Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering

[Irina]

wow you guys are amazing

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Bill Cammack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>   Like Verdi said, you can't use 24p footage directly from the HV20 in
> Final Cut. Here's an AppleTV version of a 24p video from an HV20:
>
> <
> http://blip.tv/file/get/Blipon-BlipOnBlip27Revision3ScamSchoolPopSirenTheDiggReel699.mp4
> >
>
> or
>
> 
>
> The problem is that Final Cut Pro doesn't show you both fields... It
> only shows you one. So video that looks good while you're editing it
> looks like garbage when you output it.
>
> What you have to do is capture the video to FCP using the HDV "easy
> setup". As soon as you capture it, find the video in your capture
> scratch folder and open it using Compressor and make/save a setting
> that does "reverse telecine" and has the frame rate "23.976". Make
> the codec "Apple ProRes".
>
> Once that video gets encoded, import THAT video into FCP and work with
> that.
>
> Here are some Apple Docs that explain the process:
> 
>
> Bill Cammack
> http://billcammack.com
>
> --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com ,
> "Michael Verdi"
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > So here's the deal...
> > The Canon HV20 really does shoot in 24P - it just does it in a weird
> > way. The stuttering you are seeing is partly because that's what 24P
> > looks like compared to 60i and partly because you have to do a reverse
> > telecine to put the progressive frames back in order. Here's my
> > shorthand notes on how to do it:
> >
> > Ok, it seems that FCP (at least v 5.1.4) doesn't support the 24p mode
> > of this camera. There is a way to make it work but it's a pain in the
> > ass and you probably don't want to do it unless you're a little crazy
> > like me. Here's how it goes:
> >
> > I had to make my own "easy setup" in FCP that looks like this:
> >
> > Sequence Preset - take the HDV 1080p24 preset, duplicate it and change
> > the compressor to Apple Intermediate Codec. Helps to give it a snappy
> > name like "AIC 1080p24"
> >
> > Capture Preset - HDV - Apple Intermediate Codec
> >
> > Device Control Preset - HDV Firewire Basic
> >
> > The crappy part (at least I think so - maybe not a problem for you) is
> > that you can't log & capture - it just lets you name your clip and it
> > starts recording. So it's kind of like iMovie here.
> >
> > Then once you've captured your clips (if you stopped and started
> > recording on the tape you must make a new clip), you have to open them
> > in QT Pro and figure out the pulldown cadence, ie, interlaced frame,
> > interlaced frame, progressive frame, progressive frame, progressive
> > frame.
> > There are these possibilities:
> > p-p-i-i-p
> > p-i-i-p-p
> > i-p-p-p-i
> > p-p-p-i-i
> > i-i-p-p-p
> >
> > If you find that the clip is that last one, i-i-p-p-p, then you have
> > to remove those beginning interlaced frames by using the arrow keys to
> > move through those first frames till you hit the first progressive
> > frame, then hit 'o' then "apple x" and then save. Now this clip is
> > p-p-p-i-i.
> >
> > Ok then open up Cinema Tools. and open a clip. The go to the Clip menu
> > and select Reverse Telecine. Here are the settings
> > Capture Mode: F1-F2
> > File: New (smaller)
> > Conform to:
> > 24.0
> > Standard upper/lower (checked)
> > Fields:
> > p-p-i-i-p = AA
> > p-i-i-p-p = BB
> > i-p-p-p-i = BC
> > p-p-p-i-i = CD
> >
> > Style 1 on the drop down.
> > Click Ok to start the process.
> >
> > Then back in FCP import your new 24p clips and stick them on your new
> > AIC 1080p24 sequence!
> >
> > Exporting once you're done editing
> >
> > Now for some reason exporting using quicktime conversion to apple tv
> > or ipod get's all messed up. So instead, export as a QuickTime Movie
> > (it can be a reference movie if you want) and then open that up with
> > QuickTime Pro. Then export for Apple TV and iPod and you will be
> > amazed. BTW, the Apple TV export will be at 1280 X 720!
> >
> >
> > Verdi
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Eric Rochow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > hi all
> > >
> > > not sure what i'm doing wrong all of a sudden. i'm asking if any
> of you have suggested
> > > export - compressor settings for this setup.
> > >
> > > I'm shooting on a Canon HV20, in the '24P' mode ( which isn't
> really 24P )
> > >
> > > editing in FInal cut 5.4 on a 1080 60i timeline
> > >
> > > exporting to Compressor using iPod setting and Apple TV setting
> > >
> > > and I keep getting this weird stutter - frame sync problem.
> > >
> > > you can watch a clip here:
> > >
> > > http://tinyurl.com/6oxo4g
> > >
> > > http://realworldgreen.com/RWG_sprinkler_timer.mp4
> > >
> > > does anyone else shoot on an HV20 in the 24P/film mode and export
> to iTunes via FCP
> > > Compressor?
> > >
> > > thx, eric.
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://graymattergravy.com
> >

Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering

[Brook Hinton]

Actually if you have the canvas at 100% it does show you both fields.

