|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 17th, 2004, 12:24 AM
|
#1 |
|
New Boot
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12
|
hdv output
does hdv output quicktime movies currently? what formats besides
mpeg and hdv does hdv export from a timeline? |
|
|
|
October 17th, 2004, 10:15 PM
|
#2 |
|
MPS Digital Studios
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
|
In post production, you can do that, but the QuickTime movies will be DV. Not sure if QT is HD yet.
heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog |
|
|
|
|
October 18th, 2004, 07:53 AM
|
#3 |
|
Wrangler
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Point Pleasant, NJ
Posts: 437
|
Thomas,
You can output to any codec you have listed in your QuickTime list. Motion Jpeg, Uncompressed, Pixlet, etc... Frederic |
|
|
|
|
October 18th, 2004, 12:41 PM
|
#4 |
|
MPS Digital Studios
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
|
I forgot about Pixlet, which is HD.
heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog |
|
|
|
|
October 18th, 2004, 01:11 PM
|
#5 |
|
RED Problem Solver
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,365
|
Pixlet isn't HD more than any other general pupose codec. Actusly, Pixlet is a pretty poor codec in general. I recommend PhotoJPEG100% which is also 4:4:4, compresses smaller, uses less processor and produces a better quality image, and you'll get better playback too.
Graeme
__________________
www.nattress.com - filters for FCP |
|
|
|
|
October 18th, 2004, 01:14 PM
|
#6 |
|
MPS Digital Studios
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Posts: 8,531
|
Before Lumiere HD came out, I was using freebie plug-ins and would save my footage as a Pixlet QuickTime to edit in FCP 4 (before HD came out) and had no problems at all. Video wasn't even jerky, and it was very clean. But I now use Lumiere HD and choose a decent HD codec to edit with.
heath
__________________
My Final Cut Pro X blog |
|
|
|
|
October 18th, 2004, 01:21 PM
|
#7 |
|
RED Problem Solver
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,365
|
Yes, it's not like you'd see anything wrong with it, until you do a difference comparison to the original. I did that and found it pretty bad compared to the PhotoJPEG100% alternative, and also, it exported to disc significantly slower, hence my comment that it uses more processor power. All we need now is for Apple to "enable" higher rez PhotoJPEG for real time operation in FCP as it is a truely excellent online compressed codec as well as an offline one. I use it all the time to get 4:4:4 video between Shake and FCP, with extremely low generational loss. Also, with it being 4:4:4 is stands up to generational loss better than some 4:2:2 uncompressed codecs! I tried hacking the RT enabler in FCP to allow high rez photoJPEG in real time, but it complained at me that I'd hacked the enabler and that it wasn't going to want to work for me.... Darn!
Graeme
__________________
www.nattress.com - filters for FCP |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
