[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
Gena already told you to convert the footage using MPEG Streamclip. I have an Xacti and I edit on a MacBook Pro that has higher specs than your system. I use Final Cut Pro. I have to convert the footage before editing it too. Search the archives. There's an abundance of posts regarding converting MP4 files from Xacti HD cameras. David http://www.youtube.com/davidhowellca --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Jones wrote: > > I've filmed my first blog in HD (1280x720) with my new Xacti cam and > it's all quite good. > But it turns out my editor Video Studio 12 (Pro X2) just can't cope > with editing the HD MP4 files. Trimming the clips are just painfully > slow and jerky, as are previews etc. My old SD 720x576 MPEG2 editing > was flawless, slide the trim bar and it moved instantly frame by > frame, but HD MP4 takes a second or two to respond. It's simply not > usable, so I'm looking for a solution or other editing options. To to > mention it can't output HD MP4 direct as I've mentioned before. > > My system is no slouch I think, I do 3D CAD work on it no problems. > XP, 2GB, Intel E6750 Dual core 2.66GHz, NVidia 3D graphics card. > > I don't want to upgrade my hardware yet again, and I don't want to go > back to SD as that seems a shame now that YouTube supports HD and I > have the camera to do it. > > So anyone got any suggestions? > What software are people using for HD editing?, and preferably how > does it compare in speed to Video Studio? > Am I crazy for wanting to go to 1280x720 HD? > > Thanks > Dave. >
[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
This is an excellent point Michael, I think we all got really spoiled with how easy it is to edit in DV/SD, etc. There are so many HD "flavors" out there right now and you just need a ton of processing power to edit it, if you arn't going to convert it first. It sucks but I think we are still at least a year, maybe 2 away from being able to easlily edit HD video on home PC's. Who knows though Heath http://heathparks.com/blog --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Michael Verdi wrote: > > Here's the big thing with HD video that people forget after all those > years with DV. The DV video codec is great for both shooting and > editing. The only HD video codec that I've seen that works for both > shooting and editing is Panasonic's DVCHD Pro. For everything else you > need to convert the video to an intermediate format. I use Final Cut > Pro and transcode everything to ProRes. I don't know what you'd use on > Windows editors but the concept is the same - transcoding to an > intermediate editing codec. > > - Verdi >
[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
I think you are going to be stuck wity extra steps here...I just got a zi8, now my computer is almost 4 years old now, but at the time I got it, it was screaming, dedicated video card and everything. I wanted to edit video with this machine for a while. And for standard def, it's awesome. But even with Vegas 9, HD is a no go, not in it's native form anyway. And I have searched and searched on Vegas forums, on other forms, etc and for most people they convert the footage to a different format to be able to edit. Now the funny part is, that the included software from Kodak, will edit my HD footage well, but the video editor sucks, at least from my standpoint of wanting to do cuts, overlays's etc But doing basic trims, it's fine... I hear you about having the SD card option, that is why for the longest time most of my video blogs were shot using my Kodak digital still camera and then my Cannon using the movie modes...it was just so much simplier. That's one reason I love the zi8 is that it also shoots in a widescreen VGA mode as well as 720 and 1080 HD... Handbrake might be able to convert you files for you and it's free Heath http://heathparks.com/blog --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Michael Verdi wrote: > > > > Here's the big thing with HD video that people forget after all those > > years with DV. The DV video codec is great for both shooting and > > editing. The only HD video codec that I've seen that works for both > > shooting and editing is Panasonic's DVCHD Pro. For everything else you > > need to convert the video to an intermediate format. I use Final Cut > > Pro and transcode everything to ProRes. I don't know what you'd use on > > Windows editors but the concept is the same - transcoding to an > > intermediate editing codec. > > That's messy, and I want to avoid that if possible. If it's automatic > then that might be ok. > One of the main reasons I got the new cam is for the convenience of SD > card over tape, reducing the steps/time involved in the editing > process, so have to put in extra steps again kinda sucks. > > Is anyone out there using modest hardware to edit 1280x720 H.264 HD directly? > I'm not doing anything fancy making movies here and using all the > crazy filters, I just need to take existing H.264 clips direct form > the cam, trim them, and output H.264, with a minimum of fuss and > effort. > > I'm not going to give up on HD. I sense VS12 can also do it if I tweak > my system enough, so I need to try Sony Vegas as it claims to be > quick, and then there is the more RAM option. > > BTW, MPEG Streamclip works really well, but is painfully sloow... > > Dave. >
[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
