Editing AVCHD

[Curt Talbot]

Is the challenge of editing AVCHD material present when you only wish to edit as SD rather than HD?

[Clint Harmon]

No, the problem lies in the compression that is AVCHD, no matter the resolution or definition. AVCHD almost seems engineered to personally offend any computer processor.

Good luck my friend.

[Mel Enriquez]

Curt,

The challenges of AVCHD has been discussed before. Just do a search and see the responses. As Clint pointed out, it is pretty cpu intensive. It does not matter if your final output is SD. AVCHD is a tough codec that isn't really conducive to editing (at this time).

But in a nutshell, the two main "solutions" you can opt to are:

- get a powerful quad or more cpu and an NLE that can edit AVCHD natively
- transcode first then edit that material.

There's probably other sub-variants in there, but these are basically the two options one can really look up to.

[Martyn Hull]

For me its not the fact my pc is not pwerful enough but unless i convert the footage any avchd film refuses to add titles music dissolves etc, the only 1920x1080 blu rays i can make are basic rough edited files ie deleting and chopping,
But if only sd editing is required converting the footage is the easy answer.

[Ron Chau]

Martyn, what editing software are you using ?

[Dave Blackhurst]

If you downconvert the AVCHD footage (HD>SD) before editing, you're talking about reducing the pixel load about 75%, so that should help a lot!

That said, I prefer to stay at the highest possible rez until the latest possible processing point... to achieve that with AVCHD takes a fast computer and a fair amount of patience.

[Mel Enriquez]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

If you downconvert the AVCHD footage (HD>SD) before editing, you're talking about reducing the pixel load about 75%, so that should help a lot!

That said, I prefer to stay at the highest possible rez until the latest possible processing point... to achieve that with AVCHD takes a fast computer and a fair amount of patience.

Dave,

Are you talking about proxies? I used proxies about 4 times already on long projects. I would convert the HDV files into 2-3mpbs SD mpeg2 files and edit those. Easier on the cpu. Come time to render, I use the HDV files not the proxy files. Is this what you mean?

Will this also work with HD or AVCHD files? In theory it should. I just don't have enough long material to see if it syncs well for long footages. My hf-100 is relatively new and I haven't done a project with it.

What I did yesteraday, by coincidence to your post, is I have unpacked and tried cineform, and then tried rendering a proxy using Sony Vegas 8.0c on my avchd file. Basically, they give me 1:0.5 render ratio. It means a 30 min AVCHD file will transcode in about 15 min. I tried using vegas also to make an 3mpbs mpeg2 file from the avchd file and I get about the same time. The difference is that the neo scene file is about 6x as big as the avchd files. Of course, with neo scene, I can edit that file directly and render off it. But I was thinking, will proxing also work? I edit the mpeg2 file and then, like what I did in the past, I render the AVCHD instead when it's time to create the final output. The advantage of the mpeg2 files is that they are small and not big like the neo scene files.

Have you tried using proxies? Will it work? I use Sony vegas.

[Roger Shore]

Originally Posted by Dave Blackhurst

That said, I prefer to stay at the highest possible rez until the latest possible processing point...

Any special reason for that approach Dave?

My final output resolutions are 1280 x720p, and I've been converting my AVCHD from 1920 x1080i to 1280 x720p Canopus HQ intermediate format, before editing.

Would I be better off editing as 1080i, and then resizing and de-interlacing as part of the final rendering process, rather than before the edit?

[Adam Palomer]

The rule of thumb in any editing process is to make all the cuts, titles, effects, color correction and only in the end convert and/or downgrade the footage.

Keep it pristine until the very end. You can always downgrade the quality of good footage if need be, but you can't improve an already pixelated or artifacted (is that a word?) footage.

Higher bit rate and higher resolution footage can withstand more color corrections and manipulation.

[Jim Snow]

You might want to consider using Cineform which is an intermediate codec that is specifically designed to be editor friendly. It will convert AVCHD to the Cineform codec for editing purposes. It is much less of a burden on the CPU to edit using Cineform. It is also a very low loss codec which minimizes degrading the video when reencoding. The Cineform file sizes are pretty big but that's a small price to pay when you consider the benefits of using it.

[Bryan Sellars]

Originally Posted by Mel Enriquez

Dave,

Are you talking about proxies? I used proxies about 4 times already on long projects. I would convert the HDV files into 2-3mpbs SD mpeg2 files and edit those. Easier on the cpu. Come time to render, I use the HDV files not the proxy files. Is this what you mean?

