HMC150 MainConcept Transcoding at DVinfo.net

Abraham Texidor Sr. · January 23rd, 2010, 04:25 PM

I'm presently using MainConcept Transcoder with my HMC70. The AVI footage seem very soft.

Is the transcoded footage quality better when transcoding footage from the HMC150?

Does anyone where I can to test run an HMC150 here Connecticut USA? or maybe get some raw footage?

Chris Harding · January 27th, 2010, 05:12 PM

Hi Abraham

That sounds strange??? I did a test with raw AVCHD, footage transcoded to HDV via Upshift and then the Main Concept to AVI and rendered each to a DVD and it was hard to tell the resolution difference on a 42" TV!!!

What are you comparing your 'soft footage' against???? There will be an obvious difference from an SD DVD on your TV and footage via HDMI directly from the camera into the TV. The direct footage will have 4 times the resolution!!

Just remember that you are downconverting to SD but my footage seems to still be pretty sharp. However I would be interested to see your results if you find something better to transcode with. The fact that you are 'resizing' a 1920x1080 frame to little more than 655x480 (looking at just a single still frame for comparison) you have reduced a little over 2.07megapixel frame right down to a 0.314megapixel frame so their has to be a loss!! In PAL land our frames are bigger (787x576) so there is a little less loss.

Try a quick transcode with the VAAST Upshift trial software to HDV format and see if that makes a significant improvement with a NTSC DVD????

Chris

Chris Harding · January 28th, 2010, 09:37 PM

Hi Abraham

I was busy editing a wedding so I did a quick still from the AVCHD clip and then the transcoded footage and much the same place in the track. I made both images 1024x576 and de-interlaced them and then compressed them 20% so they are not too big to upload.
Is this your concern??? If you look at the guy's tie it has lost detail so there IS softening but is yours much the same or worse????
I just figure that by dropping from HD to SD you HAVE to get some loss but although it's clear on a still it's not so pronounced once the HD footage is rendered to MPEG2.

Chris

Chris Harding · January 30th, 2010, 01:15 AM

Final Test for you is an MPEG2 render of roughly the same piece of footage the first rendered from SD AVI to MPEG2 and the second from 1440x1080i AVCHD to MPEG2 and a still frame was taken from each piece of the now SD MPEG2 footage. I really and truelt cannot see an awful amount of difference once it's rendered????

Chris

Abraham Texidor Sr. · January 30th, 2010, 06:57 PM

Hi Chris,

Thanks for all the information and the test pics. My footage was looking alot more softer.
I'm not sure what happen but everything looking good now.

Chris Harding · January 30th, 2010, 10:52 PM

Hi Abraham

Glad to hear that!! The pics were more for comparison rather than overall quality ..the grabs were actually a lot sharper than shown but I compressed the JPEG's quite a lot so they would upload quicker. If you watch an AVCHD to SD clip on a BIG TV with a comparison Transcoded to AVI clip you CAN see a difference but you have to look pretty hard!!! If the content is good then I very much doubt that anyone even looks at anything else with weddings apart from how pretty the bride is!!!

Purely that fact that the AVCHD render takes around 8 times as long on my DuoCore for weddings is the main reason I transcode. Around here everyone has a 42"+++ Plasma or LCD TV but only a standard DVD player!!

Any idea why your previous footage was "soft" ????? Can you see a big difference between transcoded and AVCHD which is rendered to an SD DVD??

Chris

January 23rd, 2010, 04:25 PM	#1
Abraham Texidor Sr. Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Meriden CT Posts: 49	HMC150 MainConcept Transcoding I'm presently using MainConcept Transcoder with my HMC70. The AVI footage seem very soft. Is the transcoded footage quality better when transcoding footage from the HMC150? Does anyone where I can to test run an HMC150 here Connecticut USA? or maybe get some raw footage? Last edited by Abraham Texidor Sr.; January 24th, 2010 at 11:27 AM.

January 28th, 2010, 09:37 PM	#3
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Hi Abraham I was busy editing a wedding so I did a quick still from the AVCHD clip and then the transcoded footage and much the same place in the track. I made both images 1024x576 and de-interlaced them and then compressed them 20% so they are not too big to upload. Is this your concern??? If you look at the guy's tie it has lost detail so there IS softening but is yours much the same or worse???? I just figure that by dropping from HD to SD you HAVE to get some loss but although it's clear on a still it's not so pronounced once the HD footage is rendered to MPEG2. Chris Attached Thumbnails

January 30th, 2010, 01:15 AM	#4
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Final Test for you is an MPEG2 render of roughly the same piece of footage the first rendered from SD AVI to MPEG2 and the second from 1440x1080i AVCHD to MPEG2 and a still frame was taken from each piece of the now SD MPEG2 footage. I really and truelt cannot see an awful amount of difference once it's rendered???? Chris Attached Thumbnails

January 27th, 2010, 05:12 PM	#2
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Hi Abraham That sounds strange??? I did a test with raw AVCHD, footage transcoded to HDV via Upshift and then the Main Concept to AVI and rendered each to a DVD and it was hard to tell the resolution difference on a 42" TV!!! What are you comparing your 'soft footage' against???? There will be an obvious difference from an SD DVD on your TV and footage via HDMI directly from the camera into the TV. The direct footage will have 4 times the resolution!! Just remember that you are downconverting to SD but my footage seems to still be pretty sharp. However I would be interested to see your results if you find something better to transcode with. The fact that you are 'resizing' a 1920x1080 frame to little more than 655x480 (looking at just a single still frame for comparison) you have reduced a little over 2.07megapixel frame right down to a 0.314megapixel frame so their has to be a loss!! In PAL land our frames are bigger (787x576) so there is a little less loss. Try a quick transcode with the VAAST Upshift trial software to HDV format and see if that makes a significant improvement with a NTSC DVD???? Chris

January 30th, 2010, 06:57 PM	#5
Abraham Texidor Sr. Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Meriden CT Posts: 49	Hi Chris, Thanks for all the information and the test pics. My footage was looking alot more softer. I'm not sure what happen but everything looking good now.

January 30th, 2010, 10:52 PM	#6
Chris Harding Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 8,441	Hi Abraham Glad to hear that!! The pics were more for comparison rather than overall quality ..the grabs were actually a lot sharper than shown but I compressed the JPEG's quite a lot so they would upload quicker. If you watch an AVCHD to SD clip on a BIG TV with a comparison Transcoded to AVI clip you CAN see a difference but you have to look pretty hard!!! If the content is good then I very much doubt that anyone even looks at anything else with weddings apart from how pretty the bride is!!! Purely that fact that the AVCHD render takes around 8 times as long on my DuoCore for weddings is the main reason I transcode. Around here everyone has a 42"+++ Plasma or LCD TV but only a standard DVD player!! Any idea why your previous footage was "soft" ????? Can you see a big difference between transcoded and AVCHD which is rendered to an SD DVD?? Chris