Hi All
I have a question. I have a Intel (R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6600 @ 2.40Hz 2.45 GHz. Installed memory 6Gig.
Windows 7 64 bit OS. Adobe premiere pro cs5.

Would it be better to bump up to quad core or use cineform to down convert AVCHD files for editing? I'm limited on my funds. AVCHD is a bear to edit I'm finding out. DV editing was not bad but now with AVCHD it's a different story. I've done searching here but still am unsure. I know there are a ton of solutions.
Any advise would be appreciated.
Thanks again
Harry

Cineform would be one good solution to your problem.
BTW, you are not "downconverting" to Cineform, you are "upconverting" from a very lossy, 4:2:0, 8 bit format to a very high quality, near lossless, 4:2:2, 10 (or 12) bit format.
Your system & CPU will edit Cineform very smoothly & easily.
Just be aware that CF is a high data rate .avi file (100 mbs, instead of 18-24 mbs), so you need to look at your storage situation and might want to consider having a RAID 0 drive for the video files.

give the Avid DNxHD codec a try, this is what i use as and intermediate codec and it works great, plus it's free. I've read it works just as good as the Cineform option.

Cineform would be one good solution to your problem.
BTW, you are not "downconverting" to Cineform, you are "upconverting" from a very lossy, 4:2:0, 8 bit format to a very high quality, near lossless, 4:2:2, 10 (or 12) bit format.
Your system & CPU will edit Cineform very smoothly & easily.
Just be aware that CF is a high data rate .avi file (100 mbs, instead of 18-24 mbs), so you need to look at your storage situation and might want to consider having a RAID 0 drive for the video files.

give the Avid DNxHD codec a try, this is what i use as and intermediate codec and it works great, plus it's free. I've read it works just as good as the Cineform option.


Robert and Iker:
Thank you both for your replies and Ideas. I will consider them both. It is very much appreciated.
Thanks Again
Harry

PS BTW I assume that Avid DNxHD codec is used with Quicktime software??????

here's another solution to consider:

you can render all your files into proxy files of a smaller size just for editing. This way you'll need way less Hard disk space than any other solution. When you're done editing, just point the proxy files to your original files (naming conventions are important) and render. It will save you both money and the cost of an expensive RAID.

OK, here's the other factor - while editing via intermediate codec, proxys, etc. may make that operation tolerable...

You probably need to consider transcoding and rendering times, as those will also be processor dependent - may not be that big a deal for small projects, but if you're doing larger ones, the reduction in render times may skew the economies in the direction of a faster machine.

One thing to keep in mind is that every part of a machine can affect the ability to "do" video - I picked up an HP laptop with "ok" specs, and because it was all new (including a 5400RPM HDD, which "shouldn't" have worked), it was able to do fairly well with AVCHD.

IOW, consider the upgrade cost in terms of a full system, not just one part... and yes, it does get expensive to build a nice state of the art i7 machine... not sure if a current AMD system would be more cost effective, but should be from the ones I've assembled that weren't for video editing...

Just some things to consider.

How does the VoltaicHD convertor compare to Cineform? Is it another case of "you pay your money..."?

OK, here's the other factor - while editing via intermediate codec, proxys, etc. may make that operation tolerable...
You probably need to consider transcoding and rendering times, as those will also be processor dependent - may not be that big a deal for small projects, but if you're doing larger ones, the reduction in render times may skew the economies in the direction of a faster machine.

Dave has a very good point.
You can get by using a D.I. with your current system and have a better editing experience, but there will still be a price to pay in performance.
The ugly truth is that it would be a makeshift solution.
This is the first time since the "HD Revolution" began that we have reasonably priced hardware, OS, and software that can actually do the entire HD editing workflow like it was DV footage.
If you are going to be doing this for the forseeable future, you should consider just biting the bullet and upgrading to Win7 64, Intel i7, 12-16GB RAM.
It will change everything :)

Robert and Iker:
Thank you both for your replies and Ideas. I will consider them both. It is very much appreciated.
Thanks Again
Harry

PS BTW I assume that Avid DNxHD codec is used with Quicktime software??????


yeah the Avid codec produces .mov files.

I personally use Adobe Media Encoder to do a batch encode of my AVCHD files into Avid's DNxHD .mov files. After that i can edit them pretty smoothly in Vegas Pro 9.

here's another solution to consider:

you can render all your files into proxy files of a smaller size just for editing. This way you'll need way less Hard disk space than any other solution. When you're done editing, just point the proxy files to your original files (naming conventions are important) and render. It will save you both money and the cost of an expensive RAID.

[quote= Iker Rieka
yeah the Avid codec produces .mov files.

