AVCHD in 4.5

[shueardm]

Awesome that EDIUS V4.5 is getting native AVCHD support- but will it be a wise thing to do? We've been taught not to edit native HDV, to use the Canopus HQ codec.
AVCHD is even more compressed than HDV, so is it fair to say that the best thing to do is still use the HQ converter?

[shueardm]

How come i can change the spelling mistake in the title but it doesn't reflect on the thread list page. <doh>

[GrassValley_KH]

Awesome that EDIUS V4.5 is getting native AVCHD support- but will it be a wise thing to do? We've been taught not to edit native HDV, to use the Canopus HQ codec.
AVCHD is even more compressed than HDV, so is it fair to say that the best thing to do is still use the HQ converter?

The HQ converter is useful for easy, multi-clip conversion, but you can do all of that inside of EDIUS too now - the Bin allows you to convert multiple clips in 4.5.

Playing around with native AVCHD, AVC-Intra and Infinity JPEG 2000 reminds me of the early early days of HDV. Nowadays native HDV is actually starting to perform well enough on a regular system, and only complex stuff makes a fast system choke. The expectation is that the same will eventually apply with these newer formats too. We live in exciting times.

How come i can change the spelling mistake in the title but it doesn't reflect on the thread list page. <doh>

Thread title and post title are two separate DB entries, since every post in a thread can have a different title from the main thread title.

[[email protected]]

When you convert a AVCHD file in the bin to a Canops HQ file, what is the difference between saving as On-Line or Off-line, other than file size?

[GrassValley_KH]

If I'm not mistaken, there is a quality different with the bitrate and quantisation used between the two - Online being the higher of the two.

[xmanflash]

If I'm not mistaken, there is a quality different with the bitrate and quantisation used between the two - Online being the higher of the two.

I am mulling over getting a Sony AVCHD instead of MiniDV Hi Def camcorder to compliment my FX-1 - is there a noticable quality difference in the latest top end models (HDRSR8 vs HDRHC7)??

[GrassValley_MD]

Awesome that EDIUS V4.5 is getting native AVCHD support- but will it be a wise thing to do? We've been taught not to edit native HDV, to use the Canopus HQ codec.
AVCHD is even more compressed than HDV, so is it fair to say that the best thing to do is still use the HQ converter?

Yes. At this time it is advisable to use HQ :)


Mike

[Ron Evans]

I have SR7 to use with my FX1 too. Quality at the highest setting is great in good light. It won't be like the FX1 when the light gets lower!!! I got it mainly for family stuff rather than using the FX1, my wife prefers the picture in daylight to the FX1 and it is very convenient for playback. At the moment support is possible in both Edius and Vegas 8 but very slow. Conversion time to HQ on my AMD X2 4200 is several times realtime for example. In Vegas 8 outputting timeline is 10 times realtime!!!!!! For family video, no effects just cuts and then make DVD ( in AVCHD or SD) the Sony Picture Motion Browser software that comes with the camera is still the fastest and it too is very slow!!! Since this software only uses one core there is little hope of speeding up with a new quad core, my initial thought!!
I have ordered a Blackmagic Intensity and will try capturing through HDMI to the Intensity codec and see how that works.

Ron Evans

[xmanflash]

Hey Ron,

Thanks for the info - that all makes sense - its a tough decision - it would be great to have Hard Disk convienience if the picture is good, but in mulling it over, I am fairly sure that having to backup 100GB of video all the time will end up being a burden, and that maybe tapes are a cheaper way to go.. but the Disk model is black.. durn..

[Ron Evans]

The HDD and mini DVD camcorders have a big advantage for consumers in being very convenient to use. Nice interface for selection of clips for playback etc and no danger of over recording an important piece of video, no breaks in timecode ( its file based) fast copy to PC. Unfortunately at this time editing etc is very slow. But for convenience it beats tape hands down. I had hoped that the SR7 would save tape changes for my "full stage" camera in theatre recording but the hastle over editing I will stay with my TRV50 or HC96 and FX1 will stay SD. If I get the SR7 working OK with the Intensity I will switch to HD. I pick up card today so will see how it all works and with what!!!
For family stuff the SR7 is a keeper.

Ron Evans

[Ron Evans]

Got the Intensity card installed with no problems. Have captured a few mins of AVCHD just to test. Files are larger of course about 4 times those of DV or HDV about 49G per hour. All played fine on the Vegas 8 or Edius timeline though doubled up to play in multicam resulted in some slowdown probably my disc wasn't fast enough for this!!!. These large files and data rate likely will need a RAID. Capture screen couldn't keep up also, but captured file played fine so the screen on the Intensity capture utility clearly slows when the load on the CPU is too much. Maybe I will invest in a PC upgrade after all!!!

Ron Evans

[STORMDAVE]

AVCHD is a much more compressed format (mostly a delivery format) so I think you mean HD (what codec, though?) Ron?

[Ron Evans]

I captured from the SR7 which is AVCHD, through HDMI to the Intensity card and captured using the BlackmagicMJPG codec 1920x1080i preset. Vegas and Edius will use AVCHD from the camera but are both very slow in encoding to anything else, between 7 and 10 times realtime. Even though this is a little fanatical hobby for me my projects are theatre productions of usually over two hours. I have become accustomed to the realtime of Edius anything less is a downer!!!. I use DV capture to capture 4 camera positions, usually two at a time so am into capture of 4 to 6 hours. Then everything else is realtime. I will move to HD when the total time gets close to this. At 20 hours for a render for one camera thats too long even if the others are HDV !!!! The Intensity card puts me in the same ball park as now for AVCHD. MPEG 4 is too stressful for the general purpose CPU with present software.
As I said before the camera's great the software at present lets it down. I am sure it will improve over the next year though. The Sony Motion Browser software just has to improve in a few ways for the average consumer to be happy. Use multiple processors ( only seems to use one core now), join clips so they don't stop each time for AVCHD disc playback.

Ron Evans

[xmanflash]

Hi Ron,

I decided to opt for MiniDV Tape instead of the AVCHD because I am at best impatient - its what got me into Canopus Storm Edit at the start :-)

I am now trying to work out whether the get the Canon HV20 or the sony HC7

The Canon seems to have much better visual quality, including 24p (25p in PAL) which doubles the lux capability and gives a filmic quality - especialy with the film gamma option, but the HC7 has that wooonderfull 3 sec 240 frame slow mo capture (check out youtube for examples - type in "hc7 slow ") which is so cool it nearly makes it worth it..

I cant believe how cheap these HDV models are getting!

If Canon had the slow mo built into their next HV20 replacement I would wait :-)

[Ron Evans]

If you are going to edit a lot then tape is better at the moment. My interest in the SR7 was two fold. A family camera that was convenient and had long record times and as second cam to the FX1 without worrying about tape changes. I have no interest in 24P ( quite dislike the stuttering effect to me its a throwback to the limited technology of the last century) The Sony cameras have the advantage of LANC remote control and better battery technology and indication a must from my point of view so writes off the HV20 for me.
I am sure you would be happy with either.
Ron Evans