Welp fellas...looks like nothing new at MACWORLD for those wanting some good news on an easier solution for the XL-H1 & the HD100. PC users got it made with CineForm, but for Apple users it's not so easy. It's good to know that Final Cut Pro can cut the 24f/25f/30f/24p/30p footage from these two cameras, it just would have been nice to hear there was no 'middle-man' program that you had to go through to do it.

So without getting off topic and turing this thread into something it's not. Please list your wonderful & tested methods of working with the Canon XL-H1 HD Footage & using Final Cut Pro 5 HD as the Non Linear Editing program:
This will hold us over for the next 6 months until Apple gives us an update.....


Canon XL-H1 (24f HDV footage captured via firewire):
1. First you must....*fill in the blanks*
2. then you must....cont.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. start a new project in Final Cut Pro & set the timeline sequence to.....*fill in the blank*
8.
9.
10. import the footage and edit as normal.


Canon XL-H1 (25f HDV footage captured via firewire):
1. First you must....*fill in the blanks*
2. then you must....cont.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. start a new project in Final Cut Pro & set the timeline sequence to.....*fill in the blank*
8.
9.
10. import the footage and edit as normal.


Canon XL-H1 (30f HDV footage captured via firewire):
1. First you must....*fill in the blanks*
2. then you must....cont.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. start a new project in Final Cut Pro & set the timeline sequence to.....*fill in the blank*
8.
9.
10. import the footage and edit as normal.

- ShannonRawls.com

Can VirtualDVHS capture from the XL? I think it can since it simply captures MT2 streams over firewire.

It's not fun but if VirtualDVHS works, a path could be:

1. Capture .m2t in virtualDVHS
2. MPEG Streamclip. demux to unscaled M2V and AIFF (requires Quicktime MPEG component)
3. Quicktime Pro: convert to .mov
4. start a new project in Final Cut Pro & set the timeline sequence to 1440x1080 HDV 1080i 23.972/25/29.97, field dominance not set
5. import the footage and edit as normal.

This worked with me with a Z1 when they had no apple support. The only thing I'm not sure on is whether the Canon will work with v-DVHS

It's obviously two more steps than I'd be happy with but we're waiting on Apple now. PremPro users are lucky with Cineform as they're really on the ball in terms of supporting new cameras. The big "A"s (Avid, Apple, Adobe themselves) tend to be a LOT slower in their turning circle.

Also, you lose timecode, though if you were really precise, you COULD reinsert timecode into the .mov files using a programme like QTtimecode or Sebskytools.

This is what I'm doing for 30f. I can't really say this is a workflow I'm happy with but it works.

1. Connect the camera to the fire wire port
2. Position the tape to before the point where I wan't to start capturing
3. Configure capture to grab 1080 x 1920 HDV
4. Start tape and hit "Capture Now".

The reason I'm using "Capture Now" is because specifying in and out points and trying to capture clips does not work. I get messages saying the software cannot find the timecode and so no capture takes place. "Capture Now" does get the data but breaks it up into individual clips (you don't have an option here) thus creating dozens of files.

5. Open a new 1080 x 1920 sequence
6. Edit away
7. When finished export to Quicktime. There isn't really anything else to export to except back to tape (I haven't tried that).

The other scheme I've fiddled with is to use HDVDX to capture from tape (though it won't work on my Dual G5) and then use MPEGStreamclip to convert to AIC (HDVDX's conversion works on my Dual G5 but not my powerbook). MPEGStreamclip preserves the tape timecode (HDVDVX does not) but does funny things if there is a timecode break (I converted a 2 minute file and got a 20 minute file out with 18 minutes of the output file being the same frame). FCP is unhappy with the resulting files. It says they are not optimized for multi streaming and that you should fix them with the Media Manager whose manual pages say nothing about this problem or process. You can work with these files but indeed they play back in the browser window very jerkily.

... How good is AIC (it is apple intermediate codec right? ) for this? I mean for capturing from xl h1 with this codec?

