Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Analysing a video MP4 recording in UHD to edit in HD

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Analysing a video MP4 recording in UHD to edit in HD

    I am searching for a sort of analyser program that can show the real need of Transfer rate in UHD to maintain a sufficient quality to edit in HD and zoom in the image at 100 %.

    I am filming a pianist with a fixed camera on tripod. No zoom, no movment of the camera. The only movment are the pianis playing. The parameters of the MP4 are 50P - H264-420-Long GOP VBR 160 Mbps Max (with sound)

    This file is to havy to be managed in real time via Edius on the PC of the editor.

    Are these High parameters abolutely necessary to edit with Edius in HD and zoom in the image up to 100 %.

    Is there a program that can analyse the video file and show if these 150 Mbs for the image are always use ?
    UHD-record.jpg
    If no program, would you find acceptable to decrease the transfer rate of my camera to 100 Mbps.

    Other solution is to convert (export) the file with Edius in UHD project and create a new MP4 that I can manage from 110 MB/sec and under to 55 or 27 or 22.... to maintain sufficient quality and edit in HD and zoom up to 100 %.

    I have to film at monday for the second time ... so a quick answer will be appreciate.
    Attached Files
    Yvon durieux alias "Haddock" Belgium GMT + 2

    Sorry for my poor english, I am french native speaking

    Main System: Azus Z87 Pro, [email protected], 16gb ram, Nvidia GeForce GT 630, Windows 7 Pro 64, Samsung 840 pro, Edius 8.53.2808 WG and 9.40.4896 + NXexpress or HDspark, 2T separate video SSD.

  • #2
    Yvon,

    It is not strictly the file bitrate that is the problem. It is also the frames size and the codec complexity. 4K is difficult to handle because it is large frame size, complex codec and relatively low bitrate high compression for the amount of data. note the relationships I list below.

    Higher bitrate = less compression = larger files = faster drives needed
    Lower bitrate = more compression = smaller files = drives can be slower
    large frame size = larger files = more data per frame = more RAM required = faster CPU for decode in the same amount of time
    complicated codec (ie.H264) = smaller files = lower bitrate = faster CPU for decode

    If you don't have a problem with drive space or speed, convert the file to HQX and edit with that. It should work a lot smoother. The conversion can be dine by right clicking the file in the bin and selection the convert option in the pop-up menu.

    This simplifies the codec, which also means that it increases the bitrate. This is the normal practice for high end post production. When working on movies and TV shows, it is normal to convert to an I frame only mezzanine codec such as ProRes, DNxHD/HR, HQ/X, etc. before beginning work because the files are easier to handle and give more consistent results because there is less chance of decode errors due to codec complexity.

    To my knowledge there is no analyzer that can tell you a bitrate for a file that will work for sure because every software program and codec variation is different and can even behave a bit different from computer to computer depending on software and hardware installed. The only reliable tests are drive speed tests.
    Edius WG 9.52.6153, various 3rd party plugins, VisTitle 2.8.0.5, Win 7 Ultimate SP1, i7-4790K @ 4GHz with HD4600 GPU embedded, MSI Z97 Gaming 7 Motherboard, 32GB Kingston HyperX RAM, nVidia GTX680 4GB GPU, Matrox MX02 Mini MAX, Corsair 750W PSU, Corsair H110i GT Water Cooler, Corsair C70 case, 4TB Internal RAID 0/stripe (2x2TB Seagate SATAIII HDD's, Win7 Software RAID 0/stripe), 1TB Crucial MX500 SSD, Pioneer BDR-207D, Dual 1920x1080 monitors (one on GTX680 and one on Intel HD4600).

