EX1 Firewire Question
I have an XDCAM Project in Premiere Pro CS3. The finished edit is about 90 minutes. Last night, I tried to send the sequence back to the EX1 via Firewire. It was going to take a while, so I let it go overnight. First it had to transcode to HDV and then it recorded. When I woke up this morning, it only captured 17 minutes of the sequence and stopped. Is there a FAT32 file size limit going on here, or did it just crap out?
The reason I'm doing this is because I want to bring that sequence back from the EX1 into Clip Browswer and downconvert it to SD. I find the AVI Letterbox Clip Browswer downconversion to be unmatched.
It sure seems like a backward awkward way to get to SD.
[Aaron Cadieux] "I find the AVI Letterbox Clip Browswer downconversion to be unmatched. "
This confuses me. Do you mean you want to go back to DV codec? Why? that's absolutely horrible. I'd use 8 Bit Uncompressed.
It's hard to figure out the goal of your workflow other than SD but what you're doing is really going to mash your file. XDCAM EX to HDV to SD DV. UGH!
I can make a score of other suggestions but can't do more than guess without a real objective explained.
Permiere Pro is cross platform so I can't even discern whether you're on Mac or Windows.
Ok. I am on a PC. I have some XDCAM sequences that I want in letterbox SD at the best possible quality. If you have a better suggestion than my original plan, I'm all ears.
What's your objective with the Standard Def file?
Can Premiere render to an 8 bit uncompressed SD file?
Final Cup Pro does this by creating an 8 bit uncompressed timeline and dropping the HD sequence in it.
One can also do this in Compressor but I'm sure any good compression app on Windows such as Episode or ProCoder would do a nice job of it.
If Premiere can export back to EX MP4 codec you can use ClipBrowser to create a new BPAV and put that back on card and into the EX camera. You could then downconvert out of the SDI port real time assuming you can feed the SDI to something such a DigiBeta deck. Without knowing the purpose of the SD file it's hard to point to a best workflow.
I don't go to SD tape at all anymore. For broadcast delivery I use MPEG-2 Program or Transport Streams. Even if going to another post house it's easier to deliver a file rather than tape and the other post house can process as they see fit. Corporate clients ask for something for web page or DVD (or even file) for presentation.
Generally though SD 8 Bit Uncompressed file can be handled easily through most "pipelines."
DV is about the worst possible SD you could deliver with given its compression.
I agree 100% with Craig.
Treat well your EX-1 footage and will look like shoot in BetacamDigital.
If you end in DV, you better shoot DV.
Wrong Rafael,my DV end product originally shot as HD on the EX1 looks much much better than DV or DVCAM originated material.
But it's not going to look as good as DigiBeta. High quality source is always important and EX to DV can certainly look better than DV to DV BUT if you're delivering SD, I can see no reason to prefer DV to 8 bit Uncompress 4:2:2.
Maybe a client only has a DVCAM deck and you need to hand them a tape but if they have any modern computer and NLE I'd hand them any number of file formats before I'd hand them a DV tape.
Craig, there is no client, I just want to be able to show my films. Projected generally, not by me so the medium has to be either tape (preferable) or DVD. When it can be Blu-Ray that would banish tape.
[Michael Slowe] "I just want to be able to show my films"
Why use DV for that? Better to go straight to DVD with a high quality source. Also a High Quality file on a laptop to a projector can yield better results. DV is simply the worst possible choice unless the only playback option is a DV deck.
"Straight to DVD from a high quality source" is what I do. From an HD timeline exported by reference as a .Mov into BitVice for encoding. But BitVice has to do a downscale since I can only make SD DVD's at present. My point therefore was that DV tape is still better than the MPEG2 of a DVD. If I have to give someone a DVD so I have to since it is not practical to rely on playing everything through a laptop. There is no doubt that shooting at high quality on the EX1 has made a big difference in the end result whether it's DVD or DV tape.
Any thing shoot with my EX-1 looks better than any thing shoot with my PD-170. Even if I compress the EX-1 footage to DV, will look better. Is not just a matter of the format, but of the camera (Lens, CMOS/CCDs, etc).
Your EX-1 footage have 1920x1080= 2.073,600 samples of Y' against 720x486= 349.920 for DigiBeta.
About Chroma, it have 1920x1080/4= 518.400 color samples per frame.
