Timecode preservation in HDV production

R Geoff Baker · February 28th, 2005, 12:31 PM

A lot depends on what industry you are working in. Those working in broadcast, or those parts of the corporate sector modelled on broadcast production, will have a much harder time imagining how to meet client/broadcaster/executive producer needs without the established systems of EDLs, timecode burns and paper trails ... those working in wedding, short form commercial and multimedia have likely never developed the commitment to timecode that others have.

Like Sean, I can't imagine how to function confidently without timecode preservation. But Kevin apparently has different requirements, and given that these tools weren't brought to market with timecode preservation fully matured ... he is likely not alone in his ability to work without timecode.

I have a close friend that delivers novels to publishers -- his is a familiar name -- and to this day he must deliver his completed manuscript printed on paper with unjustified typeface in the box the paper came in ... it is the only way the publishing houses will accept his text for proofing. Primitive, archaic ... and the only way.

My broadcast clients can only be slowly dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age -- if I can't establish timecode preservation to the source tapes, I can't get them to consider a format. They'd rather I dubbed everything to a 'secure' format and threw away my source tapes than work without timecode preservation.

Cheers,
GB

Sean M Lee · February 28th, 2005, 12:57 PM

If I lost my tapes I'd be screwd! LOL
We used to store all of our sources and finished masters at Hollywood Vaults on Seward. Awesome facility. We were just a couple doors down so it was very convenient.

Kevin Shaw · February 28th, 2005, 01:12 PM

I'd say GB summed up the whole time code situation nicely. If you have clients who insist on working from tape and having time codes linked to those tapes, then I suppose that limits your ability to work with HDV for now. Since most of my projects fall into the wedding/event category, it's a simple matter to work from the timeline time code or whatever other workarounds turn out to make sense for now.

Filip Kovcin · February 28th, 2005, 06:37 PM

i made avalanche here...

sorry for a mess.

but i just wanted to ask....
... no, i will not ask anymore about timecode. it's probably too difficult for me to explain what i wanted to know - in proper and understandable english.

maybe next time :)

filip

Kevin Shaw · February 28th, 2005, 09:42 PM

Flip: looking back at your earlier question, I think I've seen remarks elsewhere about people capturing HDV to the DV format in FCP, using DV timecodes to edit and then somehow recapturing in high definition and putting everything back together. I'm probably not explaining that quite right, so try the forums at www.2-pop.com.

Filip Kovcin · March 1st, 2005, 03:59 AM

thank you kevin,

i just searched mentioned site, but i cannot find (at least for now) that info about recapturing (batching).
is it possible for you to somehow narrow my searches?

thank you,

filip

R Geoff Baker · March 1st, 2005, 05:46 AM

Other than the demand for 'batching' -- I would have thought that is what this thread is about? Capture in DV, recapture later in HDV ...

You don't need to do this with 'batch capture' -- you can do it with any capture that preserves the (same) timecode each time. If you are using a Mac the reference earlier in this thread to a site that offers a utility that will capture and preserve timecode is there.

Filip, we have been down this path but I guess without resolution: You can do what Kevin describes _without_ batch capture; batch capture is 'simply' the organized capture of a list of files. But if you capture from the same list manually, you've still got the files & can still use them in an edit.

Does this address your question?

GB

Filip Kovcin · March 1st, 2005, 02:57 PM

Geoff, Douglas, Kevin, Sean, Michael and Others!

thank you for your efforts!
i beleive i made to many wrong explanations due to my not so proper english.

you are absolutelly right, that if time code is preserved - you can manually enter all clips and finalize what is needed. i just didn't thought about that manual solution, simply because this will not work for me.

i am working with relativelly long projects and usually with lot of cust, therefore i just overlooked this simple truth that timecode is needed even if you can't batch automatically.
of course - preservation of timecode even without automatic batch is very reasonable.

i overlooked that maybe because during relativelly long period of time (11 years) i worked on many systems both pcs and macs and never been in such a situation to work without TC. and since allways my work was off line/on line automatic batch approach, i simply forgot that one can work manually and still need TC!

MEA CULPA.

pure manual solution was something i tried just when something goes really wrong. and usually just for small amount of clips/cuts.
definitely not for entire projects i usually work with - something beetween 300 to 800 cuts... :(((

this amount of cuts will be kind of nightmare to manually prepare and redigitize it in on line resolution. especially if your project uses multicamera approach.

but, again - you learn every day...

and yes - this address my question.

thanks,

filip

R Geoff Baker · March 1st, 2005, 03:24 PM

No Filip, you misunderstand me.

You don't have to manually _re-edit_ you just have to manually recapture. You don't even have to match the clips on the timeline exactly with what you capture -- as long as what you capture _includes_ the material referenced in the timeline, that is, as long as the timecode of the clips on the timeline can be found in what you capture all is good.