    Comment


    • #3
      Well Bern, a big thank you for your detailled explanations. So, following you, the best it's export the genuine files in UHD-HQX, and use these files in the last step in HD. The computer will have less work to decompress in real time, and the disk (in this case a SSD) will normaly follow

      Thanks again
      Yvon durieux alias "Haddock" Belgium GMT + 2

      Sorry for my poor english, I am french native speaking

      Main System: Azus Z87 Pro, [email protected], 16gb ram, Nvidia GeForce GT 630, Windows 7 Pro 64, Samsung 840 pro, Edius 8.53.2808 WG and 9.40.4896 + NXexpress or HDspark, 2T separate video SSD.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Haddock View Post
        Well Bern, a big thank you for your detailled explanations. So, following you, the best it's export the genuine files in UHD-HQX, and use these files in the last step in HD. The computer will have less work to decompress in real time, and the disk (in this case a SSD) will normaly follow

        Thanks again
        That's correct. Converting to HQX will mean less work decompressing so the file should work much better. There have been many posts on the forum from me and David Harry (LiverpoolTV) talking about using HQX to get around problems playing more compressed 4K H264 based files.
        Edius WG 9.52.6153, various 3rd party plugins, VisTitle 2.8.0.5, Win 7 Ultimate SP1, i7-4790K @ 4GHz with HD4600 GPU embedded, MSI Z97 Gaming 7 Motherboard, 32GB Kingston HyperX RAM, nVidia GTX680 4GB GPU, Matrox MX02 Mini MAX, Corsair 750W PSU, Corsair H110i GT Water Cooler, Corsair C70 case, 4TB Internal RAID 0/stripe (2x2TB Seagate SATAIII HDD's, Win7 Software RAID 0/stripe), 1TB Crucial MX500 SSD, Pioneer BDR-207D, Dual 1920x1080 monitors (one on GTX680 and one on Intel HD4600).

        Comment


        • #5
          I shoot UHD 60P at 150 Mbps on my GH5 and GH5S for all my projects with the intent of cropping in to the image in a HD project. HQX encode will work fine for editing even use proxies that can be deleted when your done. ProRes from my Ninja V work fine too with similar data rates to HQX from SSD.
          Ron Evans

          Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

          ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, IP4K, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


          Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks Bern and Ron confirming that HQX is the way to go. After a test to HQX I see that the files is around 4 times bigger then the genuine MP4 UHD...
            Yvon durieux alias "Haddock" Belgium GMT + 2

            Sorry for my poor english, I am french native speaking

            Main System: Azus Z87 Pro, [email protected], 16gb ram, Nvidia GeForce GT 630, Windows 7 Pro 64, Samsung 840 pro, Edius 8.53.2808 WG and 9.40.4896 + NXexpress or HDspark, 2T separate video SSD.

            Comment


            • #7
              If you do a straight HQX encode it is of course full UHD however if you use proxy you do not need to have that level and files will encode quicker. When you export the original files will be used and you can then delete the proxies when you have finished editing. You can still do your crops etc and check the quality by disabling proxies to check.
              Ron Evans

              Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

              ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, IP4K, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


              Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ron Evans View Post
                If you do a straight HQX encode it is of course full UHD however if you use proxy you do not need to have that level and files will encode quicker. When you export the original files will be used and you can then delete the proxies when you have finished editing. You can still do your crops etc and check the quality by disabling proxies to check.
                Thanks Ron,

                I have no practize at all with Proxy. So I should learn it but not for my needs, just to train a client who seems to have a less power computer then my. So, the idea is to convert the genuine UHD mp4 file in HQX HD and use it to edit.
                After the job done, he has to replace the HQX by the genuine UHD and do the final export.

                Thanks to came back with Proxy that can be an alternative if not to complicate to learn and manage.
                Yvon durieux alias "Haddock" Belgium GMT + 2

                Sorry for my poor english, I am french native speaking

                Main System: Azus Z87 Pro, [email protected], 16gb ram, Nvidia GeForce GT 630, Windows 7 Pro 64, Samsung 840 pro, Edius 8.53.2808 WG and 9.40.4896 + NXexpress or HDspark, 2T separate video SSD.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Haddock View Post

                  Thanks Ron,

                  I have no practize at all with Proxy. So I should learn it but not for my needs, just to train a client who seems to have a less power computer then my. So, the idea is to convert the genuine UHD mp4 file in HQX HD and use it to edit.
                  After the job done, he has to replace the HQX by the genuine UHD and do the final export.