Ok...listen... You use MPEG Streamclip to convert your video BEFORE you begin editing it. NOT after. You use MPEG Streamclip to uncompress the MP4 files so that you can edit them. You cant edit MP4 files. MP4 are highly compressed and if you try to edit them, you're going to have problems. You use your editing program to export your video. Ok? Stop trying to edit MP4 files. Stop. Stop. STOP. STOP!! Now...go back and reread what Gena wrote you previously. She told you what to do. You didnt care to listen then and I'm having doubts you're going to listen this time. David http://www.youtube.com/davidhowellca --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Jones wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Rupert wrote: > > > > Before you make any more drastic decisions about buying new hardware, > > I recommend you download the trial version of Sony Vegas and see how > > that copes. > > Ok, I did that (9.0 Platinum version), and forget the editing (which > seems just as slow), it appears it can't even export an MP4 file in > 1280x720. The high quality "YouTube" option is only 480x360. So vegas > is no use to me at all. So I'm still stuck with Ulead Video Studio and > MPEG Streamclip which takes almost an hour to convert my video. > > Any other suggestions? > > Thanks > Dave. >
[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
David J. I get it, you want what you want how you want it. I might have found an option that isn't gonna cost money to try the demo. VoltaicHD http://shedworx.com/voltaichd I haven't used this program so I can't attest to the quality. It states that it can convert to any Mac and PC option so it seems that you can import, light edit and export via .mp4 http://shedworx.com/voltaichd-howto has videos of the product in Mac format but there is a PC version of the software program. The Sanyo Xacti 1000HD and a bunch of the consumer HD camcorders are listed. This is a list of the supported camcorders http://shedworx.com/supported-devices You could try using Virtual Dub http://www.virtualdub.org/ and then download the QT plugin. There is a discussion of it on a VideoHelp forum page. http://www.videohelp.com/forum/archive/mp4-remux-t368139.html There is nothing wrong with Virtual Dub. This could work if you use another bit of software. Which isn't what you want. I'll keep a look out for a .mp4 editing/export program. In the meantime, I think you are going to have to be open to the possibility that you will have to transcode and possibly downsize the videos. Sure more RAM is always good but if the current editing packages don't truly support the newer HD video formats then you have to go in search for workable alternatives. Eventually as more HD camcorders flood the market there will be complaints lodged at the video editing vendors. They will get their act together when one of the vendors figures out how to do it and then market to that population. I come in peace, Gena --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Jones wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Rupert wrote: > > Amused as I am by you telling David H that he's off the mark, just as > > he sounds like he's about to blow... (wait - 3, 2, 1, I think I can > > hear him popping like Krakatoa from 7000 miles away) > > > > He's actually right. MP4 - particularly H264 MP4 - are notoriously > > bad to edit with. They *look* editable, but they grind and crunch and > > take forever to render and slip out of sync and won't be trimmed and > > cause your software to crash. Getting a faster processor won't help > > you. Even people with blazing fast Macs and Final Cut Pro can't cut > > H264. > > > > So you *do* have to transcode them first. It will speed *everything* > > else up. It's one of the reasons I edit all my clips from little > > cameras & phones in iMovie or Vegas. iMovie converts to DV codec as > > it imports - and in my opinion the absolute best thing about Vegas is > > that it doesn't do any conversion - you put the clips in the timeline > > and cut. Which is why I recommended it to you. Although there's > > still a chance that it would have trouble editing big H264 MP4 files > > because H264 is a bugger to edit. > > Weirdly I had a conversation a bit like this - but the other way round > > - with David H on Twitter about 2 years ago when I complained about > > not being able to edit my point & shoot and phone MP4s in Final Cut > > Pro. Lots of other people were complaining about it - but David's FCP > > was editing his MP4s fine at that point. I think that was before he > > got his Xacti - and Xacti files for some reason seem to cause more of > > a problem than most. In fact, I just remembered, one time I did have > > trouble editing Xacti files on Vegas. > > > > Unless you want to try Vegas, you're going to have to transcode the > > clips. It's like taking things off tape - but you don't have to watch > > & log while you do it - you can batch convert a bunch of clips while > > you sleep or do something else. > > > > Honestly, Google it online - in almost every type of editing, there's > > some kind of preparation of clips. It seems like an insane waste of > > time, I know - why can't the editing companies adapt their software so > > we don't have to do this whole extra step, when it seems so close? > > But at the moment, it's necessary. > > > > If your editing software won't output a good enough video file, that's > > another truly unnecessary extra step - and one that's costing you an > > extra level of compression. Vegas (or Premiere) would be able to > > export a good quality MP4 direct from your timeline. Just download > > the trial of Vegas and try it. It's great. > > I already said I *have* tried Vegas (Platinum) as recommended, and for > the life of me I cannot find a way to output MP4 in 1280x720. If it's > there then please point me to where... > I've hardly used it, but I go to the obvious Make Movie output screen > and it only gives me 1440x1080 or higher for Sony AVC which seems like > the only MP4 option. Perhaps I'm missing the obvious? > > If I have to convert first and editing 1280x720 H.264 direct is an > absolute waste of time, then so be it. But really, with Video Studio I > feel so close, I can't help pushing until I get it. Sorry if I seem > overly stubborn, but also pleas
[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
