 6 Mbps Average and 8Mbps Maximum, Frame Encoder settings OFF. Approximately 4 hours to encode although the time remaining estimator indicated a larger value of ~7 hours; not an accurate estimator at all.
Example B
Compressor set to 6 Mbps Average and 8Mbps Maximum, Frame Encoder settings ON, using “Better (Linear Filter) and Better (Motionadaptive)” settings. Approximately 4 hours to encode, not the 13 hours that were estimated.
Conclusion: Comparing A & B Compressor versions, Disc B showed some improvements in reducing motion artifacts over Disc A.
Example C
Compressor set to 13 Mbps Average and 15 Mbps Maximum, Frame Encoder settings ON, using “Better (Linear Filter) and Better (Motion adaptive)” settings. Multipass checked. DeInterlace was checked. Unknown hours to encode; about 8 hours done overnight..
Conclusion: Disc C showed some minor improvements reducing motion artifacts over Disc B
Example D
Compressor Auto settings,i.e., 15 Mbps Average and 17 Mbps Maximum, Frame Encoder settings ON, using “Better (Linear Filter) and Better (Motion adaptive)” settings. Multipass checked. Approximately 12 hours to encode, done overnight. Inserted disc next morning after the overnight encoding was completed, and a few minutes later an error message pane appeared that the maximum bit rate had been exceeded. This message was consistent with the Apple posted thread referenced above. Unfortunately the long overnight encoding was wasted.
It seemed to me that the best Compressor settings for suppressing the motion artifacts were displayed by the disc burned in Example C, i.e., 13/15 Ave/Max Mbps with“Better” Motion settings in the Frame Encoder.
However, when this disc was compared to the AVCHD Disc burned using the FCPro Share, the latter still seemed much better. I do not know what the auto bit rate values are as set in FC Pro, but for me, the quality is quite good AND the motion artifacts are significantly reduced, especially evident with the scrolling text.
Sorry about this long post, but I thought the detail would be necessary for the experts, and maybe helpful to others trying to get started in this BluRay arena. Did I misuse Compressor? I think the sample video exported as a self contained QT movie was the right thing to do? Not sure where I went wrong.
Thanks in advance for Feedback and Recommendations. For now, I’m going to stay with the simpler process using Final Cut Pro Share function.
BoBo

Thank You, Brad, for responding; glad to hear I'm not the only one having similar Compressor issues.
You may have hit on something. Perhaps Compressor's use of H.264 encoding was the reason for my motion artifacts? And perhaps Final Cut Pro Share retains the 1440x1080 quality as it burns the AVCHD BluRay disc?
I had Toast 10 for less than 30 days a couple of years ago, and was lucky to get a refund.
What version of Toast do you have? Wondering if new Toast 11 has improved previous bugs, especially upgrading its Chapter text, pictures, music. I would go back to Toast if it came close to mirroring DVD Studio Pro, or even iDVD capabilities.
Thanks,
BoBo

Why is the video quality for AVCHD when uploaded to youtube higher...

when submitted from a mac?
#1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8d-fQxdBmQ
I sent this video directly from my Macbook using iMovie 8.0 and that's the video quality results
#2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5U3dDmAX7C0
I uploaded this using Adobe Premirere Pro CS 4 H.264 - youtube HD widescreen preset and those were the results...?
Why?

"I suspect you simply didnt wait long enough for youtube to fully process the video before you watched it."
Incorrect. After I uploaded the second video, I went to sleep, without watching it once.
So if I set the 2nd video to low resolution, would it end up looking like the first video? Because I still think the first video has better quality.

Is there a difference in video quality shot on MiniDV tape or HDD ?

Now that the new Macbooks lack a firewire connection, and following on from Steve Jobs comment that there are many HDD camcorders available I just wondered if there is any difference in the quality of the end video between that filmed with a MiniDV camcorder and that on a hard drive based camcorder. I have a Panasonic 3CCD camcorder that is still going strong and I think produces very good footage so I wasn't intending to replace it until it dies, but when I do replace it I want to improve on it rather than take a step backwards or sideways. If hard drive camcorders can produce better quality footage and are not just better for convenience sake I can see the point of dropping the firewire connection.
So could someone clarify this for me, and also maybe tell me what the format choice of the professionals would be?

