Video Basics...want to get my feet wet!

[Audiop]

All I know about AVCHD is that it's based on MPEG4/H.264 which FCP can handle native but FCE can not but as mentioned earlier one can always decompress into an intermediate format for editing.

A powerful computer can always handle more streams/angles and preview with higher quality without rendering than a less powerful computer but basically it's about the software.


/Peter

[Ozpeter]

I've just bought the latest version of Premiere Elements (9) which unlike the previous two versions does work with DSLR AVCHD video files that I use. But it's interesting to see how it struggles with 1080i footage as soon as you apply any effect or transition, whereas on the same PC more bottom-end-of-the-market video editing software isn't troubled at all. The difference appears to be that the lower end programs make use of Cuda (which Adobe seems to feel should only be available with CS5 and they don't want to undercut themselves), and perhaps even more significantly, the lower end programs offer lower quality timeline playback quality, thus giving themselves an easier job, though for some tasks that makes it hard to make judgements when applying effects.

You could say it's a bit like editing audio using computer speakers rather than proper monitors. You'd certainly be able to assemble your material in the right order and make basic edits, but you'd be in trouble if you needed to get the eq right.

If you want something basic but undemanding on your hardware, consider Nero Vision Xtra (current version), which here at least works very fluidly on the timeline with anything I can throw at it. But don't try to do anything too subtle with it.

[MorganN]

Originally Posted by fifthcircle

Working with native AVCHD files in Premiere CS5 (on a PC) with great success. My computer is a beast (i7 980x chip, 12GB ram, super fast SATA III drives, etc...), but there have been no issues working on these files in realtime. Can't speak to CS4, but CS5 is a great program- easy to use, very powerful feature set, full 64 bit processing throughout (don't believe it will even install on a 32 bit OS).

--Ben

Would be interesting to hear what graphic card you are using.
I'm currently working with native h264 files from 5D mk2 in Premiere on a MBP. Works ok for 1-2 1080p streams, but is sluggish when it reach 3-4..
Going to build a new i7 workstation within a couple of months for photo and video post prod and would be interested in suggestions on graphic cards.
Might also be used with Pyramix (Mykerinos x-30)..
Thanks!

[fifthcircle]

Haven't done 3-4 streams of AVCHD yet. (give me a couple weeks and I'll be getting that if my info from my clients are correct)

Anyways, I'm using an EVGA GTX 470 card on a W7-64 machine with an i7 980x chip and 12 GB RAM and a couple fast (SATA III RAID 0) hard drives.

--Ben

[Audiop]

Originally Posted by MorganN

Would be interesting to hear what graphic card you are using.
I'm currently working with native h264 files from 5D mk2 in Premiere on a MBP. Works ok for 1-2 1080p streams, but is sluggish when it reach 3-4..
Going to build a new i7 workstation within a couple of months for photo and video post prod and would be interested in suggestions on graphic cards.
Might also be used with Pyramix (Mykerinos x-30)..
Thanks!

Have you compared with the files transcoded to some intermediate format like Prores (or Win equivalent)?


/Peter

[Audiop]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

WE do hour to hour and a half long concerts with a Sony FX1 and a Fostex FR2LE and don't have a drift problem (maybe a couple of frames at the end). Something maybe wrong in your setup. Internal clocks that are not accurate??? Recording at something other than 29.97 rate?? Digital should not drift that much.

I think that in the projects I have had problems with audio-video sync my Aurora has been set at 96kS/s.

I mentioned that I had good experiences with cheaper cameras but in those situations I only did audio and set the Aurora at 88kS/s.

So for my latest project I used two EX1R and set the Aurora to 88.2kS/s and I had no sync problems in post (iZotope'd the audio to 48kS/s).

I'm not sure what caused these problems earlier but it almost seems like the clock in Aurora is off when running at 96kS/s.

I'm happy now! :-)



/Peter

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by Audiop

I think that in the projects I have had problems with audio-video sync my Aurora has been set at 96kS/s.

I mentioned that I had good experiences with cheaper cameras but in those situations I only did audio and set the Aurora at 88kS/s.

So for my latest project I used two EX1R and set the Aurora to 88.2kS/s and I had no sync problems in post (iZotope'd the audio to 48kS/s).