Congratulations! This was a good experience for both of us I think. You don't necessarily have to accept what others are telling you or you can use it as information but keep looking for your own answer. I wouldn't have changed Smart Proxy because I don't quite know what it means. I assure you that I prowled the Ulead website for answers but at the time .mp4 videos were not common. I had issues with JVC's .mod which is .mpeg2 Anyway, glad you found a solution that might help others with similar settings in their editing packages. I still think the size is too honking big for web video but I'll go with the flow. Good to have an engineer in the group. Gena --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Jones wrote: > > Well, it turns out the solution has been under my nose the whole time! > My current editing software Ulead Video Studio Pro X2 *CAN* edit HD > without too many problems at all on my current (not high end) > hardware. > I found an option in the program preferences called "Smart Proxy" > which was caching(?) video if it was over 720x576 SD. All I did was > disable this and HD editing directly on my 1280x720 MP4 files now > works a treat! > And this is still with all my other programs open in the background, I > haven't optimised my system yet, nor put in more RAM. > > Trimming is still not as smooth and instant as SD, but certainly quite > usable now. Previews are seamless. > I'm yet to give it a full run on a blog from start to finish, but > loading and playing with an existing project it now looks good, a big > improvement from before. > > As a bonus I also found that the output render option for HDV 720p > (25fps) is about 10 times quicker than the previous manual 1280x720 > MPEG2 option I was using. So my rendering is now lighting quick as > well. > > I still have the hassle of having to convert the outputted 1280x720 > MPEG2 into my final 1280x720 MP4, but there are plenty of solutions > for that. MPEG StreamClip is faster than before with this different > output encoding too, so that helps. But I'll look into faster programs > to do this. > > So there you have it, YOU CAN edit MP4 files directly on ordinary hardware! > > I can film my blog in HD 1280x720 30fps MP4 on my Xacti HD1010 and > copy the MP4 files directly to my drive and drop straight into the > timeline in VS Pro X2 and trim and edit without any conversion or > other messing around. Then just hit the output option which renders > MPEG2 really quickly, and then I convert to MP4 using whatever > standalone program. > > Dave. >
[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
To render out in mp4 in Vegas you need to go to "file", "render as". Then in the drop down box, select "mainconcept.mp4" and this then should give you an option for an "Ipod" version, if you select one of those and select the custom tab to the right you can then tweak the setings to get the mp4 output you want. Heath http://heathparks.com/blog --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Jones wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Rupert wrote: > > Amused as I am by you telling David H that he's off the mark, just as > > he sounds like he's about to blow... (wait - 3, 2, 1, I think I can > > hear him popping like Krakatoa from 7000 miles away) > > > > He's actually right. MP4 - particularly H264 MP4 - are notoriously > > bad to edit with. They *look* editable, but they grind and crunch and > > take forever to render and slip out of sync and won't be trimmed and > > cause your software to crash. Getting a faster processor won't help > > you. Even people with blazing fast Macs and Final Cut Pro can't cut > > H264. > > > > So you *do* have to transcode them first. It will speed *everything* > > else up. It's one of the reasons I edit all my clips from little > > cameras & phones in iMovie or Vegas. iMovie converts to DV codec as > > it imports - and in my opinion the absolute best thing about Vegas is > > that it doesn't do any conversion - you put the clips in the timeline > > and cut. Which is why I recommended it to you. Although there's > > still a chance that it would have trouble editing big H264 MP4 files > > because H264 is a bugger to edit. > > Weirdly I had a conversation a bit like this - but the other way round > > - with David H on Twitter about 2 years ago when I complained about > > not being able to edit my point & shoot and phone MP4s in Final Cut > > Pro. Lots of other people were complaining about it - but David's FCP > > was editing his MP4s fine at that point. I think that was before he > > got his Xacti - and Xacti files for some reason seem to cause more of > > a problem than most. In fact, I just remembered, one time I did have > > trouble editing Xacti files on Vegas. > > > > Unless you want to try Vegas, you're going to have to transcode the > > clips. It's like taking things off tape - but you don't have to watch > > & log while you do it - you can batch convert a bunch of clips while > > you sleep or do something else. > > > > Honestly, Google it online - in almost every type of editing, there's > > some kind of preparation of clips. It seems like an insane waste of > > time, I know - why can't the editing companies adapt their software so > > we don't have to do this whole extra step, when it seems so close? > > But at the moment, it's necessary. > > > > If your editing software won't output a good enough video file, that's > > another truly unnecessary extra step - and one that's costing you an > > extra level of compression. Vegas (or Premiere) would be able to > > export a good quality MP4 direct from your timeline. Just download > > the trial of Vegas and try it. It's great. > > I already said I *have* tried Vegas (Platinum) as recommended, and for > the life of me I cannot find a way to output MP4 in 1280x720. If it's > there then please point me to where... > I've hardly used it, but I go to the obvious Make Movie output screen > and it only gives me 1440x1080 or higher for Sony AVC which seems like > the only MP4 option. Perhaps I'm missing the obvious? > > If I have to convert first and editing 1280x720 H.264 direct is an > absolute waste of time, then so be it. But really, with