FORUMS: list search recent posts

Transcoding AVCHD ver 2.0 .mts files for FCP 7

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro Legacy

<< PREVIOUS   •   FAQ   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Robert Withers
Transcoding AVCHD ver 2.0 .mts files for FCP 7
on May 16, 2014 at 9:19:55 pm

I'm looking at this interesting little Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Digital Camera with a Zeiss 24-200m equiv lens that records in 60p AVCHD. Does anyone have any experience transcoding this type of file and doing basic cutting in FCP 7? Can it look good? How big a hassle is the transcoding?

I understand the long-GOP files can be problematic. I would probably work with them in Premiere, but a friend is still making exceptional films in FCP 7.
Thanks,
Robert

Robert Withers

Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Transcoding AVCHD ver 2.0 .mts files for FCP 7
on May 16, 2014 at 9:43:51 pm

[Robert Withers] " I would probably work with them in Premiere, but a friend is still making exceptional films in FCP 7. "

You think the edit system is what allows people to make great films? It isn't...it's just a tool. Stephen King in front of a typewriter writes just as well as he does in front of the latest version of Word running on a top of the line laptop.

Use Premiere. FCP and AVCHD are...problematic. And if you shoot 1080p60...they won't even work together at all without third party converters. 1080p60 is an unsupported format. If you have premiere...use premiere.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Robert Withers
Re: Transcoding AVCHD ver 2.0 .mts files for FCP 7
on May 17, 2014 at 12:09:39 am
Last Edited By Robert Withers on May 17, 2014 at 6:07:07 pm

Shane, thank you for your thoughts about FCP and AVCHD. I'm trying to learn more about converters. Partly like I said, for a friend. Premiere is good for me, now. (Though I'm also trying to learn more about what kind of files you can send out into the world to put up on screens after using Premiere for all its multi-codec magic.)

Yeah I have some perspective about tools and exceptional films and all kinds of exceptional art.
Though I wouldn't think of Stephen King in that context. :-)

Some artists do get very comfortable with their tools--I used to be really comfortable with celluloid, tape, glue, razor blades and little metal machines with rollers and pins.

Marcel Proust did pretty well with handwritten manuscript and marginal scribbles.

What if you were a carpenter and couldn't use hammer saw nails to build a table anymore but had to use software?

Or a writer and couldn't use your typewriter? Well it's true, the paper and ribbons got really expensive.

So I sympathize with makers who are mostly forced to use digital/computer/tech stuff now cause that's the way of the world, when emulsions and light were enuff.

Me I've been keeping on, through helical scan, HD, AVCHD, FCP and now in Premiere CC. Not everyone loves this digitech drift, but its OK. I wonder where we will be at 200 years into the life of cinema?

(Actually, celluloid still seems like the best archival medium, next to paper.)

Shane, you are such a generous contributor of your knowledge and expertise to all the online editing communities I follow. Your blog is smart and generous too. Thank you!

Robert Withers

Independent/personal/avant-garde cinema, New York City


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]