• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
Locked
0

HDV --> SD DVD Workflow?

Explorer ,
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Dont want to sound stupid or naive, but probably going to come across that way

I have shot [underwater] dv for years, and moved to hdv in 06. Since I have an end-to-end blu-ray setup with a broadcast scalier, my hdv footage looks great at home.

I was asked to take some of my hdv footage and burn an sd dvd for distribution. I took an edit of 1440x1080 and exported in PP-CS3 [movie] [Sorenson] as 720x480dv, no recompression highest quality (26G for a 30minute vid), etc, etc.. and imported it into a new PP3 d1 project. Burned the DVD again highest quality

I looked at the results on an sd 4:3 monitor terrible much worse then my old native dv footage. I expected to loose quality, but assumed that the scaling algorithm would smooth, and I would end-up with something acceptable --- but it does not look like it it looks like pixels are just dropped with no interpellation at all. I mean if you never saw the original footage, you might let it pass, but having seen the original footage, you can tell that the compression has killed it. I know that this is like a 2 (maybe 3) generation dupe, but I have access to the original pixels and would have assumed with minimal recompression/expansion the results would be as good as 1gen dv but I cant seem to get there

Can anyone point me to a good workflow [or some settings] to take hdv footage and cut a decent quality sd dvd using the production suite??

Thanks in advance,

Hugh

Views

26.3K

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
replies 254 Replies 254
LEGEND ,
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

(Told you, Jeff.)

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guest
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I would start by questioning the export to Sorenson. An old, inefficient codec and your footage surely got recompressed. Then look for a better program to scale. Perhaps AE or TMPGEnc.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Jim... please let us in on the joke???

Bill, Thanks. I'll look at AE. Ay thought on what settings to use? I am not an AE jocky... I thought of compressing the hdv using ReSizer in AE to dv [own both products], then importing the footage in a PP dv project??? No experience with TMPGEnc....

Thanks in advance,

hugh

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I suggested to Jeff in another post that a podcast on how to edit HD material for SD delivery might be a goo idea. He might agree, but it hasn't been done yet, so it won't be of much help.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Contributor ,
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hugh, I use Cineform, specificly NEO HDV. This is the codec only from cineform. So my HDV footage is transformed into the High Def 1440x1080i avi file, imported into DV project. I scale the image manually to about 45-50%, not using the scale to frame size. I edit, then export to MPG2 via the adobe encoder. Quality 5, CBR of 7.2 mbits. I change the field dominance to lower. It looks very good. I can send you some frame grabs if you want.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Did almost the same thing using Sorenson one member uggested changing codecs

Do you notice field issues? it seemed that my hdv is upper field, but when I switched to lower on the dv side I sometimes get field problems. Do you go progressive on the intermediate?

Any hints for manual scaling?

hugh

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Contributor ,
Feb 08, 2008 Feb 08, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I kept the intermediate interlaced. I did notice a little in background items with fine lines seemed to have a few field problems.

I posted two clips on this site:
http://completecarecomputing.com/video/

They are called
HDtoSD45%Scale.m2v I scaled the HD image 45%
HDtoSD50%Scale.m2v I scaled the HD image 50%

Take a look and see if they look ok to you.

I will post the origial file also if you want.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 09, 2008 Feb 09, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

> (Told you, Jeff.)

Haha. Yes, I agree-- it will make a good tutorial. (Someday it will see the light of day.)

Unfortunately, I'm a nitwit about HD -- I've blissfully kept my head in the sand, and haven't made the leap yet. So if anyone has a bookmark to a previous thread, let me know. Or, if anybody has any free or "PPro-only" solutions, I'm definitely willing and able to turn that into a podcast.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 09, 2008 Feb 09, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I myself am still waiting for an affordable HD camera that does things right.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 09, 2008 Feb 09, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I don't have a good excuse. I'm just lazy.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Feb 09, 2008 Feb 09, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Jim, you might want to take a closer look at the Sony EX1.
It does produce gorgeous pictures, trust me on that. :)

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Feb 09, 2008 Feb 09, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I've seen samples. It does take good video. And while it does get a fundamental design element right (full resolution imaging devices), it also gets one of them very, very wrong (interframe compression). It is my opinion that ALL video cameras should have BOTH full resolution imagers AND full frame recording. Right now that means only the Panasonic AJ-HPX3000. But I don't have $50,000 to spare. My hope is that in response to the EX1, Panny is working on a model with similar strengths of the 3000, but with a zero missing from the price tag.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 10, 2008 Feb 10, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I suggest being sure that each clip has reverse field order enabled, then output using Adobe Media Encoder, upper fields first, 2pass VBR ~8MB target rate. I have had very good results this way using HD footage in SD preset project.