                  Thanks to came back with Proxy that can be an alternative if not to complicate to learn and manage.
                  There is no need to replace the HQX file for final output if you use if the file is the same resolution. It will be easier on the computer, faster to encode and possibly even less prone to decode/encode errors because the source file is less compressed.

                  As I said, this kind of approach is normal in the the Film and TV industry because the file is easier to work with and is in a codec that does not loose any information. Linking back to the original UHD file will not benefit in any way. It will actually be a detriment to speed.
                  Last edited by BernH; 07-15-2020, 12:20 PM.
                  Edius WG 9.52.6153, various 3rd party plugins, VisTitle 2.8.0.5, Win 7 Ultimate SP1, i7-4790K @ 4GHz with HD4600 GPU embedded, MSI Z97 Gaming 7 Motherboard, 32GB Kingston HyperX RAM, nVidia GTX680 4GB GPU, Matrox MX02 Mini MAX, Corsair 750W PSU, Corsair H110i GT Water Cooler, Corsair C70 case, 4TB Internal RAID 0/stripe (2x2TB Seagate SATAIII HDD's, Win7 Software RAID 0/stripe), 1TB Crucial MX500 SSD, Pioneer BDR-207D, Dual 1920x1080 monitors (one on GTX680 and one on Intel HD4600).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I was planning to use a "HQX HD" 1920*1080 to edit. But of course if I export the genuine MP4 in "HQX UHD" 3840 x 2160... then replacement is nonsense. Hope that his PC will have the power to manage it.
                    Thanks again to powerpoint this stade
                    Yvon durieux alias "Haddock" Belgium GMT + 2

                    Sorry for my poor english, I am french native speaking

                    Main System: Azus Z87 Pro, [email protected], 16gb ram, Nvidia GeForce GT 630, Windows 7 Pro 64, Samsung 840 pro, Edius 8.53.2808 WG and 9.40.4896 + NXexpress or HDspark, 2T separate video SSD.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      BernH I was referring to proxies as an alternate option to HQX encode. Agreed if you have encoded to HQX then use it. However not true if you use proxies which will revert to the original files for export automatically. If you use a lower resolution proxy it will not use as much space or take as long to encode. Can even continue working as it is creating the proxy. With the WG version working in lower resolution while the proxies are being created. Can even set up EDIUS to do this automatically. I have a button setup so that I can switch and see the original for crops etc.
                      Last edited by Ron Evans; 07-16-2020, 12:34 AM.
                      Ron Evans

                      Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

                      ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, IP4K, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


                      Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Ron Evans View Post
                        BernH I was referring to proxies as an alternate option to HQX encode. Agreed if you have encoded to HQX then use it. However not true if you use proxies which will revert to the original files for export automatically. If you use a lower resolution proxy it will not use as much space or take as long to encode. Can even continue working as it is creating the proxy. With the WG version working in lower resolution while the proxies are being created.
                        Ron, I'm familiar with the proxy workflow and I agree it can be quite beneficial, but not everyone likes working with the Edius proxy quality, and if it is an HD project anyway, using proxy mode will degrade the HD footage too. Personally I have used proxy mode if there is a lot of layers I am dealing with, but if it is a simple on layer sequence, I would prefer to use an HQX file so that you get both the quality and a responsive timeline.
                        Edius WG 9.52.6153, various 3rd party plugins, VisTitle 2.8.0.5, Win 7 Ultimate SP1, i7-4790K @ 4GHz with HD4600 GPU embedded, MSI Z97 Gaming 7 Motherboard, 32GB Kingston HyperX RAM, nVidia GTX680 4GB GPU, Matrox MX02 Mini MAX, Corsair 750W PSU, Corsair H110i GT Water Cooler, Corsair C70 case, 4TB Internal RAID 0/stripe (2x2TB Seagate SATAIII HDD's, Win7 Software RAID 0/stripe), 1TB Crucial MX500 SSD, Pioneer BDR-207D, Dual 1920x1080 monitors (one on GTX680 and one on Intel HD4600).

