No down-conversion over firewire?

Jiri Bakala · September 27th, 2005, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Beaty

We have two of the JVC BR-HD50E decks and as far as I can tell, the analog outputs will down convert to SD but not the firewire. The down converted output on the analog component outputs is quite good.

Those of us with Avid and Mojo can therefore capture component downconverted SD video and edit in Avid - for now. Once Avid brings HDV compatible AXP we'll go native HDV over FW, too. Anyone out there actually doing it this way? Any comments?

John Mitchell · September 27th, 2005, 11:16 AM

One potential problem may have been that it is more difficult to convert the true progressive format of the GY-HD100 to interlaced in 1394. I don't really know why it is missing. At least with the JVC you get progressive, rather than the 24CF hack job on the Sony. So if you were considering buying this camera for it's true progressive scan then you might mount the same arguments against the Sony - it requires 3rd party software and lots of processing to get back to anyway near a progressive look.

Hopefully AJA or someone like that will come out with a reasonable priced convertor and help you guys out. I was never going to shoot in HD and then work in SD but if I want to, I can on the Avid. Provided they are at the same frame rate I can edit an HD clip straight into an SD timeline.

Sure there maybe a bit more processing involved on your workstation, and rendering at the end of the job, but there's also more resolution to play with, so you can pan and scan images as you would in telecine. It's a workflow I prefer to capturing things twice, but for those wishing to output a final longform product in SD as their primary workflow, the Sony maybe a better option. Of course you can always shoot in SD - the JVC does do this very well.

Thomas Smet · September 27th, 2005, 05:58 PM

My whole point was that in a year editing software/hardware will be much better so this whole complaint will seem pretty useless. While it may be a neat way of editing now I have always considered it a consumer feature for consumers with low end editing systems. Besides all the time you are saving with faster rendering you loose by having to capture all of your tapes twice. If you have 1 raw tape you end up spending a whole extra hour capturing the tape again. If you capture both DV and HDV at the same time it still takes you double the amount of time to capture but now you are taking up twice as much hard drive space as well. If this is a long form project shot on multiple cameras you could have many hours worth of tapes to capture. If you have 4 hours worth of tape it will take you 4 hours to capture and then you will still have to render everything. You are looking at almost a whole work day just to give somebody a HD version of their project where if you mastered to HDV tape you could be burning them a bluray/HDDVD in a few minutes. If you had a dozen clients call you would get really backed up.

For a few hundred bucks buy a cheap computer either mac mini or cheap PC to use to render your HDV project or convert and print to tape. This way you will not tie up your main system for editing.

Stephen L. Noe · September 27th, 2005, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jiri Bakala

Those of us with Avid and Mojo can therefore capture component downconverted SD video and edit in Avid - for now. Once Avid brings HDV compatible AXP we'll go native HDV over FW, too. Anyone out there actually doing it this way? Any comments?

Yes, this is a function of Liquid 6 and FCP, however 24p HDV capture is not supported by any NLE (AFAIK). We're still waiting for that. The Avid XpressPro group will soon be editing with the same techniques as Liquid has enjoyed since October '04.

My first advice to XpressPro (Windows) editors is to make sure your computer has enough horse power. HDV 720p has been very easy to edit on a PCIexpress/P4-3.2HT/2Gig ram/Sata/X600 (all intel) setup. 1080i is a different story. If you want realtime editing I'd recommend dual processors all the way. Pinnacles' user forum should be a gold mine for XpressPro users once HDV is integrated in Octobers release. There have been editors editing native HDV from the very start with loads of experience.

September 27th, 2005, 11:16 AM	#17
John Mitchell Contributor Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 873	One potential problem may have been that it is more difficult to convert the true progressive format of the GY-HD100 to interlaced in 1394. I don't really know why it is missing. At least with the JVC you get progressive, rather than the 24CF hack job on the Sony. So if you were considering buying this camera for it's true progressive scan then you might mount the same arguments against the Sony - it requires 3rd party software and lots of processing to get back to anyway near a progressive look. Hopefully AJA or someone like that will come out with a reasonable priced convertor and help you guys out. I was never going to shoot in HD and then work in SD but if I want to, I can on the Avid. Provided they are at the same frame rate I can edit an HD clip straight into an SD timeline. Sure there maybe a bit more processing involved on your workstation, and rendering at the end of the job, but there's also more resolution to play with, so you can pan and scan images as you would in telecine. It's a workflow I prefer to capturing things twice, but for those wishing to output a final longform product in SD as their primary workflow, the Sony maybe a better option. Of course you can always shoot in SD - the JVC does do this very well.

September 27th, 2005, 05:58 PM	#18
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	My whole point was that in a year editing software/hardware will be much better so this whole complaint will seem pretty useless. While it may be a neat way of editing now I have always considered it a consumer feature for consumers with low end editing systems. Besides all the time you are saving with faster rendering you loose by having to capture all of your tapes twice. If you have 1 raw tape you end up spending a whole extra hour capturing the tape again. If you capture both DV and HDV at the same time it still takes you double the amount of time to capture but now you are taking up twice as much hard drive space as well. If this is a long form project shot on multiple cameras you could have many hours worth of tapes to capture. If you have 4 hours worth of tape it will take you 4 hours to capture and then you will still have to render everything. You are looking at almost a whole work day just to give somebody a HD version of their project where if you mastered to HDV tape you could be burning them a bluray/HDDVD in a few minutes. If you had a dozen clients call you would get really backed up. For a few hundred bucks buy a cheap computer either mac mini or cheap PC to use to render your HDV project or convert and print to tape. This way you will not tie up your main system for editing.