If you have FCP Studio 2 you don't have to use Cinematools to do the
reverse pulldown - compressor's reverse telecine can do it more or
less automagically (there's a how to on Apple's FCP site specific to
the HV20. If you're on an earlier version, or even if you are on FCP6
and just prefer it, try the free JESdeinterlacer, which will reverse
telecine to the codec of your choice while detecting scene breaks for
you (for web work Apple Intermediate Codec isn't a bad choice - and
you don't have prores as an option anyway if you're on FCP5.x)

But... you CAN edit it without reverse telecine at 29.97. It's just
like editing telecine'd film. I don't work with the HV20's footage
this way but lots of folks do. The problem is that when you output to
a non-interlaced format (or for a non-interlaced display) you'll
either get combing (if the footage isn't deinterlaced first) or a
repeated frame every 4 frames (if it is).

One trick is to use either the flicker filter at maximum in FCP to
blend the fields, or blend fields in Compressor (I can't recall if you
do this through frame controls now or through the quicktime filters).
This will sometimes give you double images on the pulldown frames but
at 29.97 it's usually not objectionable, and the motion will be a
little more natural.

Frankly, I don't see much of a motion problem in your clip. Looking at
it frame by frame it looks like you deinterlaced as you do have a
repeating frame for each cadence cycle. Many DVD reissues of old TV
stuff shot on film have this 2:2:2:4 cadence which is why those shots
of Magnum PI running across the beach at Waimanalo look kinda funky if
you are motion sensitive.


Brook




___
Brook Hinton
film/video/audio art
www.brookhinton.com
studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab

Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering

[Brook Hinton]

oops just saw that Bill gave you the scoop on the compressor method,
didn't mean to repeat!

On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Brook Hinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually if you have the canvas at 100% it does show you both fields.
>
> If you have FCP Studio 2 you don't have to use Cinematools to do the
> reverse pulldown - compressor's reverse telecine can do it more or
> less automagically (there's a how to on Apple's FCP site specific to
> the HV20. If you're on an earlier version, or even if you are on FCP6
> and just prefer it, try the free JESdeinterlacer, which will reverse
> telecine to the codec of your choice while detecting scene breaks for
> you (for web work Apple Intermediate Codec isn't a bad choice - and
> you don't have prores as an option anyway if you're on FCP5.x)
>
> But... you CAN edit it without reverse telecine at 29.97. It's just
> like editing telecine'd film. I don't work with the HV20's footage
> this way but lots of folks do. The problem is that when you output to
> a non-interlaced format (or for a non-interlaced display) you'll
> either get combing (if the footage isn't deinterlaced first) or a
> repeated frame every 4 frames (if it is).
>
> One trick is to use either the flicker filter at maximum in FCP to
> blend the fields, or blend fields in Compressor (I can't recall if you
> do this through frame controls now or through the quicktime filters).
> This will sometimes give you double images on the pulldown frames but
> at 29.97 it's usually not objectionable, and the motion will be a
> little more natural.
>
> Frankly, I don't see much of a motion problem in your clip. Looking at
> it frame by frame it looks like you deinterlaced as you do have a
> repeating frame for each cadence cycle. Many DVD reissues of old TV
> stuff shot on film have this 2:2:2:4 cadence which is why those shots
> of Magnum PI running across the beach at Waimanalo look kinda funky if
> you are motion sensitive.
>
>
> Brook
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Brook Hinton
> film/video/audio art
> www.brookhinton.com
> studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
>



-- 
___
Brook Hinton
film/video/audio art
www.brookhinton.com
studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab

Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering

[Rupert]

1) I've only used a PAL HV20, but even with the US version, you don't  
*have* to shoot in Progressive, do you?  It's just an option, isn't  
it? (And one that Canon has failed to implement properly - with no  
pulldown flags)  So surely you can just shoot in the normal 60i mode  
without all this trouble and then add a film effect at the end?