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I think the issue is with using UHD files in a HD project with the intent of using layouter to crop/pan and zoom. In this case the HQX file will have to be UHD to achieve this. I can attest to this taking quite a while to create even on my Threadripper with a file almost 5 times bigger. However the proxy files can be HD at a low quality but switching back to the original files to confirm what has been achieved with the use of layouter. This is how I use them at the moment. Two tracks of UHD ( proxies ) and one of HD in multicam. Hopefully with EDIUS X it will use my 1080Ti like Resolve and I will not have to use proxies! Agreed for a single track/file encode to HQX will work fine and is simple to explain. Just remember the encode has to be to UHD not the project resolution and the low power PC may still have issues with drive data rates etc. UHD really tasks a PC.

                          I have actually been doing this cropping etc since 2005. HDV ( Sony FX1 ) to standard definition then for DVD. . Starting with just one track of course or even doing the whole edit with one camera before adding others in multicam. Approach really works well. Layouter gives the ability to have really nice slow pans and zooms exactly to music or scene change etc.
                          Ron Evans

                          Threadripper 1920 stock clock 3.7, Gigabyte Designare X399 MB, 32G G.Skill 3200CL14, 500G M.2 SATA OS, 500G EVO 850 temp. 1T EVO 850 render, 6T Source, 2 x 1T NVME, MSI 1080Ti 11G , EVGA 850 G2, LG BLuray Burner, BM IP4K, WIN10 Pro, Shuttle Pro2

                          ASUS PB328 monitor, BenQ BL2711U 4K preview monitor, IP4K, EDIUS 9.5 WG, Vegas 17, Resolve Studio 16


                          Cameras: GH5S, GH5, FDR-AX100, FDR-AX53, DJI OSMO Pocket, Atomos Ninja V x 2

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ron Evans View Post
                            Just remember the encode has to be to UHD not the project resolution and the low power PC may still have issues with drive data rates etc. UHD really tasks a PC.
                            Easiest way to ensure the file is kept UHD is to put the UHD in the bin, right click it and select the convert option in the pop-up menu. This retains the UHD source resolution and framerate and places a new file in the bin. Use the new file to edit.

                            I am running a 4790K and can deal with UHD HQX pretty easily using this method, as long as I am not doing multi layer. As I mentioned this has been touted by me and David Harry before. He even put up a video showing this approach on a laptop that was much less powerful than my system.
                            Edius WG 9.52.6153, various 3rd party plugins, VisTitle 2.8.0.5, Win 7 Ultimate SP1, i7-4790K @ 4GHz with HD4600 GPU embedded, MSI Z97 Gaming 7 Motherboard, 32GB Kingston HyperX RAM, nVidia GTX680 4GB GPU, Matrox MX02 Mini MAX, Corsair 750W PSU, Corsair H110i GT Water Cooler, Corsair C70 case, 4TB Internal RAID 0/stripe (2x2TB Seagate SATAIII HDD's, Win7 Software RAID 0/stripe), 1TB Crucial MX500 SSD, Pioneer BDR-207D, Dual 1920x1080 monitors (one on GTX680 and one on Intel HD4600).

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Very interesting dialog and
                              Code:
                              Hopefully with EDIUS X it will use my 1080Ti like Resolve and I will not have to use proxies!
                              this is interesting to follow.
                              Yvon durieux alias "Haddock" Belgium GMT + 2

                              Sorry for my poor english, I am french native speaking

                              Main System: Azus Z87 Pro, [email protected], 16gb ram, Nvidia GeForce GT 630, Windows 7 Pro 64, Samsung 840 pro, Edius 8.53.2808 WG and 9.40.4896 + NXexpress or HDspark, 2T separate video SSD.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X