For composite editing, does DVCPRO yield better quality than AVCHD in FCE4?

Hi folks,
From what I understand, DVCPRO is much less compressed than AVCHD. If so, then, would it also be true that FCE4 would output a "cleaner" end product (i.e. for DVD, after undergoing significant composite editing/rendering) if I used DVCPRO rather than AVCHD? (It's my understanding that you should start with the highest quality... least compressed... raw footage as possible for composite editing).
Thanks, in advance, for your expertise!
Vic

Panasonic does not make a camera with the HFC-150 model designation. Do you mean the AG HMC-150?
If so, the camera records AVCHD (which is a VERY highly compressed format) and which will need to be translated into AIC to run in FCE. AIC was designed to deal with long GOP formats starting with mpeg 2 HDV. Its great value is it translates that difficult to edit frame structure into an all "I" frame format. However, it was not the most graceful format for color detail.
Having said that, while the HMC-150 is capable of very good images, most consumer video is so badly recorded (really poor lighting, wandering auto white balance, wandering auto focus, hand shake, etc) there is no way one can tell what the camera is capable of let alone if one codec is better than another for output.
If you already have FCE, see what the material looks like. You may find it perfectly adequate, even splendid in telling your stories.
If you want to see other options, I believe Premiere has a trial version and Apple has a trial of FCX. Do your own A/B/C comparision.
Have fun.
x

Similar Messages

Does Pro-Res codec yield better quality from AVCHD files than AIC?

Hi folks,
I use FCE4 and ingest AVCHD for editing. I'm wondering if, for example, I ingested with the Pro-Res codec (eg. such as when using Final Cut Pro or FCX), would that be a higher quality transcoder than the inherent Apple Intermediate Codec that is part of FCE4? In other words, if I upgraded my software, would I likely get better quality?
FYI: I shoot with a single chip AVCHD camcorder, in case that matters.
Thanks,
Vixter

If you are running Lion, then FCPX is the only way forward unless you go with a non-Apple editing suite. For what it's worth, I think FCPX has gotten a bum rap overall. It's quite powerful compared to the old FCE even with its current limitations. Apple will continue to improve the program over time, and no one should discount the foresight that Apple actually does have in its product lines. The FCPX user interface and the method of editing is quite different compared to FCE, and takes a lot of adjustment if you were familiar with FCE or FCP. For general purpose editing, even prosumer editing, FCPX is quite an application, even if it's not quite ready for broadcasters & professionally employed editors.
The best way to find out is to try it out - it's available as a free 30-day trial so you can see for yourself whether or not it works for you. You can read all about it elsewhere and of course people in these forums have their opinions one way or the other. As I long ago discovered about wine, there is no definitively good or bad wine ... just wine that we ourselves like because it satisfies our individual tastes and conditions. I don't concern myself with Robert Parker's opinions. In fact I think a lot of his 95+ rated wines stink! If you follow my drift ...

Which yields better quality images?

Which yields better quality images?
If I "send" my slideshow from iPhoto to iDVD? Or if I start in iDVD and import a slideshow from iPhoto?

That’s the same thing.
The problem is that iPhoto needs to make a movie of the slideshow to export. This inevitably involves compression. Then, when iDVD prepares the movie for burning, it also compresses. Many folks find the quality drop off too great when the material is doubly compressd.
One solution is to create the Slideshow in iDVD, though that has limitations too - no Ken Burns effect, fo instance. But there’s only one layer of compression.
Another way is to create the Movie in +as high a quality as possible+. Some ways to do this: Export the slideshow from iPhoto using the new high quality options. Alternatively, use another app that has more export options - PhotoToMovie, Final Cut Express, perhaps even iMovie HD - to get a high quality movie, and so minimise the impact of the compression.
Regards
TD

Is m4v better quality than a remuxed MKV file via Subler?

I'm slowly building my home media server and putting my Blu-Ray's onto it. I normally do a Handbrake conversion for ATV3, so the MKV files end up being significantly smaller m4v's and the quality is outstanding. But I recently learned about the quick remux method using Subler, which quickly converts the MKV container into an m4v container without any quality loss and while keeping the same size file. But I noticed that, say, a 29GB MKV file is a much poorer softer picture on my plasma TV than the same movie that's only a 9GB MKV file (remuxed to m4v with subler for streaming over ATV3). I'm running a 300mbps cable modem so the streaming shouldn't be a problem over my home wifi. But I also noticed that the smaller m4v's (say a 3.5GB file that comes from a 9GB MKV file via Handbrake) seem to be slightly better quality than the 9GB file that was remuxed. So it seems like the larger file should be even higher quality -- but I'm getting better results with a smaller file that's Handbrake'd from MKV to m4v.
Is there some sort of streaming setting on the ATV3 that needs to be set or adjusted that will allow the full gorgeous pic quality of a 29GB file to stream right through to it, and look better than the Handbrake'd m4v file? It feels like there's a bottleneck somewhere that's not letting all of the complete picture information through, and an intact, perfect 29GB file should look light years better than that 29GB file Handbrake'd down to 4GB. Trying to figure this out before I continue down this home media server path cuz it's a lot of work to do these Blu's one at a time.
Kirby

