HDV to PRoRes Progressive

I need to make HDV 1080i clips into ProRess 422 Progressive
Should I use: Advanced Convertion > Apple Codecs > ProRes for Interlaced material 8 bits > image control for a progessive output
Or another setting??
Thanks.
b. Can I mix Pogressive, Interlaced, HDV and ProRes in the same timeline and export it via the QT convertion ProRes (for an Import into Compressor for MPEG2).

I've got and used 7toX.  Works great.
The ProRes 422 is already a lot higher resolution than my HDV, so maybe the 'optimization' might be a way to go.
I would convert beforehand with Compressor, but there are 4500 shots.  I'd be converting for a week.
Rather than bring the whole project over at once, I want to load in a scene at a time, get used to FCPX, and be able to back out quickly (and return to FCP7 or Premiere) if I find I have trouble with FCPX.  But after badmouthing it for a year or so I'm startled to find it looks kind of inviting ... they've done an awful lot to it since I first tried it.
I guess I'll bite the bullet and try a few scenes.

Similar Messages

  • HDV to ProRes 422?

    I've got a 90 minute movie to cut.  2/3'rds of the original material was shot with a Sony HDV camera 60i.  The other third is XDCam (HQ), also 60i.
    I'm trying to figure out a protocol.
    The film is aimed at some kind of theatrical distribution, festivals for sure, possibly a network airing.  (It's an engaging subject, and very nicely shot, despite the older format).
    Anybody done this?  And might you have some recommendations?
    Do I 'optimize' on my import?  I notice FCPX optimizes the HDV to ProRes 422 (not HQ), but at 60i.  Is there a way to set a different optimization?
    Should I bother with a proxy when the original was only HDV (now being optimized to ProRes on import)?  The system I have at hand here seems to be fairly robust.
    Or.  Should I edit the HDV original?  And then just output in whatever codec seems appropriate (when I've done some more research)?
    Any suggestions would be most appreciated.
    Ben

    Thank you guys, very helpful.
    And Tom, this is all footage that was captured in FCP7, mostly a long while back, except for the XDCam.  So the HDV was captured from the Sony camera, and the XDCam was the EX3, so straight from the cards (using FCP's capture transfer setup).
    Now I'm playing at switching the whole project over to FCPX.  Mainly because FCPX looks so intriguing.  And.  I had to do an emergency colour grading of an IMAX movie last week, for a test screenig ... working on their HD proxy cut.  I was going to do it in Colour, but I haven't used Colour in six months, and it's a daunting creature to get back into after long breaks.  I've been toying with FCPX for a couple of weeks, just a few minutes here and there, and tried the colour grading setup.  Wow.  In ten minutes I was up to speed.  We did an XML of their film (being cut in FCP7).  An hour later it was in FCPX.  And a few hours later I had a really really nice grade.  It blew me away.  Yesterday we did the 'real' grade in a relatively high-end studio.  Very good people.  Brand new hardware - with lots of nifty buttons and tools.  But I swear the end result doesn't look any different than what we got from FCPX.  In fact.  I'm toying with the idea of actually pulling the 4K into FCPX, and outputting it with MY original grade - just to make a comparison.  Now wouldn't that be intriguing.  And horrible, ultimately, for studios with such a huge capital outlay.  Then again.  It ain't the equipment.  The colourist was a total pleasure to work with, knew his stuff.
    Thank you very much for your help guys.
    Actually, there is still a question in my head.  I'm used to working in 24p.  This film is for theatres, festivals, even a network airing perhaps.  Is a 30 fps master going to work in those venues?  I seem to remember that the new digital projectors don't care what the frame rate is.  Have I got that wrong?  And does it matter whether my master is interlaced or progressive?  I hate the interlaced look - but I'm not sure what this footage is going to look like de-interlaced.
    And.  I'm going to do a lot of colour correcting on this show, and some modes special effects (possibly do those in Motion), but in a 'realist' sort of way; no green screen.  Just trying to make the whole look more cinematic.  But I'm not attached to the 24 fps thing.  Though 30 fps this stuff was SHOT like a film, it already looks cinematic.  But I'd love to somehow ameliorate the inevitable 'video' look of the medium.

  • Capturing in the HDV-Apple ProRes 422 Preset

    I am trying to capture some HDV footage in Final Cut 7 using the HDV-Apple ProRes 422 preset. However, when I go to log and capture after changing the audio/visual settings, the program immediately asks me to enter a file name and then jumps right into a capture now rather than bringing up the usual log and capture screen.
    Has anyone else run into this problem, and if so, have any solutions to fixing it? This is the first time I have used this capture preset, so there may be a step or setting I am accidently skipping.
    Thanks in advance.