2) I know the PAL version of the HV20 has a 25P option instead of 24P  
and I'm pretty sure that with 25P you don't have to go through this  
ridiculous circus.   I don't see any reason why anyone should care  
whether they're shooting on PAL or NTSC for web use (or even for  
broadcast - you can export any res/format you like) - so perhaps if  
you *really* want to shoot in Progressive mode for whatever reason,  
it's a good idea to buy a European HV20 or HV30 from somewhere like  
Amazon.co.uk or Ebay.

Correct me if I'm wrong about  any of this.  I don't have a deep  
technical knowledge.

Rupert
http://twittervlog.tv


On 22-Jul-08, at 7:43 AM, Eric Rochow wrote:

hey thanks for all the info. what a pain. i'll stick with my XHA1

my Canon HV20, 2 months old, is now for sale.

thx, eric.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering

[Rupert]

ahhh.
bummer.
what are they thinking, making 24P so much hard work for North  
American users?


On 22-Jul-08, at 10:21 AM, Bill Cammack wrote:

You're absolutely right, Rupert... However, in Eric's situation, he
bought the HV20 to be a b-roll camera for his Canon XHA1. The reason
he has to shoot 24p with the HV20 is to match the footage from the XHA1.

Otherwise, he'd be able to skip 24p and shoot 60i and not have to deal
with any extra conversion, time or drive space.

It's one of those pre-production decisions that kind of snowballs or
cascades. Once you decide to shoot your shows in a certain way, you
have to get equipment that matches those particular specs or change
your show so that you can utilize the features that are common to your
new and old equipment.

Bill Cammack
http://billcammack.com

--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 >
 > 1) I've only used a PAL HV20, but even with the US version, you don't
 > *have* to shoot in Progressive, do you? It's just an option, isn't
 > it? (And one that Canon has failed to implement properly - with no
 > pulldown flags) So surely you can just shoot in the normal 60i mode
 > without all this trouble and then add a film effect at the end?
 >
 > 2) I know the PAL version of the HV20 has a 25P option instead of 24P
 > and I'm pretty sure that with 25P you don't have to go through this
 > ridiculous circus. I don't see any reason why anyone should care
 > whether they're shooting on PAL or NTSC for web use (or even for
 > broadcast - you can export any res/format you like) - so perhaps if
 > you *really* want to shoot in Progressive mode for whatever reason,
 > it's a good idea to buy a European HV20 or HV30 from somewhere like
 > Amazon.co.uk or Ebay.
 >
 > Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. I don't have a deep
 > technical knowledge.
 >
 > Rupert
 > http://twittervlog.tv
 >
 >
 > On 22-Jul-08, at 7:43 AM, Eric Rochow wrote:
 >
 > hey thanks for all the info. what a pain. i'll stick with my XHA1
 >
 > my Canon HV20, 2 months old, is now for sale.
 >
 > thx, eric.
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 >
 > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
 >






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering and a 24p rant

[Brook Hinton]

What they're thinking is they want you to buy an XHA1.

The HV20 is one of those classic "oops, we made a strictly non-pro
item a little too good" events (kind of like DV). It was never
intended to become the low-cost hdv equivalent to a bolex for low-end
pros or even a b-roll camera.  But its image quality, sensor, low
light performance, relatively (compared to Sony at least) acceptable
mic preamp (you'd never know it from the horrid onboard mics) and,
once you learn the tricks, manual capability made it the biggest
camcorder-suitable-for-filmmakers bargain in history.

But since it was never intended to be a pro or even high end prosumer
camera, the 24p feature is designed to be used as is - with pulldown
added to fit a 29.97 frame rate, just like film telecine'd to video.
The higher end cameras that shoot 24p have flags built it to the
datastream that, with the right software, make it possible to remove
pulldown on capture, leaving you with a 23.98 file.

Using the HV20 professionally - and 24p is really not a consumer
format - means tweaking and hacking and working around the limitations
of a consumer camera that has enough positive qualities (not the least
of which is price) to make that process worthwhile for many.

And now the 24p rant, so move on if you aren't interested!

24p is also something of a universal format. It can be converted to
29.97 NTSC, to PAL, to film, to higher end digital formats, all
without any motion degradation. In this regard it is somewhat unique -
25p/PAL is close, but while 24p has to be sped up to 25p for one of
these format conversions (to PAL), 24p only has to have a speed change
for its PAL conversion - the others can be handled via pulldown.