DigiBeta has 720x486/2= 174.960 color samples per frame.
You know what that means?
This camera is a DREAM!!!
But depends on you how you manage what the EX-1 offers you.
If I have to shot EX-1, then transcode to HDV, then go to DV..I really prefer to shot with the PD-170 and treat the picture well. I really don't know how will look the EX-1 footage after so many "aggression".
The same than Craig, I only understand going from Ex-1 to DV if you print to video.
For any other purpose a soon as I have to render, I go to ProRess or 10b Unc.
That footage deserves the best.
PS: I should say: "One year happily away from DV" :-)
Render those at SD letterbox uncompressed. They will then be files. Large files, to be sure, files nonetheless. Uncompressed in intermediate stages is your friend, as long as disk space is along for the ride.
Once you have them as uncompressed SD letterbox files, what do you intend to do with them?
This is facinating. We all work in a FCP world, so for many reasons that we get, we do things our way, and it make sense. He's not working in FCS2, plus he's on a PC. AVI files are huge, and so they better look good. He says in his original post that he finds the Cip Browser downconvert to be unmatched. Maybe it is.
As for DVCAM tape, here's the thing: If you're going to show your playback on a CRT which is interlaced, then trust me, it will look very good. Seriously. Even in high-end shows where top qualiy DLP projectors are pushing the image downstream from a professional switching system, the image will look very good, and there will be none of the possible artifacts and/or 'chunging' that can happen when the image is being sent as a digital file. He may have produced a short (90 minutes he said) and hopes to show it at a film festival or something like that. I'm only sugfgesting that the COW pro's be open to people who turn to you for direction, especially when it sounds unusual or sometimes foriegn to our workflow.
I'm dumbfounded by the issues of HD flatpanels and their finite resolutions constricted by the pixels that struggle to present ratios and formats that do not exaclty match the resolution of the panel. Circles that looked smashed or systems that fill the panel at the cost of the truth of the ratio instead of letterboxing or whatever. It's as though we're being force-feed the flat panel, and for that matter, HD as well. Granted, I love the EX1 and I can vouch for the great quality of the high res after it's been downconverted, but what workload to always be converting everything down in a world where Blu-Ray isn't in everyones home or office.
I watched a DVD (regular old DVD, Standard Def) of a John Mayer concert; Into The Light - fantastic set of the JMT with Pino Palladino, and it looke so good that I had to check out the workflow! Guess what? It was shot on film and converted. It was amazing. The color, the contrast, the saturation, it was all pleasing to the eye. On that note, my tube bass head also sounds fantastic. We're being sold down the digital river folks. Does anyone know what I'm talking about? -s
Keystone Media Productions
[Stephen May] "As for DVCAM tape, here's the thing: If you're going to show your playback on a CRT which is interlaced, then trust me, it will look very good. Seriously."
DVCPro50 or DigiBeta will be better. File from Laptop to screen will be better. DV is just about worse possible choice and it's only use is if the only means of playback is DV deck.
[Stephen May] "I'm dumbfounded by the issues of HD flatpanels and their finite resolutions constricted by the pixels that struggle to present ratios and formats that do not exaclty match the resolution of the panel. Circles that looked smashed or systems that fill the panel at the cost of the truth of the ratio instead of letterboxing or whatever. It's as though we're being force-feed the flat panel, and for that matter, HD as well. Granted, I love the EX1 and I can vouch for the great quality of the high res after it's been downconverted, but what workload to always be converting everything down in a world where Blu-Ray isn't in everyones home or office. "
The issue is NOT the flatpanels it's the people who don't understand video. If you have HDTV then it's very easy to give it an HD source. Looks great (given proper setup). HD to HDTV requires very little work.
Heck I use DVI to HDMI to send from my computer to my HDTV. I can play the EX MOV file and don't need to do any conversion at all. It's what I do for client presentations in my office. Granted it's not an ideal color correction/accuracy but it there's NO REASON to mash your file at all. You can do the same thing with a laptop if you must be portable.
[Stephen May] "I watched a DVD (regular old DVD, Standard Def) of a John Mayer concert; Into The Light - fantastic set of the JMT with Pino Palladino, and it looke so good that I had to check out the workflow! Guess what? It was shot on film and converted."
And I'll bet anything it NEVER went to DV first as a source.