I have no experience of the remuxing you describe, but interesting observations.
There is nothing you can adjust on AppleTV - it will either play the encoded movie or it won't.
AppleTv's generally playback the h264 codec (in an m4v container) - there are many many versions/levels of this codec and each generation of AppleTv has been able to play slightly more sophisticated versions.
I suspect but cannot prove that the issue you notice is due to AppleTV attempting to support advanced h264 features but making compromises which affect playback quality - in other words it is cutting corners to playback advanced h264 profile features rather than refusing. Handbrake on the other hand has time at its disposal - it has been refined over many years by dedicated enthusiasts so if a simple remux is all that's required i'd be surprised they have not implemented that. Instead I suspect it more accurately processes enhanced h264 features before transcoding into a new smaller m4v file. Equally there might be settings in HB which artificially sharpen or otherwise alter the video which you prefer. I'd compare the BluRay tothe remuxed or HB versions to attempt to decide which was more faithful to the original but even then it would be dependent on the BluRay player's settings in some cases.

Building 2 machines for compositing & editing

hi all, Merry Christmas and Happy new year,
Working in animation industry, have just signed a contract for 60 episodes each is 15 minutes,
( will deliver them on Hard disc )1920*1080 as HD standard, DNxHD 120 Codec as the channel requirements,
our workflow animating on toonboom then export each layer as mated .swf, and compositing each scene in after effects sc6 ( the single scene include 5 : 20 layers) and then the editing phase,
1- the compositing machine am looking for:
cpu: Intel Core i7-3930K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116492&Tpk=i7-3930k
cpu cooler: CORSAIR Hydro Series H80
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181016&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mm c=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
motherboard: Rampage IV Extreme
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131802
Video Card: EVGA GTX 680 Classified 4GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130801
Memory: CORSAIR Vengeance 64GB (8 x 8GB) - 1866
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233384
Power Supply: Antec High Current Pro HCP-1200- 80 PLUS GOLD , High Current Hybrid Cable Management Active
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371043
Case: Rosewill BLACKHAWK-ULTRA- Super Tower
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147157&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mm c=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
Drive for OS.: SAMSUNG 840 Pro Series- 256GB SATA III MLC Internal (SSD)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147193
Other Drives: HGST Ultrastar 7K4000 -3TB -7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Enterprise Hard Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145621
Blu-Ray Burner: LG Black 14X BD-R 2X BD-RE 16X DVD+R 5X DVD-RAM 12X BD-ROM 4MB Cache SATA BDXL
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827136249
that's all, i need to ask you about :
- your overall Advice about this components (MB. Puzzled me choosing from Rampage IV Extreme, Sabertooth X79 and P9X79 WS)
- your advise on drive setup, like how many ssd to use and how many hdd and how to arrange them with the motherboard, and do you recommend to ad an 10,000 rpm hhd with them, as i told you before this machine will be for compositing only not for editing
- do i need Areca ARCcontroller?? what is your recommendation?
2- the editing machine am looking for:
I am interested on thunderbolt specially on those products:
- Blackmagic Design UltraStudio 4K Thunderbolt Capture & Playback
http://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/ultrastudio4k/
- Areca ARC-8050 ThunderBolt 8 Bays
http://www.nexus.com.au/areca-arc-8050-thunderbolt-8-bays-sas-raid-serious-workhorse-demo- in-store.html
- G-RAID with Thunderbolt
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822205178
- 17" TV Logic XVM-175W Multi-Format LCD HD/SD Monitor
http://www.abelcine.com/store/TV-Logic-XVM-175W-17-inch-Multi-Format-LCD-HD-SD-Monitor/
so what is your recommendation?? do i go with lga 1155 as below:
cpu: Core i7-3770K Ivy Bridge 3.5GHz (3.9GHz Turbo)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116501&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mm c=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
cpu cooler: CORSAIR Hydro Series H80
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181016&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mm c=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
motherboard: ASUS P8Z77-V PREMIUM
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131850&Tpk=Asus%20P8Z77-V%20PREMI UM%20ATX%20LGA1155%20Motherboard
Video Card: EVGA GTX 680 Classified 4GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130801
Memory: CORSAIR Vengeance 32GB (4 x 8GB) - 1600
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233232
Power Supply: Antec High Current Pro HCP-1200- 80 PLUS GOLD , High Current Hybrid Cable Management Active
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371043
Case: Rosewill BLACKHAWK-ULTRA- Super Tower
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147157&nm_mc=AFC-C8Junction&cm_mm c=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3938566&SID=
Drive for OS.: SAMSUNG 840 Pro Series- 256GB SATA III MLC Internal (SSD)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147193
Other Drives: HGST Ultrastar 7K4000 -3TB -7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Enterprise Hard Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145621
thats all, i need to aske you about :
- do i go to lag 1155 for thunderbolt tec.?? if yes your overall Advice about this components please,
- your advise on drive setup, like how many ssd to use and how many hdd and how to arrange them with the mothebord as internal and with thunderbolt as external, and do you recommend to ad an 10,000 rpm hhd with them?
- do i need Areca ARCcontroller?? what is your recommendation?
Many thanks for your support.