The answer is that HDD has nothing to do with video quality. It is just another media on which the video is recorded. The selection of media has its own pros & cons independent of the video 'quality'. That said, most tape-based cams record in DV or HDV whereas most HDD based cams record in AVCHD.
Quality is subjective. You can read all about the relative merits of DV, HDV & AVCHD on the net and in this forum. HDV and AVCHD are much more highly compressed than DV but they enable hi-def, 16:9 video.
If you're an average consumer you would be hard pressed to see significant differences between these formats in the finished video other than the obvious 4:3 vs 16:9 aspect ratio difference.
As David said, you will be better off spending time looking for camcorders that have the best lenses, and learning how to shoot top quality video, then worrying about the codec or the media.

Why is playback video quality not as good as the source?

Hi. I'm not new to PrE but am new to the forum.
I've been using PrE 2 for about 7 years. I got a newer computer running Windows 7 and basically was forced to upgrade to PrE 12 because PrE 2 didn't run very well on the newer machine. Once I installed PrE 12, I was eager to jump into my first project on this machine.
I expected that with a newer machine and the latest software, I would get outstanding results--hopefully much better than what I always got with PrE 2 on the old machine. With PrE 2, it was not uncommon that the imported video seemed lossy on playback or for whatever other reason seemed not as good as the source video.
Unfortunately, the results on the new/new were no better than the old/old. So I switched to my wife's (even newer) machine running Windows 8 and got the same results. Then I thought that perhaps the output to DVD would be better than what I saw in the PrE editor. No dice.
The video quality of the source isn't the greatest (see below), but I expected that the PrE 12 would be no worse.
What went wrong?
Here's what i'm working with on the current project:
Machine 1:
HP EliteBook 8560w
Intel Core i7-2640M 2.8 GHz CPU
Window 7 Enterprise SP1
2 GB RAM
360 GB available HD space
Machine 2:
Dell Inspiron 3521
Intel Pentium 2117U 1.8 GHz CPU
Windows 8 Touchscreen
4 GB RAM
400+ GB available HD space
Video Source:
iPhone 4 video (MOV format)
Thanks for ANY help you can give me.
BTW, I noticed that Steve Grisetti is one of the frequent commenters on this forum. In case you're reading this, Steve, I want to thank you and Chuck E. for your PrE books. I purchased one several years ago and found it extremely helpful. And surprisingly, I found that with PrE 12 I could still use the book that I purchased before because most of it was still relevant to the new software. Still a great purchase!!

kcarter
Please excuse if I mention things you may already be aware of, but I did not want to take anything for granted.
The installed RAM on Machine 1 is too low for HD work, and I wonder about the processor on Machine 2 even though it has more installed RAM than that on Machine 1. For now, I will bypass the usual drills and get to the source media and project settings.
1. From what I can put together, your source media from iPhone 4 are 720p up to 30 frames per second. That usually translates into a variable frame rate which can be problematic for Premiere Elements. The variable can lead to audio out of sync, but not necessarily. If all else fails, then it is onto HandBrake or the like to change the variable into a constant frame rate.
2. One of the features of version 11 and 12 is the program taking over the setting of the project setting based on the properties of the first video drag to the Timeline. Some times it does it OK, sometimes not. When not, then you set the project preset manually yourself based on what you know to be the properties of your source media. Please refer to the following which includes how to set the project preset manually.
http://www.atr935.blogspot.com/2013/04/pe11-accuracy-of-automatic-project.html
Based on what I have read about the properties of the iPhone 4 video, I would suggest the project preset (assuming a NTSC set up)
NTSC
AVCHD
AVCHD-LITE 720p30
One of the important things to remember is that Premiere Elements 11 and 12 have as their default project preset
NTSC
AVCHD
Full HD1080i30
and not the NTSC DV Standard of versions earlier than 11.
When 11 and 12 do not get the automatic project preset correct, they do not give you the closest fit, rather they give you their
default NTSC AVCHD Full HD1080i30 which is not going to be appropriate for 720p video.
Classically it is written if you have the correct project preset you should have no colored line over the content when you bring the video to
the Timeline manually set. But, just the variable frame rate can trigger the unrendered indicator (orange instead of red in versions 11 and 12).
So, rendering the Timeline would be indicated to get the best possible preview under these circumstances.
Do you have the latest version of QuickTime installed on either of your computers?
More later.
ATR

