Intermediate codecs for Windows editing? at DVinfo.net

Werner Wesp · January 18th, 2006, 01:30 PM

I was just wondering wether there is an alternative intermediate codec available for editing on a windows system besides the cineform solution (Connect HD, Aspect HD)?

Chris Barcellos · January 18th, 2006, 02:02 PM

I ve started fulling around with Pinnacles Studio 10 plus, which appears to capture in its own codec, with and extension of .m2v. Studio 10 is supposed to be based on Liquid editing systems, though it is sold as consumer editor. Version I purchased is Studio Plus, which I believe is the one with HD codec. The codec seems to provide a clean intermediate file that equals Cineform. However, so far I cannot use that file in Vegas or Premiere Pro to edit. Studio has had some stability problems, but with a recent Beta upgrade, those issues seem to be reduced.

Chris Barcellos

Guy Barwood · January 18th, 2006, 06:48 PM

Studio 10, like Liquid 6 & 7 are native HDV NLEs, they don't use any intermediate codec. m2v is the video component of the transport stream output by the 1394 port.

Chris Barcellos · January 18th, 2006, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy Barwood

Studio 10, like Liquid 6 & 7 are native HDV NLEs, they don't use any intermediate codec. m2v is the video component of the transport stream output by the 1394 port.

So what you are saying is that m2v is not intermediate, and essentially, in Studio 10 Plus you are editing m2t files. It didn't seem like it to me because it seemed to render pretty fast... but I didn't check files size. I did notice that I renamed the m2v files and I lost sound as a result.

Thanks for the information.

Chris Barcellos

Guy Barwood · January 18th, 2006, 07:36 PM

when you capture you will end up with mv2 and wav files. m2v are the pure video component, and the wav files are the mpg2 audio converted on capture to uncompressed PCM audio.

m2t files are transport stream files, which are a special file format for containing the video and audio in a single file (like program stream). Liquid and Studio (I do assume a bit here basing my knowledge from Liquid not Studio) just seperates the video and audio components and saves them as seperate files (and converts the audio to uncompressed).

If you renamed the audio file as well (and any other file with the same name, sometimes there are index files) you will not loose any audio etc

Stephen L. Noe · January 18th, 2006, 07:54 PM

Also, Liquid keeps the video that is un-edited in it's pristine camera codec fresh state all the way through to output. For Edits, FX and color corrections, Liquid uncompresses the HDV to 2VUY 422 8bit for processing. So, what that means is that the datastream is handled in the most efficient way. It leaves the untouched GOP's just that, untouched. The edited GOP's are rendered uncompressed which is an ideal method across the board.

It is lightning fast and you can edit HD-100 material as easily as DV25 on an off the shelf PCIexpress computer. Liquid really is a match made in heaven for ProHD. 24p film does require a workaround but it is not hard.

My wish list for Liquid later this year is 10bit processing uncompressed and 24p native (and the pull down tools as well for variable frame rate).

I do like the Cineform method as well for non native HDV editors. They have done a really nice job with their implementation and they are already working in 10bit and variable frame rates extracted from 60p but Liquid really is a great marriage with HDV.

have fun...

Chris Barcellos · January 18th, 2006, 08:22 PM

Stephen and Guy:

Thanks for update on that. I will mess around with Studio 10 Plus a little more and see how long it takes to render incomparison to Premiere and Vegas. Premeire uses the intermediate Cineform codec, while Vegas will not, unless we add Cineforms HD Connect at $200. And I understand Aspect from Cineform at $500 will bring the editing speed up to near real time in Premiere Pro. I used the trial versions and was impressed, but haven't settled on where to put the cash yet. Incidentally, I am under the impression that Studio 10 uses the same "engine" as Liquid, but I will follow that up too...

Chris Barcellos

Chris Barcellos · January 18th, 2006, 11:02 PM

This is from one of Pinnacle's promotional pages:

"It combines the power of the highly esteemed professional Liquid Edition Engine with the familiar Studio three-step workflow that you know and love. Studio Plus version 10 means more power , more control , more supported formats, more connectivity to the popular consumer devices including HDV video cameras and more reliability."

So it looks like there are at least some elements of Liquid in Studio Plus 10.

