i am pretty savvy on compression. I am not a specialist but very comfortable with the process.
I have tried :
h264 vimeohd
both prores options
mpeg4
h264 bluray (getting multiple file here)
I have yet to get an output that is at the same quality as the seq. I am on a mac so if i output to same as seq i get an unplayable file. Because i am cutting .mts which is not native to snow leopard.
I have FCS2 (fcp6) but there is no crossover other than xml. If i could output to compressor i would.
AME crashes when i come out of the TL to encode so i must use premiers encoder. I dont know why AME crashes but it always has. AME works as a stand alone but not in the export chain.
so for mts 720p24 other than same as seq. what settings will give me the highest quality master to encode other formats from.?
Uncompressed 8Bit was the best i have gotten. Thanks
I might try 10bit next time but much better than the results i was getting.
There was some low light noise that i could not see in PP but that could be from the camera. or i could have layer composited some light blur into the shot to deminish that some. My external monitor is not ideal.
anywho, THANKS.
Is it me or am i actually loosing blacks on export.
here is the screen shot from the TL which has nicely crushed blks...
www.creekcitytv.net/anomolly/theTL.png
Now here is the output.
www.creekcitytv.net/anomolly/theTL.png
It seems as though i am loosing blacks and with them 1/2 of my grade.. This is why i was looking for a 1:1 output that would contain at least 95% of the data from the TL. The outputout put file was exported as QT Uncompressed 8-Bit.
I filmed with an HMC150 @720p24. with +3chroma and -5 master ped.
Lot of gamma issues exporting with adobe. Stuff looks different from codec to codec. It is horrible to deal with.
Never had no blacks crush though. But I have not tried to export to Uncompressed. I genrally use Prores or Animation. Latter is clean while ProRes is gamma-screwed.
Try exporting to i.e. Prores or Animation or an image sequence. And see if there is any difference to the uncompressed one.
You can't use Premiere Pro's built in monitors for quality control. They are for monitoring content only. You need a properly calibrated external TV to serve as a reference for color correction and grading.
How do you connect Premiere Pro to a calibrated external TV while CC and grading Jim?
It puzzles me that you advise this and then also advise that there is no external monitoring solution in Premiere!
Do you have a third party hardware solution? Enlighten us please.
Shooternz
everything is within spec.
I do believe that there is a overall broadcast safe being applied. When i move the blacks up the trace in the chroma/rgb monitor seems cut off at the bottom.
Aton
Yes i gave up on prores out of premier. I am about to see wht will happen if i remove all grades and send it to AE to grade and export.
I have thought of trying the xml to FCP then Send to Apple Color and doing it all there. I am still researching getting the tittles to go with the xml but i may just recreate in AI or PS and reassemble in FCP.
I will try the animation codec.
Export should be a focus in CS6. Its a very nice nle but if you cant get a good export it really becomes anoying.
Jim Simon
I have an external monitor that i can view via BM Intensity.
However, in my humble oppinion, if you grade on your led monitor and view on your led monitor there still should be uniformity in the grade if you can get a full quality export.
Maybe PPro handles how it display the video in the NLE differently but i have not read anything that supports that.
It puzzles me that you advise this and then also advise that there is no external monitoring solution in Premiere!
Ah, good. So you understand the problem we now face.
Actually, what I'm calling for is a proper built-in monitoring solution, one that doesn't require third-party hardware, one that doesn't come with the limitations and bugs of third-party hardware. Basically we need for HD formats what we had for SD formats using FireWire output - a pure signal untouched, unmanaged, and unaltered by the operating system or the graphics driver.
Do you disagree with PP having such capabilities?
Actually I dont understand the problem because I am absolutely happy with my "external monitoring" but I do feel it could be improved. eg a tighter integration to hardware.
I have hopes that Adobe Speedgrade will have to address this in some way by the very nature of what is required for a professional CC and Grade application.
My guess it will remain 3rd party hardware for those that seriously require it.
Meantime.. considering you dont seem to have CC/Grade/ Gamma issues...I just thought that you must have had a viable connection to an "external calibrated TV" considering how often you profer this advice to those that do.
My extern is a lg 28" LED. The reason i did not grade thru that is because it was a web only project.
Normally, I just glance at the monitor from time to time but i am looking at my cpu monitor because i want to know how it looks on its designated means of delivery.
Might not be right but i usually get good results that are consistant on most devices.
I do feel it could be improved. eg a tighter integration to hardware.
Well, that's essentially what I'm talking about. Taking Windows and the graphics driver out of the equation, so there's no possible way they can alter the signal. Just like we had with DV. A direct connection between PP and the video output of the graphics card.
To me, it sounds like we're in agreement.
.I just thought that you must have had a viable connection to an "external calibrated TV"
I'm still working primarily in SD. (Seems no one wants to pay for HD.) So I have the luxury of using FireWire for proper connection. But I'd really love that same scenario for when I do start working in HD (which may be soon).
i did not grade thru that is because it was a web only project.