I'm not sure what caused these problems earlier but it almost seems like the clock in Aurora is off when running at 96kS/s.

I'm happy now! :-)

/Peter

GREAT!!!!I hope it continues to be a no problem setup.

We record everything audio for video at 48 kHz 24 bits and NO PROBLEMS in Post.

[magnuspater]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

It is my understanding that academic versions are NEVER updateable for the simple reason they are for someone to use for 4 or less years and then go into the real world and spend some serious coin to get the real version.

At least that is what I have been told. Go for FCP Studio would be my suggestion.

I don't know if TS is interested in Avid Media Composer, but they have an academic version for $300 with four years of free upgrades. It doesn't come with 3rd party software (can be bought separately) and can't be used commercially.

Avid | Student Pricing

[bonestar]

Just to clarify - is there no way on a low budget to stripe either the audio or video with timecode so that they remain perfectly in syc in post? With non-pro cameras, is it always just a question of getting the sample rates correct and hoping the clocks are matched enough that the video and audio align within a few frames?

Like others, I'd like to record multitrack audio of live performances and then mix them down later. Ideally, I'd like to have a few cameras at different angles running at the same time too.

It seems like a bit of a crap shoot with amateur level gear. Of course, I know pretty much nothing about video. So maybe I'm misreading.

[rcrowley]

1) Striping does NOT do anything for you as far as sound/picture synchronization.
2) There are NO video/DSLR cameras or camcorders of ANY description, format, or price range which record decent audio. You are virtually ALWAYS better off recording audio to a separate system.
3) Modern equipment typically allows even long-form (1 hour or more) production with very modest sound/picture slip. Where "very modest" means maybe a second or two per hour. To be sure there are SOME examples of equipment with crystal frequencies way out at the edge of the acceptable range, and those will be more of a problem for long-form production. But they are still usable.
4) When editing using modern NLE (non-linear editing) video software, it is almost trivial to use the separately-recorded sound track as the "master" and then align whatever camera shots to the master audio track. It is trivial to "pull-up" the sync at whatever spot you change cameras, etc. Always diddle the video and never the audio track as viewers are less disturbed by a frame or two of video "repair" than any sort of audio "correction".
5) Use the built-in mics on the camcorders to record the ambient sound to give you a "guide track" to sync the video with the master audio track.
6) Recent software products like SynthEyes actually make it automatic to pull-up the video clips to sync with the master audio track. Home of SynthEyes Camera Tracking
7) Recording sound at 48KHz is not an absolute requirement. Audio sampling rate has NOTHING to do with holding sound/picture sync. Of course, if you record at some other sample rate, you will need to convert to the video standard 48KHz either externally, or let your LNE software do it. Of course, it would be best to record at 48KHz (or 96KHz) if you are recording sound for video so as to avoid any potential conversion artifacts. Or just to make the production process faster (no conversion time) if nothing else.

This is all based on decades of first-hand experience with audio and video equipment. I am now on my 3rd generation of a portable video system. A completely digital HD live-switch multi-camera system. I was recording audio for decades before adding video production. After my Alesis HD24 died, I replaced it with a JoeCo BBR1 so now everything (audio and video) is digital recording directly to hard drives.

NOTE: I don't mean to imply that high-end solutions using gen-locked cameras and recorders are not useful. I am just trying to demonstrate that modern audio and video equipment make it much more possible to do excellent-quality production without all the traditional broadcast/Hollywood trappings. To be sure, there is a trade-off in post-production time and effort and the low-ball method is definitely not for everyone.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by bonestar

Just to clarify - is there no way on a low budget to stripe either the audio or video with timecode so that they remain perfectly in syc in post? With non-pro cameras, is it always just a question of getting the sample rates correct and hoping the clocks are matched enough that the video and audio align within a few frames?

Like others, I'd like to record multitrack audio of live performances and then mix them down later. Ideally, I'd like to have a few cameras at different angles running at the same time too.

It seems like a bit of a crap shoot with amateur level gear. Of course, I know pretty much nothing about video. So maybe I'm misreading.

As long as you are using digital audio and digital video there should be no problems with sync. The reason that you use to have to stripe everything was because the audio and the video were analog and the sound and the picture would drift apart if they were not locked to time code.