I personally use Adobe Media Encoder to do a batch encode of my AVCHD files into Avid's DNxHD .mov files. After that i can edit them pretty smoothly in Vegas Pro 9.[/quote]


Thanks for all your suggestions. When I finish editing, what format do I render out too? This is a first for me. I've never worked with proxy files before. Sorry for the question.
Harry

OK, here's the other factor - while editing via intermediate codec, proxys, etc. may make that operation tolerable...

You probably need to consider transcoding and rendering times, as those will also be processor dependent - may not be that big a deal for small projects, but if you're doing larger ones, the reduction in render times may skew the economies in the direction of a faster machine.

It also depends on the type of NLE you use, I still have a older Q6600 machine with 4gb memory and use Canopus Edius and it's HQ avi codec. Sure you need to convert first but you could batchconvert at night which is much faster then realtime for hdv footage and realtime on dslr 1080p footage, but once converted I have a workflow as easy as SD. Cutting and colorcorrecting dslr footage, several layers with effects stacked without any problem and all in realtime. 10 clips or 1000, edius eats dslr footage like cake. That you hardly can call "tolerable" :)

Exporting edited footage back to hq avi files is also 3 to 4 times realtime and when I want to make a Blu-ray files I use a dedicated winfast card which also outputs in about realtime.

Intermediate codecs can be of great value on "older" pc's and if your budget is thight, with canopus edius you don't even have to invest extra as it's already there. You only need to consider into sufficient harddive space but that's quite cheap these days.

How does the VoltaicHD convertor compare to Cineform? Is it another case of "you pay your money..."?

I've looked into VoltaicHD convertor and it seems to be user friendly and at a good price. $39. Right now I can't afford Canopus Edius at $199. Has anyone had or heard of VoltaicHD convertor? I appreciate all suggestions.
Thanks again
Harry

I've just downloaded the demo version of Voltaichd. It errored when I tried to convert the first clip and crashed completely on the second. Perhaps I'll save my pennies and get Cineform.

The VideoGuys.com site sells CineForm NEO SCENE for $100.

Videoguys.com - CineForm NeoScene for PC and Mac (http://www.videoguys.com/Item/CineForm+NeoScene+for+PC+and+Mac/54E4543435F454E4.aspx)

I've just downloaded the demo version of Voltaichd. It errored when I tried to convert the first clip and crashed completely on the second. Perhaps I'll save my pennies and get Cineform.


The VideoGuys.com site sells CineForm NEO SCENE for $100.


Thanks Ray for the heads up on your problems with Voltaichd.
Also thanks Guy for the heads up on Videoguys CineForm NEO SCENE for $100. I'll look into that.
Harry

Yes, thanks Guy. That's a few less pennies to save :)

Harry - You can download a free trial of any Cineform product from Cineform's website to test out.

I think your setup meets the min Neoscene requirements, but not their higher spec products. That said you may find 2.45 GHz dual core still slightly too slow.

When I finish editing, what format do I render out too? This is a first for me. I've never worked with proxy files before.
Harry

Harry, the proxy is used for editing - PRIOR to editing. You convert your footage to a manageable proxy (temporary) codec and edit. When you finish, you POINT your proxy files to the original files before you render (naming conventions must be strictly maintained) and then Render. The proxy files are replaced by the original files by the NLE.

The proxy files you make depend on your requirements. Other than editing, do you do anything else with your NLE? Do you finish or color correct? Do you add effects? If you're strictly editing ONLY, you can convert your files into DV for editing (note: to transcode H.264 to DV might take a day or more depending on how many hours of footage you have). The most important thing to know is the Naming convention that you'll have to rigorously maintain throughout. Like Dave mentioned, it takes time to render proxies and properly get naming right. More importantly, it takes EXPERIENCE. You might and will screw up a few times before you get it right. If money is tight, this is the only way to go. Dave is right, you have to know what you're doing plus take into account the money aspect for all options.

Another consideration is you could edit your footage by keeping the resolution/quality/whatever at one-half or one-quarter instead of 100%. This way the processing load reduces considerably. Have you tried doing this with your footage directly?

However, if you're color correcting as well, you will want to maintain the same color space as your footage or your output destination. You haven't given details so I can't tell you what to do in this case. Also, what you output to depends on your objective. Your proxy files will depend on this as well.

Harry - You can download a free trial of any Cineform product from Cineform's website to test out.

I think your setup meets the min Neoscene requirements, but not their higher spec products. That said you may find 2.45 GHz dual core still slightly too slow.

Harry, the proxy is used for editing - PRIOR to editing. You convert your footage to a manageable proxy (temporary) codec and edit. When you finish, you POINT your proxy files to the original files before you render (naming conventions must be strictly maintained) and then Render. The proxy files are replaced by the original files by the NLE.