dear Harm,
Thank you very much for your comments, they are very helpful,
Now for the compositing machine:
cpu: Intel Core i7-3930K
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116492&Tpk=i7 -3930k
*cpu cooler: Noctua NH-D14 air cooler
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835608018
*motherboard: P9X79 WS
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131798&Tpk=P9X79%20WS
Video Card: EVGA GTX 680 Classified 4GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130801
*Memory: G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 64GB
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231508&Tpk=G.Skill%20Ripjaws%20Z% 20Series%2064GB%201600
*Power Supply: CORSAIR HX Series HX1050 1050W 80 PLUS GOLD
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817139034
Case: Rosewill BLACKHAWK-ULTRA- Super Tower
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811147157&nm_mc= AFC-C8Junction&cm_mmc=AFC-C8Junction-_-na-_-na-_-na&AID=10446076&PID=3 938566&SID=
Drive for OS.: SAMSUNG 840 Pro Series- 256GB SATA III MLC Internal (SSD)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147193
Other Drives: HGST Ultrastar 7K4000 -3TB -7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Enterprise Hard Drive
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145621
Blu-Ray Burner: LG Black 14X BD-R 2X BD-RE 16X DVD+R 5X DVD-RAM 12X BD-ROM 4MB Cache SATA BDXL
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827136249
1- now is that compositing machine perfect or you have some suggestions?
2- would you assist me on how many ultrastar 3TB to use and how to arrange them (if in raid or not regarding the motherbord) like for media, for cache, for export (regarding that compositing machine only).
I am very grateful for supporting me,
Sherif

Does Final Cut Studio deliver better quality than Final Cut Express

If my export target is Apple-TV 720p, is there any difference between the quality delivered in Final Cut Express versus the new Final Cut Studio? E.g. is it the same because Quicktime is doing it? I read something on the FCS home page that it "adapted the quality to the video content"? So would FSC somehow be better at utilizing the maximum 5Mbps data stream compared to FCE? Thanks.
-Troels

+is there any difference between the quality delivered in Final Cut Express versus the new Final Cut Studio?+
Not really, not per se, for this purpose. There are many factors at play, very important among them is the nature of your source media - if it is shot on a high quality camera and captured in ProRes or one of the other higher quality codecs supported by FCS then maybe you would see a difference. What are you using?

Motion playback window MUCH better quality than final output?

I'm puzzled. I export a straight DV NTSC. The Motion playback window pops up when the job is done. It plays back the finished clip and it looks just grand, very clean. I open the clip itself in the Quicktime Player and it is quite ugly, full of artifacting and waffling.
Can someone explain to me the difference between the Motion playback window (the one that pops up when a job has been exported) and the Quicktime Player (such that one looks great and the other looks horrible)?
B.

Cher Mark,
****. Isn't life curious. And my brain even more curioser (to me). I've got credits on hundreds of films, I've produced at least twenty films myself in the last five years, I've edited half of them myself ... and I never ever knew there was that option on the Quicktime Player. Duh. Maybe it has something to do with working in SD again ... back in prehistoric times when everybody was working in SD there was always a good external monitor; and when we switched to HD the difference in QT Player quality was less noticeable, actually, I just looked, not noticeable on my laptop.
Thank you thank you, again, Mark ... the light goes on ... now I'm going to race off and find, I bet it exists, a draft\best mode for the FCP canvas window: We've been using the canvas window - dragged and resized on a second HD monitor to get a full frame 4:3 to cut this IMAX film. I'm trying to convince the boys to switch over to Apple (it's mainly a PC pipeline right now): so they have a modest tower (no frills), and are cutting in SD. They are being converted by degrees.
Very much appreciated...
Ben

In terms of organizing photos, what does Lightroom do better/different than Photoshop Elements?

