-
1. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
Harm Millaard Mar 19, 2010 1:24 PM (in response to lchapman66)You are making things pretty difficult for yourself. It looks like you are in Paris and want to go to London, but decide to travel via Sophia, Zagreb and Moscow to get there, when there are direct connections.
Why not edit in HDV without conversion and at the end export to your delivery format?
-
2. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
lchapman66 Mar 19, 2010 1:33 PM (in response to Harm Millaard)Well, it's either convert before or convert after. I chose convert before because it makes everything quicker as I edit. In addition to that, converting later would make the overhead time for the plug-in processing even worse because it would be operating on HD footage.
I disagree, the workflow is quite simple. The client might use the HD footage later, and knows this initial project is SD. So, I just converted all the HD to SD at the start and have created their first deliverable that way.
-
3. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
shooternz Mar 19, 2010 1:40 PM (in response to lchapman66)... then ..if you need HD at a later date...how are you going to match your edit back to the the HDV footage source plus apply any FX etc that you used in the SD version of your timeline. !!!!!
-
4. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
lchapman66 Mar 19, 2010 1:54 PM (in response to shooternz)The HD footage will not be used in the same way. No worries on that front. I did think this through guys. I'm just trying to find a way not to incur the huge process time the Neat Video filter takes to do it's processing. Much rather incur it once than everytime I render.
-
5. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
lchapman66 Mar 19, 2010 1:57 PM (in response to lchapman66)And before you ask . . . . my machine scored well above the average on the PPBM4 website.
-
6. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
Harm Millaard Mar 19, 2010 2:01 PM (in response to lchapman66)Have you considered downrezzing in camera to SD?
-
7. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
lchapman66 Mar 19, 2010 2:03 PM (in response to Harm Millaard)Harm - How will that help not incur the processing the Neat Video filter incurs?
-
8. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
Harm Millaard Mar 19, 2010 2:16 PM (in response to lchapman66)Sorry, I'm not familiar with the Neat filters, so I can't answer that. But on your other remark about converting at the start or the end, in my experience I prefer, keeping Graig's comments in mind, to do the conversion at the end.
My usual workflow from HDV material is edit and only when finished, encoding to I-Frame MPEG2 @ 100+ Mbps with 1920 x 1080 resolution and with 422 profile, maximum render quality and maximum pixel depth, then encoding with HC to MPEG2-DVD and then adding the AC3 track. My experience is that HC takes way more time than AME, which does the job at least twice as fast as real-time. So encoding with AME takes less than 30 minutes for a one hour timeline. That does not bother me very much.
-
9. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
shooternz Mar 19, 2010 2:27 PM (in response to Harm Millaard)I would add it seems a huge time waste to apply a filter or effect to a whole bunch of material of which you are only going to use a proportion.
..plus you are repeating a stage that you have already done.
-
10. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
Curt Wrigley Mar 19, 2010 7:50 PM (in response to lchapman66)If you are applying the neat noise filter; you want to do that to the HDV clips (just th eones that end up in your edit). It has many more pixels to work with and you will end up with better results. Yes; its slower to render, but thats the price you pay for haveing to clean up bad footage.
I (like the others) recommend editing the whole thing in HDV, then down scaling at the end. That way you can deliver both HD or SD product when you are done.
-
11. Re: Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters
lchapman66 Mar 19, 2010 8:09 PM (in response to Curt Wrigley)Curt - For the record the Neat Video filter is working quite well on the SD footage.



