If one is editing high-definition video (- 1920x1080, captured from a camera, in .m2ts format, let's say -), what kind of output would be the best, in terms of maintaining the best quality first (and a decent file size secondly)?
In what format do you output, and why, if different than what you're suggesting?
The question would be for Adobe Premiere Pro CS5, but if you've had a great experience with another program feel free to say.
Thank you very much.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 30 of 34
Best for what?
Compare that to this: What's the best thing I should eat?
The question is too open-ended to get any response.
I don't know how to be any more specific than that.
Best for viewing, I guess, on the same computer. After rendering the file, I'd like to be able to play the file in Windows Media Player, and say "Nice; that looks just as good as the original captured files; and the file size is not too big (not more than a gig, or so, let's say, for a couple of minutes, or so)."
If you're still confused, just tell me what output format you use in APP, for HD files, if you want.
I'll just follow any suggestions I get, to get a sense of what might be best for me. I'm not going to reply back and say "you're wrong", or anything like that, so please don't worry about giving the optimal answer.
h264/avc will offer the best compromise for quality / file size for viewing purposes
I guess the best answer is "The one that you like the most".
The one I like the most is 720p30 AVC/AAC in an MP4.
I say go for Blu-ray standard or at least a Blu-Ray AVCHD DVDR compromise.
If your camera was reasonable quality the Blu-ray playback will be fine. If the camera is junk, that will limit quality.
Hey you paid for the camera and about a grand or more for CS5. Don't cheap out on media.
BTW you need a new computer. A 3GHz P4 won't cut it for Blu-Ray. Shouldn't be a problem. A reasonable new quad core computer will cost about half what you paid for CS5.
Last edited by edDV; 7th Jun 2011 at 21:27.
Oh, I have another technical question, please.
I've noticed (again, in APP) that, if I change the settings of the sequence to match the original captured clips, it goes from .mts (for the original files) to .mpeg (for the sequence).
Now, .mpeg is not a terrible output solution, I think, for Windows PCs, but I've had problems playing the file on a Mac computer.
What is the take of the experts at VideoHelp on exporting as .mpeg? (This is, again, for 1920x1080 resolution.)
That computer is not the only one I have. The one I'm using to edit these clips is much newer.
Thanks for noticing and drawing my attention, though.
Do you mean I should export in H.264 Blu-ray or MPEG Blu-ray? I should choose one of those options when exporting the file?
I don't know, but whenever I export as .m2v (i.e. MPEG Blu-ray), in both Premiere and also, I've tried, Sony Vegas, I get no sound.
I'm really not sure why you're bringing media into this. If I was to author a DVD or Blu-ray, those authoring programs would tell me what kind of files they accept, to do their job, no?
Last edited by jeanpave; 7th Jun 2011 at 21:35.
Now, .mpeg is not a terrible output solution, I think, for Windows PCs, but I've had problems playing the file on a Mac computer
eddv suggested blu-ray output preset - that's a good idea - good compatibilty for devices, blu-ray players.... except mac . Macs will choke on transport streams (.mts, m2ts like your original file). Note transport streams also add about 5-7% overhead (same video file, just put into transport stream will be larger , than say mp4 container)
If you need mac compatibilty, then output h264/aac in mp4 or mov , but mp4 isn't a good container for interlaced content, transport streams are better
There is no single optimal solution for everything. Pros/cons for any choice
Who cares about BluRay? Optical media is dying, except for the $1 rental market. I can't think of any cons, except you might want to junk your BD player and buy a network player. To me, it's certainly easier to play movies from a 1TB USB drive, you don't have to change the disc, or worry about scratches.
DVD/BD only survives because the older generation doesn't keep up with tech, and hasn't retooled their equipment. That's why BD's are $20+ because there are fewer buyers.
Even in stores like Fry's, media players are hidden on lonely aisles next to routers in the "computer" dept, when they are not computers, but media players. Because FRY's sells DVD/BD and these boxes cut into those sales.
Last edited by budwzr; 7th Jun 2011 at 21:58.
That would work, but he would have to single rate deinterlace and scale down
Single rate deinterlacing means he would throw out 1/2 the temporal information. If these are regular home videos, it won't look so good
There are Pros/cons for every format. You might have to export several different formats for different targets
Who cares about BluRay? Optical media is dying, except for the $1 rental market.
You can use a media player e.g popcorn hour, wdtv, asus oplay etc.... or even PC/ HTPC
This gives you the option in the future to make a blu-ray disc to send to relatives for example
This all shows why not providing computer info and source/destination desires is a complete guessing game (aka waste of time).