Hi,
I recently purchased Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements 12. I have many, many pictures from several years on our hard drive and would love to be able to better organize and tag them, etc. I have recently learned that Photoshop Elements can do this for me. I have also recently heard that Lightroom is good for this. Before I start importing thousands and thousands of files into PSE, I figure I should determine if I should use Lightroom instead. This would obviously come at an additional cost, so I would like this forum's help in explaining how Lightroom might be better than PSE for this function so that I can determine if it's worth the extra cost.
Thanks!

The PSE Organizer has fewer features and more bugs than Lightroom, in my opinion
Lightroom has more features for searching and more metadata fields for your use if you need them
Lightroom offers the ability to geotag your photos and display them on a map
Lightroom can streamline your workflow, so if for example you want to do the same things to multiple photos (including applying the same edits), this is much easier in Lightroom.
In general, my opinion is that Lightroom's Library Module is a superior piece of software than the PSE Organizer. In general, my opinion is that the user interface for Lightroom's Library module is a superior interface than the PSE Organizer. My opinion is that Lightroom's workflow is smoother and more efficient than doing the same things in PSE.
But some people love the PSE Organizer. It all depends on what you want to do. Your best path forward is to download the 30-day free trial of Lightroom, view some tutorial videos about Lightroom (don't skip this step), and compare for yourself the PSE Organizer to the Lightroom Library Module (and other parts of Lightroom as well).

Why are the iPhone/Apple TV export presets better quality than QT h.264

I've been exporting a lot of content to the web lately and we use Compressor to batch encode most of it, but one thing has always puzzled/frustrated me! If you export using one of the Apple device presets, then the quality of output is pretty **** good, and these presets are all H.264 based. But if you export as a QT file with the H.264 codec, with all the same settings the quality is noticeably worse!
Does Apple have some special H.264 encoder hidden way for use in theIr presets?
Its really starting to frustrate us as we want to get that some quality but have a bit more flexibility with the data rate and resolutions.
Any ideas?

That's why I find this so puzzling. The extra blockiness is VERY apparent when watching the video played back. The main difference I see from the Media Info analysis is that F4V says "CABAC/3 ref frames" instead of just "2 ref frames". I suppose my main question is whether or not its possible to get the same quality in an mp4 file.

I can't afford an expensive microphone, but I want better quality than internal microphone to record voice. What's out there?

I can't afford an expensive microphone attachment, but I want higher quality to record my voice for eventual radio use. What's out there as far as inexpensive attachments that are easy to use? What can I do using my MacBook Pro?

Not sure what your idea of inexpensive is - have you searched for USB Microphones yet? There are hundreds of choices under $100 compatible with Mac or Pc. I'd be cautious and read reviews of the cheaper items as the built-in mic seems to be better than most $20-$30 ones.

Is IChat to Ichat better quality than Skype?

I have a Mac and I use Skype to AV chat to a PC overseas. Would I see better picture quality If they used a Mac overseas and we went Ichat to Ichat?

According to this post ichat is better than skype when chatting mac-mac.
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1238443

Are external DVD burners better quality than an internal on a laptop?

I've always had this prejudice that stock Powerbook G4 internal DVD drives are poor quality and prone to breaking down. I lost mine after less than a year of service and it seems to me that folks are regularly complaining about stock internal burners going out.
I've had no working DVD drive for a couple of years on my old G4 and I'm getting a new one this week. I also have a Sony external dual layer DVD burner that is a real workhorse for me. It's what I've been using for all these years.
Now I'm wondering, when I have the new DVD burner installed next week, do I need to baby it and use the external whenever possible? Should I only use it whenever absolutely necessary and let the external do all the heavy lifting? Is this new internal drive going to fritz out on me after six months just like the last one did?
I've burned hundreds, maybe close to a thousand, DVDs on my external Sony and the machine is still good as gold. No sign of wear.
Is there any evidence to support this idea that internal laptop drives are delicate pieces of equipment waiting to break down and that external Sonys are solid and rugged? Or is that just my personal experience and is everyone else happy with their internal drives?
By the way, my new internal drive being shipped to me this week is an OWC (Other World Computing) drive made just for the older 400 mHz Powerbook G4 Titaniums. There's not a lot of choice in the market for a drive for such an old machine.