How do I fix poor video quality when exporting from Keynote to iMovie

I went through Keynote to create a movie from a PowerPoint (including a soundtrack) but the video quality is very poor in the final product. Is there a way to fix this?

file > export > Quicktime > custom > then select one of the codecs: MPEG-4, standard DV, HDV, AVCHD, Apple Intermediate Codec and use full size in the options.

AVCHD / "Advanced Video Codec High Definition" & Cheap cams & Linux?

Hi!
A customer of mine seems to have his mind set on the general awesomeness of the "Advanced Video Codec High Definition". I can't seem to understand why anyone would want to have a multi-track video editor work with that random assortment of specs - at least as long as it's coming from a (relatively) cheap cam...
So my first impression: "The cam costs significantly less than 20000$ and therefore the video quality can't really get noticeable worse if one just converts the video files with ffmpeg to whatever '60 minutes of video per CD' format it sees fits".
Am I wrong / missing the point? Do you have any experience with "Advanced Video Codec High Definition" cams & archlinux / gnu software etc that should concern me?
Thanks!

So... does that mean, that usually the cams just encode with one of those "generic-jpeg-intel-codecs" (or don't compress at all) and the client-side software (that isn't used on a linux platform anyway) or something else does the rest? Or what would be a realistic / common scenario?
Also: for someone who didn't pay much attention to "video standards" in the past, just to understand the general principle... which one of the following two is closer to "the truth"?
(a) To ensure high video quality, it needs to be taken care of that in every step between the camera recording the raw video and burning the finished / rendered "movie" onto a portable medium, the software & hardware is capable of working with the advantages of "AVCHD".
or
(b) Someone obviously has been going around putting AVCHD-stickers on random objects and telling people to buy only those. If one just ignores those stickers, everything should be just fine.
And finally: Does anyone have a cam that says its "AVCHD" and used kdenlive or something & other open software to do a DVD of some sort? Was everything in between manageable with a "normal modern desktop pc" (no highend hardware)?
It seems to me like you are looking for some documentations so go there http://www.vcodex.com/h264overview.html and skip to the section 4 "h264 in practice"
Basically h264 advantage is for the same video quality, your clip takes much less space (or for the same space it will have better quality). But it will need more power to decode/encode.
Even a "low-end" camera like for example the Panasonic Lumix TZ7 (one of the best compact I think) offers 9Mbps, 13Mbps or 17Mbps when you record AVCHD. With those bitrates a "generic-jpeg-intel-codecs" will be okay. (actually the generic-jpeg-intel-codecs on the cam is a dedicated Digital Signal Processing chip aka DSP chip)
proposition (a) everything capable of working with AVC/h264 can work with AVCHD, it's just a marketing name, there is no special features.
Ensuring high quality is another beast, online guides and common sense help: the less you convert (colorspace for example) or reencode, the less information you will lose.
(b) AVCHD just means the cam can record in h264 instead of DV or Motion Jpeg.
For your final point, beyond a bitrate of 3Mbps dual-core Core 2 Duo CPU feels really sluggish when encoding to h264 but they are good enough to encode to dvd/mpeg2 format. I can't say about kdenlive/openshot/cinelerra and other NLE though, but every open source NLE can work with AVC-HD (via gstreamer or ffmpeg).
Like Gusar asked, it would be great if you can tell us your workflow.

What format to import AVCHD for best quality and how to export?

