Hello people from dvinfo! I´m building a new machine to work with HDV sony Z1 and M25U(HDMI) or M15U deck. My machine it will falow the videoguys.com specs for dual xeon dual core. But i´m wondering it will be the best way to go.

1º Adobe prodution CS3 with matrox RTX.2(realtime premiere) and intesity pro(HDMI)??? it is possible to use both? Someone here already tried?

2º Avid xpress pro with avid toolbox with mojo SDi and convert design box to conect the M25U HDMI output with the SDI in of the mojo

I usually prefer the adobe solution because i´m already trained for, but for professional issues is best to learn another apliccation. Waiting for some directions, thanx
Luis

no ideas about it?

Why not fire wire? There is no benefit in using HDMI, unless you want to to forfeit desk control.

i tought tha i could get better unconpresed signal with HDMI over firewire

Once your material is on tape, there is no way to get an uncompressed signal. Once compressed it remains compressed. Using HDMI is no different than using fire wire, just a means for digital transfer, but fire wire has the advantage of transferring time code and recording data and deck control, all of which are not available when using HDMI.

Thanx Harm! so it would be good to use HDMI for live capture from the camera, right? If i use Focus FS4HD with firewire or something like that i would be getting a better image?? than getting from tape, right?

Thanx Harm! so it would be good to use HDMI for live capture from the camera, right? If i use Focus FS4HD with firewire or something like that i would be getting a better image?? than getting from tape, right?

Impossible. Look here: http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=96213

Thanx for the directions, i will go with avid pro and m15U !and for the HDMI projects... i love experimental eltronic tests!

I thought the HDMI carried the audio & data all in one cable and as new to HD editing was going to get a new high end graphics card with HDMI to capture instead of dedicated video card ? . Then I could do others things. I've only got P4 2.8 System & Piannacle sofware is very slow at rendering. Got a couple of bits for my new build ie 150gig raptor ,new case etc..was going to get 500gig Samsung for video files , But some one said should stick with raptors even though less storage. & quad core not way to go as less than 3ghz ? Pinnacle does not support 64 bit. So may have to learn new editing software that does.
Any ideas as I've gone off the rails with which wat to go. I have a lot of dv footage to edit & now HD. I've had terrible problems with Pinnacle -but it has been easy & ok when its worked. do not like there infernal key system while upgrades give very little extra.
Joe

I thought the HDMI carried the audio & data all in one cable and as new to HD editing was going to get a new high end graphics card with HDMI to capture instead of dedicated video card ? . Then I could do others things. I've only got P4 2.8 System & Piannacle sofware is very slow at rendering. Got a couple of bits for my new build ie 150gig raptor ,new case etc..was going to get 500gig Samsung for video files , But some one said should stick with raptors even though less storage. & quad core not way to go as less than 3ghz ? Pinnacle does not support 64 bit. So may have to learn new editing software that does.
Any ideas as I've gone off the rails with which wat to go. I have a lot of dv footage to edit & now HD. I've had terrible problems with Pinnacle -but it has been easy & ok when its worked. do not like there infernal key system while upgrades give very little extra.
Joe

Instead of getting a high end graphics card with HDMI, just use on board fire wire to capture and use the amount not spent on getting a better CPU, more RAM, more disks and a good editor like Vegas or Premiere. Try to sell the Pinnacle of frustration and disillusion.

I JUST ordered an intensity card and HDMI cable, thinking there was a HUGE benefit to capturing via HDMI over Firewire. Based on this thread, it sounds like I should cancel! Opinions welcome. I think I still have time...

Hi,

Using HDMI is different from using firewire. HDMI is a digital video signal while firewire is data transfer. This means that you can take the HDMI signal out from your camera and capture it into a more manageable codec for editing.

So from the above HDMI is better ?. Does this mean the codec compression is less and you lose quality OR NOT .
Joe.

I honestly can not see any advantage in a video transfer over a data transfer, nor can I see the advantage of throwing out time code data, date and time stamp, exposure data etc. and losing deck control.

I much prefer using Cineform or similar plug-ins to convert from native HDV to an intermediate codec and keeping all relevant data intact.

The advantage of the video transfer is that you can attach the camera to a TV for watching. For editing there are only disadvantages.

