successful FCP native HDV capture

[Alex Humphrey]

Originally Posted by Paolo Ciccone

David, I still have FCP but the lack of support by Apple for some essential features, like image sequences, mpeg, and integration with After Effects made me finally cross the threshold. I just remembered that when I got my HD100, winter 2005, a friend of mine, with Premiere on a PC, was able to capture footage right away while for the past 2 years we have gone from struggle to struggle with FCP. We got the "A" upgrade that was supposed to improve things with the NLE, we got endless updates, it's still broken. I tried Premiere and I was surprised how easy it was to pick up. The downside of Premiere is the performance. I's not as optimized as FCP to run with non-specialized hardware, but it's getting there.
At the end of the day I just use what tool makes sense for the job and right now Premiere is a very good solution for HD100/250 owners and the integration with After Effects makes post work and color correction really easy.

Paolo, I have a couple follow up questions.

1. How is the DVD encoding from HDV down to DVD? I saw a friend's recent Adobe Premier Pro DVD project and it looked very good, I thought it looked less edgy than what FCP had done, though it was with a different camera and format.

2. Does Adobe Premier support the JVC SD-HDV 60p format that is on the JVC HD100/110? If so I'll order the program on pay day.

Other than that, getting a Focus Enhancement's drive (that captures in MT2 and Quicktime) solved all of my problems with breaks, and dramaticaly speeds up my workflow when back at home at the ned of the day.

[Paolo Ciccone]

Alex, I don't have direct experience with those 2 techniques. Adobe's website at http://www.adobe.com/products/premie...as&format=NTSC lists "full support" for the camera.
I'll do a test later on. If I forget please give me a reminder :)

[Sean Adair]

Personally, I'm surprised at the number of people still having problems capturing native HDV to FCP (and by native, here I mean HDV to the NLE drives without transcoding). Using the BR-HD50 and footage from updated cameras in FCP 5.14 or 6, with settings to minimum pre-roll, it just works. The footage is broken into clips ONLY at every camera pause - but I like that! - it saves me time in editing. There may be a second or so loss at these points, which could affect certain work I suppose, but I start rolling early and roll late as a matter of habit (had to edit my own footage on linear A/B systems back in the day which needed pre-roll too!).

I had glitches which wouldn't capture properly when I first started with this, over a year ago, but it's been a total non-issue - in fact the DVHS-cap/mpegstreamclip workflow was a major let down for me when I went back to it assuming that would be better for footage that all had to be transcoded to DVCPro-HD. Aargh! lost time-code, lost sync, lost frames (got repeated frames for effective 12fps look!). FCP captured whole tapes, created individual clips of each roll, and with media manager converted all to DVC-pro perfectly with not a single mid clip interruption in 13 hours.
No question, the tape you use and general maintenance is more important than SD DV. If you are getting dropout, that has to be addressed, and the JVC camera updates only work with improving the recorded tape - not playing back a problematic one. So if PPro can capture through dropouts, that is a great thing, and I certainly hope Apple can integrate that type of error correction into their capture. It's a real good thing to know about if this crops up for some reason.

In fact I'm sure PPro is better for some types of programming. If I was doing commercial spots with lots of graphics and FX, I know I'd want the native AE integration and other features. But I sync multi-cams pretty well in fcp and I really like it's long form tools. Much of it is personal, I hate switching tools unless I'm really motivated by results, but I'll take extra time and trouble to stick with an app and workflow that does the majority of my work well.

[Paolo Ciccone]

Sean, the problems still persist and it's not a matter of using a brand of tape instead of another. DVHSCap has not problem in capturing the footage, FCP has. HDVxDV gulps the whole tape, FCP breaks the continuos footage in multiple clips. This is not the start and stop situation that you described, in fact in that case I do expect FCP to create new clips.
I have lots of tapes, and they are single 1-hour takes with no dropouts that work in all programs except FCP. It's not a matter of Premiere ignoring the timecode breaks, it works with these tapes as expected.
I am happy that your setup works but the reality is that the majority of HD100 users can't capture single take, tape-long clips.