Your english seems quite good, but you've never worked with a system that could bypass the batch capture process I guess: If you have fifty clips on the timeline that reference a tape, you can capture the entire tape as one big file ... and let the edit software find the clips it wants within that giant file as long as the timecode matches! Yes! It is really that easy. Timecode preservation is essential to this, but batch capture is not even required ... not even necessarily a good way to go, unless you've good pressing drive space problems and you want to have no more than the clips required on your HD.

Cheers,
GB

Filip Kovcin · March 1st, 2005, 07:23 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by R Geoff Baker :... unless you've good pressing drive space problems and you want to have no more than the clips required on your HD.-->>>

yes, that's my case.

i.e. "12h" of materials shot with 2 or 3 cameras. (documentary with many "talking heads" etc.) which is 12x2h or 12x3h

filip

R Geoff Baker · March 1st, 2005, 08:16 PM

Even so, you have at most 12 tapes that you have to capture. This is not a 'batch capture required' situation. You just capture blocks that include your material, in ten minute chunks say -- I've produced hour long documentaries with similar amounts of source & know what the drill is. Batch capture is nice but not essential ...

GB

Filip Kovcin · March 2nd, 2005, 01:47 AM

24h or 36h!!! not 12h and really short shots.
in approx 50 min. film will be around 800~900 shots, each approx. from 4sec - 10sec. long. different cameras - almost same persons in the shot, different angles etc. so in myu opinion this will be painful. maybe i'm too lazy for that.

10 minute chunks will probably not work for me.

thanks,

filip

Kevin Shaw · March 2nd, 2005, 02:55 AM

By my calculations, 36 hours of HDV footage captured to typical intermediate editing codecs at a bit rate of about 10MB/sec works out to around 1300 GB of data. If we allow roughly 50% overhead for editing and output rendering that's about 2000 GB total, or the equivalent of eight 250GB hard drives costing a modest $1000 or so. Add a good eight-drive SATA controller card and you're up to $1500 with tax and shipping, which isn't bad to have 36 hours of HDV footage online at decent quality. Compare that to the value of the time required to meticulously log and batch capture individual portions of that footage, and $1500 is a bargain. On the other hand, if you can eliminate maybe half the footage during capture you can cut the hard drive requirement to a more modest 1000 GB, which is a little more manageable.

February 28th, 2005, 06:37 PM	#49
Filip Kovcin Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: warsaw, poland Posts: 440	oh, boy... i made avalanche here... sorry for a mess. but i just wanted to ask.... ... no, i will not ask anymore about timecode. it's probably too difficult for me to explain what i wanted to know - in proper and understandable english. maybe next time :) filip __________________ in kino (sic!) veritas

March 1st, 2005, 03:59 AM	#51
Filip Kovcin Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: warsaw, poland Posts: 440	thank you kevin, i just searched mentioned site, but i cannot find (at least for now) that info about recapturing (batching). is it possible for you to somehow narrow my searches? thank you, filip __________________ in kino (sic!) veritas

March 1st, 2005, 02:57 PM	#53
Filip Kovcin Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: warsaw, poland Posts: 440	Geoff, Douglas, Kevin, Sean, Michael and Others! thank you for your efforts! i beleive i made to many wrong explanations due to my not so proper english. you are absolutelly right, that if time code is preserved - you can manually enter all clips and finalize what is needed. i just didn't thought about that manual solution, simply because this will not work for me. i am working with relativelly long projects and usually with lot of cust, therefore i just overlooked this simple truth that timecode is needed even if you can't batch automatically. of course - preservation of timecode even without automatic batch is very reasonable. i overlooked that maybe because during relativelly long period of time (11 years) i worked on many systems both pcs and macs and never been in such a situation to work without TC. and since allways my work was off line/on line automatic batch approach, i simply forgot that one can work manually and still need TC! MEA CULPA. pure manual solution was something i tried just when something goes really wrong. and usually just for small amount of clips/cuts. definitely not for entire projects i usually work with - something beetween 300 to 800 cuts... :((( this amount of cuts will be kind of nightmare to manually prepare and redigitize it in on line resolution. especially if your project uses multicamera approach. but, again - you learn every day... and yes - this address my question. thanks, filip __________________ in kino (sic!) veritas

March 1st, 2005, 07:23 PM	#55
Filip Kovcin Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: warsaw, poland Posts: 440	<<<-- Originally posted by R Geoff Baker :... unless you've good pressing drive space problems and you want to have no more than the clips required on your HD.-->>> yes, that's my case. i.e. "12h" of materials shot with 2 or 3 cameras. (documentary with many "talking heads" etc.) which is 12x2h or 12x3h filip __________________ in kino (sic!) veritas

March 2nd, 2005, 01:47 AM	#57
Filip Kovcin Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: warsaw, poland Posts: 440	24h or 36h!!! not 12h and really short shots. in approx 50 min. film will be around 800~900 shots, each approx. from 4sec - 10sec. long. different cameras - almost same persons in the shot, different angles etc. so in myu opinion this will be painful. maybe i'm too lazy for that. 10 minute chunks will probably not work for me. thanks, filip __________________ in kino (sic!) veritas

