Vegas 8 / Premiere CS3 doesn't handle MP4 H.264 clips (Sanyo HD1000)

[edDV]

The context of this thread was editing AVC type formats in traditional PC based pro editing products, not for archive.

For archive there are two broad categories. Archive where re-edit is a goal and archive of a finished distribution product. If you are talking the latter I don't understand the connection with this thread. My assumption is a wedding photographer may need to re-edit the material or maintain an archive that can be re-edited in HD for future proofing. If you are done, just archive the DVD iso for future reorders. Why use H.264 at all?

My projects are archived for future HD re-edits. Depending on the client I may archive the open Premiere or Vegas project to hard drive so it can be opened as I left it with all source files and layers separate. Hard drives are cheap. Cheaper than the time required to compress archives.

But then you may be shooting H.264 (AVCHD). I prefer shooting HDV or DVCPro for now with current tools. We can debate that if you want.

[rernst]

Sorry, one last comment:

If you read the paper you quoted closely:

ftp://ftp.panasonic.com/pub/Panasoni..._AVC-Intra.pdf

you will see that it essentially confirms what I say: Intra-frame compression is less effective. The statement that it's efficiency does not deteriorate with motion is preposterous. First of all: I frame AVC represents the *worst possible* efficiency in a frame sequence. H.264 will *always* be more efficient. I the efficiency sinks it will eventually resort to I frames only if your encoder (the free x264 encoder is the best encoder I have yet to see, better than anything commercial I have played with). Also, as the paper points out, entropy encoding using CABAC is superior to I frame compression.

The reason hardware encoders in cameras use I frames is because they have no means of dual-pass encoding. They cannot gauge motion or predict it. However, when re-encoding o file the encoder generally makes at least two passes and can make much more intelligent assumptions about bitrate allocation. It also is not concerned with algorithm complexity because it does not have to encode in realtime.

Use H.264 preferable to any other format at this point besides DVCPRO50 because of it's better color/luminosity accuracy.

[rernst]

The context of this thread was editing AVC type formats in traditional PC based pro editing products, not for archive.

For archive there are two broad categories. Archive where re-edit is a goal and archive of a finished distribution product. If you are talking the latter I don't understand the connection with this thread. My assumption is a wedding photographer may need to re-edit the material or maintain an archive that can be re-edited in HD for future proofing. If you are done, just archive the DVD iso for future reorders. Why use H.264 at all?

My projects are archived for future HD re-edits. Depending on the client I may archive the open Premiere or Vegas project to hard drive so it can be opened as I left it with all source files and layers separate. Hard drives are cheap. Cheaper than the time required to compress archives.

But then you may be shooting H.264 (AVCHD). I prefer shooting HDV or DVCPro for now with current tools. We can debate that if you want.

I am not talking *shooting* H.264. As a prosumer you are likely to shoot HDV. You then pull this stuff off and do your edit. You have huge files at high resolutions but who cares? It is only temporary. You provide a nice DVD afterward, maybe even BluRay. Then you archive this because tapes deteriorate quickly. I am working on a documentary that is running several years (a high profile court case). As I mentioned, I have terabytes of this material. This is where the archival kicks in.

You are, of course, right when you state that the quality of the native format is always better than a generation later unless you use lossless H.264.

Maintaining the data on DVD ISOs is not an option as the edited material is only a small subset of what you might cut later. I prefer dropping this on a hard drive which are currently cheaper than burning it to Bluray. I also have little trust in media such as DVDs. Too often have I run into problems reading them later on (although I verified their readability when burning). The dye deteriorates. Leave it out on the window sill with the dye side up just one sunny day and chances are you can toss it.

[edDV]

I don't have time to go point by point now but it seems from your last response that you are archiving for future editing. I disagree that h.264 is the right format for this type of archive. I keep original format camera masters (tape + HDD) for the material likely to be used in the future and hardware encode the "cutting room floor" to MPeg2 just in case. I might agree with you that AVC could be used instead of MPeg2 for the discards but I don't want to invest the additional CPU encoding time. I might change my mind if I had a hardware AVC encoder.

Even with the level of archiving described, a typical "event" project backup fits to a 200GB-500GB drive.

I'm still not getting your project goals and work flow. I'll re-read this tonight.