Start with the highest quality and use the most direct route. Avoid more than one lousy compression. Compressing an already compressed file is potential for serious degradation.
I agree - DigiBeta, DVCPro50, both look amazing, way better than DVCAM - no dispute however, both those format should look stunning for the cost of the format! My point, poorly delivered, is simply that standard def on a CRT can look very good, and by and far, many clients do not have an HD sources feeding HDTV. You're right about the JM DVD; of course it didn't go to DVCAM - in fact it was probably converted to HD, but delivered to the public in SD DVD.
If I'm your client, and you play back the final edit from your mac to your HDTV, I'm sure it looks fantastic. Then after you have satisfied your client with the final edit, you must deliver the edit. If (and it would be nice to get a sense of how many times this is the case)your client doesn't have HD playback, two things are next:
1. You must compress the final product to some form of SD.
2. They will see it again, and it won't look as amazing.
What percent (roughly) do you end up delivering in SD versus the clients that you can deliver to in HD?
Keystone Media Productions
[Stephen May] "Then after you have satisfied your client with the final edit, you must deliver the edit. If (and it would be nice to get a sense of how many times this is the case)your client doesn't have HD playback, two things are next:
1. You must compress the final product to some form of SD.
2. They will see it again, and it won't look as amazing. "
And to do that DV does not enter into the picture. If I downrez I'm going to AppleProRes (or 8 bit uncompressed for those who don't have the codec) as my intermediary. One can go straight from HD to SD DVD encode too.
Going from HD 35mbps VBR MPEG-2 Long GOP 4:2:0 to DV 25mbps CBR 4:1:1 to MPEG-2 Long GOP 4:2:0 (Elementary Stream) is really running the source through a meat (or bit) grinder. UGH!
Again the ONLY reason I can think of to go to DV is if one MUST deliver on DV tape. DV is a bad choice for an intermediary as well as final destination.
[Stephen May] "What percent (roughly) do you end up delivering in SD versus the clients that you can deliver to in HD?"
These days I'm doing both for most clients. TV spots are SD delivery. Digital Signage is HD. Even the lowly "demo reel" clients can get 720p on YouTube or Vimeo. You can easily send those to an HDTV and play full screen. YouTube seems to be using H.264 with 2000kbps avg and 4000kbps peak data rate. While all my clients get SD, very few only get SD. Almost all of them are getting some HD version too.
BTW there are various plusses and minuses to Vimeo vs YouTube for HD delivery. Since it's relevant to the discussion and can be FREE other than the encode I'll mention this.
YouTube plays at the frame rate you upload too (big plus). Vimeo converts to 24p and does a poor job of it.
Vimeo allows you to turn off scaling when you play full screen which is good if you're screen is bigger than 720p.
Vimeo has no 10 minute duration limit that YouTube has.
Vimeo can allow the user to download the uploaded file directly (usually a very high quality 720p file at around 5000kbps for me) so it's great for delivering a good compressed version for the client to play directly on their desktop, etc.
I won't claim any of that equals Blu-ray quality but the client doesn't need to buy a player. They get 720p viewing and delivery of their HD projects and can distribute the link or download source to use as they choose. So nearly ALL my clients get HD (even if they primarily ask for SD DVD) and I don't have to buy a burner and author disks. HD distribution is here now and free at least at 720p level.
I show this to ALL my clients. I can play the file to my HDTV and tell them "you can do this right now in your home (if you already have HDTV and Computer)." In fact they can play right from the internet to the HDTV with DVI to HDMI cable out of the computer.
Aaron, how did it go for you? Did you get a solution to your post?
Keystone Media Productions
BTW..The EX1 has a 4GB single file size limit. In HDV mode (SP if you will) You can only record about 17 minute in 4 gigs.
I wish I was good at one thing rather than average at many, but oh well.
[Nick Righton] "BTW..The EX1 has a 4GB single file size limit. In HDV mode (SP if you will) You can only record about 17 minute in 4 gigs."
I've never used the EX-1 in SQ mode, but in HQ (35Mbps) you can record the 16GBs of the SxS card no stop. Guess with a 32GB card you can record 32GBs. I don't know if the .mp4 is chopped in 4GBs files inside the memory.
EX records in 4GB chunks and links the files together in metadata by the .smi files. XDCAM Transfer joins them together when creating .mov.