Maximizing HD to SD Quality

John Peterson · August 27th, 2009, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Ok, go make a picture profile like the one I linked you too. I have a bunch in my camera but the one I pointed you too should be a great place to start, and should prevent what you are seeing in this footage. Your camera is not broken, it just has the default settings which really aren't that great.

I set that one up yesterday Perrone.

I just switched to it. The white walls in this room look amber.

John

Perrone Ford · August 27th, 2009, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Peterson

I set that one up yesterday Perrone.

I just switched to it. The white walls in this room look amber.

John

Did you do a white balance?

John Peterson · August 27th, 2009, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Did you do a white balance?

You posted before I did. I fixed it. I had it on PRST which is 5600K according to the PP.

So I guess I shoot some stuff tomorrow and post back?

John

Perrone Ford · August 27th, 2009, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Peterson

You posted before I did. I fixed it. I had it on PRST which is 5600K according to the PP.

So I guess I shoot some stuff tomorrow and post back?

John

Yep. And put a clip up like you did today, and I'll take a look at it.

John Peterson · August 27th, 2009, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

Yep. And put a clip up like you did today, and I'll take a look at it.

I can't thank you enough.
Regards,

John

Bob Thieda · August 28th, 2009, 07:41 AM

Perrone,

I'm working on a project that was shot in 720 60p and will be delivered on standard DVD.
I'm going to assume that the work-flow you've described should also work well for me, correct?

Bob

Perrone Ford · August 28th, 2009, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Thieda

Perrone,

I'm working on a project that was shot in 720 60p and will be delivered on standard DVD.
I'm going to assume that the work-flow you've described should also work well for me, correct?

Bob

Yes, should work fine. Not sure what the temporal movement is going to look like going from 60p to 60i though so report back! :)

Jim Snow · August 28th, 2009, 09:38 AM

It is usually a good idea to sharpen to reduce the softening that occurs when resizing from HD to SD. Does it matter if the sharpening is done before or after the resizing? In a similar vein, I use TMPGEnc to resize and sharpen in one operation. (I load Cineform HD into TMPFEnc and output resized SD MPEG) If it should be resized before it is sharpened, is TMPGEnc smart enough to do it in the right order?

John Peterson · August 29th, 2009, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Snow

It is usually a good idea to sharpen to reduce the softening that occurs when resizing from HD to SD. Does it matter if the sharpening is done before or after the resizing? In a similar vein, I use TMPGEnc to resize and sharpen in one operation. (I load Cineform HD into TMPFEnc and output resized SD MPEG) If it should be resized before it is sharpened, is TMPGEnc smart enough to do it in the right order?

I believe it is best to sharpen after resize from what I was told more than once.

John

Albert Rodgers · September 4th, 2009, 11:37 AM

Can someone please explain this workflow, if I don't have Cineform. I've downloaded TMPEG ENC 2.524 and Virtual Dub I was going to download AviSynth, but I am not sure how it functions. I currently have a edited project that has hd and sd clips on my timeline. The final input is for SD DVD. I rendered the project to .avi using NTSC Widescreen format. Was this the proper step? I need help. Also, it appears that TMPEG is used to convert the footage to Mpeg-2. How is this more effective them converting the footage in Vegas? Please describe the process/purpose of each step/progam in each step in the process. Thank you.

Jim Cowan · September 7th, 2009, 09:44 AM

Hi Everyone,
I just want to thank Perrone Ford for sharing this information with us.
It's opened my eyes to experimenting to improve the HDV to SD/DVD (and
maybe BR/MPG4) output.

I've only been playing with a 120s clip of a Christmas tree zooming/panning.
Besides improving the sharpness there seems to be better contrast, and
when played I don't think I see as much blocking/creeping of dim colors during
pans. I noticed this on the walls besides the tree which were illuminated mostly
by the tree lights. Before the HDV->720x480 always seemed to have creeping
(not sure of the right term) wall colors. Now it seems much more consistent,
much less distracting, your eye stays on the tree being panned and is not
pulled away by seeming movement the wall.

Thanks again to everyone who contributed. It took several readings of
these 10 pages, and most of a day without other pressing needs to work
out was explained and examine the results along the way.

thanks
jim cowan
Pointe Vicente Recording and Post
l

Jim Snow · September 7th, 2009, 09:57 AM

Jim, You might be able to take your video quality up yet another notch by using Cineform as an intermediate editing format. It is a much more appropriate editing codec. IMHO any form of MPEG (or AVCHD) doesn't belong on the NLE timeline because of the block compression method that is used. There is a lot of technical information on their web site that explains the issues involved. http://cineform.com

Harry Simpson · September 7th, 2009, 10:33 AM

While i still am using Cineform NeoScene I think it was Perrone saying it was lossy - is this a big penalty in using it?

Jim Snow · September 7th, 2009, 11:09 AM

It is VERY close to lossless. Completely lossless video results in enormous file sizes that are unwieldy.