PS: computer info came from your profile.
That's why I say, shoot in 720p30, forget the 1080i. Relatives will appreciate 720p too, you can get a lot more video on the disc, and just tell 'em it's 1080i, they can't tell the difference.
budz , there is a huge difference in smoothness. Even grandma coors or baby cousin budlite can tell the difference
For your average home video, the difference will be like day and night . If you've shot everything with a steadicam or tripod and use very controlled movements, planned ahead of time with scripts then there might be less difference...
OK, then I'll fall back on: it's not worth the extra buck for the bang.
All American broadcast media is 60i, 60p, or pro shot 24p. 24p is used when the goal is international distribution.
Likewise DVB areas shoot 50i, 50p or 24p.
30p historically was a production bridge to computer graphics before 60p was practical.
If computer upload is your goal, you can get away with 30p but IMO typical 30p is not fit for the big screen unless shot film style with all the rigging and short depth of field film lenses. AVCHD Lite is a low end consumer format.
Last edited by edDV; 8th Jun 2011 at 06:31.
If you use VLC on a mac, you can play transport streams ok , including the original files. You can use bob(2x) or yadif(2x) to deinterlace
Your original criteria was
"Nice; that looks just as good as the original captured files; and the file size is not too big (not more than a gig, or so, let's say, for a couple of minutes, or so)."
Some people prefer using other encoders, but at high enough bitrates, the differences are minimal
VLC on Mac sucks. It's not even remotely the same as the Windows version.
I far prefer using MPlayer OSX Extended. It acts more like VLC on Windows or Linux.
I've not tried every possible format on it, but I'd look at it before VLC.
I would be a bit surprised if it did not play AVCHD TS.
A friend of mine has a Mac, and I was surprised he had to open VLC to play that one .mpeg file.
Thanks again for the AVC suggestion, Poisondeathray and Budwzr.
You know, I like DVDs/BDs and I'm not exactly the older generation. (To illustrate, I don't even care about Netflix's streaming service, but I'm a subscriber of the DVD-shipping method.)
The thing is, I like the menus, bonuses and overall packaging of these discs. It's like buying a professionally-printed book, I think (compared to just having a copy that looks as if it's written by hand in a regular notebook - i.e. the AVIs, MKVs, etc.), but audio-visual.
But that's just my take on these discs, and I understand why people prefer downloading their movies.
No offense to anyone, I hope; especially you, Budwzr. Thanks again for the above advice.
If you prefer not to use microsoft decoders/splitters then use preferred filter tweaker
For other windows os's you need both a splitter (splits in to audio & video, so an audio decoder and video decoder can decode them) , and decoder - so it's not an either or choice. FFDshow contains decoders for all sorts of video & audio
.avc is an elementary video stream, you cannot view it without specialized software
it needs to be in a container for you to view it, like .mp4, .mts, .m2ts , .ts, .mkv . AME has a multiplexer or you can use other software e.g. yamb for mp4, tsmuxer for transport streams, mkvmerge for mkv
Last edited by budwzr; 12th Jun 2011 at 11:05.
I think there's some confusion.
AVC is an "implementation" of the Mpeg Part 10 video standard, a "flavor" if you will.
AAC is the audio counterpart.
Just like Xvid is a "flavor" of the Mpeg Part 4 standard.
Where it gets confusing is that Apple has bastardized and usurped AVC/AAC as their own, in the form of the .MP4 and .Mov containers. So has Adobe with their .FLV and .F4V containers.
In Windows, the file extension determines which program opens when you click on it. Adobe wants their "Flash" plugin to play your media in your browser, so Adobe simply invented a new extension (.F4V) the would trigger their Flash player as opposed to WMP or Quicktime.
IOW, this is all politics, and strategy to create lock-in. So you NEED to understand how to remux, and you NEED to use a neutral player like VLC, so no matter what variations occur, you can get back control.
Premiere and Final Cut play this game too, but Sony Vegas tries to keep their timeline neutral so you can bring practically anything to edit in whatever container, and not have to transcode or remux first. Also, Sony Vegas uses industry standard terminology and concepts that pros already understand.
Sony has no dog in the race for browser domination or format domination, like Apple's "AIC" codec that can only be read by Apple computers. Sony's upside is that Sony cameras work seamlessly with Vegas, and it's a "system", so that boosts camera sales too.
Last edited by budwzr; 11th Jun 2011 at 12:04.