Hi
My boss has got himself a panasonic HDC camcorder of some sort that is formatting the video in AVCHD.
Basically he was using adobe premiere pro from around 2003 on an pc running xp and loved it. My I.T. director persuaded him to buy an iMac and Final Cut Pro 7. As we stand now he states he hates macs because he can't figure out how to get his home movies off his camcorder and onto a dvd without them looking blurry and fuzzy.
Can anyone advise what format we should be importing the AVCHD files into final cut pro for best video quality and how we should be exporting the final movie for best quality to go onto dvd?
I will also note that he is using toast 10 titanium to burn his movies to dvd.
Also he is not looking to burn to blu-ray as none of his familiy have blu-ray players. He just wants his HD footage off camera and onto a dvd with the best quality picture he can get. Also his movies are approx 2 hours long and he has just ordered some Dual Layer DVDs
Thanks
Kieran

I take it you mean Pro Res 422 from the AVCHD plugin options? And not going for any of the other 422's with bits in brackets?
Sorry for being dumb in this area but my boss and i are both pretty new to FCP
How do i ensure i edit in a pro res sequence?
Export straight to quicktime no quicktime compression or anything?
Thanks for your help
Kieran

Best choices for optimizing video quality and playability

I'm shooting family videos with a Panasonic TM-900 camcorder. I absolutely love the look of video shot in 1080p 60fps, but I'm not sure of the best way to process this video in FCPX for output. I prefer playing back edited videos on a HTPC connected to a NTSC HDTV, but I also distribute videos to family members on DVD. So my questions are: what are the best settings for FCPX to achieve a good balance of video quality and playability. Best frame rate for output files? Best codec? Will H.264 compression compromise video quality? My experiments so far have yielded wildly different results. Depending on the codec used and output frame rate selected, file sizes can be huge or reasonable; playability (via home theater programs like Plex and XBMC) can be superb, jerky, or non-existent. And of course, quality seems to suffer when outputting these files to DVD. Please share your thoughts and experiences on the best way to approach this challenge.

Working with H.264 is probably not going to give the best results if outputting to DVD. If you optimize media and let FCP determine your clips project settings, that will set the stage for several successful workflows.
If you're OK with a basic menu, you could simply use Share DVD and let FCP do all the work. It will change the frame rate to 29.97, and the quality should be pretty decent.(If you want more control over the quality settings, Compressor can do a similar job; output a master file and bring that into Compressor.)
If you want a more complex DVD and menu, what Al said about Master File>iDVD.
Also as he indicated, you could also consider using either FCP or Compressor to create AVCHD disks if your movies are under about 40 minutes in length. Your family will need Blu Ray players of some sort to be able to view them.
You could make a true Blu Ray disk from FCP or Compressor if you have a Blu Ray burner. (There are also some third party solutions for BD.)
Russ

PE 12 Video Quality - does it have to be so difficult to get good results

I downloaded PE11 trial before PE12 was released, which has since expired, but I have been monitoring this forum to see how PE12 is doing. I am also trying other editors.
A common problem theme I see here for PE is the video quality. With auto settings, so many people are posting that the quality is terrible. There are suggestions on how to improve quality, but they seem to be very intrusive and time consuming, using other apps to 'prepare' media before bringing into PE. This add lots of time to ones workflow, especially when trying to simply import some assets, and burn a DVD or create a file.
It just seems to me that it shouldn't have to be that hard. Many other editors can look into properties of the imported assets and render with fine quality. Why can't PE be that easy...or am I expecting too much?

jmklein
Thank you for taking the time to expand on your original comments.
No two situations are alike. And, as I always write, problems with the same symptoms can (often do) have different causes.
I think that you need to zero in on your specific computer environment and your installation of Premiere Elements in order to make some headway into finding the reason for what you are seeing working in your Premiere Elements in your specific computer environment. Besides settings and the like, there are expectations that may not be consistent with the format resolution and the size of the viewer screen.
You did not answer my question about your target format. But, from what you wrote, I am assuming that you are addressing yourself to DVD-VIDEO on DVD disc and not AVCHD on DVD or Blu-ray disc format on Blu-ray disc. I get good results with any of the three with Premiere Elements in my Windows computer environment.
But, after weigning all factors, you feel that you want to be heard by Adobe, then I would suggest that you contact Adobe directly or through the Adobe Feature Request/Bug Report Form
https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform
I do not work for Adobe and am not affiliated with it in any way; consequently, my comments are non promotional and are based on many years of working hands on with the versions on my computer at home and helping others with this type of problem.
Wishing you success in whatever your decision is on video editing software. If Windows Live Movie Maker works for you, then go with that to as far as its feature set can take you.
ATR

MacMini - LG 32" (32LB75) Problem - Poor video quality and now no picture.

