i am shooting a project on the 5D and we just found out that we need to deliver to dv. is there any reason not to transcode not straight to dv? Sseems like a simple issue, but i've never done such a drastic transcoding and just want a heads up on any issues that might bring on.
As far as any issues in converting, there really shouldn't be any. All the stuff we've gotten from the 5D has been standard quicktime files using H.264, which convert easily in most modern encoding applications. You may want to ask about 16:9 to 4:3....unless they're going to be editing in 16:9 using DV. If they're editing 4:3 you're going to have to lose 17% of your image on each side, or letterbox down into the 4:3 frame.
As for the choice to go down to DV...all I can say is "ick." We've received some footage shot on the 5D by outside production houses and I've been disappointed at how compressed the video is coming out of it. All the footage we've received has been very grainy with a lot of noticeable compression artifacts. Everyone that has seen it has commented on these issues.
Bumping it down further to DV is going to degrade it even more.
Ya I was dissapointed to have deliver that way. It was for the brooklyn film race, where teams create 3 minute movies in 24 hours flat..For some reason they want everything in dv, nothing in HD whatsoever...
Our workflow ended up being transcoding everything to pro res for the edit then exporting to dv at 16:9. I had talked to another editor and he had said that adding transitions/effects would be much better in pro res than if we had gone from h.264 to dv. Do you agree?
Also, I am pretty new to editing 5d markII footage..im just curious, if we could deliver in any format we wanted, does an online edit of the h2.64 'raw' footage occur? Or do people generally output at pro res hq or some equivalent?
Converting to ProRes is pretty common for editing...but in this case I'm not sure you gained anything by going to ProRes, then down to DV for delivery. I'm not sure how it would have had any negative impact on transitions or standard effects. Now if you're doing compositing and layering, certainly going to ProRes for editing makes more sense.
Very few people edit in H.264..mainly because NLE systems generally struggle with deoding it and playing it back....and since it's designed as a delivery format and not a production codec, quality would definitely suffer during rending of effects and compositing.
In terms of delivering in whatever you wanted. It really depends on the medium you're delivering to. If it's broadcast, almost all of them now prefer delivery as MPEG2 or H.264, so you'd be going back to the basic format you acquired in. If it was for a film festival, you're going to have to adhere to their requirements, which I'm sure are probably similar to broadcasters since the goal of most is to keep the file sizes manageable, but the visual quality high, and MPEG2, H.264 and VC-1 are the three codecs that do that very well.