'Traditional Style' Offline HDV Workflow
by George Costacovich
on
May 6, 2005 at 2:04:19 pm
Hi there,
I am preparing to shoot and edit my first project on the Sony HZR Z1 and I've been reading many of the posts on this great forum in the last couple of days. I have already learnt a great deal but am still unclear on how to proceed with the editing process. My background is as an avid broadcast editor and I would very much prefer to offline the project in a traditional manner, i.e first capturing my rushes at low res and then onlining at full HDV res once the picture cut is locked. My main question is this: Will I be able to reliably batch capture my edit ay HDV res from the Z1? I'm fully aware that at the moment neither FCP (until v5 arrives) or Avid currently natively support HDV. Avid are notoriously rubbish at develivering upgrades when they say they're are going to so I imagine their HDV udgrade for Xpress Pro won't arrive for several months and therefore I'm fully prepared to online on FCP5.
My intended workflow would be to work offline in Avid Xpress Pro HD, capturing the dv downconvert directly from the Z1. Then once picture is locked, export an EDL and online in FCP 5 from the original HDV tapes. Is it foolish for me to expect a traditional tape conform to work correctly? I realise at the moment that most people are using third party converters like lumiere hd to capture the HDV stream and then creating offline quicktimes from these. I am concerned however at maintaining timecode for a conform and minimising time spent on file conversions.
I also wondered what exactly happens when you set the Z1 to ouput sd component? Is it applying dv compression and then shooting out of the analog connections? If one was onlining in SD would it make sense to capture uncompressed sd through the component outs?
Would be very grateful if anyone can offer any help or advice on the above!
Re: 'Traditional Style' Offline HDV Workflow by David Roth Weiss on May 8, 2005 at 4:33:07 am
George,
The traditional approach you mentioned would be great, but doesn't work at this point, or so I was told. I went all over at NAB (FCP, Axio, Avid), searching for the tools to make that approach work, and no one seemed to be able to promise a frame accurate recapture. When you find the solution please let me know...
Re: 'Traditional Style' Offline HDV Workflow by Steven L. Gotz on May 8, 2005 at 5:00:52 am
Some people have had good luck with frame accurate recapture. I have not. I am usually a couple of frames off. Meaning that the timecode on the flashbulb is different between the DV and the HDV. Easy enough to repair, but irritating. You would have to mark certain points to make sure that you could line them up again.
Steven
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 / After Effects 6.5 Pro http://www.stevengotz.com Learning Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 http://www.lynda.com Contributing Writer, PeachPit Press, Visual QuickPro Guide, Premiere Pro 1.5
Re: 'Traditional Style' Offline HDV Workflow - Steven by Steven L. Gotz on May 8, 2005 at 8:16:48 pm
OK. I find the point of a flashbulb going off, or a particularly identifiable sound ("I do" works pretty well as does an air horn). Then I just change the timecode of the clips to match the timecode of the original at the same point.
Use the File > Timecode setting. If you know you want to change the timecode of the beginning of the clip, just do it while you have it selected in the project window. If you have a particular point you want to change it to a slightly different number, put it into the source window and set the current point.
Steven
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 / After Effects 6.5 Pro http://www.stevengotz.com Learning Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 http://www.lynda.com Contributing Writer, PeachPit Press, Visual QuickPro Guide, Premiere Pro 1.5
Re: 'Traditional Style' Offline HDV Workflow - Steven by George Costacovich on May 8, 2005 at 9:04:26 pm
Yes indeed! It does seem that all the HDV workarounds are very labour intensive. Does anyone have any other info about whether avid or FCP will properly support an offline/online tape workflow for HDV?
Re: Buzz off by Steven L. Gotz on May 8, 2005 at 11:59:17 pm
David, if I were editing a feature film, I would not be too cheap to buy a few decent sized hard drives. There is absolutely no reason to offline HDV with DV resources since it is essentially just as easy to edit as DV. Just use a NLE that is capable of editing HDV.
