5 Replies Latest reply on Feb 5, 2012 9:07 AM by bertrenolds

    Anyone using GoPro Cineform Studio as free substitute for Neoscene?

    J.Elliott8652 Level 1

      Folks,

       

      I've not been reading here for several months, so please excuse me if I repeat a prior thread. I did a search and didn't find one spot-on.

       

      GoPro, makers of that small fixed-focus HD camera for the sports and outdoor photography crowd, has bought up Cineform. Like I say, this is news to me as of this week but not exactly news. GoPro makes a casing that allows use of two Hero HD cameras to capture 3D, in a sense. As you'll have two cameras, you'll get two separate video files and separate audio that is blended in software. From what I gather, GoPro found the casing worked great but then they had no good way to finish out the 3D software side of it. It seems that GoPro decided Cineform was a ripe choice for acquisition.

       

      This might have a really nice benefit to those of us with underpowered CPU's in our rigs and AVCHD cameras. Instead of spending $130 on Cineform Neoscene to transcode the AVCHD files to a CPU-friendly Cineform intermediate codec, it looks like we can use the free Cineform Studio software to do the job. 

       

      I've been kicking around on the 'net this week to see if this is actually plausible. Here and there people mention doing it, but not often in connection with PPro CS5.

       

      So - is anyone here on the forum using the free Cineform Studio to transcode their AVCHD files to the Cineform codec, as they might have with Neoscene? Are you getting the same benefits: improved 422 colorspace, lighter CPU load, etc?

       

      I have a Canon T2i DSLR and an AMD Phenom II 955 CPU rig. Any help I can get for this non-Intel processor would be sweet.

       

      http://gopro.com/3d-cineform-studio-software-download/

      http://gopro.com/3d-hero-system-how-it-works/

        • 1. Re: Anyone using GoPro Cineform Studio as free substitute for Neoscene?
          Keith_Clark Level 2

          for kicks and giggles tried it, it won't read or import .mts files atleast.

          • 2. Re: Anyone using GoPro Cineform Studio as free substitute for Neoscene?
            hiphopsuperman Level 2

            Yup, Im using it to transcode my T2I footage for use with ppro cs5.5. Works like a dream for me and makes my underpowered system (13inch MBP) humm along nicely. Trancoding is faster than real time.

             

            Here is a tutorial: http://vimeo.com/31328472

            • 3. Re: Anyone using GoPro Cineform Studio as free substitute for Neoscene?
              bertrenolds Level 1

              Personally I'm not sold on it, cs5.5 handles raw h.264 really well in my opinion and I am the type of person that is against re-encoding a file more then you have to. Not to mention the cinaform file that get's spit out is huge so you have to cut and export a million times and it takes forever. If you have the time have fun with that, presonally I would rather get a more powerful computer before I started recompressing files just to make them work in cs5 or elements just becuase my computer blows. Even with CS3 I would just change the raw h.264 extension to .mov and deal with it so yea. Maybe if they expanded it into an editor that actually had a timeline then I could see people really starting to use it, until then I only use it for some color correction and updating my hero2 since I am forced to have cinaform to get firmware updates?

               

              And I even have the same processor as J.elliot, a quad phenom 955 not over clocked or anything with 8gigs of memory and raw gopro video plays fine in CS5.5. Converting codec from a canon t2i camera might be the only thing it is really useful for although I would imagine getting the right codec for premiere would probably be the right solution instead of re-encoding. I searched and the t2i uses .mov and it's hard for me to imagine premier not accepting .mov files when it now supports h.264? I guess in cs4 you just had to rename the .mov to .mp4 so why do all the extra work with cineform and why does someone get a correct answer for agreeing with you?

              • 4. Re: Anyone using GoPro Cineform Studio as free substitute for Neoscene?
                hiphopsuperman Level 2

                why does someone get a correct answer for agreeing with you?

                 

                Because I answered not only if Im using it but also went into detail of why.

                 

                Although you are on a powerfull system, youll transcoding helps when you add effects and color correct.

                • 5. Re: Anyone using GoPro Cineform Studio as free substitute for Neoscene?
                  bertrenolds Level 1

                  I wouldn't call my system powerful compared to those that have 12gigs of memory or more and 6-8 core processors. I guess it's a solution but I would say if you have the minimum requirements for a system to run adobe cs5, 64bit 3.2gig dual core processor and 4gigs of memory I would think that would be enough to run a .mov video codec and apparently the mercury engine as it was called runs h.264/.mov files without re-encoding in cs5 so even with what you consider to be an underpowered system you should still be able to play and edit the video in cs5 without doing anything to it. I am basically saying you may be doing unecessary encoding, why encode more then you have to? And if you don't have cs5 there has to be be a possible work around for older versions besides re-encoding. Basically computers are so cheap nowdays that if you can afford a DSLR camera you should be able to afford a $500 or even less system that can handel using raw h.264 video in older versions of CS or in CS5 instead of losing quality and wasting time and hard drive space.

                   

                  And I would like to add that if J.elliot is using CS5 I would start importing raw video from your camera right into premiere and save yourself the time and space of encoding everything in cinaform just to bring it back to premiere with quality loss.