Hi Everyone. I hope this is not considered a double post. I think my question was buried in a thread that I tried to jump on to...which I hope wasn't considered thread jacking. I am not so good at the whole forum thing.

I really need to try and edit my goods that I shot on a JVC GY110U in 24p. I am using final cut 5.1.2. I have read all of the threads regarding the drop-out capture problems I am having. .m2t was mentioned as an answer. However, I do not know what it is or what it means.

Can you help me?

Thanks,
Sharon

.m2t is the native format that HDV is captured as. It is a double file of .m2v (video) and Audio (either Aiff or AC3 etc.). Final Cut Pro can only edit HDV natively if it is wrapped in a .MOV wrapper. You would have to capture to a program live DVHSCap (free to download) which captures the raw HDV stream from the camera as .m2t and then convert it to a FCP codec using a program like MPEG Streamclip (also free).

Have you tried capturing in FCP? It handles the JVC 720p24 natively so you don't have to lengthen your workflow with MPEGStreamclip and DVHSCap, both of which are great and useful apps, but not necessary for what you've shot.

And Dave is right, there is really no reason to use the .m2t workflow for FCP anymore, but I was just giving the overview of the .m2t process.

One downside of capturing and editing native HDV in FCP is the rendering times - which can very slow. I've hit this wall when I tried to edit a wedding video in native HDV.

One of the upsides of using DHVScap and MPEGStreamclip is that you can use DVCProHD codec which cuts FCP rendering times considerably (or even AIC format - Apple Intermediate Codec)

You can of course use FCP to convert the HDV footage to DVCProHD or AIC.


Andrew

I've wondered about this too - why is it so hard for editing systems to handle this format?

I remember Barry Green warning about how hard editing HDV would be a year ago...

I just don't know why. Has FCP resolved these issues? Can it edit and then print to tape .mt2 files natively? I use Premiere Pro 2.0, but I hate it...

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com

I've wondered about this too - why is it so hard for editing systems to handle this format?

I remember Barry Green warning about how hard editing HDV would be a year ago...

I just don't know why. Has FCP resolved these issues? Can it edit and then print to tape .mt2 files natively? I use Premiere Pro 2.0, but I hate it...

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com

Because you are editing in an MPEG based format. The nature of working with a stream where most frames are falsely generated creates a lot of the overhead. Even if you have regular DV and want to to aggressive software slow-mo where many fake, in between frames have to be created, you'll see a lot of computational time involved.

Being a GOP format, every time you edit anything that requires rendering to playback in RT, the GOP structure has to be re-conformed and that's a lot of computational work to get a quality output.

-gb-

Has FCP resolved these issues? Can it edit and then print to tape .mt2 files natively? I use Premiere Pro 2.0, but I hate it...

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com

I am not sure what there is to "hate" about Premiere Pro 2.0, but I haven't had the benefit of using FCP, so I am not "spoiled" by its benefits. But I have noted that in Premiere Pro 2, "native" HDV editing on a Dual processor system is getting as easy and quick as editing in DV was 3 years ago. You do have to keep in mind that you should avoid continuous rerendering in an edit, because due to GOP you can have some strange things happening, but I think Premiere had done a great job of working with .m2t file editing.

Vegas appears, in my mind to be slower, but it seems to have a cleaner down convert after editing to a standard definition format.

And adding the AspectHD codec gives a boost to the PPro 2.0.
I can edit HDV realtime with a P4 2,4GHz processor were I needed a Matrox RTX.100 Extreme Pro card to do the same in DV.

I've noticed that FCP, PP2 and Avid are a bit sluggish (but still useable) with HDV native but, interestingly, Edius and Liquid are super slick.

I am not sure what there is to "hate" about Premiere Pro 2.0, but I haven't had the benefit of using FCP, so I am not "spoiled" by its benefits.