I am extremely offended by your statement. If you think that I am doing anything more than trying to help someone understand the technical issues, you are sadly mistaken. Yes, I am extremely offended by your statement.
I like to help people by answering their questions. If you don't like the answer, then offer a better solution. But insulting me is rude and uncalled for. If I were not afraid of being banned and losing my position as a forum leader in my home forum, I would tell you what I really thought of you. Feel free to think the worst.
Steven
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 / After Effects 6.5 Pro http://www.stevengotz.com Learning Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 http://www.lynda.com Contributing Writer, PeachPit Press, Visual QuickPro Guide, Premiere Pro 1.5
You have completely and utterly misread/misinterpreted my post. There was absolutely nothing, zero, nada directed at you, and I'm both surprised and sorry you took it that way. All I can imagine is that this Forum has everyone expecting incoming artillery all the time, even when only doughnuts of wisdom are being traded. All I was pointing out was that this new technology, we're all trying to figure out how to actually use, seems at times like 2 steps forward, and five back.
Just so you know, unless I've missed something, your posts here seem fair and thoughtful, and I have no gripes, no grudges, nor ill will toward you, and no reason to say anything mean or derogatory.
Re: Buzz off by Steven L. Gotz on May 9, 2005 at 5:14:46 am
Perhaps I misunderstood. It seemed to me you were thankful that I was not editing a feature film. Maybe I could do it, or maybe not, and perhaps I am just tired of people bad mouthing HDV when they have not even tried it.
People say a lot of things on this forum when they really don't know what they are talking about.
People want to offline HDV because it takes three times the space of DV and a faster PC. Tough. Buy hard drives and a new PC.
People want to batch capture. Fine, do so. But be aware that there might be problems and it might be better to store your clips on a hard drive until the technology is more mature.
People say there is no way to dsitribute HDV, but they are wrong. Media Center PCs can do it just fine. Sell them a hard drive with their video on it. Don't have a Media Center PC? Buy the AVeL Linkplayer2 and sell it to them at cost. If they want HD, sell it to them. If they have a big screen HDTV, why not make a few bucks accomodating a customer.
And then there are people convinced that a camera that is not yet available is better than one that is available. It will be. When it comes out. So what? I should have waited? And missed three shoots? And paid more as well? To get the next generation?
Of course the newer cameras will be better. They almost always are. But so many people who have the ones available now are bound and determined to try and convince people that it will not be better. And the ones who don't own a HDV camera are certain that it will be the answer to everyones problems. Trust me, it won't be. It is just another tool.
If people here on the forums do not want to play in the brand new sandbox, then don't. Play in the old reliable one. The bleeding edge sometimes draws blood. So many are here to dip their toes in the water and they write things that just are not true. If they can't wait for the next sandbox to be built, relax. It will come. And I will probably get my hands on one for a test before most of them.
When someone says they are grateful I am not editing a film, it sounds to me like they think I don't know what I am doing, and I take offense at that. Yes. The workflow for a film is certainly different than for a wedding video or Susie's birthday party.
I am glad to hear that was not what you intended.
Steven
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 / After Effects 6.5 Pro http://www.stevengotz.com Learning Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 http://www.lynda.com Contributing Writer, PeachPit Press, Visual QuickPro Guide, Premiere Pro 1.5
I work in a rather rigid and structured environment here in L.A. More than ever, people here are concerned about production schedules and production budgets, and there is a standardized work flow that is, more or less, universal. Work is handed off from facility to facility, and, at a minimum, one has to be able to trace back to every frame of video or film. Thats the way its done, and thats the way it works, and workarounds aren't really acceptable.
Meanwhile, we've finally figured out to shoot high definition video on a $5000 camera, and everyone wants to use it. But, suddenly we're back to trying to figure out how make frame accurate edits. Its all rather ironic.
That's all I was saying.