Video Studio I > feel so close, I can't help pushing until I get it. Sorry if I seem > overly stubborn, but also please remember that everyone has different > requirements. What might be not usable/not possible for your needs > might be perfectly adequate for my needs. > In fact VS has moments when it lets me trim and preview without any > major problems, but this seems fairly random. So perhaps going from 2G > to 3G RAM will the trick for me. I also have not optimised my machine > for performance. If it can work *sometimes* then why not all the time > on a good/optimised machine/software? > > Some people have mentioned you have to get a more "editable friendly" > MP4 codec, so that gives me further hope that's it's actually > possible. > > I can't believe there is no one out there successfully editing > 1280x720 MP4 directly, anyone? > > I'm tackling this problem in two separate areas: > 1) Basic editing of 1280x720 MP4 video > 2) Direct outputting of 1280x720 MP4 video > > Ideally I want a program that lets me do both with minimal work. > > Thanks. > Dave. >
[videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
I owe you an apology. I thought your were actually attempting to "edit" MP4 files. Not just butt them up against each other and export them. My bad. David --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, David Jones wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:13 AM, John Coffey > wrote: > > > > Well said David! Did DEVO write the song "Blockhead" about this guy? > > LOL! > So I'm a blockhead for asking a reasonable question, and than having > enough nous to not blindly follow other peoples advice, and instead > use the constructive information provided by others who aren't so > blinkered to ultimately find a way to do what I wanted? > > I would have been a blockhead if I blindly followed David's advice to > simply STOP! > I turns out I found a way to reasonably edit HD video directly just > like I wanted, so David was wrong. > Typical of people who shoot from the hip with blanket comments without > considering other peoples needs or requirements. > > Thanks to those who provided constructive advice. > > Regards > Dave. >
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:27 PM, taoofdavid65 wrote: > > > > Gena already told you to convert the footage using MPEG Streamclip. > > I have an Xacti and I edit on a MacBook Pro that has higher specs than your > system. I use Final Cut Pro. I have to convert the footage before editing it > too. > > Search the archives. There's an abundance of posts regarding converting MP4 > files from Xacti HD cameras. Thanks, but that's not my problem, VS12 reads and edits the MP4 file directly from the Xacti with no problems at all. My problem is slow editing, it's a different problem to my previous thread. If you actually mean I should convert my MP4 Xacti files to MPEG2 first before I edit so that it will speed up my editing, then I've tried that and it doesn't really help. The only conversion I need to do at present is after I render my finished project to MEP2 and then convert to MP4. I'll try MPEG Streamclip for this, but there are of course plenty of options for that. Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
It's not always a question of your computer being able to "handle" the HD video (especially if you've bought it in the last 3 years or so). It's more a question of the codec not being designed to be edited. - Verdi
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 4:04 PM, taoofdavid65 wrote: > > Ok...listen... > > You use MPEG Streamclip to convert your video BEFORE you begin editing it. > NOT after. > > You use MPEG Streamclip to uncompress the MP4 files so that you can edit > them. You cant edit MP4 files. MP4 are highly compressed and if you try to > edit them, you're going to have problems. > > You use your editing program to export your video. > > Ok? Stop trying to edit MP4 files. Stop. Stop. STOP. STOP!! > > Now...go back and reread what Gena wrote you previously. She told you what to > do. You didnt care to listen then and I'm having doubts you're going to > listen this time. > > David Sorry David, you are off the mark. My current system can actually *almost* edit the MP4 files direct, I've done 3 blogs so far doing that but it's pretty annoying to trim the clips. What's wrong with wanting a slightly faster speed to make it tolerable? Regardless of what you or others have told me so far, I think it's entirely possible to edit 1280x720 MP4 files direct. Why do I believe this?, well, I've done it, and I'm currently doing it, I can taste it, so I recon I just need a faster codec/program. But you are telling me my only solution is to convert all the files first, edit the blog, render, and then reconvert the files again? No thanks. Yes, I've got slow editing due to using MP4 files direct, but that's only PART of my problem. The other main problem everyone seems to have overlooked is that I need a system that *outputs* MP4 files directly, this was my original request. My current Video Studio X2 doesn't do this, and neither it seems does Sony Vegas I just tried based on someones recommendation. So I HAVE to manually convert to MP4 after editing, that currently takes no less than 1 hour for my 10 minute blog!, and that has nothing at all to do with the slow editing part. I think my needs are fairly simple. I need a program that can reasonably edit 1280x720 MP4 files direct and can also output 1280x720 MP4. That's it, nothing fancy, just trim some clips to length. I'm not trying to make a movie here. I will settle for batch converting the files first, IF I can get a suitable low cost editor program that can output 1280x720 MP4 directly. Thanks Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