Chris Barcellos

Chris Barcellos · January 18th, 2006, 11:56 PM

Well Okay. I captured 4 minutes of identical HDV footage in both the Pinnacle Studio Plus 10 and with the Cineform intermediate codec on Premiere Pro 1.51. The Pinnacle capture resulted in a total of 780 mgb of files, including the separate sount files. The Premeire capture was 2.7 GB in one .avi file. It looks like the Pinnacle capture is about 1/4 to 30% of the space.

Chris Barcellos

Guy Barwood · January 19th, 2006, 03:26 AM

yes the intermedite codecs hog much more HDD space. I believe they use variable bit rates but it isn't uncommon to get up 100Mbps (you got about 90Mbps average) vs HDVs 25Mbps. While I.C's take the strain of the CPU (easier to decode) they put it back on the HDD subsystem.

Studio has the guts of Liquid but with the much simplier consumer front end. It has the same rendering and RT engine as Liquid, and also features like Instant Save which is amazing in such an entry level product, but then I hear you only get one video track to work with and the first release isn't particulary stable (but that should improve quickly as you mentioned).

When you outgrow Studio you move on to Liquid.

Chris Barcellos · January 19th, 2006, 12:01 PM

[QUOTE=

but then I hear you only get one video track to work with and the first release isn't particulary stable (but that should improve quickly as you mentioned).

[/QUOTE]

Guy:

Actually, there are two tracks that will actually take video. Also the Beta update recently released has helped the stability issues. Thanks.

Ultimately, I think if you are looking for a cheap entry into HDV, this is not a bad way to go..

I did try a render of a four minute capture to DV through Studio Plus 10 (HD to DV) and through Vegas 6 (HD m2t to DV), and note their render times are are almost identical at 7 minutes on my system.

Chris Barcellos

Werner Wesp · January 20th, 2006, 05:11 AM

Sorry to intterupt this (interesting) discussion, but no one knows any alternative to Cineform? The problkem is that I really need the speed, and m2t-files don't give me that....

Guy Barwood · January 20th, 2006, 06:44 AM

Speed for what?

I get multilayer RT performance with m2t and you render less going back out to tape.

This is HD remember, rendering is not going to be anywhere near DV performance anyway you attack it.

Werner Wesp · January 22nd, 2006, 07:53 AM

I know, but I can't even get my m2t preview running somewhere realtime in Vegas.... it is like one frame /second... (even without any filters or transitions....)

Guy Barwood · January 22nd, 2006, 09:03 AM

what are your PC specs?

I am not sure why vegas performs so poorly with Native mt2
I guess there is not alternative if you want to edit in Vegas.

January 18th, 2006, 01:30 PM	#1
Werner Wesp Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 497	Intermediate codecs for Windows editing? I was just wondering wether there is an alternative intermediate codec available for editing on a windows system besides the cineform solution (Connect HD, Aspect HD)?

January 18th, 2006, 02:02 PM	#2
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Alternative Codec I ve started fulling around with Pinnacles Studio 10 plus, which appears to capture in its own codec, with and extension of .m2v. Studio 10 is supposed to be based on Liquid editing systems, though it is sold as consumer editor. Version I purchased is Studio Plus, which I believe is the one with HD codec. The codec seems to provide a clean intermediate file that equals Cineform. However, so far I cannot use that file in Vegas or Premiere Pro to edit. Studio has had some stability problems, but with a recent Beta upgrade, those issues seem to be reduced. Chris Barcellos

January 18th, 2006, 08:22 PM	#7
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Thanks for Update Stephen and Guy: Thanks for update on that. I will mess around with Studio 10 Plus a little more and see how long it takes to render incomparison to Premiere and Vegas. Premeire uses the intermediate Cineform codec, while Vegas will not, unless we add Cineforms HD Connect at $200. And I understand Aspect from Cineform at $500 will bring the editing speed up to near real time in Premiere Pro. I used the trial versions and was impressed, but haven't settled on where to put the cash yet. Incidentally, I am under the impression that Studio 10 uses the same "engine" as Liquid, but I will follow that up too... Chris Barcellos

January 18th, 2006, 11:02 PM	#8
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	From Pinnacle regarding Studio 10 Plus This is from one of Pinnacle's promotional pages: "It combines the power of the highly esteemed professional Liquid Edition Engine with the familiar Studio three-step workflow that you know and love. Studio Plus version 10 means more power , more control , more supported formats, more connectivity to the popular consumer devices including HDV video cameras and more reliability." So it looks like there are at least some elements of Liquid in Studio Plus 10. Chris Barcellos