    If you are capturing HDV as ProRes, this is normal. This is the only case that this happens like this. Only with a capture card can you get the normal Log and Capture window. Converting one format to another via firewire...typically requires a card. This is a special case.
    http://library.creativecow.net/articles/poisson_chris/hdv-prores.php
    Shane

  • Capturing HDV Into ProRes 422 (LT) Via FireWire

    I read this fine tutorial on Moviola on the technique of Capturing HDV Into ProRes Via FireWire.
    http://moviola.com/hdv_prores
    Since you can choose ProRes 422 (LT) as an option in the Log and Transfer window, I was wondering if there is a way to capture HDV to ProRes 422 (LT) via firewire like in the above mentioned article.
    I tried creating a custom capture setting in the AV Settings, but ProRes 422 (LT) was not available as an option, only ProRes 422 and ProRes 422 (HQ). And those settings cannot be edited or duplicated (grayed out).
    I don’t know why ProRes 422 (LT) is available in the Log and Transfer window but not in the AV Settings window. Maybe it will become available in an update.
    In the meantime, does anyone know a way to get around this? Maybe modifying an FCP file somewhere?
    Thanks,
    ======
    Richard

    HDV is recorded to tape inside of the camera as digital information. Component coming out of the camera is analog. The camera is performing the first conversion D/A, from HDV (digital) to component out (analog).
    Component going into the ioHD is analog. The ioHD then converts via its hardware to Prores (any flavor), which is digital. The ioHD has to convert the analog from the component outs of my camera to digital for use in FCP. FCP only uses digital video.
    You said "The IOHD internally converts to ProRes.." converts to ProRes is the second A/D conversion.
    So the path is D/A/D. I count that as two conversions, camera D/A as one the ioHD A/D as two.
    I don't want to unnecessarily convert from digital to analog to digital which is why I don't use the ioHD to convert from HDV to Prores (any flavor).
    Unfortunately I don't have any digital outs for this camera, neither HDMI or HD SDI.
    I believe capturing and converting HDV to ProRes via firewire in FCP doesn't have this D/A/D conversion which is why I'd like to be able to capture HDV to ProRes LT via firewire in FCP and stay digital all the way, with no analog conversions.
    I use the ioHD for all of my analog to digital conversions. It's a great box from a great company.
    Thanks,
    =====
    Richard

  • HDV to ProRes

    Hello all,
    It might be a simple procedure that I am missing, but I'd appreciate your help. I have HDV footage that I captured in HDV to FCP6. I saw several recommendations to edit in PreRes. How do I convert my footage from HDV to Prores, without capturing it again?

    There are also two other ways. One is better than the other.
    The less-good way is to run all your footage through Compressor to convert it to ProRes. Works great, can take forever, can require ridiculous amounts of storage.
    The better way is to change your timeline compressor to ProRes 422 from HDV. This will let you edit your HDV footage in real time (assuming you're on an even halfway appropriate system), but whenever you export, what comes out will be a ProRes Quicktime instead of an HDV one.

  • Easiest way of changing ProRes interlaced to ProRes progressive

    Hello,
    I have captured HDV ( 1080i ) as ProRes to edit it within Final Cut.
    Now, when video is done, I would like to leave it in ProRes, but would like to have it in progressive mode.
    So I am wondering, what would be the effective way of doing this?

    Export a Quicktime Movie from FCP. Take that file to Compressor. Find a ProRes preset that matches what you'd like, duplicate it, then in the Frame Controls tab in the Inspector, change the Output Fields setting to Progressive.

  • Basic 24" iMac 2.8GHz (Penryn) Captures HDV As ProRes In Real Time.

    It's OK I'm not claiming any records.
    It's just that I have been reading a lot about capturing ProRes from HDV and there are lots of warnings that capture will lag behind real time even with PowerMacs etc.
    I was therefore pleasantly surprised to find that my unmodified iMac captured everything in Real Time even though I had 5 other apps open at the same time.
    People often ask whether an iMac is suitable for FCP. This in no way is a definitive answer but it does suggest the iMac is certainly no slouch!

