Confused over what mode to record in at DVinfo.net

Allen Bartnick · March 3rd, 2009, 09:11 PM

I am using my FX1000 for weddings. I have read many posts about settings and I am more confused than before. I produce my video in Adobe Premiere and master the disc with Adobe Encore. It seems that if I record or render out in progressive mode it looks a little choppy but I may be using the wrong combination. With so many choices in recording modes & rendering options it's hard to know what works the best. Any advice would be appreciated.

Jeff Harper · March 3rd, 2009, 09:21 PM

In short, record in 60i SD 16:9. Or record in HD if your computer/NLE can handle the m2t files.

Tim Akin · March 3rd, 2009, 10:03 PM

Hi Allen,

I have done many test with 60i, 30p and 24p and I have found I prefer 30p for weddings, but that's me. I would suggest you do your own testing. Just make sure if you shoot progressive, render progressive and if you shoot interlaced and render progressive, you should apply a deinterlace filter to the footage first.

Jeff Harper · March 4th, 2009, 03:38 AM

That's right, I forgot about you Tim, and your 30p. Can you sum up how that works out again? I remember you discussing it, and I was going to try it and I never did.

Tim Akin · March 4th, 2009, 08:32 AM

Jeff you forgot about me.....my feelings are hurt. :-)

You record in 30p the same as you would 60i. I always deinterlaced the VX's SD 60i footage to knock that evening news look off, with 30p the footage looks better and saves a step in post.

Allen Bartnick · March 4th, 2009, 08:44 AM

So when you say you are recording in 30p, you are not recording in HiDef just normal DV in progressive mode. If that is the case what settings do you use when you render out your video? When you record in 1080i, don't you get a better picture even when you are creating standard DVDs?

Adam Gold · March 4th, 2009, 12:48 PM

No, on the FX1000 the 30p mode is just as "HD" as 60i. Page 66 of your manual.

It's not actually recorded to tape as 30p, though, but that doesn't affect resolution.

Most people do report that recording in HDV and then downconverting gives you a better picture than recording in SD/DV mode. But this varies by workflow and personal preference. Opinions vary a lot, but the general consensus is, if you have the horsepower in your PC to make HDV editing a breeze, do everything in HDV and then downconvert at the last second when you make your DVDs. If your PC is lacking in any of the variables necessary for smooth HDV editing (processor speed, memory or HDD space) you should edit in DV, which you can do by shooting DV in the first place or, better, downconverting upon capture from the cam.

Many people use HDV cams for shooting DV, but I've never been able to figure out any advantage of that over downconverting in the cam. But maybe that's because I'm dense. Seems to me there's no downside to having an HDV original even if you aren't using that capability right now. Again, maybe I'm missing something -- it wouldn't be the first time.

Stelios Christofides · March 4th, 2009, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam Gold

...Most people do report that recording in HDV and then downconverting gives you a better picture than recording in SD/DV mode...
Many people use HDV cams for shooting DV, but I've never been able to figure out any advantage of that over downconverting in the cam...

Adam
I have been so far recording in DV mode, editing in DV and producing excellent DVDs. Now if what you are saying is true, then I should record in HDV and downconvert in the cam. But I can't understand the technical issue of this. Why should it be better quality?

Stelios

Allen Bartnick · March 4th, 2009, 02:12 PM

So if 1080i is the same as 30p, should I render the video in progressive?

Jeff Harper · March 4th, 2009, 02:37 PM

Stelios, I have read that for best quality downconversion that is should not be done in-camera, but in post; but I cannot back that up with facts. Someone said the downcoversion in camera is not as good as it would be in post.

I record in HD and then render out to 16:9 SD, but I do it only for promotional reasons. I tell my customers I record in HD. So far I've not done a careful comparison, but I don't imagine the quality is that much better in the end, really. If we need to zoom in on an image during post and are editing in HD, then the resulting image in that case would probably be better, so editing in HD would give some added flexibility.