Today you can get into digital audio and video for less than $1000 and have good results with minimal gear. 15 years ago you would have had to have thousands of dollars of equipment and years of experience to get the same results.

Try it you'll like it!

Best of luck!!!

[bonestar]

Thanks guys!

So can anyone suggest a particularly good-value digital video camera for recording live performances? I have the audio side covered very well, but no camera. And the options seem staggering. Not sure where to start.

[MorganN]

Originally Posted by Audiop

Have you compared with the files transcoded to some intermediate format like Prores (or Win equivalent)?


/Peter

Latest reply ever.. Yes, I've done so, but I'm not sure if I like the gamma shift involved in ProRes transcoding. Haven't tried 5DtoRGB, just mpeg streamclip, and wasn't very happy with what it did.

Regarding sync, just use the built in microphone in the camera and sync it in post with Plural Eyes. If your into music, you should be able to sync it manually by eye/ear pretty easy as well.

Canon DSLRs are pretty good in terms of performance for $, although they have their limitation for concert filming. Also check out the new Sony F3 and the Panasonic AF-100.

Have fun!

[bonestar]

Originally Posted by MorganN

Canon DSLRs are pretty good in terms of performance for $, although they have their limitation for concert filming. Also check out the new Sony F3 and the Panasonic AF-100.

Can anyone reccomend a decent consumer or "prosumer" models for a guy just starting out on video?

[tonemaker]

I thought AVCHD (Advanced Video Coding High Definition) is H.264/MPEG-4 HD? What am I missing?

[bonestar]

Anyone here use a Canon HF M300 for this kind of thing?

[rcrowley]

Originally Posted by bonestar

Can anyone reccomend a decent consumer or "prosumer" models for a guy just starting out on video?

You didn't give any kind of budget range, so I will suggest something I think is a tremendous value for performance. I own two of them:

Sony HXRNX5U

[rcrowley]

Originally Posted by astroidmist

I thought AVCHD (Advanced Video Coding High Definition) is H.264/MPEG-4 HD? What am I missing?

AVCHD utilizes MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 (AVC) video coding and either Dolby AC-3 (Dolby Digital) or uncompressed linear PCM audio coding. Uncompressed audio is not supported in existing consumer devices, but is offered in several professional models.
AVCHD - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What seems to be missing?

[bonestar]

Originally Posted by rcrowley

You didn't give any kind of budget range, so I will suggest something I think is a tremendous value for performance. I own two of them:

Sony HXRNX5U

Well, I did say consumer/prosumer. Typically, that would mean under $1,000.

[rcrowley]

Originally Posted by bonestar

Well, I did say consumer/prosumer. Typically, that would mean under $1,000.

The NX5 is considered "prosumer" by most people who shoot video for a living.
Agreed, "prosumer" is an ambiguous range.

[Audiop]

Originally Posted by MorganN

Regarding sync, just use the built in microphone in the camera and sync it in post with Plural Eyes. If your into music, you should be able to sync it manually by eye/ear pretty easy as well.

Hi!

I use the on-camera sound as sync reference (and have used Plural Eyes as well) however that does not help with drift in long scenes.

Syncing each little clip manually when there is a drift is very time consuming. As it turned out my set up works fine when I stick to 88kS/s in my exernal audio.


/Peter

[fifthcircle]

Originally Posted by bonestar

Well, I did say consumer/prosumer. Typically, that would mean under $1,000.

Prosumer in the video world is totally different than prosumer in the audio world. In video, under 1000 will only get you a consumer camcorder. There is nothing even approaching pro at that price range. In the $1500-$2000 range, there are a number of good options, but most prosumer stuff starts in the $4K range. I own an NX5U and it is a pretty nice camera for the buck. The Panasonic HMC150 is similar price (if I'm remembering the right model- essentially their AVCHD cam) and also quite nice. Otherwise the "pro" stuff out there is more in the 5 figure range on up.

--Ben

[aracu]

There's a new Sound Devices unit out which significantly upgrades the image and sound of a low to mid price video camera.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

There is a new AVCHD camera out there from Panasonic the AG-AC7P and it retails for under $1300.