    Ian R. Brown wrote:
    People often ask whether an iMac is suitable for FCP. This in no way is a definitive answer but it does suggest the iMac is certainly no slouch!
    Fantastic, Ian!!
    Love the photos and I'll wager that pig was awesome. I'm a lifelong carnivore/omnivore and can't imagine a day without bacon.
    Yeah, the iMac. No one here has ever doubted it's processing capabilities at all. Where the iMac lacks is with it's abject lack of expansion beyond it's firewire ports and if one goes into that limitation eyes wide open, then there is no reason at all one can't be productive with an iMac.
    For whatever it's worth, I'm too timid to capture video with any other application save FCP working.
    Zeb

  • HDV or ProRes for exporting to MPEG2??

    I want to master a 90 minute HDV show.
    I've been getting odd little glitches going straight from the HDV timeline (all original clips, dissolves, effects, etc.) exporting out through Compressor to MPEG2.
    This time I want to create a master Quicktime, and export THAT through Compressor to MPEG2.
    Would I be better off with an HDV Quicktime, or a ProRes Quicktime? And if ProRes, which ProRes to get the best end results on the MPEG2?
    All ears,
    Ben

    I rescind my previous comment.
    The very BEST way to get the CLEANEST and SHARPEST MPEG2 is to go straight from the FCP timeline with all the original clips, dissolves, effects etc. I tried a ProRes master QT at 116 gigs; I tried an HDV master QT (at 16 gigs) ... both imported straight into Compressor. The ProRes was the softest, mushy, though the dissolves were the cleanest.
    The very best was the FCP HDV timeline straight to Compressor and out as an MPEG2. And it was by far the cleanest and sharpest.
    Now we wait a week for the next update ... and everything will change. I just found out I can get a hardware created (Pioneer) .m2v file done for $150 ... and according to the replicator on the phone it's as good as the Hollywood versions (he says he'd mastered the same film both from his own Pioneer setup and with the Hollywood setup ... and they were indistinguishable. There, if he's right I could have saved tying up my system for a week doing renders.
    Ben

  • HDV to ProRes - how do I calculate the Gigs?

    I'm going to master out my 90 minute HDV show to ProRes (HQ). What kind of Gigawattage am I looking at. What's a good formula for calculating.
    All ears,
    Ben

    ProRes 1980x1080 (NOT HQ...that is too much) would be 75GB per hour...running at 29.97. I did this with the AJA Date Rate Calculator. It can be found at www.aja.com...or just google it so you don't have to dig and dig for it.
    Shane

  • Black frames in QT after converting from HDV to ProRes 422

    I've been making a movie, shot in HDV 25p. In the timeline, everything plays fine, but when converted to ProRes422 via 'export to Quicktime Movie', I get black (dropped?) frames every now and then, on an irregular basis. Can be every 40 frames or every 90, but they're all over the movie. Worse still: the last 10 seconds of the movie are 'lost' in the QT-version, it comes to a freeze frame while the sound runs on.
    When I make the QT movie with a different setting (HDV-25p instead of ProRes422), the end is allright, but I still keep getting the black frames. Of course these black frames are visible in the movie, it looks like the movement stutters.
    Also tried QT with AIC codec, but to no avail.
    I never experienced this before, although I used this workflow several times.
    I need to make a Bluray disk via Toast. Any suggestions of how to get rid of the black frames?

    Concertpix wrote:
    ...Now render before exporting to QT, I suppose?
    You don't really have to. Exporting is kinda the same as rendering. Only thing is that if you do not render before export, FCP does not 'remember' this rendering.
    If you think you'll needs parts of the render files later, you might render first.
    Others in this forum do deliberately throw away the renders before they export, in order to avoid artifacts. Personally I prefer to see rendered footage before I export. I can see what I am sending to the export-application then. Haven't have any trouble so far.
    So. It's up to you.
    Rienk

  • ProRes vs HDV, actual advantages?

    We have been capturing and editing in HDV. Alot of heavy compositing, motion work, etc. We have been setting the render control to ProRes while working within an HDV timeline.
    I have seen a lot of people who capture ProRes right off the bat, and do all their work in ProRes. There are claims that you get better effect handling and editing efficiency by staying in ProRes.
    Have there actually been any tests out there that prove I should work entirely in ProRes? rather than just render my HDV timeline as ProRes?
    There are so many opinions out there that it is hard to decide what I should do. I have done tests with ProRes vs HDV and I am not noticing drastic differences in working with the two. Yet, when I read on the boards, there are tons of people saying ProRes yields better effects and render times.
    I understand the technical issues as to why ProRes is the better format for post-production (long gop, i-frames, etc etc)....but I'm just not actually seeing much of a difference while working between the two formats!
    Can anybody convince me with some facts as to why I should work in ProRes as opposed to a ProRes rendered HDV timeline?

