HDLink -- various questions

[Marc Colemont]

On location stores the incoming Mt2 data stream without modifying it.
So you get the same quality Cineform files after converting.

[Anthony Mwamwenda]

Thanks guys!

[Stephen Armour]

Originally Posted by Anthony Mwamwenda

Would it make any difference to the quality of the footage if it could record into Cineform directly from the camera? As opposed to converting it to Cineform after it has been recorded.

Anthony, it DOES make a difference, if you have a way to capture directly from your cams out either a HDMI or SDI port (like on the Sony V1 or the EX1) and BEFORE more compression artifacts are introduced by the HDV in-cam compression. This is done by using one of several different capture boards (like the BM Intensity or others) to a hard drive, compressing and editing only with the Cineform Intermediate codec.

If you can can do it that way, you gain in quality, especially if you do much chroma work or FX. Otherwise, it still looks very very nice after multigenerational edits using Cineform, even if you don't capture directly.

HDV material doesn't look near as nice under those same conditions without Cineform. That's why so many guys here use it for doing heavier editing jobs. It's a serious codec/software for serious production use. For general light/casual use with HDV, it's overkill. For wringing the most from existing equipment (even up to the very best), it's marvelous and cost effective.

Wow, what a promo...

[Richard Eary]

What are the pros and cons of using the CineFrame option in HDLINK when capturing video recorded using the Sony FX1 and Z1U? Of course, this would be recorded in Cineframe mode. Does this work well for low lighting conditions where lighting effects and spot lights will be used?

or, is it better just to capture in 60i? The final product is broadcast, internet flash, and dvd.

[David Taylor]

Richard, we have a lot of information posted about Sony's CineFrame modes here: http://www.cineform.com/products/Tec.../CineFrame.htm. Please take a look at this if you haven't already. Then feel free to follow up with specific questions.

[Richard Eary]

Does anyone have any experience using the CineFrame mode in HDLINK? Does the video look better compared to 60I? Any workflow issues?

I am basically looking for feedback about any experiences. The link you provided is what raised my question to switch to the CineFrame 24/25P with the FX1/Z1U. The information provided looks impressive.

[Marty Baggen]

Richard,

I've used Cineframe, and its pros and cons are discussed both here, and in the Sony forums. Bottomline, the opinion of those with much more tech savvy than I, say.... "don't use Cineframe".

If a progressive end product is your goal, I have been very pleased with capture, post, and output the final edit in the native format of capture (in your case, 60i).

Then I deinterlace in TMPGenc. It offers several different deinterlacing formulas, and also does a wonderful job of rescaling the framesize if you are thinking of using your production on the web, etc.

If you really wanted to take it a step further, you could capture 60i, then use one of the "smart" deinterlacers on each individual clip... setting up the parameters of the deinterlacer to suit the content of each.

There have been some comparisons between TMPGenc and other dedicated (smart) deinterlace softwares, and it actually holds its own very well.

There may be technical arguments against what I have cited here, but I can tell you for certain that my current workflow yields a production superior to the Cineframe scheme.

And one additional point... once shot in Cineframe, you end up taking a resolution hit, and that is your source material forever. My thought is to acquire in the absolute best format your equipment can produce so that your future options always begin with the best possible ingredients.

[Carl Middleton]

I've managed to get pretty good results capturing 50i without Cineframe, using a Z1U, and deinterlace and slow down 4.1% (all right in HDLink) to achieve 24p. It's not full vertical resolution, but it looks good, and I only typically deliver SD.

You could use the FX for that as well, but it would be a 20% slowdown or so (the presets are more specific.)

[Steven Thomas]

OK, does anyone know if I can use the BM HDLINK into a BM INENSITY PRO and capture Cineform NEO HD both audio and video via this BM card?

Also, if it does work. I believe I should be able to capture to NEO HD 1920x1080 24P 10 bit 4:2:2 from the Sony PMW-EX1. Is this true? If it does work, I would probably have to choose to remove 3-2 pulldown in the Cineform software.

I would like to know these answers before I upgrade from NEO HDV to NEO HD.

Also, if I manage to get 10 bit 4:2:2 files, I've heard that Sony Vegas 8 Pro only has 8 bit file I/O. Does anyone know if this is true? This seems odd since they offer 32 bit internal. If Vegas is out, Would Adobe Premiere Pro CS3 offer 10 bit I/O?

[Richard Eary]

It looks as if Cineframe is not the best path to take when capturing video. I have to agree that it is better to capture the source in the best format possible. It looks as if I will stick with capturing 60I in HDLink since that will retain the best picture.

Thanks again

[William Urschel]

Richard, I have not attempted to use the Cineframe mode to capture, so I cannot add any intelligence to the discussion from that standpoint - I have read the entire CineForm presentation on the use of that format, have been very impressed with the cogent presentation there, and have been tempted to give it a try, but for a good reason cited at the end of this post, I won't be using it now.

But I might mention an alternate for your consideration that you could try out without too much difficulty, and see how it works for you:

Shoot with the FX1 (that's one of the three HDVs I use) in your normal 1080i (and yes, I certainly agree with Marty about shooting in the native format of your camera to maintain the best original source material - assuming that 1080i is superior to Cineframe). Then edit in 1080i (and do not deinterlace until the edit is finished) and then, using TMPGenc (I don't have it, but have read in dozens of different posts that it is the best prosumer program out there), convert to 480 progressive, or another size.