Thanks Harm. I was getting hung up on getting HDMI ports on computer/ laptop when my Canon HV20 has both firewire & HDMI. So its more conveinience in USING hdmi connecting to HD LCD. I think partly the problem is people hearing about the 1.3 HDMI standard where most LCD TV's are obsolete and think HDMI is superceding Firewire.
Joe

It's just a different workflow and not a matter of one connection superseding another.

Some users use firewire capture in the native DV or HDV codec with timecode and deck control. They may choose to re-encode the captured footage to another format after capturing.

Others will use HDMI, capture to their codec of choice and use firewire for deck control and still retain time code information. This way, they use the camera's hardware filtering to regain the 4:2:2 signal out of the camera.

Some other users capture live of the camera via HDMI into Uncompressed codec for green screen work bypassing HDV compressing to tape altogether.

Others will use HDMI, capture to their codec of choice and use firewire for deck control and still retain time code information. This way, they use the camera's hardware filtering to regain the 4:2:2 signal out of the camera.


Please explain how you regain a 4:2:2 signal when all you have to start out with is 4:2:0. Is it the Wizard of Oz at work? How can you retain time code info, when is has been lost during HDMI transfer? What about all the other data thrown away during transfer with HDMI?

You make it sound like you drive your Trabant into your garage, attach the charger to your battery and expect to drive out of your garage driving a Bentley. Just to make it clear, even with charged batteries a Trabant is still a Trabant.

The HDMI output is a YUV 4:2:2 video signal and is derived by the camera's internal hardware processing from the HDV footage on tape. As mentioned previously, timecode is captured because it comes in via firewire as the NLEs use that as the timecode source when not using DV or HDV. This is similar to capturing HD-SDI and getting time code from the RS422 control. Other data will not be captured.

Im just learning about this issue, so forgive me my ignorance:

would it be better quality (lets say color space) an HDV-on-tape image captured by HDMI to AspectHD, than by firewire to AspectHD?

My whole reason for going with HDMI capture was that I heard it was higher resolution than Firewire: 1920x1080 (HDMI) vs 1440x1080 (Firewire). It appears this may be a myth? And if HDMI captures contain no timecode, I don't undertsnad all the hoopla. It MUST contain SOME sort of time stamp, no?

My whole reason for going with HDMI capture was that I heard it was higher resolution than Firewire: 1920x1080 (HDMI) vs 1440x1080 (Firewire). It appears this may be a myth? And if HDMI captures contain no timecode, I don't undertsnad all the hoopla. It MUST contain SOME sort of time stamp, no?

IMO it is all a myth. Once your signal is on tape, it is recorded at 1440x1080 in a 4:2:0 color space and heavily compressed. If you add some arbitrary bits to make it into 4:2:2 color space, it does not add information, it just adds some arbitrary bits that were lost previously, not meaningful information. A second thing to consider is the placement of the HDI chip in relation to the DSP. In most consumer camera's it is placed after the DSP, which means that the original signal (1920x1080) has been converted to 1440x1080 with a PAR of 1.333.

Look at it as if it were taxation. You earn $ 1000, the IRS comes along and they have you pay your taxes, say $ 800 (yeah, they are greedy), so you end up with $ 200. Whatever you do, your spending power is limited to $ 200, unless you find a way the IRS does not stop by (HD-SDI or HDMI live). Where and how you spend that $ 200 amount is up to you, just as HDMI or fire wire. But there is no way you can make that $ 200 into $ 500 or more without cheating the system.

Signals once recorded at 4:2:0 can be artificially converted to 4:2:2 color space, but do not gain you anything. Just like the $ 200 can be changed into other denominations, but will not by some magical trick amount to $ 500.

Just my 0.02 cents

I'm using HDMI now to connect to Sony 40x series LCD TV with the Canon HV20. Suppossedly 1080p LCD TV, Having shot on Sony High Def tape. Sony also tell me the two HDMI ports are HDMI 1.3 Standard. Yet I can not find this on any Sony specs.We are told HDMI 1.3 will be more future proof for handling far more data. The Camcorder is supposed to be true HD. Yet I only ever get 1080i. It all seems to be some kind of Joke. Some HDMI Gold/silver cables costing up to hundreds of dollars to just a few. HDMI is HDMI should handle the standard whatever the cost. The only advantage to me is connecting one cable with the video signal also instead of two cables.
I Have yet to see 1080P on my latest Sony model from any source. Even latest games on Sony PS3 are only 720p.
Bought my HDMI cable for around $25.
Joe