Shooting with XL1 for CD-ROM

Joe Redifer · December 22nd, 2001, 06:14 PM

Macs can view Divx, but I have run across a couple that don't seem to work. Too bad it's not an official format of any kind. I've seen Divx's that look much worse than Quicktime. Anyway, I would never create a CD-ROM that couldn't be run on both Windows and Macs. That's like creating a web page that can only be viewed on Internet Explorer. The only exception would be if you KNOW the person who is getting the CD-ROM will only have Windows available to them. Plus, if the video ever ends up on the web, well then you should know that Quicktime is the de facto standard for web video (Real Video does not count as "video"... it falls into the "crap" category). If you want to spend mega bucks, then you can have Quicktimes that simply look awesome (check out the Star Wars trailers which were encoded with a professional Sorenson package).

Ozzie Alfonso · January 10th, 2002, 09:56 PM

Joe Redifer,

Earlier you said to shoot "as always" for generating QuickTime movies that will end up on CD-ROMs and/or the Internet. Would you recommend shooting in Movie mode (full frames and not fields)? I'm thinking the user might want to pause the QT. It would be good to have a full, clean frame while on pause.

Joe Redifer · January 11th, 2002, 04:59 AM

I would recommend shooting in Frame mode (I assume Movie Mode is the same thing?) in any case, but even if you don't you are still OK. The only thing you will have to remember to get a clear paused and moving picture is the size of the Quicktime. You won't get the effects of interlacing if you shrink your QT down to 320 x 240 since that resolution just gets rid of every other line. The next step down would be 160 x 120. Just stick with those two sizes and it won't make any difference if what mode you shoot in. If you plan on having 640 x 480 QTs, then you will want Frame/Movie mode.

By the way, I've found that the full version of Media Cleaner (not the EZ version) is actually not bad... the Windows version that is. My previous opinions were of the Mac version. Windows doesn't make it's Sorenson QTs as horribly dark, even if you make your QT with Quicktime itself. I guess the compression codec they put in the Mac Quicktime is just not as good :(. Media Cleaner actually uses QT to do its QT compression. Just make sure you go to the mode where you can input all of your selections in manually, don't do the "wizard" or whatever it is called.

Ozzie Alfonso · January 11th, 2002, 12:56 PM

The specs we got for the QTs are: 240 x 180 at 15fps; MPEG Layer 3 audio, mono, 22.05kHz, 16 bits.

I guess what you're saying is that at that resolution it makes no difference if I shoot with the XL-1 in TV or Movie mode. I've seen some of what they have already shot and it looks okay. The only possible fly in the ointment is that we'll be making a BetaSP protection master since there's a chance this might end up on the air. At t his point I'm getting a little over my head since I've never shot Movie mode (or full frames - i.e. two fields at a time) for broadcast. I don't think it would make a difference since it would end up being broadcast with fields anyway but I'm wondering if there might be some problems looming.

Joe Redifer · January 11th, 2002, 01:13 PM

At that resolution you might see some motion quirkiness in your Quicktime. Also, shooting if Frame mode will work fine for broadcast. It is still interlaced, it's just that both fields are of the same image instead of the two fields being of different points in time. Get what I'm saying here? Anyway you should be fine for the full Betacam version. Shoot in Frame mode just like you would in any other mode. Just be aware that it will look a little jerkier on playback and you may not be used to seeing that from video. It will go a long way into making it look more like film, which is slightly jerkier than that.

Try to make a test Quicktime of about 5 seconds or so at their resolution. Make sure to have lots of motion in that 5 seconds and make sure that you have shot it in interlaced mode. Then see if the Quicktime looks funky.

January 11th, 2002, 01:36 PM

you can have divx on a mac, quality is not that great in os 9.1 but in os x, the quality is excellent (and its still in beta!!!).
Regarding media cleaner pro......... settings CAN be entered manually. if you examine the package properly, you will see how, i cant remember right now!! Media cleaner pro does a very good job, if you use the right settings.

if you are shooting for cd, what are you gonna edit in? and on which platform, mac or pc?

greg
finito productions
stockholm, sweden

Ozzie Alfonso · January 11th, 2002, 02:27 PM

Joe,

>>Just be aware that it will look a little jerkier on playback and you may not be used to seeing that from video. It will go a long way into making it look more like film, which is slightly jerkier than that. <<

Of course at 15fps it WILL be jerky no matter how we shoot it. Regarding broadcast - the problems usually arise on how the signal is processd for uplinks and transmission. Engineers used to bitch a lot just because it was a compressed signal. I think they've gotten over it by now.

The client is asking for frame grabs for printing. This makes shooting in Movie mode even more appealing.

Bobby,

Using divx was mentioned earlier but it's not an option since the product was already started with QT prior to our taking it over and change is not possible.

We'll be editing the material on an AVID 1000, NT based. We'll be delivering the QTs on a PC formatted CD.

