Does HDV footage and Avid Codec DN x HD mix well?

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

Since I do not have CineformPremium or Professional (considering it), I'm following up on a recommendation from this very forum of using Avid DN x HD to archive my finished masters.

I'm trying to understand its advantages which looks to include: up to a 220 Mbps rate, 10 bit and 4:4:4 options. Is this format almost lossless or lossless?

My source material/footage is HDV1080 shot in "30F" (Canon tech speak) from either a A1 or A1s which I'm told is actually a hybrid of interlaced and progressive. I could copy and paste that explanation if it helps.

Once installed, I looked at the parameters which yielded questions:

In my case:

1) Is the color level 709 or RGB more appropriate?

2) Alpha - it's "Greek"to me, what do I select?

3) Do any of you use this with Premiere Pro? It offers options to render with this codec to 64 bit depth. Is 24 or 32 bits less overkill for the task at hand?

4) All of the listings for resolutions for a frame rate of 29.97 are 1080p not i.

5) How will this codec treat and process HDV 30F as progressive or interlaced?

6) Since my source footage is 4:2:0, does it make any sense to use one of the 4:4:4 resolutions?

Please help assist in my education as to how to use this product to obtain the best possible results.

Thanks

[poisondeathray]

Since I do not have CineformPremium or Professional (considering it), I'm following up on a recommendation from this very forum of using Avid DN x HD to archive my finished masters.

There is a free version of cineform that allows encoding now , gopro cineform studio

I'm trying to understand its advantages which looks to include: up to a 220 Mbps rate, 10 bit and 4:4:4 options. Is this format almost lossless or lossless?

almost lossless

1) Is the color level 709 or RGB more appropriate?

Rec709 is the conversion matrix used when converting to and from RGB for HD footage . Use this as well if you are using the DNxHD options

2) Alpha - it's "Greek"to me, what do I select?

If you don't know what it is - you don't need it . Alpha channel, is for compositing (transparnecy)

3) Do any of you use this with Premiere Pro? It offers options to render with this codec to 64 bit depth. Is 24 or 32

bits less overkill for the task at hand?

If you're not using alpha channel 24bit is fine

4) All of the listings for resolutions for a frame rate of 29.97 are 1080p not i.

For HDV 30F you should be using p anyways

5) How will this codec treat and process HDV 30F as progressive or interlaced?

It depends what programs and filters you use . The codec doesn't do anything. It's what is upstream, how the HDV footage is handled & decoded that is important

6) Since my source footage is4:2:0, does it make any sense to use one of the 4:4:4 resolutions?

Usually not

[Cornucopia]

I would agree with pdr, with the revision that, if the option exists for 1080 @ 59.94fps, that probably means Interlaced (HDV has AFAIK never supported 1080p60).

"30F" likely means the same as PsF, or a progressive frame folded into an Interlaced structure. Which app & algorithm is used to decode this can greatly affect the quality (you want something that can recognize that it is meant to be progressive and can re-weave it internally in the Editor/Processor to avoid losing resolution or generating blended artifacts).

None of the DNxHDs, nor Cineforms, nor ProRes, nor JP2K codecs are truly lossless. They are all visually near-lossless - to - lossy (depending on bitrate bracket chosen), using Wavelet-type or DCT encoding. Using DNxHD or Cineform are certainly a workable solution for your situation.

BTW, if I were you, I'd look up on the website of your NLE of choice (AVID MC, Apple FCP, Sony Vegas, Adobe PPro, GV Edius, etc) and search for an HDV workflow whitepaper. Very often there is already one existing that lays out in detail the best way to get footage from your camera to final product (and one that will specifically work with that NLE).

Scott

[aedipuss]

??? if all the footage is HDV the highest quality output for storage will be HDV. you can export it losslessly to file or write back to tape. blowing up the filesize with a "nearly" lossless codec isn't gong to make it look any better and will result in loss of quality.

[poisondeathray]

??? if all the footage is HDV the highest quality output for storage will be HDV. you can export it losslessly to file or write back to tape. blowing up the filesize with a "nearly" lossless codec isn't gong to make it look any better and will result in loss of quality.

It's for an edited master, color corrected graded - nothing will be passed through, and HDV compression is very poor

[Cornucopia]

Agreed. Actually, if the kind of editing goes anywhere beyond simple I-frame cuts, you can throw the presumption of MPEG2 smart rendering out the window anyway, so then you REALLY want to have a lossless or visually-lossless workflow.

Plus, it's likely going to end up as something besides HDV (DVD, BD/AVCHD, MP4/MKV-h.264, FLV). So better to up it to something easily editable and make it LL/VLL early on to make all the subsequent editing/compositing/effects/rendering/recompression jobs that much easier and less prone to degradation. Just watch for gotchas in the AR resize, interlacing, color subsampling & colorspace change areas, and you'll be OK.

Scott

Scott

[aedipuss]

i've never worked that way. i save the original source files and vegas project file when finished. then there is no need for a humongous "semi" lossless "master" as it can be recreated from all original material and rendered out again in different formats with no loss at all.