Hi there, apologies for the length of this post....
I purchased a mac mini 1.8Ghz with 2Gb RAM yesterday with a wireless keyboard and mouse and hooked it up to my 32" LG 32LB75 using VGA. On startup the display looked ok, I managed to click through the various Leopard initialisations. I bought the machine for use as a front room media player for mainly DivX movies and the occasional bit of music.
Once I had installed the DivX codec I opened a DivX file in Quicktime and selected "full screen mode." As soon as the movie started I became quite disappointed. The picture quality was quite pixelated ("noisy") and certainly not as good as when I play the same movie file from my old dell PC on the same LG tv (the dell PC has a 64Mb PCI radeon 7000 which connects to the tv using the same VGA port as the mac).
Anyway just to give the mac a fair go I thought I would try out some genuine quicktime video samples from the itunes store (this time viewed from front row)....again not brilliant.
So I thought I would investigate the screen resolution to see if I could improve things. It appeared the resolution was set to 1900 by 1200ish I say "ish" because I can't remember exactly. I then attempted to reduce the resolution and eventually I settled on one that looked quite clear with the font size big enough to be easily read. Again I tried the movie and there wasn't much (if any improvement). Whilst changing resolutions the screen would go blank for a few seconds but on one particular setting (can't remember exact numbers) the display went blank and never came back. The tv now just displays "no signal".
I despaired and connected the mac to a 17" Iiyama montior that I use with a PC and it worked ok. However each time I tried to "hot swap" back to the television I would end up with no picture.
I'm really disappointed because everything else about the mac I really like. Particularly the remote for frontrow which is precisely what I wanted it for. The problem is I've spent over £500 and now seem to have a lesser quality picture than I had to begin with (ignoring for the moment that I don't have any picture!!)
Anyway my questions are these, answers to any or all most appreciated.
1) what is the easiest way to get my mini to start displaying on my tv again?
2) what would the optimum resolution be? My television mentions 1366 x 768 in the manual
3) If the mini doesn't offer this resolution in the pick list is it advisable to "force it" using some alternative software (ie 3dexpress.de)?
4) Is the video quality affected by the software player? ie would VLC give better picture with DivX over quicktime/itunes/front row?
5) How likely is it that the video resolution of my new mac mini isn't "as good" as my old dell machine with its PCI graphics card?
6) Finally if I don't get results as good as my existing PC setup, how accomodating are apple with refunds? I bought it from a UK high-street apple store. The back of the receipt mentions a "14 day not satisfied" return policy but then goes on to say something about being "unopened"...which seems a little confusing. Ie how do you know if you're satisfied until you've actually used it?

Hi there
the solution was to remove the various display config files in leopard and then restart the machine, this got my display back on the tv (albeit off centre). To fix the "off centre issue" I used the LG "auto correct" feature from the remote control "menu > screen" options.
The apple support site describes how to remove the affected leopard display files here http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2213?viewlocale=en_US As you will see their resolution consists of 2 main steps, the first one involves starting your machine in safe mode, if this doesn't work then you proceed to the second step where you remove the files using a terminal prompt.
I didn't bother with the first step mainly because I don't think I can start my mac in safe mode since my only keyboard is wireless (bluetooth). So I connected the mac mini to a 17" LCD monitor (which thankfully did display the video signal ok) and removed all the listed files using terminal. I then shut the mac down, swapped the VGA cable back to the LCD tv restarted the mac and it detected the tv and set a resolution that worked. I then very carefully reduced the resolution down to one that was recommended by my tv (1300ish.. x 768ish??).
At this point I was back to having an acceptable signal but still a little off centre. So I used the TV remote, pressed menu, went into screen options and chose "auto correct". Picture then filled the screen perfectly.
The problem seems to be, leopard lists a bunch of resolutions that it believes your tv/display can handle but it would appear that in fact some of these resolutions are not supported by your TV and if you choose one of these your signal disappears and you can't get it back.
I would still say that I'm not 100% convinced with the mac mini's onboard graphics (I have a 1.8GHz version). I'm going to download some HD content and see if that improves things, but certainly my existing DivX collection looked a little sharper and clearer and better coloured using my old dell PC with its radeon PCI card. But the difference in picture quality is outweighed by the convenience of its size and the font row interface. I might tinker with putting Windows Media Center on it one day, perhaps that might improve things.