That should not affect anything here. The calibrated external monitor allows you to see the video as it is. Without that, you do not see the image correctly, and any adjustments you make could be in the wrong direction.
So, you use that correct image from the external monitor as a reference to make the video look the way you want. Where it will end up is largely irrelevant.
SD. Now I understand.
So, you use that correct image from the external monitor as a reference to make the video look the way you want. Where it will end up is largely irrelevant.
Issues such as gamma, luma high / low, chroma etc ( legalising video) are best observed in the scopes and adjusted in the scopes. Eyeballing them is no indication of where they are placed.and a dangerous practice for broadcast. Its a bit similar to judging exposures and levels in the camera viewfinder ( eg. without a field monitor and wfm)
"look the way you want "... should not be such an issue for web viewing.
Whatever...a high quality full raster monitor (calibrated) is up to both tasks and provision to use them already exists in Premiere. Just needs a tiny little mindset change.
BTW - I do wonder if the infamous QT Gamma issues are more often an issue on Macs rather than PCs? I certainly am less aware of it in the PC part of my workflow.
I have heard this Monitor argument a lot. I do agree that the monitor is the best place for CC and "most" looks for broadcast or web.
I started in SD and i was using a sorry 15" TV for external. It was not all that adjustable and nothing like a blue gun. My 1st 5 projects were reject for broadcast. Then i learned to use the scopes and understanding what the trace was telling me. I used FCP and Shake3 for color.
I could use the scoipes to stay broadcast safe but the scopes could not tell me what a look was. So i had to learn the nuances of my ragedy monitor and that monitor took me through my 1st 1yr and i could always create the look i was expecting when i saw it on any tv.
That taught me that there is a way of making due, when thats all you can do. I purchased a 800 dollar Pro JVC w/ blue gun and some other fixings after that.
Now, its HD and i as of yet have had 2500. to spend on a Flanders. So currently everything i edit is viewed on a 28" LG LED ( and that an upgrade from an insignia 26"). It only shows up to 720p. I have not been able to learn it the way i had my start-up. Its way too bright so what i see as 0 black and 100 WHT maybe darker than i intended through out the mid-range.
What i am saying is that sometimes it is the eye and not the scopes that make the adjustment. Often time that adjustment is being made through a series of considerations for equipment personalities. i.e. this screen has more yellow and that codec has a gamma shift so i will lower or raise this or that to compensate.
Still i do not at this time think that you can get a full quality export from premier. In FCP4.5 - 7 you can. I like working in premiers interface. It is my prefered interface, but it is still at least .5 - 1.0 versions from being equal to fcp 6 or 7. Monitoring included.
Meanwhile.......
I ended up nesting the seq and putting a contrast filter (+6contrast) to somewhat offset the shift in QT Animation 32bit. I am sending it Through Compressor to get h264 with a filtered gamma shift.
The version that came out of premier this time was the best of the bunch. I didnt try 10bit though cause i think it will only give me slightly better color space and i am not grading anymore at this point.
What i am saying is that sometimes it is the eye and not the scopes that make the adjustment.
Thats absolutely fine and obvious for the "looks" but not for Broadcast legality ...as your previous experiences have told you.
So the solution is easy...
a high quality full raster monitor (calibrated) is up to both tasks and provision to use them already exists in Premiere. Just needs a tiny little mindset change.
For $1500, you can get very close to a broadcast quality monitor. Since I work for a broadcast network, all of my productions have to be correct, so I normally always use the scope. But here is what I also did, and it hasn't let me down yet:
I purchased a 61" DLP display and a colorimeter, you can get both for under $1500. Using a calibration disc and calibration software, I was able to calibrate the DLP in about 2 hours. My before and after results were astounding, and my after results were very close to perfect. So close, in fact, that I've never had a project rejected.
The only downside to this is that it only works for HD, it is not suitable for SD (since it's been calibrated to 709). We have a broadcast Sony monitor for SD (I think we paid $3500 for it).
Now we are getting somewhere.
That 61" Sony DLP may not fit into the 15x 12 space i have for this editbay but if a DLP can be teaked to do the job through a MXO i may need to find a 42-48" that may work.
I have seriously considered an Panasonic Plasma with the MXO . A lot of people swear by it.
I just saw this :
and i was reading that with mxo2 you can use any mid-Hi level hdtv and get relatively close. I dont believe that a mid level LCD or a LED would get me there.
I am gonna get something over the next 2weeks. I also oreder the mxo2 mini for desktops ( http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/618348-REG/Matrox_MXO2_MINI_D_MX O2_Mini_for_Desktop.html ). This leaves me about 1000. top work with.
Thanks a lot for your help guys.
North America
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Asia Pacific