The proxy files you make depend on your requirements. Other than editing, do you do anything else with your NLE? Do you finish or color correct? Do you add effects? If you're strictly editing ONLY, you can convert your files into DV for editing (note: to transcode H.264 to DV might take a day or more depending on how many hours of footage you have). The most important thing to know is the Naming convention that you'll have to rigorously maintain throughout. Like Dave mentioned, it takes time to render proxies and properly get naming right. More importantly, it takes EXPERIENCE. You might and will screw up a few times before you get it right. If money is tight, this is the only way to go. Dave is right, you have to know what you're doing plus take into account the money aspect for all options.

Another consideration is you could edit your footage by keeping the resolution/quality/whatever at one-half or one-quarter instead of 100%. This way the processing load reduces considerably. Have you tried doing this with your footage directly?

However, if you're color correcting as well, you will want to maintain the same color space as your footage or your output destination. You haven't given details so I can't tell you what to do in this case. Also, what you output to depends on your objective. Your proxy files will depend on this as well.

Steve Thanks for the heads up on the free trial. I'll try it out.

Sareesh. Yes I have tried keeping the resolution lower and that seems to help out alot. And yes I do color correct. Also I am upgrading from 2 to Quad core which should help out. If Cineform is successful I'll purchase that also. I'll have too trial and error in order to be successful.

I want to thank you all for your suggestions. It has helped out alot.
Best wishes
Harry

you should consider just biting the bullet and upgrading to Win7 64, Intel i7, 12-16GB RAM.
It will change everything :)

Robert, what is your own configuration? Specifically, processor and memory?

Thanks.

Dave has a very good point.
If you are going to be doing this for the forseeable future, you should consider just biting the bullet and upgrading to Win7 64, Intel i7, 12-16GB RAM.
It will change everything :)

Right now I already have Win7 64, However I only have 6 GB Ram. I am upgrading from 2 core to Quad core which should help for time being. Thanks for the suggestion.
Harry

Another good lower resolution format to use as a proxy is the photojpeg codec built into Quicktime. I have found it to perform very well and even seems to playback with RT performance a bit better then DV AVI files on both my systems. I doubt you will be able to playback full HD with this format but it is super great for lower resolution proxies. For example I can convert my 1280x720p 60p footage to 640x360p 60p and it plays perfectly in Vegas at best full quality with basic effects. If I down convert to 30p instead I can get multiple layers of effects to play at best quality in RT.

I will typically make my proxies 720x480 interlaced lower field 1.212 pixel aspect ratio. This way When I am finished editing I can use either the proxies or the AVCHD files for final rendering. If I am making a DVD or SD master there is no more conversion needed other then encoding to mpeg2 or dumping to DV tape. If I need a HD master, Blu-ray or HD web format then I can use the AVCHD files.

I should note that you will get better quality DVD's by using Photojpeg as opposed to DV. The reason is the color space and compression of DV. Photojpeg above a quality level of 75 uses 4:2:2 color which makes a much better conversion to DVD then the 4:1:1 color from DV.

If you really want to push the RT performance of your system you can go even lower with your proxies such as 320x180 for 16x9 material. Vegas will slice through this like butter not to mention your proxy files are going to be very small.

See post below

Another good lower resolution format to use as a proxy is the photojpeg codec built into Quicktime. I have found it to perform very well and even seems to playback with RT performance a bit better then DV AVI files on both my systems. I doubt you will be able to playback full HD with this format but it is super great for lower resolution proxies. For example I can convert my 1280x720p 60p footage to 640x360p 60p and it plays perfectly in Vegas at best full quality with basic effects. If I down convert to 30p instead I can get multiple layers of effects to play at best quality in RT.

I will typically make my proxies 720x480 interlaced lower field 1.212 pixel aspect ratio. This way When I am finished editing I can use either the proxies or the AVCHD files for final rendering. If I am making a DVD or SD master there is no more conversion needed other then encoding to mpeg2 or dumping to DV tape. If I need a HD master, Blu-ray or HD web format then I can use the AVCHD files.

I should note that you will get better quality DVD's by using Photojpeg as opposed to DV. The reason is the color space and compression of DV. Photojpeg above a quality level of 75 uses 4:2:2 color which makes a much better conversion to DVD then the 4:1:1 color from DV.

If you really want to push the RT performance of your system you can go even lower with your proxies such as 320x180 for 16x9 material. Vegas will slice through this like butter not to mention your proxy files are going to be very small.

Robert Thank you very much that suggestion. Gives me alot to consider. I have Premiere Pro CS5 and all I've been editing is DV video. I'm very familier with it. Now with proxy editing I've got to start again to relearn things. I'm googling Proxy editing to try to find a Step-by-step tutorial on the subject. Got a few good hits. Once I learn it it should be great.
Thanks again
Harry

Robert, what is your own configuration? Specifically, processor and memory?
Thanks.