Amused as I am by you telling David H that he's off the mark, just as he sounds like he's about to blow... (wait - 3, 2, 1, I think I can hear him popping like Krakatoa from 7000 miles away) He's actually right. MP4 - particularly H264 MP4 - are notoriously bad to edit with. They *look* editable, but they grind and crunch and take forever to render and slip out of sync and won't be trimmed and cause your software to crash. Getting a faster processor won't help you. Even people with blazing fast Macs and Final Cut Pro can't cut H264. So you *do* have to transcode them first. It will speed *everything* else up. It's one of the reasons I edit all my clips from little cameras & phones in iMovie or Vegas. iMovie converts to DV codec as it imports - and in my opinion the absolute best thing about Vegas is that it doesn't do any conversion - you put the clips in the timeline and cut. Which is why I recommended it to you. Although there's still a chance that it would have trouble editing big H264 MP4 files because H264 is a bugger to edit. Weirdly I had a conversation a bit like this - but the other way round - with David H on Twitter about 2 years ago when I complained about not being able to edit my point & shoot and phone MP4s in Final Cut Pro. Lots of other people were complaining about it - but David's FCP was editing his MP4s fine at that point. I think that was before he got his Xacti - and Xacti files for some reason seem to cause more of a problem than most. In fact, I just remembered, one time I did have trouble editing Xacti files on Vegas. Unless you want to try Vegas, you're going to have to transcode the clips. It's like taking things off tape - but you don't have to watch & log while you do it - you can batch convert a bunch of clips while you sleep or do something else. Honestly, Google it online - in almost every type of editing, there's some kind of preparation of clips. It seems like an insane waste of time, I know - why can't the editing companies adapt their software so we don't have to do this whole extra step, when it seems so close? But at the moment, it's necessary. If your editing software won't output a good enough video file, that's another truly unnecessary extra step - and one that's costing you an extra level of compression. Vegas (or Premiere) would be able to export a good quality MP4 direct from your timeline. Just download the trial of Vegas and try it. It's great. Rupert On 8-Nov-09, at 7:43 AM, David Jones wrote: > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 4:04 PM, taoofdavid65 > wrote: > > > > Ok...listen... > > > > You use MPEG Streamclip to convert your video BEFORE you begin > editing it. NOT after. > > > > You use MPEG Streamclip to uncompress the MP4 files so that you > can edit them. You cant edit MP4 files. MP4 are highly compressed > and if you try to edit them, you're going to have problems. > > > > You use your editing program to export your video. > > > > Ok? Stop trying to edit MP4 files. Stop. Stop. STOP. STOP!! > > > > Now...go back and reread what Gena wrote you previously. She told > you what to do. You didnt care to listen then and I'm having doubts > you're going to listen this time. > > > > David > > Sorry David, you are off the mark. > My current system can actually *almost* edit the MP4 files direct, > I've done 3 blogs so far doing that but it's pretty annoying to trim > the clips. What's wrong with wanting a slightly faster speed to make > it tolerable? > Regardless of what you or others have told me so far, I think it's > entirely possible to edit 1280x720 MP4 files direct. Why do I believe > this?, well, I've done it, and I'm currently doing it, I can taste it, > so I recon I just need a faster codec/program. > > But you are telling me my only solution is to convert all the files > first, edit the blog, render, and then reconvert the files again? No > thanks. > > Yes, I've got slow editing due to using MP4 files direct, but that's > only PART of my problem. > > The other main problem everyone seems to have overlooked is that I > need a system that *outputs* MP4 files directly, this was my original > request. My current Video Studio X2 doesn't do this, and neither it > seems does Sony Vegas I just tried based on someones recommendation. > So I HAVE to manually convert to MP4 after editing, that currently > takes no less than 1 hour for my 10 minute blog!, and that has nothing > at all to do with the slow editing part. > > I think my needs are fairly simple. I need a program that can > reasonably edit 1280x720 MP4 files direct and can also output 1280x720 > MP4. That's it, nothing fancy, just trim some clips to length. I'm not > trying to make a movie here. > > I will settle for batch converting the files first, IF I can get a > suitable low cost editor program that can output 1280x720 MP4 > directly. > > Thanks > Dave. > > [Non-text portions of this message have be
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Rupert wrote: > Amused as I am by you telling David H that he's off the mark, just as > he sounds like he's about to blow... (wait - 3, 2, 1, I think I can > hear him popping like Krakatoa from 7000 miles away) > > He's actually right. MP4 - particularly H264 MP4 - are notoriously > bad to edit with. They *look* editable, but they grind and crunch and > take forever to render and slip out of sync and won't be trimmed and > cause your software to crash. Getting a faster processor won't help > you. Even people with blazing fast Macs and Final Cut Pro can't cut > H264. > > So you *do* have to transcode them first. It will speed *everything* > else up. It's one of the reasons I edit all my clips from little > cameras & phones in iMovie or Vegas. iMovie converts to DV codec as > it imports - and in my opinion the absolute best thing about Vegas is > that it doesn't do any conversion - you put the clips in the timeline > and cut. Which is why I recommended it to you. Although there's > still a chance that it would have trouble editing big H264 MP4 files > because H264 is a bugger to edit. > Weirdly I had a conversation a bit like this - but the other way round > - with David H on Twitter about 2 years ago when I complained about > not being able to edit my point & shoot and phone MP4s in Final Cut > Pro. Lots of other people were complaining about it - but David's FCP > was editing his MP4s fine at that point. I think that was before he > got his Xacti - and Xacti files for some reason seem to cause more of > a problem than most. In fact, I just remembered, one time I did have > trouble editing Xacti files on Vegas. > > Unless you want to try Vegas, you're going to have to transcode the > clips. It's like taking things off tape - but you don't have to watch > & log while you do it - you can batch convert a bunch of clips while > you sleep or do something else. > > Honestly, Google it online - in almost every type of editing, there's > some kind of preparation of clips. It seems like an insane waste of > time, I know - why can't the editing companies adapt their software so > we don't have to do this whole extra step, when it seems so close? > But at the moment, it's necessary. > > If your editing software won't output a good enough video file, that's > another truly unnecessary extra step - and one that's costing you an > extra level of compression. Vegas (or Premiere) would be able to > export a good quality MP4 direct from your timeline. Just download > the trial of Vegas and try it. It's great. I already said I *have* tried Vegas (Platinum) as recommended, and for the life of me I cannot find a way to output MP4 in 1280x720. If it's there then please point me to where... I've hardly used it, but I go to the obvious Make Movie output screen and it only gives me 1440x1080 or higher for Sony AVC which seems like the only MP4 option. Perhaps I'm missing the obvious? If I have to convert first and editing 1280x720 H.264 direct is an absolute waste of time, then so be it. But really, with Video Studio I feel so close, I can't help pushing until I get it. Sorry if I seem overly stubborn, but also please remember that everyone has different requirements. What might be not usable/not possible for your needs might be perfectly adequate for my needs. In fact VS has moments when it lets me trim and preview without any major problems, but this seems fairly random. So perhaps going from 2G to 3G RAM will the trick for me. I also have not optimised my machine for performance. If it can work *sometimes* then why not all the time on a good/optimised machine/software? Some people have mentioned you have to get a more "editable friendly" MP4 codec, so that gives me further hope that's it's actually possible. I can't believe there is no one out there successfully editing 1280x720 MP4 directly, anyone? I'm tackling this problem in two separate areas: 1) Basic editing of 1280x720 MP4 video 2) Direct outputting of 1280x720 MP4 video Ideally I want a program that lets me do both with minimal work. Thanks. Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
> Honestly, Google it online - in almost every type of editing, there's > some kind of preparation of clips. It seems like an insane waste of > time, I know - why can't the editing companies adapt their software so > we don't have to do this whole extra step, when it seems so close? > But at the moment, it's necessary. This is why video editors are in such demand. I know the RED camera demands a very specific "process" to prepare the clips to be edited and then exported. If you know this process, then you'll have editing work for the next 5 years. As others on this thread have expressed, it feels like it should just work. Import, edit, done. But many of us have struggled with various workflows to make it simple. Unfortunately, it takes time. It sounds like you have a good handle on the technology so please research and test. You could very well find a solution that you can share. Maybe Apple will make a camera that records in a format that FCP can edit. Vertical monopolies! Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com http://twitter.com/jaydedman 917 371 6790
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:59 AM, compumavengal wrote: > > David J. I get it, you want what you want how you want it. I might have found > an option that isn't gonna cost money to try the demo. > > VoltaicHD http://shedworx.com/voltaichd > > I haven't used this program so I can't attest to the quality. It states that > it can convert to any Mac and PC option so it seems that you can import, > light edit and export via .mp4 > > http://shedworx.com/voltaichd-howto has videos of the product in Mac format > but there is a PC version of the software program. > > The Sanyo Xacti 1000HD and a bunch of the consumer HD camcorders are listed. > This is a list of the supported camcorders > http://shedworx.com/supported-devices That looked promising, but I just tried VoltaicHD and it couldn't even open my Xacti MP4 files - very strange... > You could try using Virtual Dub http://www.virtualdub.org/ and then download > the QT plugin. > > There is a discussion of it on a VideoHelp forum page. > http://www.videohelp.com/forum/archive/mp4-remux-t368139.html I've been looking at Virtual Dub, but it doesn't look like it does any actual project editing > There is nothing wrong with Virtual Dub. This could work if you use another > bit of software. Which isn't what you want. Not really, I'm used to having the one package do everything in the SD realm. At present I can edit my Xacti HD MP4's direct with Video Studio X2, but there is of course the slowness issue, but it's do-able, three blogs so far prove that it's almost workable... And VS X2 can also export MP4's direct, but unfortunately not 1280x720 resolution. So it's almost the ideal package. Looks like the (newer?) VideoStudio Express 2010 supports HD, I'll have to give that a try: http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite/us/en/Product/1175263344580#tabview=tab1 > I'll keep a look out for a .mp4 editing/export program. In the meantime, I > think you are going to have to be open to the possibility that you will have > to transcode and possibly downsize the videos. I am, once the single program holy grail avenue has been exhausted! Thanks Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