January 18th, 2006, 11:56 PM	#9
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	Pinnacle Studio Plus 10 v. Cineform Capture files Well Okay. I captured 4 minutes of identical HDV footage in both the Pinnacle Studio Plus 10 and with the Cineform intermediate codec on Premiere Pro 1.51. The Pinnacle capture resulted in a total of 780 mgb of files, including the separate sount files. The Premeire capture was 2.7 GB in one .avi file. It looks like the Pinnacle capture is about 1/4 to 30% of the space. Chris Barcellos

January 18th, 2006, 06:48 PM	#3
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	Studio 10, like Liquid 6 & 7 are native HDV NLEs, they don't use any intermediate codec. m2v is the video component of the transport stream output by the 1394 port.

January 18th, 2006, 07:36 PM	#5
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	when you capture you will end up with mv2 and wav files. m2v are the pure video component, and the wav files are the mpg2 audio converted on capture to uncompressed PCM audio. m2t files are transport stream files, which are a special file format for containing the video and audio in a single file (like program stream). Liquid and Studio (I do assume a bit here basing my knowledge from Liquid not Studio) just seperates the video and audio components and saves them as seperate files (and converts the audio to uncompressed). If you renamed the audio file as well (and any other file with the same name, sometimes there are index files) you will not loose any audio etc

January 18th, 2006, 07:54 PM	#6
Stephen L. Noe Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,214	Also, Liquid keeps the video that is un-edited in it's pristine camera codec fresh state all the way through to output. For Edits, FX and color corrections, Liquid uncompresses the HDV to 2VUY 422 8bit for processing. So, what that means is that the datastream is handled in the most efficient way. It leaves the untouched GOP's just that, untouched. The edited GOP's are rendered uncompressed which is an ideal method across the board. It is lightning fast and you can edit HD-100 material as easily as DV25 on an off the shelf PCIexpress computer. Liquid really is a match made in heaven for ProHD. 24p film does require a workaround but it is not hard. My wish list for Liquid later this year is 10bit processing uncompressed and 24p native (and the pull down tools as well for variable frame rate). I do like the Cineform method as well for non native HDV editors. They have done a really nice job with their implementation and they are already working in 10bit and variable frame rates extracted from 60p but Liquid really is a great marriage with HDV. have fun...

January 19th, 2006, 03:26 AM	#10
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	yes the intermedite codecs hog much more HDD space. I believe they use variable bit rates but it isn't uncommon to get up 100Mbps (you got about 90Mbps average) vs HDVs 25Mbps. While I.C's take the strain of the CPU (easier to decode) they put it back on the HDD subsystem. Studio has the guts of Liquid but with the much simplier consumer front end. It has the same rendering and RT engine as Liquid, and also features like Instant Save which is amazing in such an entry level product, but then I hear you only get one video track to work with and the first release isn't particulary stable (but that should improve quickly as you mentioned). When you outgrow Studio you move on to Liquid.

January 19th, 2006, 12:01 PM	#11
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	[QUOTE= but then I hear you only get one video track to work with and the first release isn't particulary stable (but that should improve quickly as you mentioned). [/QUOTE] Guy: Actually, there are two tracks that will actually take video. Also the Beta update recently released has helped the stability issues. Thanks. Ultimately, I think if you are looking for a cheap entry into HDV, this is not a bad way to go.. I did try a render of a four minute capture to DV through Studio Plus 10 (HD to DV) and through Vegas 6 (HD m2t to DV), and note their render times are are almost identical at 7 minutes on my system. Chris Barcellos

January 20th, 2006, 05:11 AM	#12
Werner Wesp Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 497	Sorry to intterupt this (interesting) discussion, but no one knows any alternative to Cineform? The problkem is that I really need the speed, and m2t-files don't give me that....

January 20th, 2006, 06:44 AM	#13
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	Speed for what? I get multilayer RT performance with m2t and you render less going back out to tape. This is HD remember, rendering is not going to be anywhere near DV performance anyway you attack it.

January 22nd, 2006, 07:53 AM	#14
Werner Wesp Major Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Belgium Posts: 497	I know, but I can't even get my m2t preview running somewhere realtime in Vegas.... it is like one frame /second... (even without any filters or transitions....)

January 22nd, 2006, 09:03 AM	#15
Guy Barwood Major Player Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 423	what are your PC specs? I am not sure why vegas performs so poorly with Native mt2 I guess there is not alternative if you want to edit in Vegas.