David
Over the last thirty years I have worked through the film era, with work print and edge code; then on to the days of 3/4" offline, with visible timecode window, and eyeball matching back to camera original in the online bay; then on to the days of offline and online with timecode; and then on to fully digital NLE, with fully integrated timecode and a complete studio in a box. And, I do happen to work in Los Angeles, Now I find us discussing the need to regress back to manual syncing. I hate to say it, but I find that to be rather ironic.
Final Cut Pro user here. You know, I have ALWAYS had a few clips off a frame or two on recapture. So if it happens just a little bit, in one or two clips, it wont be the end of the world.
This advice via Larry Jordan: output a reference movie of your offline with a one frame 2-pop and color bars at the beginning. Then, after recapturing online quality, open that little reference movie in the Viewer (Source Monitor). You can then set the playheads in both the Viewer (Source) and Timeline to play at the same time from the beep and see if anything is off.
Also, lets pick up this conversation in a couple of weeks when FCP5 is shipped.
And as an aside: shouldnt we be thinking of a native HDV timeline as "offline" because of the very lossy render pass for FX? I dunno, I'll have to see the render myself, but my gut says noticeably "lossy". And I was under the impression that native HDV was close in file size to DV (between 3.5 to 5 MB/s).. Isnt that right?
[Christopher S. Johnson]"And as an aside: shouldnt we be thinking of a native HDV timeline as "offline" because of the very lossy render pass for FX? I dunno, I'll have to see the render myself, but my gut says noticeably "lossy". "
Christopher,
Could you please elaborate on this? I am not yet a FCP person, so please excuse my ignorance about FCP and rendering. Are you saying that FCP renders FX at some lower rate than whatever is on the timeline? If so why do they do that?
It isnt my impression that David meant to direct anything at you. I think it is rather funny and he is right about cave painting. I use fcp hd but also work with PC. I like the apple for edit and compositing but love the canopus procoder for encoding.
Im going to wait for FCP 5, hopefully many of the problems will be solved with this release. I mean what a pain to work in hdv right now. I mean capture using dvhs. review using mpeg streamclip. Convert to various codecs that take forever, edit in fcp. Sheesh. Imagine if you had to buy a car like that.
I believe however, this is a temporary problem and will be solved shortly.
Thanks George. My sentiments exactly. I spent two full days at NAB searching for a solution, because I desperately want it to work. But, the solution has to work as well, or at least nearly as well as what I use now, otherwise its not a solution at all.
As with any edit system, not just FCP, when you capture lossless to a native timeline, like DV or HDV, and then *render* any color correction, title, dissolve, or filter, then the data gets crunched by the native codec a second time. It goes down a generation. This is true on the highest end Avid. And in the case of MPEG2 codecs, it could be very noticeable. So while a cuts-only show would look perfect, any rendering will crunch it down.
So I was just thinking that bringing the HDV footage into a an HDV timeline may not be the "online environment" the original poster was hoping for. If your on a tight budget, I would try for the DVCPRO HD codec timeline. Its still compressed, and works on cheap drives, but the quality is higher for rendering.
Re: Buzz off by Steven L. Gotz on May 10, 2005 at 12:54:02 am
This is not intended to be a format war kind of thing, because I think Apple uses an intermediate codec too, right?
But the Cineform intermediate codec allows for better FX by using 4:2:2 instead of 4:2:0 - so the loss is not nearly as bad. No more so than when you add effects to DV. I am not a fan of editing the M2T, and until proven otherwise, I will consider Cineform the way to go for PC users. And I hope that Apple uses something as good.
Steven
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 / After Effects 6.5 Pro http://www.stevengotz.com Learning Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5 http://www.lynda.com Contributing Writer, PeachPit Press, Visual QuickPro Guide, Premiere Pro 1.5
Apple had an intermediate codec (called AIC) and still uses it in Final Cut Express and iMovie. Final Cut Pro 5, which is coming out in a month, will have the option of a pure native HDV codec timeline, OR if you install iMovie, the intermediate codec will still be around for use in final Cut Pro 5 if you wish. But using the Panasonic DVCPRO HD codec that is built into FCP also has 8bit 4:2:2 and has the advantage of hardware acceleration from Black Magic and AJA HD cards and can be mastered to a DVCPRO HD tape with a rented deck. It is a user friendly format, and I have heard of it being available on some PC platforms.