[poisondeathray]

i've never worked that way. i save the original source files and vegas project file when finished. then there is no need for a humongous "semi" lossless "master" as it can be recreated from all original material and rendered out again in different formats with no loss at all.

That's true, but he needed a "semi lossless" master , and didn't want to consume the space required for something lossless

Sometimes you need a "master" to hand off to other people, and sometimes you don't want to have to render slow effects, filters multiple times for different outputs

[Cornucopia]

It is a tradeoff between Space (big interim files & hdd requirements) vs. Time (needed to re-load, re-render, reconvert). For some of us, time is money, and the extra space used up is cheaper than the time involved in recreating the wheel.

Scott

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

Actually, all three of you are right.

I save all original/source footage files & the project master.

I do not save the rendered/preview files for example which take up HDD space.

My PC is limited tech-wise at the present andi s due for replacement this year when I find work.

Meanwhile it takes hours to render a heavily edited project which I do not want to invest the time redoing.

So a high quality master which retains visual quality without being a pig storage space wise works for me.

[poisondeathray]

For a "visually lossless master", in situations where you control everything and the platform (PC), my personal preference is cineform



At similar bitrates, DNxHD and cineform are quite similar in quality . There are different "flavours" available - you can select higher quality , higher bitrate versions or lower quality , lower bitrate versions if space is a concern

DNxHD pros: is more cross platform compatible, and besides the standard Avid implementation there are open source decoders and encoders available (cineform is closed , proprietary)

DNxHD cons: beware of gamma and levels shifts, with some software - inconsistentcies - this can cause problems if you're handing off work to other people , slightly worse editing performance than cineform (not as smooth to edit, except maybe on an avid system)

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

PDR,

Thanks for sharing your experience with those 2 solutions.

I was going to ask the very same question addressed above!

Do you use Cineform to re/downsize to SD? If so, how is the quality of the result say compared to the HD2SD workflow.

What is your view on CF's ability in the spatialization area?

[poisondeathray]

PDR,

Thanks for sharing your experience with those 2 solutions.

I was going to ask the very same question addressed above!

Do you use Cineform to re/downsize to SD? If so, how is the quality of the result say compared to the HD2SD workflow.

What is your view on CF's ability in the spatialization area?

No I don't use cineform to resize.

The free version of cineform doesn't come with other tools like hdlink, firstlight or other utilities. It does come with a GUI, cineform studio, but it's quite limited (you can do some resizing, but I wouldn't use it). Besides, if you were encoding out of your editor (eg. premiere) - the manipulations would be done by the editor (you can access cineform in adobe media encoder, and it will show up under "microsoft AVI" in all windows NLE's)

I've mentioned this to you already - HD2SD is good for interlaced resize. Progressive resizing isn't a concern in NLE's, but you're probably not going to be resizing your "master". You have more control using avisynth with your resize and subsampling options, assuming you're using the exported "master" as input (so you wouldn't be using the editor for that anyways)

I don't understand your question about "spatialization" can you clarify ?

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

Thanks for all comments and input contributed thus far.

Are you saying that I shouldequate & process A1/A1s "30F" footage going forward as if it were 30p?

I installed CF Studio. The GoPro-CineForm codec now shows up as an option in the Quicktime codec section in Premiere Pro. However, the only thing to consider is to put a check mark in the"interlaced video source" box or not. Should that be left unticked for best results?

What kind of file (properties) is going tobe created if I use that to export direct from the timeline?

8 bit, 10 bit , 4:2:2?

All I know is that presumably the extentsion is .mov which i do not work with.

I prefer .avi.

Do you perhaps have CF Premiumor Professional?

[poisondeathray]

Are you saying that I shouldequate & process A1/A1s "30F" footage going forward as if it were 30p?

But you are using this as export, not import , correct? Or are you encoding source files to cineform, then importing? I thought this was for export "master" ?

Ideally once you have a 29.97p sequence, everything should be native 29.97p native from then on

I explained this in your other thread. It's the same thing as Scott said above about PsF. It's 29.97p content encoded interlaced in a 59.94i fields per second stream

I installed CF Studio. The GoPro-CineForm codec now shows up as an option in the Quicktime codec section in Premiere Pro. However, the only thing to consider is to put a check mark in the"interlaced video source" box or not. Should that be left unticked for best results?

It depends how you have everything setup.

If you have a progressive sequence, file is interpreted as progressive, I would export progressive

My preference is to have everything progressive (this makes sense since you shot progressive) - this will cause fewer headaches down the road.

Do you recall I explained in your other thread how deinterlacing kills quality on progressive content ? well many programs will misinterpet the file as interlaced and apply deinterlacing = bad

What kind of file (properties) is going tobe created if I use that to export direct from the timeline?

Not a recommended way to use premiere. Use AME

8 bit, 10 bit , 4:2:2?

Cineform is 10bit 422

All I know is that presumably the extentsion is .mov which i do not work with.

I prefer .avi.

