No, only implying that the codec has an RGB option built into the choices.
If the codec would support RGB, then it would support 4:4:4, because RGB and YUV4:4:4 are effectively the same. But I can't find a RGB-Option in the dialog:

No, I downloaded your dv-version and your png-compressed HD-version. The left attachment was a grab of your dv-version, the right was a grab of my dv-version made out of your hd-version with compressor.

Really?!! That's great news! When you have the time, can you pretty please tell me exactly what setting you used in Compressor. (remember to dumb it down for us non-technical guys, hehehehe)

Thank you very much Domink.

Perrone, I think your solution is great too, it's just that Dominik has seemed to have solved it using the tools I already have. :)

Perrone, I think your solution is great too, it's just that Dominik has seemed to have solved it using the tools I already have. :)

Completely understand! And that's why we are here. To find Mac solutions for Mac users. My solution is meant as an alternative at best, either for those without compressor, or those who, for whatever reason, can't get the results needed from their Mac based solution.

Mine does have the benefit of being free, so for those who have bootcamp but don't have Compressor, there is a way.

I hope Dominik gets you a screenshot, because this should solve your problem. And honestly, should be a sticky in a new, clean thread. That is, if we've actually solved the HD > SD conversion for Mac folks. And Dominik's posts and screenshots lead me to believe that he has.

Gentlemen, I think this thread shouldbe turned into a sticky.
What a wealth of information :)

OK gormless question. How do you get a tif from an M2V file? I opened in Quicktime, go export, buut there is no export frame. I tried export image sequesnce and have spent 20 minutes clearing 1000 tifs from my desktop. Changed the amoount per second to 0.5 to get a few, but the quality is not as good as the .mov.

All I need is to find the frame I like, and then export that frame as a tif.

I used XDCAM-EX-source for testing. I attached an 100%-crop-example. The left side is avid with 36mbit/s, the right unaltered XDCAM. There are clearly more artifacts on the left side.


Ok,

So here is a screen shot of my editing space. Essentially, I took 5 seconds of a closeup of water on a fountain. So organic movement, and unpredictable by the codec for the most part. I stacked the original, and uncompressed, a jpeg2000, and the DNxHD175 on the timeline.

I then did a difference composite for each one. I have highlighted the Avid against the original source. I have histograms (Luma, R,G,B), Waveform, Vectorscope, and RGB Parade open as well as the preview window.

You can see from this that there is nearly NOTHING. For all intents and purposes, DNxHD at this bit rate is lossless when presented with an XDCamEX image.

[Edit]
Oh, file sizes for 5 seconds of 1080/24p:

Uncompressed: 972,008
Jpeg2000: 114,882
DnxHD 175: 107,522

Interesting results, Perrone, thanks for posting.

OT: I notice you're from Tallahassee. Have you done any shooting down at Wakulla Springs? I lived there as a kid.

Ok here's the two TIFs I made.

First one is using Cinema Craft Encoder MP, 15 pass VBR.

http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/CCE_.tif

Second one is using prores422 into Compressor then out using Cinema Craft Encoder MP, 15 pass VBR.

http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/qtprores422.tif

Pretty sure I have captured the wrong way. The tifs don't looks as smooth as the video.

When you have the time, can you pretty please tell me exactly what setting you used in Compressor.
I didn't do anything more than I showed in this video except for selecting QuickTime/DV as output-format:
YouTube - high-quality HD to SD-DVD conversion with FCP (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSw9JfVmIpI&fmt=22)
How do you get a tif from an M2V file?
You can get PNGs with MPEG Streamclip. PNG is better than TIFF for web-use, because it's lossless compressed (vs. uncompressed TIFF) and well supported by web-browsers.
DNxHD175
I was talking about the 36mbit/s-variant not 175mbit/s. The 175mbit/s-variant will of course look very good.
I attached a screen-shot to show you what I mean.

Steve you've done something very wrong there my friend!

I completely misundderstood you! So for grins, I'll try a 36mbps render now.

was talking about the 36mbit/s-variant not 175mbit/s. The 175mbit/s-variant will of course look very good.
I attached a screen-shot to show you what I mean.

New difference attached...

File size: 22,082

I think Dominik, and myself to a degree, get in these semantic arguments for no purpose. <snip> DVCPro50 is nice, but not full raster. So you'll take your 1920x1080 and shring it to 1280x1080. better than DV, but still a terrible thing to do if you don't have to.

If I am not much mistaken, DVCPro50 is Panasonic's souped up version of DVCPro (Panny's 'DVCAM'), which uses 2.5:1 compression rather than 5:1, therefore getting pret-ty close to DigiBeta. I used it a lot for sucking in and laying off to DigiBeta/BetaSP with my Aja IO. Useful format for stuff with lots of motion graphics 'pre-ProRes'.

