HDV and Pro Res 422

My current project has a timeline of 1080i HDV footage that was down converted to DV. My question is when we want to up convert which is better.
1. Make the sequence offline and re-capture at Pro Res 422
2. Convert the DV sequence to Pro Res 422
If we go with option 1. will the timecodes match what is in the sequence if I bring it in via Firewire or should it go through a capture card like the KONA 3?
Thanks for any advice you can give me.

For the difference in price I would go with the i7. I am sure you would be just fine with the i5, but you can never have too much computing power. I received my i7 based iMac several days ago and have ]been very happy with it. As I recall the difference in price between the two chips was about $200 so I don't think you will regret spending the extra. Also watch out for the keyboard. If you get the wireless KB it does not have a numeric keypad.

Similar Messages

HDV to Pro Res 422 HQ, how would you do it?

I am shortly going to short some HDV 1080' and deliver it to the customer after I've edited it, on a hard disc as Pro Res 422 HQ 1920 x 1080.
Last time I simply ingested the HDV in the normal way and exported to Pro Res using "make Quick Time Movie".
Should I have injested the footage from HDV, direct to Pro Res 422 HQ and edited this and then outputed the Pro Res 422 HQ edit master? In other words did I needlessly encode the material twice when I did it before?

Why can't I simply change the "Capture settings" to Pro Res HQ?
Because FCP doesn't do that via firewire. The data rate is too high. It only does ProRes 422 via firewire.
Now you are getting into professional workflows, and for that you need professional hardware.
Why do I need to sling my Macbook Pro in the bin and start all over again, because I presume a capture card wont go in a laptop.
You presume incorrectly. The Matrox MXO2 and MXO2 LE will work on a laptop just fine. I use my MXO2 all the time on mine. BUT...here's the rub. You can't capture 1920x1080 29.97 at ProRes HQ. Well, you can, but not for long durations. Because the encoding of that needs to be handled by the processor, and you need at least a Quad Core to do that, laptops are Dual core. BUT, you can get the AJA IO HD, that works on a laptop too, and has a ProRes encoder built in. Issue is that it is $3400, while the MXO2 LE is $1000 (that encoder adds a lot).
I think it would be best to capture as HDV, then use the Media Manager to Recompress to ProRes HQ. Because they might want full raster ProRes and HDV>ProRes gets you anamorphic ProRes. I believe the Media Manager will make it Full Raster. As will Compressor.
Shane

HDV and Pro Res

Quick question...
Is the quality of a HDV clip that was captured via firewire as ProRes...better or the same quality....of a clip that was captured as HDV and then media managed Recompressed to ProRes?

No, that's not the same thing. There will be some loss of quality, probably very minor, but that is not the same as media managing the original media or using Compressor to recompress it. HDV has to be conformed for output and that will happen before the material is exported. Why capture using ProRes? So that your compositing uses a higher resolution, higher quality codec, and so that your program does not have to be reconformed for output, and so that any rendering will render quicker. The only reason to stay in HDV is if you need to go back to HDV tape.

Pro Res 422 (Proxy) in Adobe Premiere

Guys, I've been having the most monumental problems today and in order to have a back up in case the doo doo hits the blades can the following be done?
I've got 12 Sequences which have been edited in a mix of Pro Res 422 (Proxy) and Pro Res 422.
The original files are AVCHD.
I'm unable to either access Media Manager or Batch Capture as FCP 7 just crashes.
If I was to give the Pro Res Sequences to my client can he then convert them to a suitable format on Adobe Premiere?
I really am at my wits end
EDIT: OK. I've just read that Pro Res cannot be imported into Premiere
So, lads, what can I do to give a final format to my client so that he can then author a DVD?
Message was edited by: Alpesh Gor

WHo says Premiere doesn't import ProRes? It has since CS3.
And why not try to solve your problem? Trash your prefs?
#44: FCP acting weird - Trash Prefs
Shane's Stock Answer #44: FCP acting weird or unusual. Just not like is normally should
If the program was working fine, and now isn't, or just isn't working the way it should, the first things to do are:
1) Trash your FCP preferences. Download the Preference Manager from Digital Rebellion: http://www.digitalrebellion.com/pref_man.htm
http://www.kenstone.net/fcphomepage/trashing_fcpprefs.html
2) Open the Disk Utility and Repair Permissions.
3) Shut down for 10 min. Go for a quick walk around the block and get SOME exercise today. Come back, turn on the computer and see how things are.
4) (optional) Do the Hokey Pokey and turn your self about. Results may vary.
Shane

Log and Transfer: Options besides Apple Pro Res 422 ?