Seth Bloombaum · September 7th, 2009, 12:35 PM

Agreeing with Jim about Cineform; their marketing-speak is that it is "visually lossless", which I think is by and large true for everything shot with a camera.

If I remember correctly from previous posts, Perrone does some work with animation, in which he has found he must use a truely lossless codec to maintain the original quality.

With content shot with a camera, you have to go down many generations of Cineform before seeing degradation, although it is a "lossy" codec, by definition.

However, only you can decide how good is good enough for your projects. There's always one more step that will increase quality, at some increase in time and/or money .

August 28th, 2009, 07:41 AM	#141
Bob Thieda Major Player Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Carol Stream, IL Posts: 541	Perrone, I'm working on a project that was shot in 720 60p and will be delivered on standard DVD. I'm going to assume that the work-flow you've described should also work well for me, correct? Bob __________________ Bob T.

September 4th, 2009, 11:37 AM	#145
Albert Rodgers Regular Crew Join Date: May 2003 Location: Ypsilanti, MI Posts: 87	Can someone please explain this workflow, if I don't have Cineform. I've downloaded TMPEG ENC 2.524 and Virtual Dub I was going to download AviSynth, but I am not sure how it functions. I currently have a edited project that has hd and sd clips on my timeline. The final input is for SD DVD. I rendered the project to .avi using NTSC Widescreen format. Was this the proper step? I need help. Also, it appears that TMPEG is used to convert the footage to Mpeg-2. How is this more effective them converting the footage in Vegas? Please describe the process/purpose of each step/progam in each step in the process. Thank you. __________________ Jack-of-all-trades trying to master one (Videography) www.sdfvideo.com

September 7th, 2009, 09:44 AM	#146
Jim Cowan Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 34	re: Maximizing HD to SD Quality Hi Everyone, I just want to thank Perrone Ford for sharing this information with us. It's opened my eyes to experimenting to improve the HDV to SD/DVD (and maybe BR/MPG4) output. I've only been playing with a 120s clip of a Christmas tree zooming/panning. Besides improving the sharpness there seems to be better contrast, and when played I don't think I see as much blocking/creeping of dim colors during pans. I noticed this on the walls besides the tree which were illuminated mostly by the tree lights. Before the HDV->720x480 always seemed to have creeping (not sure of the right term) wall colors. Now it seems much more consistent, much less distracting, your eye stays on the tree being panned and is not pulled away by seeming movement the wall. Thanks again to everyone who contributed. It took several readings of these 10 pages, and most of a day without other pressing needs to work out was explained and examine the results along the way. thanks jim cowan Pointe Vicente Recording and Post l

September 7th, 2009, 10:33 AM	#148
Harry Simpson Major Player Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Nashville, TN. Posts: 581	While i still am using Cineform NeoScene I think it was Perrone saying it was lossy - is this a big penalty in using it? __________________ Nashville TN using Canon 5D MK3, Canon 550D, RODE SVM mic, 70-200 f2.8L II IS, 24-105 f4L IS, 50 and 85 f/1.8, Vegas Pro 11, Zoom H4n, Blackbird, Lilliput Monitor, Lightroom

September 7th, 2009, 12:35 PM	#150
Seth Bloombaum Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,420	Agreeing with Jim about Cineform; their marketing-speak is that it is "visually lossless", which I think is by and large true for everything shot with a camera. If I remember correctly from previous posts, Perrone does some work with animation, in which he has found he must use a truely lossless codec to maintain the original quality. With content shot with a camera, you have to go down many generations of Cineform before seeing degradation, although it is a "lossy" codec, by definition. However, only you can decide how good is good enough for your projects. There's always one more step that will increase quality, at some increase in time and/or money . __________________ 30 years of pro media production. Vegas user since 1.0. Webcaster since 1997. Freelancer since 2000. College instructor since 2001.

August 28th, 2009, 09:38 AM	#143
Jim Snow Trustee Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Santa Clara, CA Posts: 1,104	It is usually a good idea to sharpen to reduce the softening that occurs when resizing from HD to SD. Does it matter if the sharpening is done before or after the resizing? In a similar vein, I use TMPGEnc to resize and sharpen in one operation. (I load Cineform HD into TMPFEnc and output resized SD MPEG) If it should be resized before it is sharpened, is TMPGEnc smart enough to do it in the right order?

September 7th, 2009, 09:57 AM	#147
Jim Snow Trustee Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Santa Clara, CA Posts: 1,104	Jim, You might be able to take your video quality up yet another notch by using Cineform as an intermediate editing format. It is a much more appropriate editing codec. IMHO any form of MPEG (or AVCHD) doesn't belong on the NLE timeline because of the block compression method that is used. There is a lot of technical information on their web site that explains the issues involved. http://cineform.com

September 7th, 2009, 11:09 AM	#149
Jim Snow Trustee Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Santa Clara, CA Posts: 1,104	It is VERY close to lossless. Completely lossless video results in enormous file sizes that are unwieldy.