Others say we should keep the HD for offering customers the options of an HD product later, which is not a bad idea, but I haven't figured how I would archive it in that case. Possilby print to tape? I've never used that feature and don't know excactly how that works.

Rob Morse · March 4th, 2009, 03:09 PM

Jeff, that sounds like a good idea in theory because you have the tape backup (if that’s in your normal workflow). If I were to ingest the footage using my tape via fire wire it would be no problem to bring it back in later. Although, the whole reason for the CF card is to be able bring the footage in quicker and alleviating wear and tear on your camera by using it as a deck. That creates a problem for me because I will not have 1 file per tape, I will have multiple files from the CF card. That would mean I would have to backup by CF files and that would be a ridiculous waste of time. I have heard of people doing it though. I guess it would depend on your NLE. Sorry I guess that was OT.

Ken Ross · March 4th, 2009, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stelios Christofides

Adam
I have been so far recording in DV mode, editing in DV and producing excellent DVDs. Now if what you are saying is true, then I should record in HDV and downconvert in the cam. But I can't understand the technical issue of this. Why should it be better quality?

Stelios

Stelios, I've tried it both ways with my Z5 and see little difference. The Z5 does an excellent job with setting the cam for ordinary SD acquisition and better than my VX2100. The color may be a bit better when downconverting on the fly, but if you do this you need to be very careful of your framing since you'll be seeing a 16:9 aspect ratio on the LCD/viewfinder.

It's easy to get areas of interest outside of the 4:3 frame if acquiring in 16:9. So you always need to be thinking of a 4:3 frame when seeing a 16:9 framing. Of course many programs allow you to change your framing while the program downconverts, but that creates an additional step in the editing process...especially if you need to do this for some clips or part of a clip.

I just find it easier to set the camera for SD if the final product is to be in SD.

Jeff Harper · March 4th, 2009, 05:14 PM

For the record when I refer to SD I'm referring to 16:9 SD not 4:3...doesn't the term SD cover 4:3 and 16:9? Or am I mistaken?

Ken Ross · March 4th, 2009, 05:19 PM

Good point Jeff. Somehow I always think 4:3 when we talk SD, but you are correct, it can include 16:9 AR. When I shoot in SD I'm always shooting 4:3 because Corporate America is still predominantly 4:3.

My general thought on this is that if they have 16:9 displays, they're almost certainly HD. If that were the case I'd be shooting in HD for those cases.

Rob Morse · March 4th, 2009, 05:31 PM

If you set the guides on your LCD to 4:3 it's easy to see where you need to be when you're considering down converting the HDV footage.

March 3rd, 2009, 09:11 PM	#1
Allen Bartnick Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: new hartford, ny Posts: 37	Confused over what mode to record in I am using my FX1000 for weddings. I have read many posts about settings and I am more confused than before. I produce my video in Adobe Premiere and master the disc with Adobe Encore. It seems that if I record or render out in progressive mode it looks a little choppy but I may be using the wrong combination. With so many choices in recording modes & rendering options it's hard to know what works the best. Any advice would be appreciated.

March 3rd, 2009, 10:03 PM	#3
Tim Akin Major Player Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Newbern, TN Posts: 414	Hi Allen, I have done many test with 60i, 30p and 24p and I have found I prefer 30p for weddings, but that's me. I would suggest you do your own testing. Just make sure if you shoot progressive, render progressive and if you shoot interlaced and render progressive, you should apply a deinterlace filter to the footage first. __________________ Tim

March 4th, 2009, 08:32 AM	#5
Tim Akin Major Player Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Newbern, TN Posts: 414	Jeff you forgot about me.....my feelings are hurt. :-) You record in 30p the same as you would 60i. I always deinterlaced the VX's SD 60i footage to knock that evening news look off, with 30p the footage looks better and saves a step in post. __________________ Tim

March 4th, 2009, 02:37 PM	#10
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	Stelios, I have read that for best quality downconversion that is should not be done in-camera, but in post; but I cannot back that up with facts. Someone said the downcoversion in camera is not as good as it would be in post. I record in HD and then render out to 16:9 SD, but I do it only for promotional reasons. I tell my customers I record in HD. So far I've not done a careful comparison, but I don't imagine the quality is that much better in the end, really. If we need to zoom in on an image during post and are editing in HD, then the resulting image in that case would probably be better, so editing in HD would give some added flexibility. Others say we should keep the HD for offering customers the options of an HD product later, which is not a bad idea, but I haven't figured how I would archive it in that case. Possilby print to tape? I've never used that feature and don't know excactly how that works. Last edited by Jeff Harper; March 4th, 2009 at 05:21 PM.