30p, on the other hand, cannot be transferred to PAL or to 24p HD
formats without serious motion degradation or softening. Even 60i is
better for these. 30p means you are NTSC or the Web, for good,
forever. It's less hassle, but less flexible.

But Rupert's right. If your just shooting for the web none of this
matters much - except for 3rd party flash transcodes. Different places
(blip, vimeo, youtube, etc) transcode to different frame rates, and
this can cause all kinds of weirdness. A [EMAIL PROTECTED] file on vimeo HD is
going to look really really weird. But a 24p file @24p, which will
look great on vimeo hd, will look really weird in flash on blip
(unless they've changed the way they do flash transcoding). Then
there's the whole interlace artifact nightmare (at least in HD you can
deinterlace for the web without much meaningful resolution loss -
unless of course you're trying to serve hd as a final format.).

I use 24p because of its flexibility, its efficiency for transcoding
(progressive and fewer fps both make for better quality encodes at a
given data rate), and because I like the slower motion signature.
Heck, I like ONE fps in the right context, but never got used to 60i
in any but the most "pure content" situations. Aesthetics is all about
transformation of the real. 60i is much closer to the way our eye sees
motion than slower motion signatures. Hence many of the aesthetic
challenges of interlaced NTSC video.

Brook

_
Brook Hinton
film/video/audio art
www.brookhinton.com
studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab

Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering and a 24p rant

[Rupert]

Wow - thanks, Brook.  Clear and comprehensive.

On 22-Jul-08, at 11:07 AM, Brook Hinton wrote:

What they're thinking is they want you to buy an XHA1.

The HV20 is one of those classic "oops, we made a strictly non-pro
item a little too good" events (kind of like DV). It was never
intended to become the low-cost hdv equivalent to a bolex for low-end
pros or even a b-roll camera. But its image quality, sensor, low
light performance, relatively (compared to Sony at least) acceptable
mic preamp (you'd never know it from the horrid onboard mics) and,
once you learn the tricks, manual capability made it the biggest
camcorder-suitable-for-filmmakers bargain in history.

But since it was never intended to be a pro or even high end prosumer
camera, the 24p feature is designed to be used as is - with pulldown
added to fit a 29.97 frame rate, just like film telecine'd to video.
The higher end cameras that shoot 24p have flags built it to the
datastream that, with the right software, make it possible to remove
pulldown on capture, leaving you with a 23.98 file.

Using the HV20 professionally - and 24p is really not a consumer
format - means tweaking and hacking and working around the limitations
of a consumer camera that has enough positive qualities (not the least
of which is price) to make that process worthwhile for many.

And now the 24p rant, so move on if you aren't interested!

24p is also something of a universal format. It can be converted to
29.97 NTSC, to PAL, to film, to higher end digital formats, all
without any motion degradation. In this regard it is somewhat unique -
25p/PAL is close, but while 24p has to be sped up to 25p for one of
these format conversions (to PAL), 24p only has to have a speed change
for its PAL conversion - the others can be handled via pulldown.

30p, on the other hand, cannot be transferred to PAL or to 24p HD
formats without serious motion degradation or softening. Even 60i is
better for these. 30p means you are NTSC or the Web, for good,
forever. It's less hassle, but less flexible.

But Rupert's right. If your just shooting for the web none of this
matters much - except for 3rd party flash transcodes. Different places
(blip, vimeo, youtube, etc) transcode to different frame rates, and
this can cause all kinds of weirdness. A [EMAIL PROTECTED] file on vimeo HD is
going to look really really weird. But a 24p file @24p, which will
look great on vimeo hd, will look really weird in flash on blip
(unless they've changed the way they do flash transcoding). Then
there's the whole interlace artifact nightmare (at least in HD you can
deinterlace for the web without much meaningful resolution loss -
unless of course you're trying to serve hd as a final format.).

I use 24p because of its flexibility, its efficiency for transcoding
(progressive and fewer fps both make for better quality encodes at a
given data rate), and because I like the slower motion signature.
Heck, I like ONE fps in the right context, but never got used to 60i
in any but the most "pure content" situations. Aesthetics is all about
transformation of the real. 60i is much closer to the way our eye sees
motion than slower motion signatures. Hence many of the aesthetic
challenges of interlaced NTSC video.

Brook

_
Brook Hinton
film/video/audio art
www.brookhinton.com
studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]