I believe you were referring to DVCPro-HD? Or more specifically the 720p variant at 50 mbps? If so, would that be 960x720? ... Does anyone care?

With that and a penchant for PhotoJPEG, I feel like a 'Dead Codec Preservation Society' - "Anoraks Up!"

I believe you were referring to DVCPro-HD? Or more specifically the 720p variant at 50 mbps? If so, would that be 960x720? ... Does anyone care?


Yep. Always forget the SD variant because I never used it. Went from VHS to SVHS to DV. I trade DVCam with the local PBS folks and that's about the extent of it. No Digibeta for me! Couldn't afford the VTRs!


With that and a penchant for PhotoJPEG, I feel like a 'Dead Codec Preservation Society' - "Anoraks Up!"

O Captain my Captain! LOL!

OK last night I completely messed up the images of the clips I was trying to show. Downloaded and installed Mpegstreamclip and it was very easy to grab a frame.

Here are the results of using Compressor with a two pass VBR, and using Compressor plugin Cinema Craft Encoder MP.

Now this is how I got the footage to Compressor.

I dropped the 720P50 footage on its own timeline, then exported it to prores422 720P50, self contained movie.

I then made a new sd timeline , PAL and dropped the prores422 file onto it. FCP asked if I should change the timeline. No is the answer. Then I rendered the timeline. I now have a nice SD timeline with the 720P50 footage converted down to SD PAL. It looks lovely and clean, no aliasing.

I then export this timeline to Compressor, and did a two pass VBR on the 90 minute DVD setting, and then did it again using Cinema Craft Encoder MP, do a 10 pass VBR.

First thumb is the original footage, second is compressor, and third is Cinema Craft Encoder MP.

http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/original.png
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/compressor.png
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/CCE1.png

Thoughts?

I then made a new sd timeline , PAL and dropped the prores422 file onto it.
I tested this method and I figured out that this method gives the same result as using Compressors "better" rescaling method, but much faster than doing it with Compressor. The quality is great, but if you want the absolute highest quality and you have enough time then use Compressor with its "best" rescaling.
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/original.png
You should really check the detail-settings in your ex1. The sharpening looks really ugly. I always recommend to turn the detail-function entirely off.

Btw, you're not converting to interlaced SD, so you're effectively converting 50fps to 25fps. Do you intend to do that? If yes, then I would recommend not to shoot with 720p/50 but with 1080p/25.

I dropped the 720P50 footage on its own timeline, then exported it to prores422 720P50, self contained movie.

I then made a new sd timeline , PAL and dropped the prores422 file onto it. FCP asked if I should change the timeline. No is the answer. Then I rendered the timeline. I now have a nice SD timeline with the 720P50 footage converted down to SD PAL. It looks lovely and clean, no aliasing.


It is not necessary to to export to anything. Just drop the HD sequence on the DV timeline. Did you test that workflow?

OK
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/original.png
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/compressor.png
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/CCE1.png
Thoughts? The CCE1 comes out a little better than compressor.

The CCE1 comes out a little better than compressor.

I agree. Cinema Craft Encoder MP is better than Compressor. But then it should be for 800 bucks.

It is not necessary to to export to anything. Just drop the HD sequence on the DV timeline. Did you test that workflow?

I haven't but I will certainly try this out.
Thanks
Steve

I tested this method and I figured out that this method gives the same result as using Compressors "better" rescaling method, but much faster than doing it with Compressor. The quality is great, but if you want the absolute highest quality and you have enough time then use Compressor with its "best" rescaling.

You should really check the detail-settings in your ex1. The sharpening looks really ugly. I always recommend to turn the detail-function entirely off.

Btw, you're not converting to interlaced SD, so you're effectively converting 50fps to 25fps. Do you intend to do that? If yes, then I would recommend not to shoot with 720p/50 but with 1080p/25.

Good point on the detail. As I shoot 95% weddings the client mostly wants the video look, so that's what they get. I wil shoot some footage tomorrow morning and compare detail on and off.

I shoot 720P50 because its much better for slo mo in the snogging musical interlude. 50% of 50 frames = 25P.

As I shoot 95% weddings the client mostly wants the video look, so that's what they get.
If the video-look is a goal, then convert to interlaced SD not to progressive. That's much more effective concerning the video-look than ugly sharpening.

Ive read this thread form top to bottom and i'm still confused with Dominik's work flow.

So to get the best convert from HD to SD mpeg is to check the re-scaler to best and turn detail of on the EX camera.
Is this the work flow?