Here is the page translated AG-AC7P Panasonic Cmera

There is a story about it in this month's Post Magazine page4 bottom.

That plus FCPX and Compressor and and a tripod and you have a very nice video setup for under $2000.00. Not too shabby...

[jnorman]

the large sensors in most DSLRs tend to overheat when trying to do longish video clips and will generally shut themselves down after about 12-15 minutes, i think. so they are not a good choice for long recordings.

my single cam work is generally static, and mostly just runs for the entire set, with a break at intermission.

for bottom feeders like me, the upper end of the compact P&S cameras offers extremely nice HD video in AVCHD format. i use a lumix ZS7 which is very highly rated for its HD video files, but there are several others such as the sony HX9V and the lumix LX5. you can see an example of what the ZS7 can do here:

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by jnorman

the large sensors in most DSLRs tend to overheat when trying to do longish video clips and will generally shut themselves down after about 12-15 minutes, i think. so they are not a good choice for long recordings.

my single cam work is generally static, and mostly just runs for the entire set, with a break at intermission.

for bottom feeders like me, the upper end of the compact P&S cameras offers extremely nice HD video in AVCHD format. i use a lumix ZS7 which is very highly rated for its HD video files, but there are several others such as the sony HX9V and the lumix LX5. you can see an example of what the ZS7 can do here:

It is not the sensors that overheat it is that the video camera manufactures who are limiting the time by contractual agreement, especially in Europe, so the DSLR cannot function as a video camera. Also the 4 GB card can only hold about 10-15 minutes of video. This is due in part to the file format which is FAT32. In the very earliest of cameras there may have been some overheating and some people were running their cameras with an ice bag wrapped around the camera but it still shut off. There are ways around this but most of them are expensive and some require a modification to the software of the camera which voids the warranty. If you want to use the camera to record long events either use two of them and change out the cards or take a break every 15 minutes to change the cards.

[Foldedpath]

Jnorman, that video clip shows a lot of aliasing on the arms of the flautist against the background, even with YouTube set to 720p. Is that just YouTube compression, or is it in the original file?

BTW, thanks to all participating in this thread. It's been very informative.

I'm trying to resist being dragged into video as an adjunct to our small-time location audio business. I do have a background in corporate/documentary video and still photography back in the analog days. So, on the one hand I have some skills, but on the other hand, I know what the complication are -- i.e. hours and hours of post, that may or may not be billable, depending on the gig. My instinct is to avoid getting back into that whole area, especially since my main skills are more in creative lighting than documentary. But my partner in the audio business is seeing more requests for video, so we may have to go there to sell enough audio work. With YouTube so pervasive, it's getting harder around here to promote audio-only services.

I'm still trying to figure out where the sweet spot is, in gear that will pay for itself in a year or less. And then we can decide about upgrades from there, if the business supports it. That new Panasonic AG-AC7P looks interesting. I have the non-video version of the Canon 5D (the first one), with a nice lens collection, but it sounds like upgrading to the newer video version isn't a good option for concert work.

[NathanShirley]

These videos were shot with two Canon HF S200 cameras, and a Canon T2i.

The T2i is a DSLR, so no good for live use. The S200 is easier to use, and gives a pretty nice image if used right (the T2i gives a better image if used very well).



And



These are both rough cuts, post is not quite complete.

Beware of false claims like 24 or 30 frames per second, progressive (24p). This is often shot at 60i and converted to progressive. Some of the better/newer consumer cameras, such as the S200 do true 24p.

[Fran Guidry]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

It is not the sensors that overheat it is that the video camera manufactures who are limiting the time by contractual agreement, especially in Europe, so the DSLR cannot function as a video camera. Also the 4 GB card can only hold about 10-15 minutes of video. This is due in part to the file format which is FAT32. In the very earliest of cameras there may have been some overheating and some people were running their cameras with an ice bag wrapped around the camera but it still shut off. There are ways around this but most of them are expensive and some require a modification to the software of the camera which voids the warranty. If you want to use the camera to record long events either use two of them and change out the cards or take a break every 15 minutes to change the cards.

Actually the current Canon sensors do have issues with heat according to many reports I've read.

And Panasonic has no problem with FAT32 file size limits. My GH2 will fill a 16 GB card in one continuous shot.

Fran