Software is the key to quality. Period, along with the quality of the original content, if it is good quality then you will get good quality, if it's poor quailty then you will get poor quality.
Use the best.
http://www.roxio.com/

Which is better quality for watching a pre downloaded movie airplay or HMDI?

I have the new Retnia. I have an apple tv and high quality HDMI cable. If I want watch a 900P movie from my laptop to my up to 1080p tv which would be more reliable/better quality? BTW the movie is predownloaded so it WOULD NOT be streamming.
Thanks!

My guess is the HDMI cable will yield better quality than AirPlay. Since you already have an HDMI cable and a Mac that supports AirPlay, why not try both for yourself then report back here with your results?

What gets better quality for watching video.. airplay mirroring or HDMI cable

I have the new Retnia. I have a apple tv and high quality HDMI cable. If I want watch a 900P movie from my laptop to my up to 1080p tv which would be more reliable/better quality? BTW the movie is predownloaded so it WOULD NOT be streamming.
Thanks!

My guess is the HDMI cable will yield better quality than AirPlay. Since you already have an HDMI cable and a Mac that supports AirPlay, why not try both for yourself then report back here with your results?

Why does the Fireworks save for web function give better results than in Photoshop?

Having used the trial version of Fireworks, I have noticed that the save for web function gives greater compression and image quality than saving for web in Photoshop. Why is this?
As Adobe are not continuing in developing Fireworks, does anyone know if will they will improve the save for web function in Photoshop to match the Fireworks version?
Are there any third party companies who anyone can recommend who will process large volumes of images for web?
Thanks

One of my favourite topics ;-P
First, the save for web function in Photoshop has not seen any real updates in a long time. In Fireworks PNG export allows for fully transparent optimized files with indexed 256 or less colours, which is impossible in the save for web function in Photohop. It is unsupported.
This is one of the reasons why Fireworks does a much better job than Photoshop. Another reason is that Photoshop adds meta junk in its exported files, and this also increases the file size (and should be removed, because there are also a number of fields which include information about your setup).
One other caveat is that Photoshop's save for web functions neither allows for a choice in chroma subsampling, and instead decides automatically below a certain quality threshold to degrade the colour sharpness quality. The user has no control over this. (Fireworks also limits the user this way.)
One thing to be careful of: FW's jpg quality setting, and PS's quality settings are very different - a 50 in Photoshop is not the same 50 setting in Fireworks.
For jpg optimization I generally use RIOT (free): http://luci.criosweb.ro/riot/
(When you install, be careful NOT to install the extra junkware!)
Fireworks cannot change the chroma subsampling to 4:2:0, which does degrade the quality a bit compared to RIOT and Photoshop in my experience. Photoshop adds useless meta information, even if the user tells it not to do that. RIOT allows you to remove that information, saving 6k. RIOT also offers an automatic mode that optimizes existing jpg images without degrading the quality further, and often saves 10k or more, depending on the images.
Interestingly enough, in my tests exported Fireworks jpg images are always reduced in file size by RIOT, due to FW's jpg export limitations, without any image degradation.
In my tests FW's jpg quality versus file size turns out to be the worst of all three. RIOT generally wins, or is at least on par with Photoshop.
As for PNG export, Photoshop's save for web function is quite abysmal. No 256 colour full transparency export is possible, while Fireworks does support this.
Having said that, there is a free alternative that leaves both Photoshop AND Fireworks in the dust: Color Quantizer. http://x128.ho.ua/color-quantizer.html
CQ is an amazing little tool: with it anyone can create PNG files with full transparency and reduced to ANY number of colours! It means that a 512 colour PNG with full transparency is now very easy to do. On top of that, for more difficult images a simple quality mask brush tool allows the user to control and retain even small colour details in a PNG, while reducing the file size to an absolute minimum.
CQ is one of the best kept secrets of a Web Developer's toolkit. And it is free!
Both RIOT and Color Quantizer have a built-in batch mode. Both are available for WIndows. Not for Mac. If you are on a Mac, try imageOptim. Not nearly as good as RIOT and CQ, but quite passable.
PS to be fair, the newest versions of Photoshop do allow for export of 8bit PNGs with full transparency through the use of its Generator functionality. But again, it cannot compete with CQ. And as far as I am aware, Generator cannot be used in Photoshop's batch processing (which, btw, is very slow! For simpler daily image processing tasks I have to do in batches, I prefer IrfanView, which is lightning fast! IrfanView).

For composite editing, does DVCPRO yield better quality than AVCHD in FCE4?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for