Hi, I am now using a camcorder that records files to a card. When I use Log and Transfer in FCP, the resulting files default to Apple Pro Res 422, which are absolutely huge. Is there a way to set this up to transfer to a smaller file type, maybe of a quality similar to HDV?
Thanks, BOb

There's a reason HDV files are small - they're highly compressed files. Final Cut is a professional product - it's built for high quality video, which requires storage space.
In some instances can change Log and Transfer preferences to transcode to ProRes422 LT, which is a lighter weight version of ProRes422. The files will be smaller, but they probably won't be as small as you're hoping they will be.
Open the Log and Transfer window. On the upper region there will be a gear, pick that and pick preferences. Find the camera type you're using and change the Target Format to ProRes422 LT if possible. As you did not tell us what kind of camera this is it is impossible to tell which one you need to change.
All that said, storage is pretty cheap. If you don't do a whole lot of editing a 320gb G-Drive Slim for $80 would be a great investment. If that isn't an option and you really need small files I would suggest editing in iMovie. I believe it converts everything to H.264, which is very small in comparison to ProRes. Don't try editing H.264 in FCP.

HDV or Apple Pro-Res 422???????

ok i have an cannon xh-a1. and if i want to get the top quality which one do i use? would i use HDV or Apple Pro-Res 422, and then which one would i export in to get the top quality.
or are there any other ways to get the best quality. Thanks

A simple answer? OK here it is: You bought the wrong computer for doing what you want to do. You should have bought a MacPro, an external drive array, and a 3rd party capture device such as an Aja IoHD or Kona LHe.
That's your simple answer. However, as is often true in life, simple isn't the same as easy. Golf is a simple game, but it's far from easy.
If you have clients paying you money to produce video projects, then you should buy the tools for the job that won't let you, and your clients, down. You might be able to edit with an iMac, but it can let you down when you most need it to perform.
I would never recommend the iMac for a video business. You cannot expand it with 3rd party cards or powerful-enough external storage.
I know that is not possible for you, so of all the bad choices you have in front of you, the least bad is to edit HDV. Forget about your quest for "the best quality". That ship sailed when you chose your iMac. Even editing HDV, you might be disappointed in your iMac's performance from time to time.
For an external Firewire drive, I'd recommend a Burly enclosure (from MacGurus) with a removable drive tray and a Seagate 7200.11 SATA drive. Do not buy a LaCie or a Western Digital MyBook.
Sorry, but this is a realistic answer.

PRO RES 422 HQ from color to fcp to HDV 1080i tape

Have just thrown myself off a bridge due to frustration. Filmed a holiday movie a few years ago on HDV Pal and taught myself color on the project after completing it on FCP. I have spent 3 months of my spare time getting it looking how I want it and have just sent it back to FCP for outputting. Everything hunky dory so far except when I came to print to video (back to HDV for archiving) I'm being told that I can't print that seq to tape. Presumably because PRO RES 422 won't go to HDV. Is that so and do I have any answers?

For having just thrown yourself off a bridge, your grammar, spelling, and punctuation are impeccable.
You are correct. A ProRes sequence will not go to HDV. You must place your ProRes sequence into a new HDV sequence, render/conform, and print that to HDV tape.
When you're going out via firewire, you pretty much have to match your sequence settings to your deck settings, DV>DV, HDV>HDV. Hardware capture cards/boxes by AJA & Blackmagic can up/down/cross convert on the fly, but not a direct firewire connection.
So, use your ProRes sequence to create the DVD, and create an HDV sequence to archive it to a tape.
And stop throwing yourself off bridges.

Sharing FCPX Pro Res 422 .mov master file with both Ps and Macs

I'm using FCPX 10.1.4 on Mac OS 10.10.2. I want to put a FCPX Pro Res 422 master file on a data DVD so it can be read and poled on both a Mac and PC using Quick Time 7. I tried using Toast 12 to create a data DVD playable on both a PC and Mac but it would not open on the PC. Any ideas what the problem might be or an alternative way to do this?
Thanks

One additional possible point of confusion: I think you wrote (or meant to write) "so it can be read and played."
A playable DVD is a very specific standard of filenames & compression sufficient to fit a two hour movie into 4.7GB of standard def video. Simply writing any video file onto a disc (maybe marked as "DVD-R") never creates a DVD that is playable in standard DVD players.
Given that, you can transfer any file (up to 4.7GB) by writing it onto a data "DVD" disc. However, as others point out, ProRes isn't windows-friendly (or good for small files) and just for seeing the video on other platforms, H.264 would be the right choice.

