Nice little article. The camera continues to pick up momentum.

http://www.studiodaily.com/filmandvideo/currentissue/6088.html

Thanks for the link - the video that's w/ the article is nice too!

John

Good read but another example of a poorly written article. Why don't these authors do their homework a bit and add some substance to the article. At the time this was released they could have added a paragraph at the end explaining that there ARE other native editing solutions that don't require the $2000 card. passing on.

Man we should invite him over here to this forum to swap stories and help with his workflow. Anybody know the guy in question?

Man we should invite him over here to this forum to swap stories and help with his workflow.

Yeah, like the $80.00 HDVxDV :)
BTW, I was puzzled by his continuos mention of MiniDV as a limiting factor, the weakness of red etc. Is he assuming that the encoding is the same of SD cameras? I thought that the transport mechanism wasn't the issue in color loss. The codec is the main responsible. Unless I misunderstood what he means.
I know that MPEG2 compression is not as good as capturing from the component output, I'm just curious about the MiniDV-specific issues.
Anybody can elaborate on this?

--
Paolo

Right. Just another example (no offense to the author) of a misinformed unqualified person publishing an article.

Always take what you read with a grain of salt and find other articles (data) to support it before running with it.

I was looking for a "page 2" but I guess that's it. It seems a bit more like a press release than an article.

I was looking for a "page 2" but I guess that's it. It seems a bit more like a press release than an article.

I think he may have had a point about the post software solutions being a giant pain in the butt compared to using an AJA card and importing that way. He clearly mentions that he tried Lumiere - I'd assume he looked into the other software solutions too.

Is there evidence that the software solutions degrade quality or cause other issues as opposed to coming in via AJA?

with that workflow wouldn't HDSDI be even more degrading to the image? If it were recorded to tape first then output through analog component video converted to HDSDI isnt that unneccesary recompression right off the bat. It would only be advantagous if it were captured live off the cam and not recorded to tape first. Sounds like this guy just needed a little help with his flow.

Sounds like this guy just needed a little help with his flow.

I do too.

My impression from a couple people I've spoken with is capturing via the component out into a card to get into another more "Post Friendly" codec is a good solution. That's obviously what this guy decided to do and he said he tried Lumiere... which appears from what I've read to be the better of the software routes.

I don't think we really want to be in HDV when we start color correcting and doing composites - so the question I have is what codec do you want to be in and what's the highest quality way of getting there in Final Cut?

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems. He made FCP issues sound like camera issues, unless you check out the video you get the wrong impression about things. (Not attacking FCP here, just one persons ignorance).

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems. He made FCP issues sound like camera issues, unless you check out the video you get the wrong impression about things.

What is most surprising is that he didn't test this before beginning shooting. Can't blame anybody but yourself if you didn't verify all the steps before. Just reading the product specs is not enough.

--
Paolo

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems. He made FCP issues sound like camera issues


I didn't take it that way. I took it that he was told one thing and found out another later and was a little frustrated. The reality is this camera doesn't appear to meld with the Mac very well right now... it's a workflow issue that relates to the codec this camera uses. I think that's a fair consideration. I'm not sure asking someone to switch platforms is a better idea than just plugging a card into their Mac.

I'm still waiting for some wise person to answer my questions on the topic... so I'm not sure this DP could have posted here and gotten a quick solution. He may have found the highest quality solution on his own - and AJA card. Or not. I've seen no one here say they've test both and Lumiere is better because... etc.

Had he used Vegas and ConnectHD he wouldn't have those workflow problems..

I agree fully Joe. Aside from a couple minor capture issues in ConnectHD, this combo has worked near flawlessly. Ive also tried a trial of Premiere Pro and Aspect 4. Also flawless. Ive always been a PC man. In this business though, tons of people use Macs. A Mac has usually been the better way to go for most. It seems like just not for this camera yet.

I'm not sure this DP could have posted here and gotten a quick solution.

There are plenty of people in these forums who have their workflow figured out on the Mac for the time being and dont use HDSDI. But you would think Apple would have a fix by now man. They eventually will.

But you would think Apple would have a fix by now man. They eventually will.

Yeah - I'd actually put the blame on Apple more than JVC. They've had forever to figure this out. Maybe Apple believed all the Panasonic hype and thought it would be a category killer. Hopefully they know better now.

Maybe Panasonic paid Apple to support P2 and the HVX so quickly. If so, hats off to them for getting their camera supported. I don't think the HVX works very well on PC's quite yet though... almost the reverse situation of HD-100's.

Joel,

As a long time FCP user, yes Apple should have gotten a patch out for HDV 720P24. But I think that most of their programmers are working overtime to make the switch to a Universal version of FCP that will work on the new Intel Macs. Apple usually (at least for the past 3 years) releases a new version of FCP at NAB every year. You would think that they would want to announce a new version that will use the new Intel chips. Hopefully the new HDV 720p24 codec will be included.