January 10th, 2002, 09:56 PM	#17
Ozzie Alfonso Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: New York, NY Posts: 355	Joe Redifer, Earlier you said to shoot "as always" for generating QuickTime movies that will end up on CD-ROMs and/or the Internet. Would you recommend shooting in Movie mode (full frames and not fields)? I'm thinking the user might want to pause the QT. It would be good to have a full, clean frame while on pause. __________________ *Ozzie Alfonso* www.ozziealfonso.com

January 11th, 2002, 12:56 PM	#19
Ozzie Alfonso Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: New York, NY Posts: 355	The specs we got for the QTs are: 240 x 180 at 15fps; MPEG Layer 3 audio, mono, 22.05kHz, 16 bits. I guess what you're saying is that at that resolution it makes no difference if I shoot with the XL-1 in TV or Movie mode. I've seen some of what they have already shot and it looks okay. The only possible fly in the ointment is that we'll be making a BetaSP protection master since there's a chance this might end up on the air. At t his point I'm getting a little over my head since I've never shot Movie mode (or full frames - i.e. two fields at a time) for broadcast. I don't think it would make a difference since it would end up being broadcast with fields anyway but I'm wondering if there might be some problems looming. __________________ *Ozzie Alfonso* www.ozziealfonso.com

January 11th, 2002, 01:36 PM	#21
bobbyxl1 Posts: n/a	mac divx and media cleaner pro settings you can have divx on a mac, quality is not that great in os 9.1 but in os x, the quality is excellent (and its still in beta!!!). Regarding media cleaner pro......... settings CAN be entered manually. if you examine the package properly, you will see how, i cant remember right now!! Media cleaner pro does a very good job, if you use the right settings. if you are shooting for cd, what are you gonna edit in? and on which platform, mac or pc? greg finito productions stockholm, sweden

January 11th, 2002, 02:27 PM	#22
Ozzie Alfonso Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: New York, NY Posts: 355	Joe, >>Just be aware that it will look a little jerkier on playback and you may not be used to seeing that from video. It will go a long way into making it look more like film, which is slightly jerkier than that. << Of course at 15fps it WILL be jerky no matter how we shoot it. Regarding broadcast - the problems usually arise on how the signal is processd for uplinks and transmission. Engineers used to bitch a lot just because it was a compressed signal. I think they've gotten over it by now. The client is asking for frame grabs for printing. This makes shooting in Movie mode even more appealing. Bobby, Using divx was mentioned earlier but it's not an option since the product was already started with QT prior to our taking it over and change is not possible. We'll be editing the material on an AVID 1000, NT based. We'll be delivering the QTs on a PC formatted CD. __________________ *Ozzie Alfonso* www.ozziealfonso.com

December 22nd, 2001, 06:14 PM	#16
Joe Redifer Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 290	Macs can view Divx, but I have run across a couple that don't seem to work. Too bad it's not an official format of any kind. I've seen Divx's that look much worse than Quicktime. Anyway, I would never create a CD-ROM that couldn't be run on both Windows and Macs. That's like creating a web page that can only be viewed on Internet Explorer. The only exception would be if you KNOW the person who is getting the CD-ROM will only have Windows available to them. Plus, if the video ever ends up on the web, well then you should know that Quicktime is the de facto standard for web video (Real Video does not count as "video"... it falls into the "crap" category). If you want to spend mega bucks, then you can have Quicktimes that simply look awesome (check out the Star Wars trailers which were encoded with a professional Sorenson package).

January 11th, 2002, 04:59 AM	#18
Joe Redifer Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 290	I would recommend shooting in Frame mode (I assume Movie Mode is the same thing?) in any case, but even if you don't you are still OK. The only thing you will have to remember to get a clear paused and moving picture is the size of the Quicktime. You won't get the effects of interlacing if you shrink your QT down to 320 x 240 since that resolution just gets rid of every other line. The next step down would be 160 x 120. Just stick with those two sizes and it won't make any difference if what mode you shoot in. If you plan on having 640 x 480 QTs, then you will want Frame/Movie mode. By the way, I've found that the full version of Media Cleaner (not the EZ version) is actually not bad... the Windows version that is. My previous opinions were of the Mac version. Windows doesn't make it's Sorenson QTs as horribly dark, even if you make your QT with Quicktime itself. I guess the compression codec they put in the Mac Quicktime is just not as good :(. Media Cleaner actually uses QT to do its QT compression. Just make sure you go to the mode where you can input all of your selections in manually, don't do the "wizard" or whatever it is called.

January 11th, 2002, 01:13 PM	#20
Joe Redifer Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 290	At that resolution you might see some motion quirkiness in your Quicktime. Also, shooting if Frame mode will work fine for broadcast. It is still interlaced, it's just that both fields are of the same image instead of the two fields being of different points in time. Get what I'm saying here? Anyway you should be fine for the full Betacam version. Shoot in Frame mode just like you would in any other mode. Just be aware that it will look a little jerkier on playback and you may not be used to seeing that from video. It will go a long way into making it look more like film, which is slightly jerkier than that. Try to make a test Quicktime of about 5 seconds or so at their resolution. Make sure to have lots of motion in that 5 seconds and make sure that you have shot it in interlaced mode. Then see if the Quicktime looks funky.