So to get the best convert from HD to SD mpeg is to check the re-scaler to best and turn detail of on the EX camera.
Is this the work flow?
Yes, it is.

Okay, let me try to summerize this thread: (this is really a question for Dominik)

Do we go with Option #1 or #2?

OPTION #1 (scale to DV in FCP)
1) With no project open, go to Easy Setup and choose NTSC and DV
2) Create a new project
3) Import your XDCAM footage
4) Drop the footage into your timeline and edit as necessary
5) Choose NO when FCP asks whether to conform the sequence to your footage
6) Choose "Export to Compressor"
7) In Compressor assign the DV NTSC preset (or MPEG-2 for Standard Def DVD)
8) In the Frames>Rescaler tab, turn it on and choose Best
9) Submit and your done

OPTION #2 (don't scale in FCP)
1) With no project open, go to Easy Setup and choose HD and the appropriate XDCAM-EX preset
2) Create a new project
3) Import your XDCAM footage
4) Drop the footage into your timeline and edit as necessary
5) Choose "Export to Compressor"
6) In Compressor assign the DV NTSC preset (or MPEG-2 for Standard Def DVD)
7) In the Frames>Rescaler tab, turn it on and choose Best
8) Submit and your done

I've watched Dominik's video a number of times now and I can't tell exactly what he's doing, so I thought I'd clarify. (it doesn't help that it's all on German! hehehehe)

Hey Dominik, I would like to thank you for your advice on this thread.
You come over as a very straight talking guy but I like that.

Cheers
Steve

@Mitchell
option1->step8: Compressors rescaler-settings have no effect here, because all rescaling happens in FCP.

You forgot option3:
1. edit on a hd-timeline
2. drop that hd-timeline on a sd-timeline

I would go with option2 or option3, because I like to edit on a hd-timeline. Editing on a hd-timeline gives you that hd-"supersampling" which will increase the quality of some effects and (text-)graphics. Also you can export a hd-version of your edit at any time if you would like it (keyword: flexibility).
Option2 will give you slightly better quality when Compressors rescaling is set to best, but option3 will be significantly faster.
I've watched Dominik's video a number of times now and I can't tell exactly what he's doing, so I thought I'd clarify.
Which moments/seconds are unclear?

Dominik,
What are your thoughts on bit rate?
Avg
Max
Min
My work are 30mins features so fitting on to a DVD is easy.

Dominik,
What are your thoughts on bit rate?
Avg
Max
Min
My work are 30mins features so fitting on to a DVD is easy.

NIck I can say from experience, don't go above 8000 or you will choke older DVD players and have to remake the DVD with a lower rate.

Average 6000
min 2000
max 8000.

My work are 30mins features so fitting on to a DVD is easy.
, don't go above 8000 or you will choke older DVD players
If 8000 is the "choke-limit" and you have 30min to encode, then go with 8000 CBR. Because 30min with 8000 CBR fit on a DVD, you don't need to go lower in any part of your clip, so you don't need VBR.

Thanks,
I have always thought by using CBR will give better results than VBR if the material will fit onto a DVD.

I appreciate Mitchell's attempt to summarize (since I am lost again and have been waiting for just such a summary), but in option #1 if you drop the EX-1 footage into a DV SD timeline and choose NO when asked to conform the sequence to the footage won't you just be saddled with constant needs to render?

I appreciate Mitchell's attempt to summarize (since I am lost again and have been waiting for just such a summary), but in option #1 if you drop the EX-1 footage into a DV SD timeline and choose NO when asked to conform the sequence to the footage won't you just be saddled with constant needs to render?

NO. You have to render then you output. You don't do any further editing once you have brought it onto the SD timeline. All editing is finished in HD beforehand.

Okay, I think I've got it:

OPTION #3 (import your finished HD sequence into an SD sequence)
1) With no project open, go to Easy Setup and choose HD and the appropriate XDCAM-EX preset
2) Create a new HD / XDCAM-EX project
3) Import your XDCAM-EX footage
4) Drop the footage into your HD timeline and edit as necessary
5) Create a new SD sequence (create a new sequence, go to Sequence Settings, and change the settings to and SD format. See note #1 below)
6) Final Cut will scale your HD sequence to fit letter-boxed in an SD frame. Optionally you could choose to increase the scale so that it fills the frame, but looses the L/R sides. This is called "center-cut".
7) Choose "Export to Compressor"
8) In Compressor assign the DV NTSC preset (or MPEG-2 for Standard Def DVD)
9) In the Frames>Rescaler tab, turn it on and choose Best
10) Submit and your done

NOTE #1: What are the recommended sequence settings for the SD sequence? Standard DV? DVCPRO50, DVCPRO100? Uncompressed? Can you even set a Sequence to Uncompressed HD? (I'm at home right now, so I don't have FCP in front of me.....I'm thinking of installing FCS2 on my laptop!)