I've figured out how to get 24F material to work inside a DVCPRO HD 1080 24fps FCP5 sequence with no rendering required. The catch is, this is using existing .m2t files. I'm assuming this would work similarly with the XL-H1 capture via HDVxDV.

Software needed - HDVxDV (http://www.hdvxdv.com/), Cinema Tools, and FCP5 (not sure if 5.0.4 matters or not).

See a demo movie of the process. It's a bit of work :(

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/XL-H1_24F_FCP_HDVxDV.mov

I'm not sure what the Lumiere process would be. Now, I guess we'll have to see what FCP can do natively with an update.

Now that I've chatted with Michael Pappas about Elton's Kona capture process, that might be the easier way to go.

Hmmm...

Teev,
That's big news bro. Thanks for your wonderful discovery and video to support it. We need more people like you! *smile*

Two questions:

1. Is DVCPROHD better then AppleIntermediateCodec?
2. Does HDVxDV capture correct timecode from the tapes?

- ShannonRawls.com

Two questions:
1. Is DVCPROHD better then AppleIntermediateCodec?

Well to tell you the truth, I hadn't tested it until now, or at least I forgot. :) And the answer is AIC is noticeably better than DVCPROHD and a lot smaller file size!

AIC - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/1080_AIC_Other_Progressve.jpg
DVCPRO HD - http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/1080_DVCPRO_HD_Compression.jpg

So then I tested if the same workflow works with AIC, and pretty much yes. Here are the settings in HDVxDV and FCP:

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/AIC_HDVxDV.jpg

2. Does HDVxDV capture correct timecode from the tapes?

It appears to, yes. http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/HDVxDV_Timecode.jpg

Well this clears the way for a few more of my concerns with workflow. I'm closer to the HVX vs XL-H1 decision. What a mind eroding see saw. :| :P

WHOA!!! Keep it coming Steev! Keep the good info coming!

Yes, I agree the AIC looks better. The red paint on the Ferrari looks much richer and the aliasing on the curved lines are not created on AIC as they were with DV100. Ok...So if AIC looks just as good or better then DVCPROHD, then here's a couple questions for ya:

1. Can HDV converted to AIC be edited in FCP5 HD as easy and in real time like the wonderful DVCPROHD can?
2. Do you still need to 'conform' AIC footage to 23.98 like you did with the DVCPROHD footage?

I hope you realize your findings are helping MANY MANY people right now. *smile*

P.S.
What type of system are you using? I was told that HDVxDV did not have the ability to create DVCPROHD files from captured HDV. But you seem to be able to do it no problem.

- ShannonRawls.com

P.S.S
I don't know about that timecode. All the clips start at 0.00. I real way to find out if timecode is accurate is to see if a clip that didnt start at 0.00 shows the correct number.

P.S.S.S.
And why are your FCP sequence settings at 1280x1080?? This is the XL-H1 you're working with, right? Shouldn't that be 1440x1080 with Anamorphic 16:9 checked off for 1.333PAR?

- ShannonRawls.com

Note: Regarding the 1440pixel descrepency, I got it to export AIC at 1440x1080, in preferences I told it to leave the size "as is".

WHOA!!! Keep it coming Steev! Keep the good info coming!

:D

1. Can HDV converted to AIC be edited in FCP5 HD as easy and in real time like the wonderful DVCPROHD can?

I can get 4 HD layers in AIC 1440x1080, no rendering or RT downres needed. I can get 7 layers to play in unlimited RT without much stutter.

2. Do you still need to 'conform' AIC footage to 23.98 like you did with the DVCPROHD footage?

Yes. This has got to be a glitch with HDVxDV. But at least there's a workaround. The difference is significant, because without doing the conform step, you will have compromised performance on the timeline.

What type of system are you using?

I'm on a Quad G5. No RAID yet.

