Best way to get 3/4 inch tape material into FCP?

Question

I have several 3/4 inch tapes I would like to edit on my FCP system.
I can only Capture through firewire.
Is it better to transfer the 3/4 material to DVD or create QT files?
(I can create the QT files on an Avid Adrenaline)
I need to keep the material at the best quality.
Thanks.

Answer 1

OK, I'm back now. Let's get to the first part of your question... and some tips.
To start with let me clear up some semantic errors that I may have inadvertently created. When I say "up-rez" I'm not talking about it the way you would use the term in print production and Photoshop. I was using the term "up-rez" as a more generic term meaning a general improvement in picture quality and upgrade of color space.
Now, to the improvement I have seen by taking my DV source material into a sequence using PhotoJPEG 75% or DVCPRO50 codecs with a 4:2:2 color space.
First, as a baseline, to all of my DV clips in the timeline I add the "4:1:1 Color Smoothing" filter as the first in line, and the final filter is always "Broadcast Safe" set to the lowest preset of "100" or "Extremely Conservative." If I use any color correction filter I always use it after the color smoothing and before "Broadcast Safe." Unless it works better using a different order, but this is where I start. However "Color Smoothing" is almost always the first filter.
It is the "Color Smoothing" filter that provides the extra chroma data that is used by the 4:2:2 codec to "improve" the color after rendering. Now understand, this is an interpolation process. The computer is guessing at what the extra color data should be. But in most cases where my goal is to provide "pleasing color" the computer usually makes some pretty good guesses.
Especially if you use color correction to remove any exising color casts from the clips in question. If you have a definite color cast in your original clip, you may find it necessary to color correct that cast out, then add the Color Smoothing, and then do your "primary" or "balancing" color correction by adding that filter a second time in the list to get things to look right. Confused yet? Don't be - if you have a good calibrated video monitor, then you can really trust your eyes a lot more than you might think. The point is, if you present the "Color Smoothing" filter with reasonably good color when it looks at the DV clip, then it will do a good job of "enhancing" your color after you render with a 4:2:2 codec.
Oh yeah, make sure your rendering quality level in the "Video Processing" tab of the sequence "Settings" is set to the best you have. FCP 4.5 and FCP 5.x differ slightly in how they word this setting, but the intent is the same.
So that's how I "improve" the color of a DV clip by taking it into a sequence with a 4:2:2 color space. I hope I explained it clearly enough.
BTW - Nattress suggests using PhotoJPEG 75% over DVCPRO50 for content that comes from an analog capture. He says that an unintended but positive consequence of the "lossy" compression in the PhotoJPEG codec is to remove some of the latent analog noise from the video during final rendering and encoding. I had my doubts about this at first since the specs would suggest that DVCPRO50 is the best way to go. But after trying it out I must say that Graeme is dead-on with this. A lot of the minor video noise in the luminence and chroma that comes in with the analog video is removed pretty cleanly when you look at your final rendered digital video. So once again we learn that Graeme Nattress is "The Man."
The truly scary thing is that among his peers in the community of this forum, Nattress is only one of several similar intellects. This forum is a gold mine for all of us FCP users. Nattress, Shane, Sheffield, and all the rest who I am probably making mad because I forgot to mention them -- wow! We couldn't afford to take classes from all these guys, and here they give it all for free. I hope everyone appreciates the value of the resource we have in this forum. I certainly do. Belated and future thanks to all you gurus out there.
Anyway, back to your analog capture issues. Here's some tips from my own experience. When doing my initial capture from analog via the A-to-D converter...
1) I always find I need to boost the saturation levels a bit. Use a vectorscope to keep track of this, but my analog source material always seems to come in 20 to 25% light in the chroma value. Boosting the saturation setting a little bit in the convertor fixes this.
2) I know I'll get some arguments about this one. In my ADVC-300 I have a "Sharpening" setting, with "0" being no enhancement, "-100" being totally blurred, and "+100" being totally sharpened. I find that adding a significant amount of "sharpening" to my capture settings really improves the quality of the analog input without leaving a lot of visible and unpleasant artifacts in the picture. So I always add between +15 and +35 of sharpening. Usually +25 works best so that's where I start.
Now, understand that I find this completely counter-intuitive after my years of experience with digital image editors and scanning software like "Photoshop" and "Scantastic," and the generally complete uselessness of the vanilla "sharpen" tools for sophisticated image enhancement. But for some reason, with these tools in this environment, "sharpening" works wonders.
The way it looks to me when I compare the "before" and "after" by switching the inputs on my video monitor is that the "after" picture looks like someone properly backlit the scene. The entire effect is to give that look of 3D depth to the picture that still photographers call "snap," and that I was taught to try to achieve by the guys who taught me TV lighting. When used in a subtle and appropriate fashion, the effect of this "sharpening" filter is stunning. But this is a matter of personal taste. To my eye the sharpened picture looks better, but you may disagree. Like I said, it's a matter of taste.
I must add that I am unable to duplicate these results by adding FCP's sharpening filter to an already digitized clip. This says to me that either you need to sharpen before digitizing, or the sharpening algorithm in my Canopus ADVC-300 is way better than the FCP filter. I don't know which it is, but I really don't need to know, practically speaking. It's practical results we are after here, so I can live with the mystery.
3) Always go back to the earliest generation of analog source tapes you can find. If this means re-editing the program, then be prepared to do it if max quality is your goal.
In 3/4-inch U-matic format (and especially with 1/2-inch S-VHS or lesser formats) the difference in picture quality between a third-generation dub and a second-generation edit master is immense. Look at the degradation of edge definition and the increase in noise between the generations. It's huge. It's even more striking if you compare the first-generation master tapes with a distribution dub or duplication master.
Conversely, don't even waste your time if you have a fourth-gen or later distribution dub. If you are dealing with a late generation tape source, then none of our digital and computer editing or enhancement wizardry will matter a hoot. Garbage in equals garbage out. So if you really care about quality, be prepared to go back to the earliest generation tape you can find, even if that means re-editing the program from the first-gen shooting masters.
OK, that's all I have for you right now. Please post any additional questions or any comments you have on my missives and I'll be glad to get into this further - at least until you suck me dry of usable info.
Let me leave you with this. It's funny how viewers don't seem to mind poor video quality when watching a late-gen dub on a VHS player. But when you offer them a DVD, they expect to see feature film or broadcast TV quality, and if they don't see something close they won't watch the program with the same degree of receptivity.
In my experience, picture quality really matters in its effect on the communication process, and that's why we should all take it seriously. Worrying about quality is not a purely technical exercise important only to technicians. Poor audio and poor video quality will negatively impact the communication process. That's why we care about quality.
After all, it's our business - the COMMUNICATION business. That's the perspective I try to maintain in my work.
Good Luck in your endeavor. Please let me know how it works out. My e-mail address is in my posted profile.