NOTE #2: Dominik hasn't talked much about interlacing. For example, what if you shot in 1080 30P and want your end result to be 480 30i? Will the Compressor take care of this automatically?

As always....more questions. :)

I to have wondered what SD Seq settings I should be using.
This is what I would like to know:
Easy Setup?
Pal SD seq settings?
Quick Time video settings / compression setting?
Advanced Compressor Type?
Field Dominace if I have interlaced footage? ( Should I de-interlace in FCP)

I'm sure there is more

Hi there,

I have read this thread with great interest, although a lot of it is fairly intricate stuff!. As a new owner of an EX1 I find I am constantly learning about this camera and getting more confident.

The whole down converting issue seems to be a huge bugbear. I have tried a few ways and thus far the best results come from simply exporting to compressor straight from the HD timeline, with the best quality DVD 90 minute setting.

I haven't done an massive projects yet but have done stuff with motion graphics and text effects. I spose for you guys doing huge long projects that fill a DVD then rendering in the HD timeline is the prob?!?!

My main concerns with the end result have been aliasing and unnatural movement , kinda jerky on certain subjects.

I just wonder what each of our expectations are. Some people seem to be happy with results and others not so. Be great if we all had one clip and used our differing down conversion methods to see if we could compare our results and see what each others expectations are!

Interesting stuff!!

I'm at work today and I'm currently testing OPTION #3. It's processing now, but I have an appointment with a client in 20 minutes so I'm not sure if I'll have time to post results until I'm finished with them (2 hours?)

Original untouched file is here. Shot with EX1.
Right mouse click and "save target as"
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/944_1441_01.mov

The finished file is here.
Right mouse click and "save target as"
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/CinemaCraftEncoderMP.m2v

Can anyone improve on that finished file?[/QUOTE]

I can't get the second link with Steve's result, would love to have seen!

Original untouched file is here. Shot with EX1.
Right mouse click and "save target as"
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/944_1441_01.mov

The finished file is here.
Right mouse click and "save target as"
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/CinemaCraftEncoderMP.m2v

Can anyone improve on that finished file?

I can't get the second link with Steve's result, would love to have seen!

Hi Darren I have put it back online. Take a look. It was made with the Cinema Craft Encoder MP. a plugin for Compressor.
Right mouse click and "save target as"
http://www.steveshovlar.com/cinemacraft_encode/CinemaCraftEncoderMP.m2v

Hi Steve,

Looks cool, whats it like when burnt??

Try it yourself by bringing it into DVDSP and burning it to a cheap blank dvd. Looks fine here.

What benefit is there in making a reference Quick Time file rather that exporting the time line from FCP to Compressor.

Thanks

What benefit is there in making a reference Quick Time file rather that exporting the time line from FCP to Compressor.
Faster (seconds)
Smaller files

Are there ANY advantages making a selfcontained QT (other than it is possible to send it to another computer)?

What benefit is there in making a reference Quick Time file rather that exporting the time line from FCP to Compressor.
Faster (seconds)
Smaller files
You can still work with FCP if Compressor are encoding separate files. If you export from FCP using Compressor, FCP will be locked for you during the export.

Are there ANY advantages making a selfcontained QT (other than it is possible to send it to another computer)?

Okay, I'm back (sorry I got busy at work).

I did some more testing and I think I discovered a flaw in our "testing" methods. Perrone asked me to send him a HD file in PNG format and I did. He then compressed it to SD and it looked great. But today I looked at the PNG file I sent him. It's "looks" great as far as been very crisp, but the motion in the PNG file is unusable in my opinion. It's almost like it's running at 15 fps instead of 30 fps. So it's understandable that it came out so great when converting to SD. Maybe this is a Mac/PC thing...dunno.

With all my testing I have been using an XDCAM 1080 30P file as my starting point (as this is a XDCAM thread). I then followed the steps Dominik recommend (OPTION #3).