Will this also work with HD or AVCHD files? In theory it should. I just don't have enough long material to see if it syncs well for long footages. My hf-100 is relatively new and I haven't done a project with it.

What I did yesteraday, by coincidence to your post, is I have unpacked and tried cineform, and then tried rendering a proxy using Sony Vegas 8.0c on my avchd file. Basically, they give me 1:0.5 render ratio. It means a 30 min AVCHD file will transcode in about 15 min. I tried using vegas also to make an 3mpbs mpeg2 file from the avchd file and I get about the same time. The difference is that the neo scene file is about 6x as big as the avchd files. Of course, with neo scene, I can edit that file directly and render off it. But I was thinking, will proxing also work? I edit the mpeg2 file and then, like what I did in the past, I render the AVCHD instead when it's time to create the final output. The advantage of the mpeg2 files is that they are small and not big like the neo scene files.

Have you tried using proxies? Will it work? I use Sony vegas.

Hi Dave, I think Mel has the best solution, one way I have read about is to set up 2 folders one with the original AVCHD and the other the low res copy which you edit then substitute the AVCHD for the low res and relink the files, I use Corel ProX2 and that uses what they call smart proxy and does all the low res files in the background for you, it then uses the AVCHD for the final render. I always do a AVCHD 1920x1080i edited video first and then use that to produce the 1280x720P for Vimeo, and re-encode it with SuperC (freeware) into MOV or mp4 using it's h264/AVC codec
Bryan

[Martyn Hull]

Originally Posted by Ron Chau

Martyn, what editing software are you using ?

Sorry i missed you Ron i use pinnacle ultimate but have tried Adobe and a few others, having to down convert is one of the reasons i have gone back to hdv for now ,editing is so much easier with it.

[Mel Enriquez]

Originally Posted by Bryan Sellars

Hi Dave, I think Mel has the best solution, one way I have read about is to set up 2 folders one with the original AVCHD and the other the low res copy which you edit then substitute the AVCHD for the low res and relink the files, I use Corel ProX2 and that uses what they call smart proxy and does all the low res files in the background for you, it then uses the AVCHD for the final render. I always do a AVCHD 1920x1080i edited video first and then use that to produce the 1280x720P for Vimeo, and re-encode it with SuperC (freeware) into MOV or mp4 using it's h264/AVC codec
Bryan

Bryan,

When I was still using core 2 duo in my dell notebook, sometimes, I use proxies for the HDV files. I'd lay down the HDV track on the Vegas timeline, render it to a 3mpbs or so mpeg2 file. That's what I edit. Come render time, I use the HDV file to get the best quality. I've used this method for 4 full projects in the past without problems. The cuts were where I cut them. And there was no audio syncing problems. But this was with HDV files, not AVCHD.

In theory, the avchd file should be the same. I haven't tried it yet with a true project, so I can't really say if it will work. I can go for neo scene workflow and have tried it. But the file size it produces is horrendous. I've tried a 5 min avchd file and it takes about 2:40 to make a 2.1mbps bitrate mpeg2 file w/c are also small to convert in vegas 8.0c.

So, has anybody tried it with longer files or with a true project?

[Ron Evans]

If you are using Vegas there is no need to use proxies. I use Vegas 8 to edit AVCHD from my SR11 and XR500 native on the timeline. Playback in the preview monitor is set to so that frame rate is normal and resolution is about the same as SD. For multi track editing in Edius I convert to Canopus HQ. File sizes increase just like Cineform to about 4 times the AVCHD file sizes depending on the conversion settings.

Ron Evans

[Mel Enriquez]

Originally Posted by Ron Evans

If you are using Vegas there is no need to use proxies. I use Vegas 8 to edit AVCHD from my SR11 and XR500 native on the timeline. Playback in the preview monitor is set to so that frame rate is normal and resolution is about the same as SD. For multi track editing in Edius I convert to Canopus HQ. File sizes increase just like Cineform to about 4 times the AVCHD file sizes depending on the conversion settings.

Ron Evans

Ron,

I am aware of that. But on multicam editing, it does bog down even for a Quad core. I am even talking of hdv files here, not yet avchd. Mostly, it's the poor preview implementation of vegas, plus the need to access the HD constantly as you play back. If a proxy can be used, created easily and whose file size is small, that can be a way to edit with less pain, or at least less time waiting for the NLE to load the files, and "render" it to preview.

I've noticed that 2 multicams is not much of a problem. But once you hit 4, it becomes dicey. Without a doubt, I'll save myself a lot of extra work by not using proxies with avchd files, but I'll stick with 2 files on multicam editing. I don't know how it will go with 3.

I need to experiment though. We'll see :-)