Macbook Pro to VIZIO LCD TV via HDMI Grainy Video Quality?

So when I bought my MacBook Pro back in July 2010, I purchased an assortment of accessories to go with it including a special third-party Mini DisplayPort to HDMI Adapter device off of eBay. The HDMI Adapter device works mostly the way I expected it to. That is, the video and audio signal coming out of the MacBook is channeled into the LCD TV display properly so that I can see the computer video display on the LCD TV and sound is also coming out of the TV too.
Just one minor annoyance: video quality. Actually, the picture is perfectly fine and beautiful, except for some reason I get weird video artifacts that are basically tiny specs that quickly fly across the screen very rapidly and they are all over the video display. Almost like the video signal is partially grainy or fuzzy or something.
I've tried to Google to see if anyone has reported any similar problems, but no luck. I wish I knew exactly what device in this process is the culprit of this behavior; i.e. either the MacBook, the HDMI Adapter, the HDMI Cable, or the LCD TV (Vizio SV470XVT 47" 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV).
If anyone can help to possibly instruct me how to fix this problem or how to further diagnose the problem, I would greatly appreciate it.

For a 2010+ MBP you can connect with a Displayport to HDMI, which will include Audio.
With older MBP you will need a displayport to HDMI, if you want audio to the actually TV, then you will need to get a cable with either digital out from MBP to the HDMI, or USB audio mixed into the HDMI
eg
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/NewerTech/CBLMDPHDMID/

FCP Novice needs help with video quality and FCP 5!!

Hi,
I have a real problme that I cannot seem to fix. I think its because I am doing something really wrong!
I have a Sony HC42E MiniDV Camcorder which by default records video in full widescreen. I recorded several tapes this way and have now begun trying to edit them in FCP 5.04 (Tiger 10.4.6). Whenever I log and capture my clips they appear to be fuzzzy and unclear on the Mac monitor whilst being totally crisp and sharp on the camcorder viewfinder. I tried capturing using the DV PAL 48Khz Anamorphic Preset which keeps everything the right size (the final output needs to be true widescreen and not with black bars added) but the resulting video on screen is blurry and bitty. I then tried capturing using the DV PAL 720 x 576 normal preset and the video is a little clearer on the screen (for both presets I have chosen lower field dominance) but when I play back it plays back in widescreen on the mac canvas window but at 4:3 on the camera's viewfinder.
I then assumed that maybe this is just becuase the mac screen (CRT by the way) doesn't use fields. So I exported the sequence as a QT movie using DV PAL 16:9 and used quicktime (OS9 Classic - my compressor has never worked because of the dreaded "unable to connect to baackground process" problem which I've never managed to correct) to convert it to MPEG2. When I import this as an asset into DVD Studio pro 4 and set the track size to 16:9 it comes through at the right aspect ratio. However it looks blurry on screen. Thinking that this will be fine on a TV I burned the disc - inserted it into my DVD player (a good one!) and watched it on my new 32" widescreen TV (a good one!) and the picture qualitty is poor. Its so much blurrier and bittier than the original footage looks when played through the camcorder's viewfinder!
The final footaage looks like an old VHS recording that's a year or two old!
Does anyone know how I can capture my footage in FCP with the maximum quality, edit it without quality loss and the export it for DVD again without such significant quality loss whilst all the time keeping it at proper 16:9 widescreen?
Is there some presets I should be working to?
I'm tearing my hair out! Help!