Back to your original question though. I attended a seminar where Gary Adock, a top editor in Chicago, talked about editing HDV and that the best solution was to edit in another format than HDV. Shoot HDV and then convert upon ingestion into your NLE. He was touting the AJA card and using it to convert the footage into the DVCPro HD 720p codec. This would have to be done via the component outs on the HD100/deck, whatever your feeder is.

The main point was that HDV is great for shooting, but get out of it fast for editing and final delivery.

I have been editing HDV on a Mac for the past year, though it has been the Sony 1080i format. I am really longing for a progressive image though. Interlace artifacts on HDV are really bad.

What I am not sure of it how you could use the 24P images via the component output of the HD100. Does it output a 720p60 signal or a 24P one?

I need to do some more research.

Dan Weber

What I am not sure of it how you could use the 24P images via the component output of the HD100. Does it output a 720p60 signal or a 24P one?
Yes. That's a bit of a problem because you need to edit in a 60P sequence to avoid rendering. So you have the 2:3 pulldown duplicate frames all the time. I've captured some uncompressed 720P60 (while in 24P mode) using the BM Decklink and it worked well, both live and off tape. When capturing live you can never get 2:3 pulldown 24P, but instead 48P in a 1:1:1:2 pulldown pattern.(or maybe you could call it a 4:1 pulldown?) You can get a full 60P live out of the component when in 720P30 mode.

But I think that most of their programmers are working overtime to make the switch to a Universal version of FCP that will work on the new Intel Macs.

Unlikely. The FCP Universal Binary was announced at the last MacWorld, scheduled for March. Switching to Universal Binary, for a developer, is a pretty simple transition, no much more than turning on a few switches in the compiler. And Apple had that technology available before anybody else. The biggest challenge is in QA and, in the case of FCP, integration with all the existing plugins.
No, Apple has really no excuse for taking so long to add 24P support to FCP. The 30P support is already there, they cannot claim that they don't have access to JVC specs. I'm a big fan of the company but what they did for the HD100 has really no explanation but the usual business games that are probably playing behind the scenes. It's no mystery that Apple and Panasonic are bedfellows, I think it's time for them to turn it into a threesome :)

--
Paolo

Paulo,

Now let's not talk dirty on this forum!!!! LOL

I have a relative who works as a programmer/tester at Apple. I can give him a call and see if he can find anything out, though he says that the different teams do not talk to each other. Might be part of the culture there.

Apple should have fixed the problem. I asked them about it at DV Expo East last summer and they said that the HDV 720p24 spec wasn't part of the original HDV agreement made by the 5 original companies. This wasn't a high up that made the statement, but it did make sense from what I have read.

I hope they do implement it soon. I am making my mind up on a new camera soon and the HD100 is at the top of the list. And I won't be changing my editing system, so it has to work with FCP.

Dan Weber

Paulo,
I have a relative who works as a programmer/tester at Apple. I can give him a call and see if he can find anything out, though he says that the different teams do not talk to each other. Might be part of the culture there.

Sometimes it's just the size of these projects. I worked for 7 year at Borland and each team was pretty separate too. Some technology was shared but everybody was busy working 14 hours a day trying to kick digital ass :)


I asked them about it at DV Expo East last summer and they said that the HDV 720p24 spec wasn't part of the original HDV agreement made by the 5 original companies.


If that's true, it's a pretty dumb agreement. What were they thinking? who was the visionary who thought that 24fps doesn't matter? :) Quick give him a VP position, he's too good!


I hope they do implement it soon. I am making my mind up on a new camera soon and the HD100 is at the top of the list. And I won't be changing my editing system, so it has to work with FCP.


Dan, it does work with FCP provided that you use something like HDVxDV. I got the camera in October and since then I've been testing and importing clips into FCP. I use HDVxDV or the clips capturedfrom DVRack (PC), export the m2t to AIC and then edit it in FCP. So far so good and the cost of HDVxDV is about $80, if I remember well, so it's affordable. One more step but nothing too dramatic. My main concern is about possible quality loss (not noticed) and the fact that I lost the rather excellent clip logging feature of FCP. It's not bad in the interim but Apple's latency is gettingincresingly frustrating.
But wait, on the other hand they just announced the WONDERFUL iPod leather case. WOW! Now, that's was worth the wait ;)

--
Paolo

There is certainly no excuse as to why they aren't supporting 25p. That must have always been a known spec. Why support 30p and not 25p???

From what I was told, the original specs for HDV were 720p30 and 1080i.

JVC then developed ProHD with its 720p24 frame rate, which technically isn't part of the HDV spec. (This is what I was told so don't flame the messanger).

No matter what the case it, support for 24P needs to happen soon in FCP.

Apple and Panasonic have had a close relationship, but Apple also pushed the FX-1 when it came out (to help sell FCPE HD).

NAB should bring out some new stuff. Though I remember waiting for 2 years for DVCPRO HD over firewire to come out. Everyone thought that they needed FW800 for it and they didn't.