Do you perhaps have CF Premiumor Professional?

It should show up in the "Microsoft AVI" options in AME

(I have an old version of Cineform Prospect I used on an older computer eons ago, but it's not relevant to the new versions of cineform)

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

With Prem Pro (only NLE editor I have), I find that when I export a 30F master from the timeline as "progressive" and click/compare the picture between the input (source) and the output tabs there is immediate decrease in visual quality as it goes noticeably soft and my eyesight is not all that great.

For HDV projects there is not a whole lot of options/project presets when initializing a master.

My choices are:

a) 1080 p30 or
b) 1080i 30i (60i)

I have no clue if b is best however that's what I normally use.

If there's a better, more appropriate format/preset please let me know.

Thanks

[poisondeathray]

With Prem Pro (only NLE editor I have), I find that when I export a 30F master from the timeline as "progressive" and click/compare the picture between the input (source) and the output tabs there is immediate decrease in visual quality as it goes noticeably soft and my eyesight is not all that great.

Was was the file interpretation? right click the file in the clip bin

Go back and read your other thread. When there is a mismatch in settings, (e.g. file interpreted as interlaced, and you export progressive, PP will apply deinterlace = bad. That's why it gets soft and blurry - the blend deinterlace applied)

For HDV projects there is not a whole lot of options/project presets when initializing a master.

My choices are:

a) 1080 p30 or
b) 1080i 30i (60i)

I have no clue if b is best however that's what I normally use.

If there's a better, more appropriate format/preset please let me know.

Thanks

Assuming the information you've given is correct (are you sure this is 30F material) ?

I answered this in your other thread. Everything should match

Sequence settings: 1080p29.97 (progressive, no fields)
File interpretation: 1080p29.97 (progressive , no fields)
Export: 1080p29.97 (progressive, no fields)

If there is a mismatch anywhere, you're going to degrade the quality

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

Sorry for the confusion. We are talking about an end destination/archival format.

Right now, until I obtain Cineform, I use PP to export my master to a variety of formats.

Hence this thread to finds a good, all-around solution.

I do not use Cineform at all but am exploring that possibility.

If I purchase it I can then export to Cineform from within PremPro.

Why is it better to use AME as a standalone as opposed to exporting from within Premiere?

Interesting question!

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

I now shoot in 30F vs 60i because I get significantly more light to work with when shooting indoors.

A1/A1s suffers in the low light areas.

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

I should have used the correct term which was indeed resize.

I was thinking of resizing footage to 1920 from 1440.

Trying to ascertain if CF is worth the $300.

Thanks for all of your input.

[poisondeathray]

Sorry for the confusion. We are talking about an end destination/archival format.

Right now, until I obtain Cineform, I use PP to export my master to a variety of formats.

Hence this thread to finds a good, all-around solution.

I do not use Cineform at all but am exploring that possibility.

If I purchase it I can then export to Cineform from within PremPro.

Why is it better to use AME as a standalone as opposed to exporting from within Premiere?

Interesting question!

AME has more control over options. You can queue up encodes and continue working.

Since you're using the already rendered "master" as the source to export a variety of formats, it makes even more sense to use AME (you don't even need PP open, faster, less overhead, less memory consumption)

[poisondeathray]

I should have used the correct term which was indeed resize.

I was thinking of resizing footage to 1920 from 1440.

Trying to ascertain if CF is worth the $300.

Thanks for all of your input.

CF is free now to encode. You don't need the other versions unless you are using HDLink features or FirstLight (grading , color work) , or 3D, or higher subsampling support 444

The way I would do this is use the non resized master. Keep it 1440x1080p29.97

The native "HDV 30p" sequence setting in premiere is 1440x1080p29.97 . I would export it as 1440x1080p29.97 in whatever "master" format you choose, cineform, lagarith, whatever . Make sure all settings match (progressive) . This will save you some space as well (fewer pixels to encode).

The resize and other manipulations should occur upon exporting different formats

[Cornucopia]

And BTW, "1440"x1080 is actually displayed as 1920x1080 because of the 4:3 PAR (unlike most standard HD PARs of 1:1). So you shouldn't need to resize.

I'm still a little confused about your workflow (me=lunkhead!), maybe you could give us a detailed stepwise description...

Scott

[Canon GL-2 Guy]

No, I'm the "lunkhead" for not knowing and doing the asking.

This has been educational and informative gents!

My general workflow is dependant on whether the end product is HD or SD.

SD is much more involved since it involves resizing from HD.

1) Import footage and organize. Set up sequences for each program segment. Edit each as needed. Add graphics. Audio/Video trax manually synced.

2) Heavy editing. Extensive color correction. Assemble master timeline from finalized segments.

3) Render then export to Lagarith, MPEG-2 100 Mbps I-Frame, H.264 for blu ray until now.

4) Use Avisynth to resize to SD. Render to MPEG-2 DVD spec.

Also set-up, and shoot (sometimes with my wifes help) all of the footage.

Pretty much a one man effort for the most part out of necessity.

It's a lot of work!!