Win7 64, Intel i7, 12 GB tri RAM, Quadro fx 3800 GPU, Adobe CS5, RAID 0 media drives.

Processor speed? Mobo? What do you use to backup your RAID0?

Processor speed? Mobo? What do you use to backup your RAID0?

This system is a Dell XPS Studio tower. I purchase these desktops from Dell fairly stripped down and inexpensive. Then add all the goodies (RAM, hard drives, BR burners, Hi end GPU, etc.) myself. Seems to work out much cheaper that way.
Processor is Intel i7 920 2.67 GHz
Mobo: whatever Dell gives me.
Media backup: I offload raw files to a seperate drive, then convert to Cineform which goes to RAID and is used for editing. I keep the file names unchanged. If the RAID goes down I can reconvert the footage back onto the new RAID & the NLE doesn't miss a beat.
Project files, scratch disk stuff on yet another drive, with end of day copies of the project file on another HD.
Also, System drive image is kept on the project file drive.
I think if (when) any one of the drives fails, I should be able to recover that drive's critical data without too much hassle.
That's the theory anyway ;-)

Thanks Bob.

Why do you have RAID0 though. Cineform has relatively low bandwidth, and you could easily go RAID1 (if you have 2 drives), or RAID5 (3 or more drives), and not be in danger to lose your work any second, like you are now with RAID0...

Personally I use Raid10 locally on the editing machine, and a Thecus N8800 backup with Raid6 (Raid5 would be fine too... I'm just being paranoid...)

Cineform.avi runs about 100 mbs.
You could get by doing single stream editing with SATA HD, but everything runs really smooth from RAID 0, no matter what the complexity of the editing.
Your back up is much more sophisticated.
If I have a drive go down, it will take some time to restore everything & get the project up and running, might loose part of an editing session, etc., but at least, I would not be totally up the creek without a paddle.

>> Cineform.avi runs about 100 mbs.

A single 5400rpm SATA drive has real-live transfer rate of around 50MBs (megabyte, not megabit...)

So realistically, with all the overheads and bottlenecks and HDD fill-up issues, one should be able to comfortably run at least two CFHD streams off one 5400rpm drive.

Now, that's a very slow, sad, single drive.

Going up to 7200rpm will likely get you more throughput, and RAID 10 or 5 (or 6) are also very fast with good controllers.

Win 7 reports 140MBs transfer rate on my local RAID10 with my trusted Areca ARC-1220 controller (http://amzn.to/cSFxfj).

Interesting report.
I'll probably move in that direction whenever I build a new system.

I also have a Core2Duo processor in combo with CS5. What I do is use adobe media encoder to convert AVCHD files to MPEG2 files. This provides an easy to edit file while maintaining a low datarate. Works great for me.

Quote Brian Tori=I also have a Core2Duo processor in combo with CS5. What I do is use adobe media encoder to convert AVCHD files to MPEG2 files. This provides an easy to edit file while maintaining a low datarate. Works great for me. End Quote

Hi Brian
Thanks for your reply. After your done editing do you render out from the MPEG2 files or replace the MPEG2 file with the orig AVCHD files then render out.
Thanks again
Harry

This is my workflow:

1. I convert the original AVCHD .MTS files on the SD card directly to .m2t files using Adobe Media Encoder using the MPEG 2 Blu-ray preset in encoder.
2. I edit the newly created .m2t files in Premiere as normal.
3. I render effects, etc.. on the .m2t files
4. I export to whatever final format needed. If I'm making a master file, I use the same MPEG-2 preset in encoder, using a high bit-rate.

Many may assume that encoding to MPEG-2 again reduces quality. But I've found that as long as the bitrate is high, the quality reduction is barely noticeable if at all. The Blu-ray preset in encoder allows up to 40Mb which is plenty high enough for me.

If you live anywhere near a MicroCenter, they have Q9300s for $140 - pretty cheap to double your CPU power.

This is my workflow:

1. I convert the original AVCHD .MTS files on the SD card directly to .m2t files using Adobe Media Encoder using the MPEG 2 Blu-ray preset in encoder.
2. I edit the newly created .m2t files in Premiere as normal.
3. I render effects, etc.. on the .m2t files
4. I export to whatever final format needed. If I'm making a master file, I use the same MPEG-2 preset in encoder, using a high bit-rate.

Many may assume that encoding to MPEG-2 again reduces quality. But I've found that as long as the bitrate is high, the quality reduction is barely noticeable if at all. The Blu-ray preset in encoder allows up to 40Mb which is plenty high enough for me.

Brian:
If you are going to a DVD what format would you use for that? I am using Adobe Media Incoder CS5.
Thanks for your feedback
Harry