Uncompressed vs Pro Res 422 (LT) as archival codec and as editing codec

Hi -
I'm working on a project where we will be capturing 600 hours of footage from Hi8 tapes. The tapes are in somewhat iffy condition so we're only going to get one pass with them and that's it.
We've agreed with the owner of the tapes to digitize all of them for archival purposes, after which we will make a backup copy for us to edit with. We want to use Pro Res 422 (LT) as our editing codec, but there's some question about what codec we should use for archival purposes -- Pro Res 422 (LT) or uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2.
Basically, the debate is, given that the Hi8 format retains a relatively small amount of data, is there a benefit in terms of quality if we archive the tapes in uncompressed, or will the quality be just as good if we deliver in Pro Res LT to the archive?
Thanks!

Because while we would prefer Pro Res as our editing codec, the people to whom we will deliver an archival set of the material may insist on uncompressed.
Please -- no more questions about why I'm asking this question.
What I am hoping for here is a brief, to-the-point comparison of the pros and cons in terms of video quality of the two codecs (but something a little more informative than 'filet mignon' and 'hamburger').
I'm aware of the white papers, but I'd like to get the opinion of people with experience and knowledge who don't work for Apple who could boil it down --
Is Pro Res a good codec for archiving material, and how much if anything would be lost if we delivered to the archival house on Pro Res rather than uncompressed?
What argument, if any, can we make to an archival house that is leaning toward uncompressed that Pro Res will work as well for them? At the risk of answering my own question, would we be correct in saying that the image quality would be effectively as good with either codec (given that we're digitizing from Hi-8 tapes) and that delivering in Pro Res would save them a great deal of storage space?
As a reminder, we're talking about 600 hours of Hi-8 footage here. Thanks.

Having some problems with Apple Pro Res 422 HQ and Hard Drives

Hey,
I've been having trouble when digitizing video via Apple Pro Res 422. First off I'm using a macbook pro 2Ghz intel core duo/2GB of Ram and my hard drive is pretty much almost full. I've set my scratch disks to a Lacie 1TB drive via USB 2.0. Second of all during the Apple Pro Res 422 capture process in the middle of capture it says that my Internal Drive is almost full and won't let me continue on with capture. I don't get it because everything in the scratch disks are set to my Lacie Drive.

My Lacie has 1 firewire 400 and 2 firewire 800 ports but my computer is an early macbook pro that only has 1 firewire 400 port and 2 USB ports. So yea it kinda of stinks but could you recommend a eSata Express card?
Message was edited by: Final Cut Pro 4.5

Date gone after pro res 422 log and transfer

Is it normal with AVCHD video that after it is transferred and encoded to Apple Pro res 422 that the date and time of the recording it lost? I now cannot search for video by date recorded in my CatDV8 catalog. With my mini DV tape imports, all of that came over.

Brian --
I'm very much in the same position -- about to start ingesting many hours of AVCHD footage for which I need to retain date & time info for each clip.
It seems the height of absurdity that the browser portion of FCP's Log & Transfer window has a "Date Created" column with that exact info, and yet FCP7 (yes, version SEVEN) apparently won't let you simply transfer that column over and have it be displayed (as well as be a sorting option) in the Browser itself!
If this is some technical limitation of transcoding to ProRes, then ProRes is still Beta software in desperate need of some serious development. And I can't see blaming it on the AVCHD codec, since L&T seems to have no trouble seeing and displaying the Date Created info for each clip.
So the question remains: if Log & Transfer can see it (and since L&T does have several data fields which do show up in their respective Browser columns after import) then why the !@#$%^&* can't something as fundamental and as obviously important as the Date Created info not be transferable as well???
Especially for a documentary, that kind of basic metadata -- and the ability to have your imported clips display in chronological order -- is CRUCIAL.
(I'd send a Feature Request to FCP Feedback, but are they still accepting suggestions for version 3?)
=================
Sarcasm aside, I have found one very kludgy and inelegant way to have that Date Created info automatically included as part of the Log & Transfer process:
In the bottom right portion of the L&T window, you have to create a new, custom "Name Preset", one that includes the ClipDate (and/or any combination of the ClipTime, ClipMonth, ClipDay buttons appropriate to the time span of your project's footage) into, and -- if needed as a sorting display option in the Browser -- at the beginning of, each clip's "Transfer As" name.
It's ugly, it's awkward, it's limited (you can't have the date display as a compact 091123, for example, or have the time be included without seconds, etc.), but it appears to be as good as we've got -- however pathetically inadequate that may be -- for what should be an obvious and automatic option.
(I mean, do the Log & Transfer development team and the Browser & Clip Import development team work different shifts, and just never get the chance to talk to each other? It's the only sane explanation I can come up with.)
John Bertram
Toronto
(Still hoping someone can suggest a workflow which allows AVCHD clips to be ingested into FCP7 without their Date Created info being ridiculously tossed in the trash.)