    I switched totally from HDV to ProRes last year, including even switching to AVCHD cameras (I had a Sony V1U, and now have two Panasonic HMC-150s).
    The advantages for me were huge. When shooting HDV on tape, I almost never had a complete one hour MiniDV tape without at least 1 or 2 dropouts. Shooting AVCHD to SDHC cards, I've completed hundreds of hours of footage and never had a single frame dropped.
    I log and transfer to FCP using Pro Res right from the start. No waiting for 'Conforming HDV'. I can put my footage on a timeline and start editing right away; much faster and smoother throughout the whole process.
    The only disadvantage I can see to ProRes are larger files, but as mentioned above, storage is cheap these days.
    I'm not suggesting you should go as far as switching your entire acquisition format (cameras, etc.), but I would at least try capturing your HDV footage as ProRes for one short project, and see if you notice any differences in speed and/or smoother workflow while editing and rendering, etc.

  • Rendering in ProRes from HDV

    Hello all.
    I've captured HDV into ProRes, and made a simple effect - I've distorted the image size to it would like 3D, in order to add slides (I was shooting a presentation with one camera - so I've shot the speaker, and now I have the slides as images. I've imported the images and would like to create the Apple event style look).
    Rendering only one instance of that effect will take 2 hours ! Does it make sense? I have a Macbook pro, 2.4, 4GB, 256M graphic card. is rendering such a thing supposed to take so long? is there any way to reduce this rendering time?
    Message was edited by: kfirPravda
    Message was edited by: kfirPravda

    I have a Macbook pro, 2.4, 4GB, 256M graphic card< </div>
    That's not much power for what you're trying to do. Another factor is disk access. Do you have an external drive for these huge files? If you're using yoru internal, the read-process-write sequence is taking a huge time hit. If you had to external drives, one for the source media and another for the rendered media, disk access time alone would be cut almost in half.
    Open Activity Monitor and see if you can make any sense out of the CPU and RAM usage graphs. Disk Activity is meaningless to me and I've not found an useful assistance for understanding that graph.
    bogiesan

  • Editing in HDV or transcoding to Prores

    I've been doing some research on editing HDV and have found that FCP can transcode HDV to ProRes as it imports. I understand that there's no log and capture doing it this way and it takes more time on import, but will the benefits of editing in ProRes outweigh these limitations?
    Really what I'm asking is do you edit in HDV or Transcode to ProRes first, and what are the ups and downs of each?

    If you need to go back to HDV tape, stay in HDV (although you can output your ProRes sequence to Compressor, convert to HDV, and bring it back, if you need to). If your finishing process doesn't need HDV, and it'll take the ProRes, capture to ProRes.
    In my experience, editing HDV requires a lot more rendering for timeline changes. ProRes is much nicer as an editing codec.
    Matt

  • Recompress HDV Clips to ProRes

    I have HDV clips (heaps of them, 1080i/50)and am thinking of recompressing to ProRes for output/rendering time-saving.
    If I do this, does it convert the original captured clips from HDV to ProRes?
    Am I right in thinking this would be a time saving method?
    If I Choose only the clips in the Sequence to recompress, how does it manage to recompress sub-clips? Does it do the whole referenced clip?
    Thanks in advance..

    Hi MArk, I think you have your answre . I'd like to add that I have been using the HDV 1080/50i to PRORES422 as part of my workflow in FCS2 now because:
    • it is much easier to work with than HDV in FCP iteself. This is subjective. Most scrubbing and editing in FCP 6 on this OCTO is smoother using the PRORESS sequqnce than leaving it as native HDV there are small overheads setting up and execting GOP editirs I understand.. especially in this case as HDV is MPEG2 LGOP).
    • the CONFORMING to workflow and readiness for some distribution format (e.g. H.264 Multipass segmented transcode ) is demonstrably much faster in COMPRESSOR from APPLE PRORESS than HDV. Note I use QMASTER with VIRTUAL CLUSTERS on this OCTO.
    My workflow is simply either to:
    • ingest the HDV as HDV1080i/50 and THEN use an FCP BATCH export to maek all the footage I want into PRORES422 1440x1080P or 1080i (use HQ if you want) .. or
    • set UP INGESt to encode the HDV on the fly as it ingests the HDV.
    From a quality perspective as any one who knows will tell you you WONT get any iprovement in the HDV 4:2:0 by making it proress.. but for me the WORFLOW is much better .. especially o this DUAL QUADCORe beaty.
    FWIW.. I am today of all days collecting an Panasonic HVX-200 to go to DVCPROHD (720p/24/25 and 1080p/24/25) AWAY finally from HDV. I'm dumping my 16 month old SONY HVR-Z1P for this reason
    that I want to work on PRORESS and have MORE COLOUR info at 422 and now I can really take advantage of bothe apple color.app and my colorista.
    anyway I hope that FCP tip helps..
    w

  • Check settings combinations to achieve good Optical Flow HDV 50i -ProRes422

    Hi Guys
    RE: Motion 3, HDV 50i, standard ProRes 422, optical flow
    I'm trying to decide which combination of settings I should choose in order to ensure the highest possible standard of optical flow-treated video for a video clip which just features live people - no graphics.
    So far my results haven't been as 'smooth' as I would have liked. Below I have detailed my steps taken - if you could recommend which combination of 'lighting', 'field rendering', 'motion blur' or 'frame blending' I should choose I'd appreciate it.
    1. I captured my Canon XHA1 HDV 50i video via HDV - standard Prores 422
    2. I edited in FCP6 with standard Prores 422
    3. I sent a video clip to Motion 3, new project and chose Broadcast HD 1920 x 1080 25 fps field order Top (Upper First)
    4. I treated the video clip with optical flow to slow it down.
    5. Export as standard Apple ProRes 422 movie.
    Prior to exporting which of 'lighting', 'field rendering', 'motion blur' or 'frame blending' would anyone recommend please?
    For reference, in this forum David Bogie kindly stated the difference between the choices. I have included his post below. However I just want to be sure I'm making the correct choices, as I'm a bit confused about the '50i' (interlaced) aspect of my video footage.
    Here is David's post:
    "lighting
    field rendering
    motion blur
    frame blending"
    These are options you need to use when you know why you want to use them.
    If you have lights on in your scene, you want to render them. If you have no lights (and no camera) you do not need to activate lights. why does the switch exist at all? I render without lights for preview purposes.
    Fields are necessary for interlaced formats. You must know if your production format is progressive or interlaced.
    Motion blur enhances the illusion of movement by simulating image smear caused by an open shutter. You get the illusion at the expense of rendering time.
    Frame blending is only necessary if you have video clips in your scene and even then you don't need it unless you've changed the speed of the clip. Sort of. "
    Zak Peric also kindly posted, although I think his post relates more to graphics as opposed to interlaced video footage. Nonethless, here is his post:
    "Just use animation codec + alpha if you have alpha channel if not use animation codec millions of colours. This is the best codec for best quality. Also 4444 is a very good codec to use as it supports alpha channel but gives you smaller file sizes. Use always BEST from the render window, if you want additional motion blur then switch it on in render view. Be advised it takes much longer to render with motion blur on."
    Any tips would be really appreciated.
    Warm regards
    Peter

    Hi Mark
    Thanks for your kind prompt feedback.
    "You say you sent a clip to Motion, but then you say you chose project settings - I don't understand this. If you really "sent' a clip to Motion using Final Cut Pro's "Send to Motion" command, you don't need to set project settings - Motion automatically creates a project with settings that match the FCP sequence. "
    Okay I understand - sorry for any confusion caused - I had already used "Send to Motion" and applied Optical Flow to a clip which I then exported from Motion 3 as a Quicktime file. I was planning to repeat this process afresh, but am interested in which settings you could recommend from 'field rendering', 'motion blur' etc that might be applicable to my Optical Flow-analysed footage prior to exporting it as a Quicktime file.
    As regards exporting my Motion work as a separate Quicktime file, I prefer to do this so as to avoid the waiting for it to render in FCP.
    The already-optical-flow-analysed footage is actually pretty good (the original clips from FCP6 have already been stripped down to short durations to suit Optical Flow), but want to to double-check which of the 'field rendering', 'motion blur' etc combinations I should ideally choose to obtain best results, just in case I'm neglecting something that could otherwise make the quality even better?
    Once I finish this video project I'm on I'll definitely be going for a clean install of SL and FCS3.
    So, based on these choices...
    lighting
    field rendering
    motion blur
    frame blending
    ...I'm thinking that for my optical flow-treated video I won't need lighting, as it's mostly applicable to graphics.
    I don't have any graphics in these optical-flow video clips. It's just moving video footage of people.
    Am not sure about whether to choose Field Rendering (interlaced PAL 50i HDV - ProRes422 video).
    Am not sure whether to choose Motion Blur.
    Am not sure whether to choose Frame Blending.
    Any tips would be really appreciated, and thanks again for your valuable feedback.
    Peter

Maybe you are looking for