It's just a very un-intuative system IMHO. Getting it to do even the most basic things (like, say, getting the image to fill the entire screen, rather than just a small portion of it) is like pulling teeth - if you can do it at all. You need the manual for almost any task - and I've been an on-line video editor for a decade at least.

As far as it's ability to handle HDV, I read a few months ago that it's impossible to export at full, native, quality, regardless of the process used. Can't say if this is a problem that's been addressed or ever will be - but I do know I don't want to lose 15-20% of my resolution of the top with no say in it. I must render virtually everything to look at. It works, which is better than nothing, but it certainly is no joy to use.

Never used FCP before - but almost everyone else has. If I have a question about PP2 (which is almost constantly) it's on-line questioning, or nothing. I know 6 cats right now who could teach me FCP. This is not direct knock against PP2, but given the clumsy, and at times, absolutely counter-intuative set up, it is a even more serious limitation.

Part of the problem is that HD cameras and editing solutions are so new. Whatever .mt2 is, is seems to crush all but the newest computers.

john
evilgeniusentertainment.com

I edit professionally and I've used Avid, Adobe Premiere Pro, and Final Cut Pro. Final Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 are virtually identical in every way. I'd be hard pressed to see anyone convince me that they are all that different since I've now done projects in both in the last 2 months.

Like any software you're not used to using - you'd have to grab the manual. After being a Premiere user for 6 years, switchign to AVID for features was a change, but I don't think it's all that different either. Different buttons to do the exact same things.

There is NO SUCH THING as "better" or "worse" with NLE's - only preference. It could be "better" for your circumstance, but that doesn't make it better for everyone.

Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 already has presets available for download for JVC 24P 720.... AVID hasn't gotten there yet.

.m2t is the native format that HDV is captured as. It is a double file of .m2v (video) and Audio (either Aiff or AC3 etc.).

Hi Steve. I thought the audio in HDV was MPEG1 Layer 2?

Richard

Rich, you are right. HDV1 records as MPEG1 Layer 2 Audio. You can demux the file in MPEG Streamclip into AIFF or AC3 though.

I edit professionally and I've used Avid, Adobe Premiere Pro, and Final Cut Pro. Final Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 are virtually identical in every way.

Peter: Its funny you mention that. I had never seen the GUI for Final Cut til today, after I made my earlier post. Then I travelled to my wife's office, and their media guy had FCP up on a screen and I casually glanced at it and said, oh you're using Premiere, then I zeroed in on the upper left hand corner, and it said FCP.... Of course I didn't use it, but I was surprized at how similar it looks.

It's just a very un-intuative system IMHO.





I guess its just what you have learned with in the first place. It feels very intuitive to me, and I have been using it for years, as it developed, I am comfortable with it. Have had no real issues with editing even in HDV with my AMD 3800+ dual core system, self built for about $1,000.00.

I also have Vegas 7, which I am struggling with to make intuitive to me....Its all about interface, the way I see it. After I saw FCP today, after my first post, I'm thinking if you have problems with PPro 2, you will have problems with FCP.

but I was surprized at how similar it looks.

Premiere Pro and Final Cut Pro not only look incredibly similar, they work very similar. Most people when referring to Adobe Premiere have not actually used it since it's gone "Pro". It's far more intuitive than AVID. I find Avid to be stuck in their old ways and not very efficient, especially in the realm of editing on the actual timeline, although I love the TRIM tool and wish that was in Premiere. Avid does have impeccable file management that's been tried & tested on the biggest of projects.

Again, I cannot stress that there is no such thing as "better" in a sense byond what is better for themselves, and no one else. Each person has a different working style and so each program can be better or worse depending on their own expectations, needs, etc.

- PJR

Thank you for everyone starting up this discussion. However, when I try to capture my 720p24 there are major media dropouts and the media gets broken up into bits. I really have gone through all of the settings and turned off the abort settings and the setting to make subclips. I have even tried the AIC codec. None of this is working.

Any thoughts? What am I overlooking. It seams from other forum discussions that I am not the only one that this is happening to.

Thanks,
Sharon