HDV Capture as Pro Res 422

I have captured my 50i HDV footage using the Pro Res 422 codec, but when I look at the captured files in finder they are marked simply as text files?
Is this normal?
I can open the files up in quicktime, but when I try to import them into a new project I cannot?
Any help

The 7.0.2 update is contained in the ProAppsUpdate 2010-01 which is accessed via Software Updater under the apple menu.
x

Apple Pro Res 422 HQ export - "render at max depth" and "24 bit or 48 bit depth"?

I'm exporting my 90 minute feature for DCP using the Apple Pro Res 422 HQ codec. The film is 1920x1080 and that is what the export will be. We used a variety of cameras (Canon 7D, Sony XR160, GoPro, Blackmagic in HD) for the film.
For the export options:
Do I check "Render at Maximum Depth"?
Which do I choose - 24 bit or 48 bit depth? - one has to be chosen even when "Render at Maximum Depth" is unchecked
When I asked the DCP house, they said that "Render at Maximum Depth doesn't actually do anything when using this codec" and haven't answered the 24 vs. 48 bit question.
This discussion:
https://forums.adobe.com/message/4529886#4529886
says that you "never need to enable the Max Render Quality (MRQ) unless you are exporting in a format/pixel ratio different from your original video."
This discussion:
https://forums.adobe.com/message/5619144#5619144
adds insight into what 24 vs 48 bit depth means, but doesn't answer my specific question
Thanks for your help.

For your reading enjoyment -
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4529886
http://images.apple.com/finalcutpro/docs/Apple_ProRes_White_Paper_October_2012.pdf
A question for you - what is your workflow where you think you might need this? Keep in mind that the majority of cameras only record 8-bit color, and also in a very highly compressed format, so you won't necessarily gain anything by going to 4444, as the source video is of limited quality already.
Basically, if you don't have any high-bit-depth sources in your timeline to preserve the quality of, there may be little or no benefit to enabling "Max Depth".
Thanks
Jeff Pulera
Safe Harbor Computers

Specs for cutting in Pro Res 422 HQ

What sort of system specs do I need to edit in Pro Res 422 HQ with decent non-nightmarish results? I'm getting a FW800 G-Raid drive loaded with a large (80 minute) Quicktime file in HD, Pro Res 422HQ. I'm running a 2.8ghz Quad Intel, with 8gb of memory. I also have a CalDigit S2VR Duo that I can move the footage over to if necessary. Any thoughts would be sincerely appreciated. Thanks

For having just thrown yourself off a bridge, your grammar, spelling, and punctuation are impeccable.
You are correct. A ProRes sequence will not go to HDV. You must place your ProRes sequence into a new HDV sequence, render/conform, and print that to HDV tape.
When you're going out via firewire, you pretty much have to match your sequence settings to your deck settings, DV>DV, HDV>HDV. Hardware capture cards/boxes by AJA & Blackmagic can up/down/cross convert on the fly, but not a direct firewire connection.
So, use your ProRes sequence to create the DVD, and create an HDV sequence to archive it to a tape.
And stop throwing yourself off bridges.

Speed of conversion into Pro Res 422

Has anyone done a test to check the speed of a conversion from HD to Pro Res 422 using compressor?
example 1- a 10 minute clip in HD converted to Pro Res 422 using compressor takes . . .
example 2- a 10 minute clip in HDV conveted to Pro Res 422 using compressor takes . . .
also, does the meta data come across during the recompress (ie the timecode)?

Ok, at least one of them:
I converted a HDV "reference" export of 7 minutes to ProRes 422 HQ and it took about 16 minutes on a G5 Quad, 4GB memory using the second internal drive for source and results.
I did it a couple of ways: using the smart defaults, and then tweaking it a bit to get rid of "jaggies" on all edges. I can't make them go away when viewing the resulting ProRes 422 HQ movie in Quicktime: tried changing QT to deinterlace, HIgh Quality, and all other known variants: no dice. It actually looks like what compressor 2 would do when down converting HDV to SD directly without the Bonzai workaround. I'm sure I'm doing something wrong.
I was at the FCS 2 seminar in San Francisco on Tuesday, and their ProRes stuff looked great, so I don't know if it's because I started with HDV or what, but my HDV video in Quicktimes look MUCH better than my ProRess 422 HQ.
The PR422 file size is and data rate are big enough; 220mb/s data rate and 10.6GB file. Hmmmmmmm.
Anyone got a clue?
Ed

HDV and Pro Res 422

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for