I use VoltaicHD on mac for my HD videos, as the camera stores them as .mts files so I need to convert before editing. (& I couldn't get mpeg streamclip to do this) works well. though yes, it takes time & makes large files but they convert down afterwards to smaller files. which is sometimes why I want to just do sd with nokia n95 as it's much more convenient/quicker to upload. 2009/11/9 David Jones > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:59 AM, compumavengal > > wrote: > > > > David J. I get it, you want what you want how you want it. I might have > found an option that isn't gonna cost money to try the demo. > > > > VoltaicHD http://shedworx.com/voltaichd > > > > I haven't used this program so I can't attest to the quality. It states > that it can convert to any Mac and PC option so it seems that you can > import, light edit and export via .mp4 > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
Well, it turns out the solution has been under my nose the whole time! My current editing software Ulead Video Studio Pro X2 *CAN* edit HD without too many problems at all on my current (not high end) hardware. I found an option in the program preferences called "Smart Proxy" which was caching(?) video if it was over 720x576 SD. All I did was disable this and HD editing directly on my 1280x720 MP4 files now works a treat! And this is still with all my other programs open in the background, I haven't optimised my system yet, nor put in more RAM. Trimming is still not as smooth and instant as SD, but certainly quite usable now. Previews are seamless. I'm yet to give it a full run on a blog from start to finish, but loading and playing with an existing project it now looks good, a big improvement from before. As a bonus I also found that the output render option for HDV 720p (25fps) is about 10 times quicker than the previous manual 1280x720 MPEG2 option I was using. So my rendering is now lighting quick as well. I still have the hassle of having to convert the outputted 1280x720 MPEG2 into my final 1280x720 MP4, but there are plenty of solutions for that. MPEG StreamClip is faster than before with this different output encoding too, so that helps. But I'll look into faster programs to do this. So there you have it, YOU CAN edit MP4 files directly on ordinary hardware! I can film my blog in HD 1280x720 30fps MP4 on my Xacti HD1010 and copy the MP4 files directly to my drive and drop straight into the timeline in VS Pro X2 and trim and edit without any conversion or other messing around. Then just hit the output option which renders MPEG2 really quickly, and then I convert to MP4 using whatever standalone program. Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
Marvellous! Congrats. Glad you didn't listen to me and kept on trying :) I know only too well how offputting unnecessary extra steps are - it's one of the things that pushed me to start experimenting with doing all the shooting, cutting & posting in my phone. Something that Nokia has killed in its new phone, just as it becomes possible on the bloody iPhone. R On 9-Nov-09, at 11:38 AM, David Jones wrote: > Well, it turns out the solution has been under my nose the whole time! > My current editing software Ulead Video Studio Pro X2 *CAN* edit HD > without too many problems at all on my current (not high end) > hardware. > I found an option in the program preferences called "Smart Proxy" > which was caching(?) video if it was over 720x576 SD. All I did was > disable this and HD editing directly on my 1280x720 MP4 files now > works a treat! > And this is still with all my other programs open in the background, I > haven't optimised my system yet, nor put in more RAM. > > Trimming is still not as smooth and instant as SD, but certainly quite > usable now. Previews are seamless. > I'm yet to give it a full run on a blog from start to finish, but > loading and playing with an existing project it now looks good, a big > improvement from before. > > As a bonus I also found that the output render option for HDV 720p > (25fps) is about 10 times quicker than the previous manual 1280x720 > MPEG2 option I was using. So my rendering is now lighting quick as > well. > > I still have the hassle of having to convert the outputted 1280x720 > MPEG2 into my final 1280x720 MP4, but there are plenty of solutions > for that. MPEG StreamClip is faster than before with this different > output encoding too, so that helps. But I'll look into faster programs > to do this. > > So there you have it, YOU CAN edit MP4 files directly on ordinary > hardware! > > I can film my blog in HD 1280x720 30fps MP4 on my Xacti HD1010 and > copy the MP4 files directly to my drive and drop straight into the > timeline in VS Pro X2 and trim and edit without any conversion or > other messing around. Then just hit the output option which renders > MPEG2 really quickly, and then I convert to MP4 using whatever > standalone program. > > Dave. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
YOU CAN edit MP4 files directly on ordinary hardware! > I can film my blog in HD 1280x720 30fps MP4 on my Xacti HD1010 and > copy the MP4 files directly to my drive and drop straight into the > timeline in VS Pro X2 and trim and edit without any conversion or > other messing around. Then just hit the output option which renders > MPEG2 really quickly, and then I convert to MP4 using whatever > standalone program. congrats on finding that solution. I wonder if this trick extends to other editing programs. Ive never seen "smart proxy" on FCP. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://jaydedman.com http://twitter.com/jaydedman 917 371 6790