[Justin Ferar]

FWIW- I have no problems with HD200 footage (720p60) over firewire with BR-HD50 using FCP and Leopard. All software and firmware updated.

The only hiccup comes when the deck plays back a dropout (which is not on the tape) so a new clip is created which wasn't a start/stop.

[Steve Oakley]

I can load 2-3 tapes perfectly, then I'll have one that will just give FCP fits. you never know. yes I'm using good tape - panasonic AMQ.

as for multicam, once you learn Prem Pro's multicam, you'll NEVER go back to FCP for multicam. PP does this so much better then FCP it isn't even funny. basically PP lets you set up a TL with your cameras in it on each V track, then you place it into another and cut away. since PP uses a normal TL, you can fix things like where somebody stopped to change a battery. you just make the cut, then resync the remaining clip. easy easy. if you make changes in the source TL, they ripple into the master edit. PP also removes old edits if you decide to redo a section, FCP just keeps adding more edits. Prem Pro is the Porsche, FCP is a hugo when it comes to multicam.

[David Knaggs]

Originally Posted by Paolo Ciccone

I have lots of tapes, and they are single 1-hour takes with no dropouts that work in all programs except FCP.

Very interesting, Paolo.

I am very interested in data from anyone who has gotten the latest "camera firmware updates" and is still experiencing mid-clip breaks with FCP.

For example, I noticed this post made just today:
http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showpost....6&postcount=12

Other NLE companies seem to be able to make their NLEs work with ProHD footage ingestion by fixing their NLE. They adapt their NLE so that it will work with the camera. Yet Apple seems to be saying to JVC, "Adapt your camera so that it will work with our NLE."

And guess which seems to be the only NLE still giving problems with the ingestion of ProHD footage?

To me, two things are now clear.

1/ JVC seems to have bent over backwards to accommodate Apple by coming up with firmware updates.

2/ Apple have been working on a wrong target (i.e. trying to solve the wrong problem).

If you had a car with four flat tyres, you might go to the tyre company and say, "It's really hard to drive." The tyre company then says, "You're not getting enough traction. You need to install the latest firmware for your automatic transmission."

You install it and find you do have more power and you are now able to drive (on the wheel rims, tearing up the road pavement as you go) to the corner store and buy your loaf of bread. But now you say, "Gee, the motor is now overstraining." The tyre company says, "You need to use lower-viscosity motor oil." (Read higher-quality camera tapes.) And later you point out that it's extremely difficult to steer (with four flat tyres) and they say, "You need to use this new brand of power steering fluid," (switching to a computer with Intel chips or getting a faster hard drive with more free space). And yes, you do now find that it's now a little less difficult to steer and turn a corner on your wheel rims.

And so it goes on, each new symptom being directed for its "solution" in everything else except the tyres. (REC or REGEN, anybody?)

And you can't help but notice that drivers of the same model car go to their (different from yours) tyre companies with their four flat tyres and those companies re-design their tyres and give them thicker walls and better treads, etc. and send their customers driving off with non-flat tyres.

That brings me to point 3:

3/ Apple's FCP unit seems under-resourced to give the proper care and attention to correctly analyze the true cause of their ProHD ingest problems and then correct it.

and

4/ I think (or perhaps hope) Steve Jobs might shortly solve all of the above problems by reducing the major NLE players (Adobe, Apple and Avid) down to two (i.e. buy one of the other tyre companies who are providing non-flat tyres). Much in the same way that he simply bought the companies who make Shake and Color. He realized that he didn't have the resources to make these from scratch, so he bought them. Isn't that what he did to get FCP in the first place?

I might expand on this last point over in the Area 51 forum but, as far as my first three points go, I'm concluding that camera firmware is not solving the majority of FCP ingest problems. And is therefore a wrong target.

Unless we get 100% of members reporting zero ingest problems since upgrading to the latest firmware. In which case I'll rush out and upgrade tomorrow!