February 28th, 2005, 12:31 PM	#46
R Geoff Baker Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 471	A lot depends on what industry you are working in. Those working in broadcast, or those parts of the corporate sector modelled on broadcast production, will have a much harder time imagining how to meet client/broadcaster/executive producer needs without the established systems of EDLs, timecode burns and paper trails ... those working in wedding, short form commercial and multimedia have likely never developed the commitment to timecode that others have. Like Sean, I can't imagine how to function confidently without timecode preservation. But Kevin apparently has different requirements, and given that these tools weren't brought to market with timecode preservation fully matured ... he is likely not alone in his ability to work without timecode. I have a close friend that delivers novels to publishers -- his is a familiar name -- and to this day he must deliver his completed manuscript printed on paper with unjustified typeface in the box the paper came in ... it is the only way the publishing houses will accept his text for proofing. Primitive, archaic ... and the only way. My broadcast clients can only be slowly dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age -- if I can't establish timecode preservation to the source tapes, I can't get them to consider a format. They'd rather I dubbed everything to a 'secure' format and threw away my source tapes than work without timecode preservation. Cheers, GB

February 28th, 2005, 12:57 PM	#47
Sean M Lee Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Indy Posts: 160	If I lost my tapes I'd be screwd! LOL We used to store all of our sources and finished masters at Hollywood Vaults on Seward. Awesome facility. We were just a couple doors down so it was very convenient.

February 28th, 2005, 01:12 PM	#48
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	I'd say GB summed up the whole time code situation nicely. If you have clients who insist on working from tape and having time codes linked to those tapes, then I suppose that limits your ability to work with HDV for now. Since most of my projects fall into the wedding/event category, it's a simple matter to work from the timeline time code or whatever other workarounds turn out to make sense for now.

February 28th, 2005, 09:42 PM	#50
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	Flip: looking back at your earlier question, I think I've seen remarks elsewhere about people capturing HDV to the DV format in FCP, using DV timecodes to edit and then somehow recapturing in high definition and putting everything back together. I'm probably not explaining that quite right, so try the forums at www.2-pop.com.

March 1st, 2005, 05:46 AM	#52
R Geoff Baker Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 471	Other than the demand for 'batching' -- I would have thought that is what this thread is about? Capture in DV, recapture later in HDV ... You don't need to do this with 'batch capture' -- you can do it with any capture that preserves the (same) timecode each time. If you are using a Mac the reference earlier in this thread to a site that offers a utility that will capture and preserve timecode is there. Filip, we have been down this path but I guess without resolution: You can do what Kevin describes _without_ batch capture; batch capture is 'simply' the organized capture of a list of files. But if you capture from the same list manually, you've still got the files & can still use them in an edit. Does this address your question? GB

March 1st, 2005, 03:24 PM	#54
R Geoff Baker Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 471	No Filip, you misunderstand me. You don't have to manually _re-edit_ you just have to manually recapture. You don't even have to match the clips on the timeline exactly with what you capture -- as long as what you capture _includes_ the material referenced in the timeline, that is, as long as the timecode of the clips on the timeline can be found in what you capture all is good. Your english seems quite good, but you've never worked with a system that could bypass the batch capture process I guess: If you have fifty clips on the timeline that reference a tape, you can capture the entire tape as one big file ... and let the edit software find the clips it wants within that giant file as long as the timecode matches! Yes! It is really that easy. Timecode preservation is essential to this, but batch capture is not even required ... not even necessarily a good way to go, unless you've good pressing drive space problems and you want to have no more than the clips required on your HD. Cheers, GB

March 1st, 2005, 08:16 PM	#56
R Geoff Baker Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 471	Even so, you have at most 12 tapes that you have to capture. This is not a 'batch capture required' situation. You just capture blocks that include your material, in ten minute chunks say -- I've produced hour long documentaries with similar amounts of source & know what the drill is. Batch capture is nice but not essential ... GB

March 2nd, 2005, 02:55 AM	#58
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	By my calculations, 36 hours of HDV footage captured to typical intermediate editing codecs at a bit rate of about 10MB/sec works out to around 1300 GB of data. If we allow roughly 50% overhead for editing and output rendering that's about 2000 GB total, or the equivalent of eight 250GB hard drives costing a modest $1000 or so. Add a good eight-drive SATA controller card and you're up to $1500 with tax and shipping, which isn't bad to have 36 hours of HDV footage online at decent quality. Compare that to the value of the time required to meticulously log and batch capture individual portions of that footage, and $1500 is a bargain. On the other hand, if you can eliminate maybe half the footage during capture you can cut the hard drive requirement to a more modest 1000 GB, which is a little more manageable.