Here's one of my biggest tests left, which I may go just get an XL-H1 if I can find one locally, and test. Performance using a 35mm imager (http://www.holyzoo.com/content/mpic/). First test - straight up - what does it look like using -3 gain, and all suggested ideal settings, recorded to HDV, then run though the above mentioned process, and seen with my own eyes. Then try it with the XL-H1 output and captured via HD-SDI to uncompressed. Then export that uncompressed file to DVCPRO HD, and to HDV and look at the difference.

Hmm. Who might have an XL-H1 in stock in the Bay Area on a Sunday. :)

Regarding Timecode, I double checked in HDVxDV and in FCP and there is indeed timecode and they do match.

Alright, this is post hog city here, but one thing I'd like test for sure is the audio. Right now I have audio with drop frame rate - 47616Hz. FCP isn't lookin happy with that - it's upconverting to 48khz on the fly. So I tried Non-Drop in HDVxDV and that goes into FCP perfectly with no upconverting necessary. Question is, how accurate is the audio using this method? Hmm. I don't think I have any .m2t files with anything I can reference audio sync with.

Isn't AIC based on wavelet compression, somewhat akin to the Cineform codec?

Right now I have audio with drop frame rate - 47616Hz. FCP isn't lookin happy with that - it's upconverting to 48khz on the fly.

Something doesn't compute here. Drop frame timecode does nothing to the audio or video. It only effects the numbering of the frames, dropping frame numbers 00 and 01 (not the frames - the numbers) at the start of every minute except the 10th, 20th etc. The audio sampling rate, in all HD modes, is 48.000 kHz.

Something doesn't compute here. Drop frame timecode does nothing to the audio or video. It only effects the numbering of the frames, dropping frame numbers 00 and 01 (not the frames - the numbers) at the start of every minute except the 10th, 20th etc. The audio sampling rate, in all HD modes, is 48.000 kHz.

I agree something is fishy here. But regarding audio always being at 48khz, I've seen rare anomalies, where drop frame has been applied to the audio.

http://www.holyzoo.com/content/xl-h1/DropFrameAudio.jpg

Reference of use:

http://www.dvxuser.com/V3/showpost.php?p=99706&postcount=5

I found HDVxDV conversion with drop frame selected in preferences, outputs audio at less than 48khz, so I was assuming it was tweaking audio to suit. I would assume selecting non-drop in preferences to correct this, and hope that audio sync was accurate.

Or just get a damn HVX200! :) Oh decisions decisions.

That number (47.952048 kHz) is the effective sample rate if you have exactly 1600 audio samples per video frame (48.000 kHz at 30fps) and then switch to 29.97 fps but keep the same number (1600) of audio samples. I believe several consumer DV cameras do actually do somehing like this. The XL1s, in particular, was rumored to have some strange effective audio sampling rate. Calling this "drop frame" is misleading because 1) it is confused with drop frame timecode and 2) no frames are dropped - the frame rate is .1% lower.

In the XL-1H I'm relying on the manual which says that in all HD modes the sampling rate is 48 kHz. In the SD modes you have a choise of "locked" and "unlocked" audio but the manual doesn't say what that means beyond that they are, respectively, synchronous and asynchronous. Could be 47.952048... in locked mode (synchronous with the frame rate) and 48.000000 kHz in unlocked (not synchronous) but I really have no idea.

I suppose you could record some of the 1 kHz tone from the camera's generator, transfer to an analysis program and count the samples per cycle. If there are 48 in the same place in every cycle then that's 48 kHz sampling. If the samples appear in different places in different cycles then the sampling rate is other than 48 k.

I suppose you could record some of the 1 kHz tone from the camera's generator, transfer to an analysis program and count the samples per cycle. If there are 48 in the same place in every cycle then that's 48 kHz sampling. If the samples appear in different places in different cycles then the sampling rate is other than 48 k.

That's a great idea! Well, after all of this, I've decided it's all not worth the hassle, and there are other factors as well, but for me it'll be the HVX200 workflow. :)