[Shaun Roemich]

David: I agree whole heartedly with your first three points. I await my first ever JVC camera, the HD200UB, which should be arriving next week. I dread trying to integrate it into my workflow, based on issues raised in this forum. However, I must point out that point 4 doesn't ring with me, personally. I don't WANT to lose FCP. I learned to edit on AVID and respect Media Composer and the rest of the pro lines, but I was able to start my company based on an Apple FCP workflow while AVID was still tens of thousands of dollars and Premiere was still a multimedia "toy". I don't WANT to leave my platform of choice. I have invested many thousands of hours into learning its workflow and developing mine. So while I agree that this issue is unconscionable, I can't support any decision that rids me of MY CHOICE in NLEs.

Need more pressure on Apple to make it work? Tell me how and I'll put my weight (which is quite considerable, physically speaking) behind it. But don't take away my bread and butter.

Respectfully yours,
Shaun

[Paolo Ciccone]

Originally Posted by David Knaggs

Yet Apple seems to be saying to JVC, "Adapt your camera so that it will work with our NLE."

And please note that I'm not quickly jumping on a sandbox and pointing fingers. I've been patient and waited 2 years for Apple to fix it. When I bought the HD100 I "failed" to read the fine print in their compatibility document which listed the HD100 as supported. 24p was not :( OK, so I wait a couple of years and the problems are far from being solved. In the meantime the HVX200, which came out much later, gets full support. At that point I started smelling a rat. JVC's implementation of the HDV capture cannot possibly be so exotic to not being understandable by Apple. Especially since *everybody else* got it right. So, now I'm thinking politics. And I just had enough of all this nonsense. I tried Premiere, it works beautifully, the multi-camera support is better, the ripple-edits are better, m2t files, which are what you get by using direct-to-disk recording, are supported with a simple drag-and-drop. And the list goes on. Tell you the truth, IMHO, I find Premiere a much more professional tool than FCP.

Isn't that what he did to get FCP in the first place?

Right, there is a great article on WikiPedia about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Cut_Pro#History

[Paolo Ciccone]

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich

I don't WANT to leave my platform of choice.

Well, that's not gonna happen any time soon. FCP is very strong in the market and for good reasons. In good measure because of Adobe's foolish decision to stop porting Premiere to the Mac OS years ago. The corrected the move last year with the release of PPro CS3 for the Mac but all these years Apple had pretty much free reign and that established their market and FCP is not a bad editor, it just has some limitations that can be important depending on what you do. Tell you the truth, your skills in FCP are actually more marketable today and if I get asked to edit something in FCP I will take the job. Gladly. But, if I'm free to choose the platform I go with Premiere. There is another reason. There is a lot of talk about Color but the fact is that, for many, many videographers, the power of Color is overkill. On the other hand the usefulness of After Effects is generally much larger because it doesn't stop at CC, which it can do at the level of a DaVinci system, just not in real time. So, from my own point of view, it's much more useful to be able to go from the NLE to After Effects than from the NLE to Color. An example is this commercial shot, for the beginning segment, with my HD100. The opening shot features a bar of red-hot metal being hammered. In reality the bar was totally cold and the effect, including CC and masking, was applied in After Effects. It could not have been done in Color.

Need more pressure on Apple to make it work?

I don't think that it's a matter of pressure. For more than two years we've been discussing this and the results are still less than inspiring. I just think that it's one of those features that Apple simply considers low-priority.

[David Knaggs]

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich

However, I must point out that point 4 doesn't ring with me, personally. I don't WANT to lose FCP.

Hi Shaun.

I can see that I didn't explain point 4 properly (because I didn't want to go too far into Area 51 [forum] territory).

What I meant was Apple buys Adobe, reducing the field to two major players (Apple and Avid).

FCS and FCP will not be going anywhere. They'll be enhanced by the acquisition. (Look at how Motion and FCP have already been enhanced by the acquisition of Shake.) So don't worry.

I'll make a post shortly (explaining why) in the Area 51 forum and I'll provide the link in a separate post below.

[David Knaggs]

Here's the link:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...351#post874351

[Shaun Roemich]

Hi David. I knew of what you were referring with the Adobe/Apple issue but some have speculated that FCP would be phased out, not Premiere. I'm invested financially and intellectually with FCP. For the record, this isn't a platform "war" with me; I edit in FCP. I make money editing in FCP. If I need to relearn a new NLE, I lose money and I lose several significant parts of my skill set until I can get up to speed on a new editor.