Hi Guys,
thanx for your replies.
here's the latest:
Brian, I followed your instructions and the DVD burned successfully. However the video quality of the dvd when viewed on my TV ('ve tried on all 3 of my tvs now) is still a lot poorer than the quicktime movie that was imported into DVDSP4. When I play the original QT Movie on my Mac CRT monitor it looks a little blurry and grainy because I guess its non interlaced however when viewed on an external Video monitor it looks great - very sharp.
When I view the burned DVD on my television the picture quality looks like the non interlaced version of the original QT Movie that appeared on my Mac CRT and not the sharp interlaced (lower field) version that appeared on my external video monitor.
Its almost like taking a sharp jpeg into Photoshop and applying a gaussian blur of about 0.3 followed by jepg compression compressing it down to 5% quality!
I'm totally mystified. Can the conversion to Mpeg2 be removing all interlacing so that you get the less sharp computer monitor look? I just want the video on my final DVDs to be as good as the original source footage! I appreciate that along the way there might be loss of some quality but surely not that much?
Does this make sense to you guys or am I still doing something very wrong?
Robert: I have tried setting all manner of drives including a fresh external firewire HD with nothing on it (clean out of the box) but it doesn't seem to help.
Brian: I tried the no network suggestion a few months back but I'm not sure if I got it right. At the moment I have broadband through an external speedtouch usb modem and am also connected (occasionally although not for the last 3 months) via a crossover cable to my PCs ethernet card. When I last tried the No Network solution I had immense trouble getting my internet to work again! Can you please help me by directing me to the best ay to do this while protecting my internet settings?
any more help guys would be greatfully appreciated.

IPhone 6 Plus video quality is extremely poor when on Facetime and when sharing via text/message

I upgraded to the 6 plus from the 4S. Everyone that I facetime with and send videos to via text/message tells me how incredibly horrible the video quality is....especially in comparison to the way it was before I upgraded from the 4S to the 6Plus. These are people that I have always sent videos to and Facetimed with before, and they all say they can really tell a difference. So frustrating that my three year old iphone 4S is better than the new 6 plus 128gig that I just paid $500 for. We have little ones at home and this is one of the main things we use the phone for....to send vidoes and to Facetime with grandma and grandpa.
I'm on the same carrier (Verizon) that I have always been and have not changed anything. Is there a setting on the phone I can change that will help with this? I love the phone otherwise, but if it can't do this right, I'm going to return it and get my money back.
Can anyone help? Anyone experiencing this???
Thank you.

I have the same issue!! Why isn't there any answers to this problem? I became the laughing stock who owns a $1000 iPhone that can't share videos with family and friends. Please help!!!

How should I best import HD Videos from the new iPad to my mac without loosing video quality?

The new HD video on the new iPad is awesome, but it can eat up a lot of memory in no time. I would like to know what is the most recommended way to export my ipad movies to iLife on my mac without loosing image quality, so i can free up space on my iPad.
If I use iPhoto I notice that the file size of the video from the new iPad is a lot smaller then if I use iMovie to import the same video.
Example: I import a 53 second video from the new iPad to iPhoto and the imported file has a file size of 143 MB in iPhoto. (iphoto save the video as IMG_0048.mov)
I import the same video to iMovie manually and the imported file size is 843 MB in iMovie. BIG DIFFERENCE. (iMovie saves that same video as clip-2012-03-20 16;13;08.mov)
Now to really be confusing: I go to Image Capture program and locate the file manually on my iPad and is has the same name and file size is what is in iPhoto.
So either iMovie is making the File a lot larger when it imports to an event, or the file I'm looking at is actually the iPhoto version that I get because I sync with iPhoto.
The second issue that I have is that now I have 2 videos on my hard drive: one in iPhoto, and one in iMovie for a combined data storage of close to 1 GB.
I would like to be able to import ALL my iPad recording into iPhoto and then delete the video from the device when done.
But if I loose video quality, I'm not happy about that. Secondly, by importing video from my iPad into multiple iLife programs, I'm creating duplicates with sometimes different quality. Any suggestions? is there a setting in iPhoto that can do all this for me?
Robert

Don't use iphoto to deal with movies. it's not really meant for that. use Quicktime or iMovie to work with your videos

Avchd camcorders video quality

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for