Scaling using the motion keys is very straightforward, and the results can be like using a $1,000 fluid head to pan and scan. Just use easy in/out key frames and you have lots of flexibility with your footage.

I am about to post a thread describing a problem I am having with slow motion using this scheme. Haven't had any trouble with real time footage.

ESC

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 10, 2008 Feb 10, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I don't really know what all the fuss is about. I keep everything HDV and export to Encore as Blu-ray. Then I tell Encore to create a DVD image and it does the transcoding. The last time I did this it seemed to be pretty good and it maintained the 16x9 format.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 11, 2008 Feb 11, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

To summarize:

I spend years shooting underwater SD [for establishing shots] and stills [for close-up] , then combining both in SD and burning to DVD. Results very good. BTW, underwater imaging is all about delicate color contrasts, very fine detail and negative space separation, plus all the regular rules of composition that apply top-side.

Switched to HDV for stills and vid. Decided to edit the entire thing in HDV for my blu-ray setup. Results good. Colors accurate, detail intact, etc. life is good.

Decide to make an SD DVD for a client, so what the hell, I have so many more bits to play with, if PP used bicubic-smooth to scale, then transcode, results should be fine --- they are not.

Dont get me wrong, they are good, but not as good as the stuff I did in native SD then output to DVD. On the stills, I loose some color separation and some fine edge detail. I also end-up with far more spurious interlace artifacts. I suspect that this because of the extra generation (or 2) that I need to interpose on the process

To satisfy my curiosity, I spent most of the weekend re-working the 200 assets in the project into native SD. Today I am going to reconstruct a new project with manually scaled HDV footage (several folks have suggested that method), and combining the new assets, output to DVD and do a direct compare.

Will let you know the results.

Thanks for al the help, and if you all think of any more workflow tips, I am all ears.

Hugh

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hugh, I just read this thread. I have the EXACT same situation. But I don't see a solution in this thread. Did you ever figure it out.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

To answer: No.

I have never received an answer, nor any settings to try. I have spent the last week doing experiments with codecs, filters, settings. everything, anything. Absolutely no progress. All look far worse then SD. I am burning a new test DVD as I write this. I am using every purmation of filter, frame option and codec in an exhaustave attempt to find an answer...

Just to satisfy myself, I hooked a Sony HDV/DV VTR directly to a monitor and watched raw footage the differences are striking.. The HDV is unbelievably better.. Then compared the DVD burn on the same monitor. differences are also incredible the HDV ---> DVD sucks, full stop...

Remember, I expected differences, but to think that an HDV burn was so far blow SD, when the HDV raw material is so far better is just unacceptable.

I dont know what the correct settings are, and I dont think Adobe knows either, or maybe they just dont care. I have now spoken to 3 post-prod folks and they are all in the same boat 5 hours of footage and no-way to get it onto a DVD.

I suppose it depends on ones definition of quality

If you find anything out, please let me know. If I discover the Rosetta stone, Ill post.

Thanks in advance,

Hugh

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

From my origional post: I never received an answer norany settings to try. I have spent the last week doing experiments with codecs, filters, settings. everything, anything. Absolutely no progress. All look far worse then SD -> DVD. I am burning a new test DVD as I write this. I am using every purmation of filter, frame option and codec in an exhaustave attempt to find an answer...

Just to satisfy myself, I hooked a Sony HDV/DV VTR directly to a monitor and watched raw footage the differences are striking.. The HDV is unbelievably better.. Then compared the DVD burn on the same monitor. differences are also incredible the HDV ---> DVD sucks, full stop...

Remember, I expected differences, but to think that an HDV burn was so far blow SD, when the HDV raw material is so far better is just unacceptable.

I dont know what the correct settings are, and I dont think Adobe knows either, or maybe they just dont care. I have now spoken to 3 post-prod folks and they are all in the same boat 5 hours of footage and no-way to get it onto a DVD.

I suppose it depends on ones definition of quality

If you find anything out, please let me know. If I discover the Rosetta stone, Ill post.

Thanks in advance,

Hugh

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

That is about the worst news Ive had in a while. Sounds like youve been working on it longer than me. I only have two days and a dozen DVDs invested so far. But this is a potentially big problem. As far as the quality; Ive been unable to output anything even close to minimal acceptable quality. It looks like crappy home video. I have $2300 invested in CS3 Master Suite (thats another nighmare story), $7000 in a fresh dual Xeon SCSI raid machine, a few grand in camera and tapes, and now cant output it to a DVD. Im going to look into Vegas or FC to see what they have to offer. Ill stay in touch. Thanks for the info.



