Should shoot in 60i or PF30?

I have a Canon Vixia HF200 camcorder. I bought it because I've seen some footage shot with it and it was very very good quality. Also CNET.com had picked it as the best budget camcorder.
However, so far, I'm not really satisfied with the quality of my videos -- no processing, just straight out of the camcorder footage. So, I'm looking into a few factors to see how I can improve the quality.
My question here is on frame rate. My camcorder has three settings: 60i, PF30 and PF24 - 60i seems to be the default setting. Also, I'm always shooting in the best quality HD setting.
With that said, what setting should I use for the frame rate so that:
I can use one of the available presets in PrE 8 without having to worry about conversion issues
I also don't want to capture anything that will end up going to waste anyway
With that said, what is my best option for frame rate, considering the fact that the footage will be edited in PrE 8?
Thanks,
Sam

30fps is the NTSC frame rate in PRE. Also PRE outputs only stereo sound. Assuming your PC is powerful enough to work with AVCHD then go for the 30fps stereo setting. If your PC struggles with AVCHD use HDV if available.
Cheers,
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

Similar Messages

60i or PF30

Hi,
I've posted this question before but wasn't 100% clear about the answer. Also after doing some reading I need to provide additional information to pick the correct shooting mode. My camcorder offers me 60i or PF30 shooting modes. Also offer PF24 but don't want the film look yet.
My videos are going to be for web and I'm using PrE 9. I also shoot full HD at highest quality in order to get the best footage.
In order to minimize, conversion, rendering, editing issues, which should I use 60i or PF30?
Thanks,
Sam

Sam, this isn't the same footage you're discussing in your other thread, is it?
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/729950?tstart=0
Please don't post your questions to more than one thread. It makes it very hard to track what we've answered and what we haven't, and you end up repeating a lot of information that was in the other post.
Please stay with one thread until your issue has been resolved. Please don't start new threads midway through. Thank you.

60i vs PF30 "recorded as 60i"

I have a Canon HFG10 that has among its frame rate settings the usual 60i, and then one called PF30 that says it shoots at "30 frames per second progressive" but that has an asterisk that says this is recorded at 60i. I have taken video at both 60i and this PF30, and they both get imported into final cut pro x at a frame rate of 30 (29.97) interlaced. So what's the point of this PF30? By the way, I am shooting primarily for viewing on computers. Uploading to YouTube. Stuff like that. Any help? Thanks!

Thanks, Goldfish. I actually just came across this series of article you provided the link to. Part 8 (http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/atepper/story/psf8217s_missing_workflow_p art_8_clipwrap_to_the_rescue/) seemed to address exactly what I was talking about. Tried it out. Got a trial version of ClipWrap, and that appears to be doing the trick. So I have to jump through some hoops, but I have it figured out. My only remaining questions are,
Is it worth it? In other words, is there really a big different in quality between 30 frames progressive and the 30 interlaced?
Will there be a problem mixing this 30 frames progressive with other cameras that can only shoot interlaced? (I will be creating multicam clips with these cameras)

Should I shoot in HD or SD?

This question comes up from time to time in this and other forums. Clearly, the answer would be to shoot in HD if the final result will be delivered in HD. But what if the final result will be delivered in SD, such as DVD? Does it still make sense to shoot in HD, or will the results not be worth the extra hassle? Here we enter a sort of gray area.
As a general rule, conversion introduces artifacts, whether you're converting from 35mm film to DVD, or from HD to Flash for the web, or even from DV to DVD, the process of converting introduces certain artifacts. This is just a fact of life we can't yet avoid. So the ideal scene is to convert as little as possible. If you shoot in SD for DVD delivery, there is at least the one conversion step that can't be avoided. After all, DVDs will only take MPEG video. But if you shoot in HD for DVD delivery, you need two conversions, one to go from the HD resolution down to the SD resolution, and another to the required MPEG video for DVD. (Whether or not this can be done in a single step is incidental, two conversions are taking place - the resolution change, and the MPEG encoding.)
This brings us to our question. If shooting in HD adds a second conversion step to the process, thus adding more opportunity for artifacts, is it's greater source resolution really worth it? Some say yes, other don't know, I'm not convinced.
So here I suggest a game of sorts, and here are the rules:
1) Same scene shot twice, once in SD, once in HD.
2) Same camera, same lens both times.
3) Both shot in the video norm of 30i. (24p and 30p might also make good tests, but would be separate tests.)
4) Both imported into an appropriate Premiere project. No editing or other manipulation should be done at this point, the idea is to keep things as pristine as possible. A second test after doing some editing would make for another good comparison.
5) Both exported out of Premiere as MPEG2-DVD 30i files which can be used for authoring a normal 30i DVD, uploaded to whatever file sharing site one prefers. I suggest
FlyUpload because you don't have to 'sign up' to use their service, but there are others as well. Files should be named without any indication of which was which, so testers have no preconceived bias.
5a) Those still working in CS3 may also add an hd2sd (script from Dan Issacs) version for comparison, but also as 30i with the same final encoding settings to keep things as level as possible.
6) Once the files are uploaded and links posted, readers in this forum can download the files, burn their own DVDs and watch on their own TVs. I recommend a variety of such tests, DVD on a CRT, DVD on an HD set, DVD played back on a Blu-ray, etc., then come back here and post our observations. Those who take the time to do the work of shooting, processing and uploading should wait a bit for several users to post observations before listing which version was which.
So there it is folks. Anyone care to play?

Dan,
>his love of the "film look"
And you are all the way innocent :)
Back to topic.
I may have misjudged what Bill showed in his link. For my excuse I could say, oh it was web format. The thing is though that I have several times seen the end product bringing something from the source, also when the end product is video for web. The overall look made in the camera (no matter SD or HD) is more important than pixels in most cases, unless of course one wants to use a BIG screen.
Even more back to topic.
I think Jim has a good question (wanted test). That's because the few times I have worked with HDV/AVCHD, I have been surprised seeing how little of the "extra pixels" in HD that makes a difference in the end product.
And, I have done one test myself that showed me pretty clearly that I should shoot in SD instead of HD. I filmed a mobile-phone (cellular, or whatever you call it) and the end product's (flash video) pixel-size was set. Trying to shoot HD and resize to the set pixel-size did NOT turn out well at all. I didn't try Dan/Jim/Jeff's method because deadline and budget didn't allow that.
Just to shoot SD, adjusting zoom/distance on the camera so that cropping to correct size didn't involve resize of the footage gave me the best and quickest results.
Anyone who has dealt with one pixel sized text will probably take my point here. Don't resize, shoot (or screen capture for that sake) at the size the end video is going to be!
Of course I could have zoomed the HD camera so I didn't need resizing (just cropping off everything I didn't need), but then I just don't see the point of having to deal with HDV.
Now, I know that filming displays may not be the "usual" thing to do, but still, that is one example where "biggest" (meaning pixels) not give anything extra, and rather make more problems.
I have seen a lot HDV/AVCHD footage that just don't have the same feel as my PD-150 (PS! I normally use low sharpness in the camera setting. That's one thing better adjusted in post). Then it's just don't matter for me how many pixels I look at.
The end product's quality, meaning what people are looking at, that's what going to be judged. And then again, Jim has a good question, is it always needed to "shoot big".
I would like to see the same test as Jim describes (and I regret I didn't have the time to do it myself last time I had a HDV camera in my hand (which could do both SD and HDV)).
Would it be bad for anybody to see that test coming through?
Dag

Should I shoot RAW or JPG and what ratio should I pick when shooting stills?

I want to take artistic pictures. Does that mean I should shoot RAW and then deal with the settings in Photoshop? I realize I can't for the corporate photo contest because I am not allowed to Photoshop anything for the contest. And pictures at a party that I intend to share or immediately upload, I understand why I would not shoot RAW.
Are there other reasons not to do so?
Many of you know me. I have been shooting video for a while and I am just now starting to shoot stills. These are tough questions for me.
I always assumed I would shoot stills using the maximum frame size possible. However, I have other choices.
When the aspect ratio setting is [4:3]
4608x3456 pixels, 3264x2448 pixels, 2336x1752 pixels
When the aspect ratio setting is [3:2]
4608x3072 pixels, 3264x2176 pixels, 2336x1560 pixels
When the aspect ratio setting is [16:9]
4608x2592 pixels, 3264x1840 pixels, 1920x1080 pixels
When the aspect ratio setting is [1:1 ]
3456x3456 pixels, 2448x2448 pixels, 1744x1744 pixels
Now, to be honest, I can't think of a reason to shoot stills at any size other than the 4:3 based 4608x3456 except to save room on the memory card. But I figured I should probably ask just in case I am missing something. Storage is not an issue as far as I can tell at this time. I bought two 64GB cards and I will be able to use part of my 16GB Smartphone memory card for additional storage should the need arise. Most likely I will have plenty of room until I can copy over to my laptop and then on to an external drive.
For reference: http://www.herviewphotography.com/2012/06/18/raw-vs-jpg-file-formats.html

Steven,
You are correct, that you should not shoot the Holiday Party pics in RAW, as they will only be used to blackmail your boss, and co-workers, so JPEG would be adequate for that (unless you really need to do Photoshop work, to make the images more "compromising... ").
Now, shooting in Camera RAW has several advantages, and really only two disadvantages, that I can think of.
Camera RAW captures everything that the sensor can, but it is in unprocessed form (one of the disadvantages), and then Photoshop with the ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) can "process" your images. I do this, when I have real use for the Images. I have developed a Preset for my Nikon Camera RAW, for each camera, so it's fairly easy to batch process. I always Save_As PSD, since I will very likely do additional work (not useful for the company competition, but CAN be useful for those black-mail pictures, if you have much "work" to do).
I Save my NEF's (Nikon Camera RAW) Images, and then, in a separate folder, my processed PSD's. Those are sort of like duplicate transparencies, but with slightly different data in each. From the first, the NEF's, I could always run them through ACR again, should something happen to my PSD's. The reverse is not true, but at least I would have my PSD's.
For use in Video, I will almost always Open my PSD's, and Scale them, plus possibly do other Image-editing, per my needs. As I shoot at max. resolution (~ 4000 x 3000), I will be Scaling, and then likely Cropping (as most Projects now, are 16:9). If you do any 4:3 Projects, then you are already there, save for the Square Pixel vs Rectangular Pixel issue, but if you Scale the 4:3 material to 640 x 480 Square, it should look just fine in a 4:3 PAR=0.9 Project's Frame.
In camera, I always try to mentally compose the Images into 16:9 horizontal, if I see the potential for Video use. It's like keeping 11 x 17 in the back of my mind, when shooting for potential double-truck magazine use. [Back in film days, I made several Nikon screens, to fit various common uses.]
Though PrPro CS 6 (as of CS 5), with full CUDA/MPE support, can do a great job of Scaling, I still use my PS Actions to batch process entire folders, and usually on Bicubic Sharper, though for some subjects, I choose Bicubic Smoother. This means that I am not "pushing around" a bunch of unused pixels. I Crop each Image, and then Scale it, with the Action, to match the Frame Size of the Project.
Now, back to RAW. That allows you the full capture from the sensor, so you have everything to work with. I shoot in 16-bit, for as much data, as I can get. One step in the process, but usually well after the ARC processing, and Saving_As PSD, will be the conversion to 8-bit Mode, but only after ALL of my processing, as PrPro cannot use 16-bit Bit-Depth, for Video.
For just general shooting (usually "happy-snaps"), with no inteneded high-rez printing, or Video use, I will shoot JPEG, at the highest quality setting (lowest compression), and be done with it.
One disatvantage of Camera RAW is the write time to the card, but with newer cameras, and faster cards, that is less of a problem, than it once was. Still, even high-rez JPEG's, though they do require in-camera processing to JPEG, will allow one to shoot more quickly. [That can be very important with those Holiday Party pics, as who knows what will happen in the next nanosecond?]
To me, Camera RAW is sort of like standing in front of a photograph, with my entire set of cameras. I ask, "Is this really a great shot?" If so, out comes the 4 x 5. If the answer is "maybe," then I grab a Hassleblad. If the answer is "no, but it IS interesting," then the 35mm is my choice. Sort of the same thing, but instead of cameras, it's RAW vs High-rez JPEG.
Just some thoughts.
Hunt
[Edit] PS - what the linked article said.

Canon AVCHD 30p vs. 60i, encoding times?

I just picked up a new Canon HF-M41 video camera and am presented with the dilema of shooting in either 60i or 30p AVCHD. On this camera, the 30p is 'recorded' at 60i but saved as 30p.
I am literally stuck on the frame rate selection screen of the camera, not certain which frame rate I should go with.
I do most of my publishing to YouTube and to DVD. It seems like 30p would be a better format for me to work with natively on the camera, but I'm not sure how Premiere handles 30p from Canon. Since the video has been shot 60i and then wrapped as 30p, has anyone had enough experience with this to tell me if Premiere does a good job of handling this kind of video?
Alternatively, if I stick with 60i that will allow me to burn blu-ray video in the future. I definitely like that idea. But, if I take 60i video into premier, edit it, then encode it as 29.97 progressive for YouTube what kind of extra encoding time would I be looking at? Twice as long as it would take to encode 30p from the camera? What does THIS video look like? Would it look better or about the same as having done the same process with PF30 shot on the camera itself.
I'm sure many of you have already figured out the best frame rate (60i or PF30) on Canon camcorders when it comes to working in Premiere. If you have any advice please let me know.

I don't like the idea of locking myself out of future Blu-ray authoring (or needing a conversion to make it work). If it were me, I'd stick to shooting HD at Blu-ray legal specs. At 1080, that means 24p or 30i only.

60i vs. 30p

I feel like I've been getting some inconsistent info on which to shoot for my specific camera from searches on the web, so I thought someone here would have some better answers. Now some of you will jump on that first sentence and say "Well it depends on what your scene is" and I do somewhat agree but please read on. First of all, I use a Canon HF11 which shoots AVCHD at 60i, 30p, or 24p but records them ALL as 60i. The camera is not really important but the way it records is the issue. Forget about the 24p as I played with a few test clips, removing pulldown was a pain, and the footage looked bad. I've been shooting 30p 99.9% of the time. I read somewhere(posters credentials unknown) if your final output is TV, shoot 60i but if it's web/computer shoot 30p, this is even though it all comes out as 60i. My final output will ,in the somewhat near future,(50 years or less...) be an HDTV/BluRay player. In one place I read that for action scenes(motocross/car racing/etc.) you should shoot 30p, in another place someone said just the opposite, again credentials unknown. This is where I started to question things. In my own thinking, it makes total sense shooting progressive for action scenes. A single frame, even recorded as two interlaced fields, should be pretty "clean". For interlaced, a fast moving object may move enough in that 1/60sec to have that object in the two fields have jagged edges. Ok, so I think that pretty much leaves me with, why not always shoot 30p(recorded as 60i) or am I missing something that 60i has over 30p(60i)?

My personal feeling is that is the quality of motion. All of my stuff is home video. And if I deinterlace or shoot in 30p it looks less like video. I do not want a film-like look; I want a window into that time and place. 60i has that video effect. 30p does not. It does indeed depend on your intent. I wouldn't generalize about "action" or anything else. If you want it to look like a home movie, use 60i.
I've read many complaints on these forums about "problems" in the motion. I think many of these are people who wanted the 60i look (fluid motion) and deinterlaced. Perhaps this is because there is marketing hype that 1080p means "Full HD" and is "best". That's a load of garbage. You either mean 1080p30 or 1080p60, and they are two very different things. And one looks profoundly different than 1080i60.

Shot in 60i on a DVX100B, FCP easy setup?

Hi, I have been using a Panasonic DVX100B (NTSC) in 24PA mode and capturing/editing in FCP, I'm very happy, not too much trouble.
now I have tried to shoot in 60i mode (scene 1), I cannot find an easy setup preset....
1: What's the best capture setting for this?
2: Should I set my sequence to the same as Q1?
3: This footage will be going to my website as either a QT movie or Flash so am I doing the correct thing shooting in 60i?
4: If I do eventually send this to DVD is it still wise to use 60i?
I have tried to duplicate a preset and choose a frame rate of 60, but I'm not 100% this is correct because as soon as I try to log and capture it says it dropped frames, it won't even capture anything.
This will probably be the first of many posts as I'm trying to take in as much info as possible, but it's not sticking... LOL
Thanks
C.

DV/NTSC 29.97. 60i just means 60 interlaced fields...which works out to 30 frames...and all DV runs at 29.97...so...
DV/NTSC 29.97. No advanced pulldown...just the basic setting.
Shane

Shooting video for DVD. Which camera setting?

I'm shooting a video with a HD only camera (Canon XF300). I was wondering what were the best settings for the camera, since I'll be burning a DVD for my client. I'm thinking 1280 X 720 at 30p. Does this make any difference at the end? Should I shoot at 60i instead?
Thanks for the help.

It shouldn't make any noticeable difference what you shoot but it's always best to do a quick test.
Shoot a couple of minutes of similar footage at both settings, capture it, add a few transitions and burn to DVD.
The whole exercise will take well under 30 minutes and will show you exactly what to expect.

Editing in 60i or 30p? for canon Hf 10 and multiple frame rates?

My canon hf 10 shoots at 60i, 30p, and 24p. I would like to incorporate all the features of my camera into my projects, like the 24 frame movie mode for certain clips in my video, shoot at 30p for others, and 60i for fast moving when we are in a car. Now I understand that my camera does 30p and 24p in a wrapper, but if I were to edit a project timeline, which setting would be the correct to use If I wanted to use all the different footage??? Should I just use 60i? and just remove pulldown for 24p footage? Someone said that progressive is better then interlaced for DVD and internet viewing, or should I edit at 30p? 24p is of course not a reasonable option so I left it out. So I am left with either 60i or 30p...
The project will be put on DVD and on the internet. I was told 30p is better then 60i for this, but if my 30p and 24p are just 60i in a wrapper, should I go and EDIT IN THE TIMELINE with 60i since thats the format that its "really" coming from? Then, when its all done, it will be better?

The 60i setting should work best with PRE with the Full HD 1080i preset.
As for performance that can be highly dependant on your system and how it is set up. By default most PC's startup with a whole load of cr*p provided by your supplier - all of which can eat into your performance. Anti-Virus software (especially McAfee) can cripple PRE. Try working through the steps in this article: PrE Hanging, or Crashing - Some Tips. If that doesn't solve your issue then this article lists the things we need to know about your system and clips - Got a Problem? How to Get Started
Cheers,
Neale
Insanity is hereditary, you get it from your children

Shooting in 30p vs. 24P vs 24P advanced? / sequence settings

I'm using a Panasonic DVX 100 camera. (i'm new to it) Sorry if these are naïve questions, but I need help.
Not sure what the difference is if I should shoot in 30p/24p/24p advanced?
If I shot in any of the three, do I use different settings when I import?
Also, how do I set the sequence settings for the best results?
I appreciate your guidance...

Whether you shoot in 30p or 24p depends on what your style of filming. Hands down 24p is going to look the most like modern day cinema, but you need to make sure there is plenty of light, and also watch a bunch of movement. Basically you are looking at the difference between packing 24 frames in a second, or 30 frames in a second. Most of the time, so long as you aren't doing massive pans you will be fine with 24p. For me, I do a bunch of shoulder mounted filming, so I use 30p to make sure I don't get any "slideshow" effects if I decide to slow it down or maybe pan across the horizon. If you film in 24p, you want to capture in 24p. You can do an easy setup for HDV 1080p 24 or 720p 24 depending on what reso you are filming at.
Usually the question comes between 24p and 60i. If you are ever going to have a bunch of movement, or intend on doing slow motion at all, 60i is a much better result. You can always color the film later to get a cinematic effect. Hope this is helpful. (and true..)

1080-60i so why is is 30fps after importing?

The whole interlaced vs progressive thing is confusing. I have a HF100 1080-60i camcorder (also records 720-30p, though not sure it is true 30p or not). When I import into iMovie as a 1080i file, its shows 1080i-30 in the finder and the .MOV clips also show 30fps. Why not 60i? Is iMovie converting the 1080-60i to 1080-30i? I know iMovie can't do 1080p. Would it be better to create a 720-30p iMovie instead? Looking for the smoothest quality output, which is why I shoot in 60i rather than 30p. Thanks.

No, don't record in 30p.
In 30p each "field" (..as Matt has explained; a "field" is half the information that's contained in a single frame..) is more-or-less doubled, or recorded twice. When that reaches iMovie, iMovie plays the video at twice the normal speed! ..because it thinks that there should be two separate or different "fields" in every frame, not the same field twice.
Record at 60i. That's the "traditional" way to record video. That's compatible with iMovie. 30p is NOT compatible with iMovie.
Using a p ("progressive") frame rate is intended to simulate film, and to be a cheap way - at 24p - to shoot video and then have it transferred to film for showing in cinemas.
Avoid anything with p on the end; always shoot at an i frame rate, because that's what iMovie understands.

Shooting in 1080 P with 60P frames per second

I recently bought the Sony HDR CX 700 V .. shoots in 1080 P .. with 24p, 60i up to 60p ...
The Final Cut X phone support guy told me the 60p setting wouldn't work in IMovie or Final Cut Express.. but it would work in Final Cut X ... so I bought it.. First attempt to shoot in 1080P / 60p wouldn't work..
but the 24P and the 60Iwork fine..
Shall i just assume the 60 p won't work in Final Cut X ?
What is my best course of action?
do i continue to shoot in 60 p and use a third party conversion software program.. or should I just shoot in 60i or 24P.. if thats the case.. what is better? .. 60i or 24P?
... and will there be a fix... ? .. curious.. who is responsible for that fix.. is it Sony to make a driver for it? or Apple to upgrade it's Final Cut X ?
any info is greatly appreciated.
thanks

Don't give up! I currently have hundreds of 1080 60p clips at 1920x1080 in Final Cut Pro X and they have ALL been running smoothly. Select a clip and open the "Info" window; in the very top of the window you will see your clip settings. Are you using the raw camera data? If so, try transcoding them to ProRes 422 or ProRes 422 HQ and then importing them into FCP X. My clips have all been transcoded to ProRes 422 (I used ClipWrap, a separate program) and they are working wonderfully.
Try the transcode first before you give up. FCP X will run faster and smoother if you use the transcoded files any way. To do this, click "Import" and in the window check the "create optimized media" box.
Good luck!