I was under the impression that anyone looking to purchase FCP would essentially take it apart for the component pieces and leave the rest to rust, not continue to build upon it. I agree with Paolo that the integration of a Suite is its strength; Adobe has set up their suite to move components easily back and forth between FCP and AE (and others in the suite as well). Apple has made it easy for me to move from FCP to DVDSP and Motion easily. I seldom use AE right now (I plan on getting AE CS3 and LEARNING it this summer) and therefore FOR ME and ONLY me, the exporting of my FCP timeline into a QT file that I import into AE is good enough for me.

If your workflow requires tighter integration than mine, I have no interest in standing in your way. All I was doing is defending my need to continue to use the tool I am most comfortable with to continue to earn a living.

If my posts have in ANY way suggested that I disagreed in a way that was combative or antagonistic, I apologize. That was certainly not my intent. My sole reason for addressing this issue is to ensure that the voice of an FCP editor who hasn't YET experienced this issue (my HD200 arrives next week - I'm so excited/petrified) is heard.

In great admiration of the people on this forum,
Shaun

PS. When and if I start having my own issues next week I will be leaning very heavily on the support of those of you that have been facing this issue for 2 years now.

[Daniel Weber]

I have been observing this thread from afar with interest.

I don't use my HD100 that much anymore since I have access to an EX1 from my office.

I want to address the Adobe/Final Cut issue.

I am glad that Adobe has made their product better. But it still has some limitations when trying to integrate other hardware, etc.

I will give you an example. I don't use Premiere so I haven't even looked at it that much. A few weeks back I took my wife to a bed and breakfast just outside Yosemite National Park. On Sunday morning we went down to have breakfast with the other couples that were there. None of us had ever met before, so we started talking about what we do for our professions. When the guy next to me found out that I was a video producer, he started to ask all sorts of questions. What camera did I shoot with? What NLE did I use?
After a few minutes to told me that he was the Windows Product Manager for AJA video. We then had a long conversation about FCP vs. Premiere.

He said that AJA puts about 60% of it developers on it's FCP products. They sell Mac products over PC ones by a ratio of 10 to 1.

I asked him about the development cycle and he stated that it is much harder to write code and drivers for Premiere. He told me that Premiere is just an interface and that when they write code so that one of their boards can be used they have to re write a major of portion of the program. He also stated that Adobe is not real good about providing the API's. They will get an SDK from Adobe and use it to write code from and then they will receive the final version of Premiere and it has a whole bunch of new code that was not included in the SDK.

I asked him about Final Cut and he stated that it was easy to write for. Apple has made it easy to write code to implement new drivers. If you can make sure that it works with Quicktime, it will work with Final Cut.

Now this is just a simplification of the whole process.

As a user of and HD100 and Final Cut, I know that pain that lot's of you have felt. But I keep asking myself, how come anything I shoot with a Sony camera works fine, but the JVC stuff is such a pain.

I really think that there is a bigger difference between HDV1 and HDV2 than we think. Maybe Apple decided to support the company and format that had more users? I am not saying that is right, but maybe that's the way it is.

Again, I don't want to turn this into a FCP vs. Premiere thread. I know that Premiere does some things well that FCP doesn't. But for me, I have a lot of money and time invested in FCP. I have been a user since version 1.0.
It is what I am comfortable with.

Daniel Weber

[Paolo Ciccone]

Shaun, I personally took it as an attach to my... kidding, absolutely kidding :) I too have no interest in getting into a FCP/PPro diatribe, had my share of Vi vs Emacs and other flame wars in the past, I'm still hurting.
This is actually a form of "confession" since in the past I used to dismiss Premiere in favor of FCP without a serious examination of the program. In a way I want to be sure that other HD100 shooters on the Mac consider Premiere as a possible candidate. No confrontation meant, as always this forum is just a way of exchanging experiences and sharing knowledge.