OPTION #3 (import your finished HD sequence into an SD sequence)
1) With no project open, go to Easy Setup and choose HD and the appropriate XDCAM-EX preset
2) Create a new HD / XDCAM-EX project
3) Import your XDCAM-EX footage
4) Drop the footage into your HD timeline and edit as necessary
5) Create a new SD sequence (I used DV for my sequence settings)
6) Final Cut will scale your HD sequence to fit letter-boxed in an SD frame. Optionally you could choose to increase the scale so that it fills the frame, but looses the L/R sides. This is called "center-cut".
NOTE: I did not render before Step 7
7) Choose "Export to Compressor"
8) In Compressor assign the DV NTSC preset (or MPEG-2 for Standard Def DVD)
9) In the Frames>Rescaler tab, turn it on and choose Best
10) Submit and your done

I performed this process 3 times, using 3 different settings in Compressor:

With Frames turned off: (16 mb file)
http://www.ssscc.org/ftp/hd-sd/DV-Seq-DV-NTSC.mov

With Frames turned on and set to Best: (16 mb file)
http://www.ssscc.org/ftp/hd-sd/DV-Seq-DV-NTSC-Frame-Best.mov

With Frames turned on, set to Best and Interlace turned on, set to Best: (16 mb file)
http://www.ssscc.org/ftp/hd-sd/DV-Seq-DV-NTSC-Frame-Best-Deinterlace-Best.mov

The original file I used is here: (20 mb file)
http://www.ssscc.org/ftp/hd-sd/Test-(XDCAM-1080-30P).mov

If you look at the original XDCAM file, you'll notice that it dosn't look that great to begin with. I'm wondering if I should do the same test again, but this time starting with a ProRes 422 HQ file as my starting file?

Thoughts?

Steve,

I burnt it off and I have to say my version of your footage probably looks better.

Literally edit in your HD settings then export to compressor using 90 minute best quality. No need to drop into DV sequence, makes no odds.

I'll send you a disc if you like of the outed footage.

I have also found that analyzing the footage on a monitor is pointless. After all the reason we are all trying to get a good downconvert is for DVD's ....right?

I've done numerous tests and looked at stuff on the monitor, got excited because it looks sharper then burnt it and found its no better than the best method I have so far.

Maybe we all expect too much?

What are peoples main reservations about the results they are getting?? Mine mainly involves odd movement and aliasing. I can get stunning looking HD-SD downconversion on still shots. It's just when the camera pans or there is a moving subject that things are disappointing.

I agree Darren. I'll add that there's a huge difference watching a DVD on a setup box connected to a SD monitor (or HD if you're upscaling on the monitor) compared to even watching a DVD using Apple DVD Player. Good point!

My big issue right now is what you might call "aliasing". The edges of graphics don't look sharp anymore. But if I create the entire project in SD and make a DVD I can make it look great, so that tells me the problems not with SD quality versus HD quality.

I'm doing some more testing right now....

Steve,

I burnt it off and I have to say my version of your footage probably looks better.

Literally edit in your HD settings then export to compressor using 90 minute best quality. No need to drop into DV sequence, makes no odds.

I'll send you a disc if you like of the outed footage.

Thanks for the offer but no need to post me your results. i already know due to playing with it tonight.

Aliasing, as you and Mitchel have said, is the bugbear and the one to sort out. the way Final Cut Studio deals with the Ex1 footage is the problem and at the moment it seems difficult to get around.

Apple are probably more than aware there's a problem with the way the codec is being handled in downconversion and may be working on a solution as I type this. Or they may not!

Either way its good that there are some on here, with far superior technica nouse than i have, who might be able to crack the problem and give us all fantastic looking SD footage out of our EX1 and EX3's.

Okay, I feel stupid saying this.....I was wrong.

I've been trying and trying to get my example footage (bright red logo over video) to look good and have had no success. I had seen the original unconverted (never been HD) SD footage playing on our NTSC video monitor and it looked great, so I was convinced that the SD DV codec wasn't the problem. But just now, I opened that original file (from over a year ago) and watched it in Quicktime (something I'd never done before). It looks terrible!!

So the point is....(someone said this already just a couple of posts previous): Just because it doesn't look good in Quicktime, doesn't mean it won't look good on your monitor.

What doesn't add up though is

1) I understand that interlaced DV footage will look good on an NTSC monitor, but look terrible on a computer monitor. Whereas progressive footage will look a little bit strobed on an NTSC monitor, but look great on a computer monitor.

2) All the testing I have done with FCP and Compressor has been progressive. It should look fine on a computer monitor.

I think Dominik is right, bright red graphics just won't ever look good in DV due to it being a 4.1.1 color space.

I'm giving up and waiting until all my equipment arrives next week. Then I can use our new HD LCD monitor and AJA Io HD to do some more tests that I can view outside of Quicktime.

Thanks to Dominik and Perrone for providing such great advice on this thread.

I'm kind of lightly following all this waiting to it sort out before I do my own tests, but from the last posts could I assume that if graphics are the biggest problem, I should be OK shooting on my EX and handing downconverted original camera files to a client who might have asked for an SD DV camera in the first place?