Actually I have not personally done a render pass with the DVCPRO HD codec. I hope to in the next couple of months and report back here about artifacting. I am positive it will be much much less than an HDV timeline, but I also understand that 8bit codecs still have banding in the gradients like a blue sky or light falling on a wall.
Does the Cineform codec play out through an HD card?
Re: Offline HDV Workflow by George Costacovich on May 10, 2005 at 2:45:18 pm
I'm not that familiar with FCP but wouldn't it be possible to work in an DVCProHD timeline to allow realtime playback on a modest setup for the duration of your edit and then, once everything is locked, change to a uncompressed HD timeline before rendering a final quicktime. Obviously playback would not then be possible without serious drives but you could chuck your uncompressed QT into After Effects and from that create a high quality SD downconvert version or a version in one of the HDV codecs for print to tape.
Re: Offline HDV Workflow by Matt Smith on May 10, 2005 at 9:05:37 pm
There isn't going to be any reason to "offline" or "online" with HDV. (with fcp5 anyway). You offline to keep the size of your data down, but now with HDV the data is already the same size as DV, if you down-convert the HDV tapes to DV, then do an offline, you haven't gained ANYTHING. The files will be just about the same size. So, you're already editing your footage at it's full resolution. If you need to output to tape then, you can just get a black magic, or kona card and output, but still no online is necessary... I think HDV is going to create a completely new indie film workflow.
1) Shoot in 50i
2) Edit in FCP while doing dialogue cutting and sound design simultaneously in soundtrack pro
3) Finish to SD or HD DVD's for festival screening.
(THEN IF THE FILM IS BOUGHT)
4) convert to 25P and slow to 24P
5) Print Film, or use 3:2 pull down to master to NTSC
It's a very simple and cheap workflow, but with that being said, on a film with a decent budget I would still shoot full HDcam and do a proper offline post with sound work being done in Pro Tools etc...
Re: Offline HDV Workflow by George Costacovich on May 10, 2005 at 9:56:12 pm
Of course! I keep forgetting that the storage requirements for DV and HDV are the same. Even so, it would be good to be able to offline at lower res than DV if you have a large amount of footage. Also it would be good to able to use a traditional avid workflow and then simply online in FCP5. But you are right Matt, this workflow is ideal for indie filmmaking.
Re: Offline HDV Workflow by Matt Smith on May 10, 2005 at 10:32:49 pm
I agree that using the traditional workflow is best, but i think if that is the workflow you're dead set on then HDV isn't exactly the best format. The standard workflow has always relied on real frames existing. And from what i've read and been told real frames don't exist on HDV. There are just key frames and then heavily compressed data about the changes in between.
As far as the storage thing goes... a 500GB firewire drive is $400. That's nothing. It seems to me you would spend more hiring an assistant editor to make sure your offline is logged exactly right etc. And 1 day in an online room can be thousands... so for the price of a day in an online room, you could have Terabytes of space... Like I said in the post before, i think the choice really comes down to the budget of your project. If you have the money to do a proper post with offline, and sound editors etc. then you probably have the money to shoot on a stronger format such as HDCam. If you don't have the money to shoot on HDCam then why waste money on doing things a certain way in post when you don't have to? Save all the money you can on post and use the extra on lighting and production value. Anyway, it's a brand new format and I'm sure there will be many workflow's that people come up with, and they'll all have pro's and con's. Best of luck with it!
I see the workflow you are proposing. Just be careful if you render any filters in the HDV timeline. Watch for artifacts. It might be worth the slight extra compression to a DVCPRO HD timeline if you are doing much color correction or layers and FX. Or if you can afford it, uncompressed.