How to Import and Edit a 60i video to Final Cut ProX

Hi Final Cut ProX community,
I just recently purchased a Sony HDR - JP650V Camcorder which shoots 24p, 60i and 60p. I've been shooting long video's and the only frames per second I can use is 60i for this specific camcorder.
Recording mode
Recording time
HDR-PJ650E
HDR-PJ650V/ PJ650VE
[60p Quality ]/ [50p Quality ]
2 h 30 min
(2 h 30 min)
2 h 15 min
(2 h 15 min)
[Highest Quality ] 60i /24p
3 h
(3 h)
2 h 40 min
(2 h 40 min)
[High Quality ] 60i/24p
4 h 5 min
(4 h 5 min)
3 h 40 min
(3 h 40 min)
[Standard ] 60i
7 h 15 min
(5 h 30 min)
6 h 30 min
(4 h 55 min)
[Long Time ]60i
12 h 30 min
(10 h 15 min)
11 h 15 min
(9 h 15 min)
I've been trying to shoot in 60i and then import it to Final Cut Pro X and edit it for YouTube but everytime I import it the inspector tells me it's a 1440x1080 | 29.97 fps. I know I have the camera set to [Long Time ]: 1440 1080/60i quality, AVC HD 5M (LP).
How can I get Final Cut ProX to recognize the 60i fps when importing the video vs the 29.97 fps?
Reading some forms and being new to the video world could this be because of the i stands for "interlacing" which is 30 fps x 2, so FCPX only registers 30 (29.97fps).
Could that be the issue?

Brandon,
I also use Sony's HDR-PJ50V camcorder to record seminars at remote locations. These seminars are four days long, with some presentations lasting up to 1.5 hours or more.
Each evening, I back-up the days proceedings to an external hard drive.
I record in the 60i mode as it only takes up half the cameras hard drive space. The photos and videos that I use for my outros are recorded in 60p and appended to the end.
I export video to QT7, process it in Compressor, and send to YouTube. See the excellent link below.
I also drag the QT7 file to Toast for DVD burning.
http://vimeo.com/27929472
Also see this YouTube link, especially the the 60p ending.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEVwOv6d5RA&list=UUpqHQ2t8Q1AQWO64ljNwn_g&index=7

Which format should I have the camera men send me for editing in HD?

Hello All,
Thank you in advance for all help. I have a Mac G4 with dual processor, 2gb mem, FCEHD 3.0, 500GB external hard disk and Canon GL2.
I have been editing fine with this setup for quite some time and am very pleased. I now have a client that will be sending me concert tour footage (3 cameras) from each city. My question is, what will I need to get this done? I would like several recommendations from different editors if possible?
If it will be too costly to do this, what are your recommendations? Thank you again, MilliMac

millimac -
With FCE 3.0 the only formats for direct capture in FCE are either DV or HDV. Your GL2 is only a DV format camera, so if you are going to use your GL2 to capture tapes that your client sends you, they should shoot in DV, not HDV. Further, make sure your client shoots in 480i60 (NTSC interlaced) not 480p30 (progressive). Depending on their camera they may or may not have an option to select progressive mode, but you should make sure to tell them that you need NTSC DV, interlaced. That should be enough information for them.
The GL2 can also shoot/play anamorphic so you could get 16:9 video if your client can shoot DV Anamorphic. (Keep in mind that is simply 16:9 aspect ratio, it is not HD or HDV video). However this can be a tricky area unless the same camera model is used for both the shoot and the FCE capture.
If for some reason they intend to send you HDV material you will either need an HDV camera yourself in order to capture the tapes in FCE, or some alternate means to import the video to your Mac plus convert it to Apple Intermediate Codec before importing it into FCE (vs capturing it in FCE). MPEG Streamclip is a great utility for doing the conversion but it adds extra steps between the tape and being able to edit the video in FCE.
I hope this was helpful.

Should shoot in 60i or PF30?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for