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:57 AM, compumavengal wrote: > > Congratulations! This was a good experience for both of us I think. You don't > necessarily have to accept what others are telling you or you can use it as > information but keep looking for your own answer. > > I wouldn't have changed Smart Proxy because I don't quite know what it means. > I assure you that I prowled the Ulead website for answers but at the time > .mp4 videos were not common. I had issues with JVC's .mod which is .mpeg2 > > Anyway, glad you found a solution that might help others with similar > settings in their editing packages. I still think the size is too honking big > for web video but I'll go with the flow. I agree, it is too big, that's why I also render a 480x270 iTunes video podcast version as well. The 1280x720 only goes to YouTube, and they host it all and take care of the rendering to different resolutions to suit peoples bandwidths, and the embedded player takes care of it all for you. But it's good to know your video is forever more captured in HD for those that might want to see it that way. This is why YouTube is now recommending uploading in 1280x720 if possible. Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
Well said David! Did DEVO write the song "Blockhead" about this guy? --- On Sun, 11/8/09, taoofdavid65 wrote: From: taoofdavid65 Subject: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 12:04 AM Ok...listen. .. You use MPEG Streamclip to convert your video BEFORE you begin editing it. NOT after. You use MPEG Streamclip to uncompress the MP4 files so that you can edit them. You cant edit MP4 files. MP4 are highly compressed and if you try to edit them, you're going to have problems. You use your editing program to export your video. Ok? Stop trying to edit MP4 files. Stop. Stop. STOP. STOP!! Now...go back and reread what Gena wrote you previously. She told you what to do. You didnt care to listen then and I'm having doubts you're going to listen this time. David http://www.youtube. com/davidhowellc a --- In videoblogging@ yahoogroups. com, David Jones wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Rupert wrote: > > > > Before you make any more drastic decisions about buying new hardware, > > I recommend you download the trial version of Sony Vegas and see how > > that copes. > > Ok, I did that (9.0 Platinum version), and forget the editing (which > seems just as slow), it appears it can't even export an MP4 file in > 1280x720. The high quality "YouTube" option is only 480x360. So vegas > is no use to me at all. So I'm still stuck with Ulead Video Studio and > MPEG Streamclip which takes almost an hour to convert my video. > > Any other suggestions? > > Thanks > Dave. > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:13 AM, John Coffey wrote: > > Well said David! Did DEVO write the song "Blockhead" about this guy? LOL! So I'm a blockhead for asking a reasonable question, and than having enough nous to not blindly follow other peoples advice, and instead use the constructive information provided by others who aren't so blinkered to ultimately find a way to do what I wanted? I would have been a blockhead if I blindly followed David's advice to simply STOP! I turns out I found a way to reasonably edit HD video directly just like I wanted, so David was wrong. Typical of people who shoot from the hip with blanket comments without considering other peoples needs or requirements. Thanks to those who provided constructive advice. Regards Dave.
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
From what I know of RED workflow, you work on smaller proxy files, and then with the final rendering, the hi-res versions are used. This makes editing *much* faster, as we've just learned... Here's some related info on FCP and proxy editing: http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/8/1057975 Pete Jay dedman wrote: > YOU CAN edit MP4 files directly on ordinary hardware! > >> I can film my blog in HD 1280x720 30fps MP4 on my Xacti HD1010 and >> copy the MP4 files directly to my drive and drop straight into the >> timeline in VS Pro X2 and trim and edit without any conversion or >> other messing around. Then just hit the output option which renders >> MPEG2 really quickly, and then I convert to MP4 using whatever >> standalone program. >> > > congrats on finding that solution. I wonder if this trick extends to > other editing programs. Ive never seen "smart proxy" on FCP. > > Jay > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Slow HD editing
This is the way we used to work on AVID. Then we had a blissful 10 year interim period with FCP SD editing where you got to cut the actual clips at original resolution, even if you were doing an online afterwards. Guess it'll take a while again before the processing power catches up with the raw hi-res video files generated by top-end cameras. Then just as we all start cutting those files at original resolution in real time, everything will switch to 3D IMAX :) On 12-Nov-09, at 8:20 PM, Pete Prodoehl wrote: > > From what I know of RED workflow, you work on smaller proxy files, and > then with the final rendering, the hi-res versions are used. This > makes > editing *much* faster, as we've just learned... > > Here's some related info on FCP and proxy editing: > > http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/8/1057975 > > Pete > > Jay dedman wrote: > > YOU CAN edit MP4 files directly on ordinary hardware! > > > >> I can film my blog in HD 1280x720 30fps MP4 on my Xacti HD1010 and > >> copy the MP4 files directly to my drive and drop straight into the > >> timeline in VS Pro X2 and trim and edit without any conversion or > >> other messing around. Then just hit the output option which renders > >> MPEG2 really quickly, and then I convert to MP4 using whatever > >> standalone program. > >> > > > > congrats on finding that solution. I wonder if this trick extends to > > other editing programs. Ive never seen "smart proxy" on FCP. > > > > Jay > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: videoblogging-dig...@yahoogroups.com videoblogging-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: videoblogging-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