Howell Conant

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Just checked Vegas Pro forums. They are having the same problem. Didn't see any solution there.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Howell,

Just got off the phone with a friend, who has a friend who is a broadcast pro... etc....

Ill post full report later.. it will take a while.. the full answer is non-trivial

This is the results of hours of conversations. This is a quick summary and will be short in some areas

What do people accept as quality???

In short: its the number of generations. Folks who are getting good results in CS3 are kidding themselves. There are tools that will do this, but you need another $50K to do this correctly and to do it REALLY correctly requires another $300K My friend spent $45K on his post-prod system and he has acceptable results with 30 hour renders

But there is hope

The problem starts with capture, then progresses in editing, to transcoding, to output... it comes-down to generations and internal frame management From what I understand, there is a "simple" way and a "not-so-simple-way" to make this work. Read as $$$ and time

The short story is time -vs- quality...

I'll summarize: quick answer in case you are on a timeline...

The quick method is to let the hardware do the work... if you are going to output to 16:9 SD DVD anyway, then just do it... set your source device to SD: 16.9, then re-import all the raw HDV footage as 16:9 Widescreen SD into premiere. Yes, just flush all that HDV footage you wont need it.

Summary: Let the camera/VTR convert all the HDV footage into SD in hardware and re-import into a premiere SD widescreen project you wont need the HDV if you are going to SD

Your hardware will convert the footage much more accurately then Premiere/Encore and you will get a better result, basically the answer is fewer generations that is the key or so Im told..

I have 17hrs of RAW HDV and lots of timelines. Ill give it a small try.. But if this is the case, Ill ask for a refund on CS3

This is the answer from 2 pros...

It is strange that Adobe doesnt have a white paper addressing the issue Or maybe they dont want to

What do we accept as quality?

Hugh

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Howell,

Just got off the phone with a friend, who has a friend who is a broadcast pro... etc....

Ill post full report later.. it will take a while.. the full answer is non-trivial

This is the results of hours of conversations. This is a quick summary and will be short in some areas

What do people accept as quality???

In short: its the number of generations. Folks who are getting good results in CS3 are kidding themselves. There are tools that will do this, but you need another $50K to do this correctly and to do it REALLY correctly requires another $300K My friend spent $45K on his post-prod system and he has acceptable results with 30 hour renders

But there is hope

The problem starts with capture, then progresses in editing, to transcoding, to output... it comes-down to generations and internal frame management From what I understand, there is a "simple" way and a "not-so-simple-way" to make this work. Read as $$$ and time

The short story is time -vs- quality...

I'll summarize: quick answer in case you are on a timeline...

The quick method is to let the hardware do the work... if you are going to output to 16:9 SD DVD anyway, then just do it... set your source device to SD: 16.9, then re-import all the raw HDV footage as 16:9 Widescreen SD into premiere. Yes, just flush all that HDV footage you wont need it.

Summary: Let the camera/VTR convert all the HDV footage into SD in hardware and re-import into a premiere SD widescreen project you wont need the HDV if you are going to SD

Your hardware will convert the footage much more accurately then Premiere/Encore and you will get a better result, basically the answer is fewer generations that is the key or so Im told..

I have 17hrs of RAW HDV and lots of timelines. Ill give it a small try.. But if this is the case, Ill ask for a refund on CS3

This is the answer from 2 pros...

It is strange that Adobe doesnt have a white paper addressing the issue Or maybe they dont want to

What do we accept as quality?

Hugh

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I was just trying that very thing, but for some reason I can't seem to capture the HD footage into a SD PP project. The capture utility will not operate the camera/tape transport. I just got started and hit this glitch. Will let you know, but i have to go out for a couple of hours.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Feb 20, 2008 Feb 20, 2008

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

My HVR-Z1U and HDR-FX1 both have a menu setting to convert HDV to DV. When this setting is selected, PP CS3 recognizes the input as DV, not HDV. The video is letterboxed.

To me it seems crazy that this video would look better on export to SD DVD. This is about 300 lines of vertical resolution I am guessing (480 minus the letterboxing) One would think that editing HDV at 1080i and exporting a wide SD DVD (full 480 lines, made to view on TV in STRETCH mode) would look better to the eye. I guess its in the compression, and the fact that hardware encoders are better than software, etc.

I have never really tested it and do not have any HDV projects still on the computer. Anyone been able to verify that this is the recommeneded workflow for HDV if output to SD DVD is the goal?

-BChil

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines