MPEG 2 , not XDCAM EX

[Ronald Jackson]

I regularly upload files recorded on a CF Card via my nanoFlash to an external hard drive for storage and eventual editing,currently in FCP X.

Looking at the file information I see that files recorded earlier in the year are stored as XDCAM EX 4:2:2, whereas later files are stored as MPEG 2.

Is there a problem here or is it just down to Apple and nothing to worry about?


Ron

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Ron,

If you record, in the nanoFlash at 50 Megabits per second or above, the file is recorded in Sony XDCam 422 file format, within an MXF or MOV wrapper. This is 4:2:2, at 50 Mbps or higher.

If you record at 35 Megabits per second or lower, the file is recorded in Sony XDCam EX format, which is 4:2:0, 35 Mbps, Variable Bit Rate.

[Ronald Jackson]

Thank you Dan. I can refine my question by adding that it is the files as recorded to the CF Card that are currently named MPEG 2s.

They used to be named as XDCAM EX etc etc.

I am concerned to know whether anything has or is going wrong. All I can think of is that I used to record "I-Frame" but I now record "Long - GOP" at 100Mbps.


Ron

[Dominic Witherow]

Ron

XDCAM, in its various guises, is one flavour or other of MPEG2 (of which there are multiple flavours), so it may just be the FCPX 'not supporting XDCAM' thing making itself known, but not actually making any real difference as it does support MPEG2 generically.

Try opening an old 'XDCAM'-marked clip and a new 'MPEG2'-marked clip in Quicktime (ideally v.7 Pro rather than QT X) and look at the inspector and properties windows. That will give you all the tech spec of the clips and should make it a bit clearer if it's purely an Apple naming thing or if the clips are in different formats after all.

To recap - XDCAM / EXCAM / XDCAM HD 422 etc are ALL trade names for types of MPEG2, you should expect your clips to be MPEG2, though normally they would be called XDCAM etc.

I hope that makes some sense?

Dominic

[Ronald Jackson]

Thanks Dominic, and nice to see you here as well. I had drawn the conclusion that both were the same thing in different packages.

Talk about living and learning though. Lost without forums like this and DV Doctor.


Ron

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Ron,

Where are you seeing these "names"?

The files have a ".MXF" or ".MOV" extension, unless you have selected our "MPG" mode.

What file extension are you seeing?

You can easily just check the nanoFlash System|File menu item for this.

[Ronald Jackson]

Dan,

My nano reads "File =01495001.MOV" . A file I recorded yesterday reads, off the CF Card via this iMac: "01487001.MOV"

If I highlight this file in the Finder it reads, inter alia," Codecs: MPEG-2 Video, Linear PCM,Timecode"


Maybe as Dominic has said it boils down to one and the same thing.


My "Holy Grail", if I can put it that way, and I'd imagine I'm not alone, is to somehow ensure that the quality of what is written to the CF card matches the quality of what is re-gurgitated via my NLE.

Some debate as to whether this can be in a portable format, BD 1080p seemingly no in PAL land; similar restrictions with WD Media Player ; MacBook Pro yes (I think) provided the editing is performed in FCP 7 and contains only basic editing.


None of this seems to be written into any manual I can get hold of and in particular there is a deafening silence from the likes of Sony with BD technology and EVERY camcorder manufacturer who touts how easy it is to write 1080p to BD about the presumably un-necessary limitations they have imposed on the (huge) PAL market.




Ron

[Dan Keaton]

Dear Ron,

This gets complicated.

I am not familiar with the Blu-ray players in Pal land,
but in general, for HD, there is no such thing as PAL,
just 25 frames per second progressive and 50 fields per second (25 frames) in interlaced.

HD is standard around the world, just some areas use different frame rates
and of course there is both 720p and 1080 options.

With a proper HDMI or HD-SDI interface on your editing computer,
you can connect a nanoFlash to your NLE and output your edited sequence.

In the nanoFlash, you can then either record at high bit-rates,
and use the nanoFlash as a player for very high quality playback, in 4:2:2.

Or, you can setup the nanoFlash to record in ".MPG",
at 19, 25 or 35 Megabits per second. This will be 4:2:0.

This setup will instruct the nanoFlash to create an ".MPG" file.

This is a pre-rendered (in real-time) file for a Blue-ray disk.

Then one takes this file and uses an appropriate Blue-ray disk burning software,
one that recognizes that the file has already been rendered,
and you can very quickly create a Blu-ray disk.

I hope this helps. Of course, there are other ways. As always we welcome other suggestions.

Respectfully,

[Ronald Jackson]

Dan,


I'm using "PAL" and "NTSC"as figures of speech denoting the division of the world into those, "PAL" who record and edit at 25p and those "NTSC" , who record and edit at 24p.

It is impossible to burn a 25p movie to Blu Ray without it defaulting to 720/50p i.e. a downgrade.

No such problem with a 24p movie.

Nothing to do with C.D. of course but a seemingly little appreciated short-coming of BD technology, with BDs taking off a bit over here. All the popular consumer cam companies are advertising words to the effect "Full HD 1080p video to burn to Blu Ray", which is not possible in the UK, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, China, I could go on and on.

Anyway, I'm relieved that my "MPEG 2" concerns are groundless and I look forward to, eventually, being able to organise FCP 7, if not X, so that I can use my nanoFlash as a full quality playback device.

Ron