I have tried all kinds of combinations with Cineform and my current Premiere CS3 crummy Adobe Media Encoder. Here is how I am currently getting the very best results for me and my customers using the AME. I shoot and download in 1080i, using CineForm, perform complete edits in Premiere in 1080i, and then using CineForm to export from the Premiere timeline, I convert to 1080p. Then in Encore, and using the much maligned MainConcept device, I transcode and burn DVDs in 480p. Of course I set the transcode up for target 7 Mb variable 2 pass, which takes about six hours for a 45 minute feature on my PC's dual, dual Xeon 3.0 processor. The results are better than seven other work flows I have tried, including converting 1080p to 480p using CineForm!

Using this workflow (versus leaving the format in interlaced til the end and then converting to progressive) I get superb results (and I'm picky).

I have been warned off by some real experts against burning progressive DVD-Rs since the DVD spec apparently doesn't even allow for progressive. Well, I run everything I produce in Standard Definition through a Toshiba HD-DVD player, a Sony Blu Ray player, a Sony progressive output DVD player, an inexpensive Sony DVD player with interlaced output, a elcheapo Insignia DVD player feeding a cheap CRT, and two portable Insignia DVD players (also unbelievably cheap) - interlaced DVD-Rs play on all of these - progressive DVD-Rs play on all except one of the Insignia portables. The progressive DVD-Rs play on most of my customers machines, if the machines were manufactured since 2003. And as you probably well know (I didn't, and it surprised me) since you're evidently producing DVDs in progressive, our equipment does a lot better in deinterlacing than does the equipment in our customers playback equipment (unless they have some expensive Silicon Optics chips or such).

By the way, you didn't indicate if you're on an Apple or a PC - but if you're on a PC, you might be interested to know that Microsoft has had Service Pack #3 out in Beta for some time, and will be releasing it shortly - if it doesn't mess up our programs, according to some Beta users, it may speed up transcoding by 50% for those of us with multiple processors!

Finally, I will be setting aside this whole interlaced issue, as I'll be purchasing a Sony EX-1.

Best of success to you in whatever transcoding you do!

[Marty Baggen]

William, you may want to see if TMPGenc is available as a trial. You should also investigate Fields Kit by RE:Vision. TMPGenc is a great tool even if you upgrade to progressive acquisition.

I'm adding the EX1 as well, so let me ask this... given your experiementation and the caveat of progressive DVD, are you going to mess with interlacing a progressive source for the benefit of SD DVD?

It seems like an unlikely step backwards, but I suppose in the rare cases that you cite, there may be compatibility issues?

[William Urschel]

Marty, thanks for the suggestion re TMPGEnc - sorry to be so late getting back to you, but I've been trying to get at the root of an issue in my screening room that just started yesterday morning (I'm suddenly and inexplicably getting serious screen flicker - the projector bulb in a Panasonic AE1000U has only 425 hours on it), and I'm trying to find out if this intermittent issue is the result of the projector, the receiver, or the HDMI cable (the player is OK).

Finally prompted by your post, I've now gone to TMPGEnc's site - of all thier flavors available, I assume you're talking about "TMPGEnc 4. XPress". It's available for trial download. Still having four major productions to edit which were shot in 1080i, I'm going to purchase the program, which isn't expensive, and give it a shot on one of my current productions, as one alternate to my current workflow.

From your early post in this thread, it sounds as if you have some real experience using TMPGenc for de-interlace (as well as its other many functions). I'd appreciate any feed back you might provide about one specific aspect of your workflow - with source material of 1080i, at what point do you de-interlace? Do you deinterlace right after capture, on individual clips, using TMPEnc, or after you've finished editing in 1080i (or after editing in 480i, previously down-rezzed by Cineform or TMPGEnc?).

As to whether or not I intend to continue to produce DVD-Rs in 480p or 480i, I will produce everything in 480p, except when a customer doesn't have a main player which will read 480p (I check that out ahead of time by giving the customer two little test discs, one in 480i, and the other in 480p). One of my customers, for instance, just found that his old, old (2002) Sony player played the 480p test disc fine, but his first generation Toshiba HD-DVD player (the only one feeding his flat panel LCD widescreen) wouldn't register anything - I have suggested to him that he replace that Toshiba (with its old CPU and 1 gig of Ram!) with Toshiba's latest HD-DVD for $150 - no word yet.

And re Blu Ray, I don't have the faintest yet. I'm currently archiving every production on hard drives in 1080i, for the future. And when a customer asks for a Blu Ray, I'll purchase my first burner, and figure that all out then. I see that almost all commercial Blu Ray discs advertise on their packaging that they are presented in 1080p - in keeping with the current consumer hysteria about 1080p ala Best Buy and Circuit City! And again, I see that for whatever reason, 1080p is excluded from the Blu Ray spec!?

[Carl Middleton]

Hey guys,

I have a good bit of footage I shot yesterday with my Z1 in 1080i60 mode. I'm looking to possibly do some slow motions, and I'm thinking of finishing this in 720p for the sake of more lattitude with slow-motion.

Can I deinterlace and scale to 720p? The reason is, there is some rather unsteady footage here, but I shot at a very high shutter speed to allow for better motion processing. What would be the best settings to go from 1080i60 to 720p24? Ideally I would like to do something along these lines, 1080i60 deinterlace to 540p60 (540x1440) scaled to 720p60 then slow-mo -60% to 720p24.... giving me a LOT of room to work with already in the slow-mo department...

I am worried I will lose a lot in the deinterlace and then having to upscale to 720 though, any thoughts?

C

[Tony Modena]

I am trying to convert 60i clips to 24p, I was about to purchase DVFilm maker or Magic Bullet for this but then I noticed these options in HDLink.

When capturing, does HDlink do a good job converting and de-interlacing the footage to 24p?

Thanks