March 4th, 2009, 03:09 PM	#11
Rob Morse Major Player Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 427	Jeff, that sounds like a good idea in theory because you have the tape backup (if that’s in your normal workflow). If I were to ingest the footage using my tape via fire wire it would be no problem to bring it back in later. Although, the whole reason for the CF card is to be able bring the footage in quicker and alleviating wear and tear on your camera by using it as a deck. That creates a problem for me because I will not have 1 file per tape, I will have multiple files from the CF card. That would mean I would have to backup by CF files and that would be a ridiculous waste of time. I have heard of people doing it though. I guess it would depend on your NLE. Sorry I guess that was OT. Last edited by Rob Morse; March 4th, 2009 at 03:15 PM. Reason: OT

March 3rd, 2009, 09:21 PM	#2
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	In short, record in 60i SD 16:9. Or record in HD if your computer/NLE can handle the m2t files.

March 4th, 2009, 03:38 AM	#4
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	That's right, I forgot about you Tim, and your 30p. Can you sum up how that works out again? I remember you discussing it, and I was going to try it and I never did.

March 4th, 2009, 08:44 AM	#6
Allen Bartnick Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: new hartford, ny Posts: 37	So when you say you are recording in 30p, you are not recording in HiDef just normal DV in progressive mode. If that is the case what settings do you use when you render out your video? When you record in 1080i, don't you get a better picture even when you are creating standard DVDs?

March 4th, 2009, 12:48 PM	#7
Adam Gold Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Woodinville, WA USA Posts: 3,467	No, on the FX1000 the 30p mode is just as "HD" as 60i. Page 66 of your manual. It's not actually recorded to tape as 30p, though, but that doesn't affect resolution. Most people do report that recording in HDV and then downconverting gives you a better picture than recording in SD/DV mode. But this varies by workflow and personal preference. Opinions vary a lot, but the general consensus is, if you have the horsepower in your PC to make HDV editing a breeze, do everything in HDV and then downconvert at the last second when you make your DVDs. If your PC is lacking in any of the variables necessary for smooth HDV editing (processor speed, memory or HDD space) you should edit in DV, which you can do by shooting DV in the first place or, better, downconverting upon capture from the cam. Many people use HDV cams for shooting DV, but I've never been able to figure out any advantage of that over downconverting in the cam. But maybe that's because I'm dense. Seems to me there's no downside to having an HDV original even if you aren't using that capability right now. Again, maybe I'm missing something -- it wouldn't be the first time.

March 4th, 2009, 02:12 PM	#9
Allen Bartnick Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: new hartford, ny Posts: 37	So if 1080i is the same as 30p, should I render the video in progressive?

March 4th, 2009, 05:14 PM	#13
Jeff Harper Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 8,425	For the record when I refer to SD I'm referring to 16:9 SD not 4:3...doesn't the term SD cover 4:3 and 16:9? Or am I mistaken?

March 4th, 2009, 05:19 PM	#14
Ken Ross Trustee Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New York Posts: 1,945	Good point Jeff. Somehow I always think 4:3 when we talk SD, but you are correct, it can include 16:9 AR. When I shoot in SD I'm always shooting 4:3 because Corporate America is still predominantly 4:3. My general thought on this is that if they have 16:9 displays, they're almost certainly HD. If that were the case I'd be shooting in HD for those cases.

March 4th, 2009, 05:31 PM	#15
Rob Morse Major Player Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 427	If you set the guides on your LCD to 4:3 it's easy to see where you need to be when you're considering down converting the HDV footage.