Best solution for recording with different cameras and save it as such

[marciano999]

Hello!

I do e-learning, and some courses i do is recording a person exaplining something with different cameras (different angles views). The thing is sometimes this courses are very long(10+ hours), and to be edited after is not very costly effective. So i want to do this:

I would like to record the person who is explaining, with the different cameras live, and in the end have one file with the different cameras, so I do not have to edit the videos after all. I would like to know what solutions I have that is not very expensive, what I really need, some device, what software and what options I have. The point of this is not to do it live streaming, but to leave it already recorded, and have one file with the different angles of the different cameras that I have made when i was recording. Thank you very much in advance.

[Cornucopia]

These are your choices:

1. Pre-edit/mix, by using a live switcher/mixer to combine & narrow down multiple views into 1 single view and record that. You could simultaneously record the raw cameras individually, for safety backup or for alternate post options. Though you might not use them after all, and will have stored extra...

2. Standard edit/mix, using an NLE. Requires full or nearly full length captures of all the angles (you can skimp on some that might be used only for accent moments, but would need to maintain timecode sync). This is the thing you mentioned you wanted to avoid, so not likely. However, certain tools may allow for a "realtime" single-pass post edit, with the result possibly either a rendered final edit/mix file or possibly an edit/play list metafile. Depends on next stage of distribution/usage.

3. Record the various views as separate streams, but multiplex those streams (either live or in post) such that the outcome is a single file encapsulating ALL the streams, and the end user (using capable tools) views what view or views they want to. The downside of this is that you have no control over which view they choose, and you must save/send ALL the streams, which is inefficient and costly in terms of storage/bandwidth. Plus, it needs more specialty tools. Plus, there may be issues if/when the user wants to switch mid-way because the clips would rarely be in sync regarding encoding frametype (hopefully they should be in sync re: elapsed time).

That's it.

None of them are cheap, or that quick (although #1 is by far quickest).
Which one appeals to you?

Scott

[marciano999]

Thanks for your reply

I like option 1 and 3. ABout option 3 it could be an option so the user choose which angle view they want.

There isn't a software that i could use with my computer and changing the different cameras with my computer and record as such? or do i need a live switcher?

These are your choices:

1. Pre-edit/mix, by using a live switcher/mixer to combine & narrow down multiple views into 1 single view and record that. You could simultaneously record the raw cameras individually, for safety backup or for alternate post options. Though you might not use them after all, and will have stored extra...

2. Standard edit/mix, using an NLE. Requires full or nearly full length captures of all the angles (you can skimp on some that might be used only for accent moments, but would need to maintain timecode sync). This is the thing you mentioned you wanted to avoid, so not likely. However, certain tools may allow for a "realtime" single-pass post edit, with the result possibly either a rendered final edit/mix file or possibly an edit/play list metafile. Depends on next stage of distribution/usage.

3. Record the various views as separate streams, but multiplex those streams (either live or in post) such that the outcome is a single file encapsulating ALL the streams, and the end user (using capable tools) views what view or views they want to. The downside of this is that you have no control over which view they choose, and you must save/send ALL the streams, which is inefficient and costly in terms of storage/bandwidth. Plus, it needs more specialty tools. Plus, there may be issues if/when the user wants to switch mid-way because the clips would rarely be in sync regarding encoding frametype (hopefully they should be in sync re: elapsed time).

That's it.

None of them are cheap, or that quick (although #1 is by far quickest).
Which one appeals to you?

Scott

[marciano999]

And i really don't want it live. I just don't want to do post producion (changing angles). Just wanted recorded and saved on my computer in 1 file

[johnmeyer]

And i really don't want it live. I just don't want to do post producion (changing angles). Just wanted recorded and saved on my computer in 1 file

I only know of one way to have multiple cameras of the same event combined into a single file: DVD angles. I have done this and it works. Very few people have used it, but almost all DVD players support it. You need to have an authoring package which supports it.

What you do is put all your cameras onto separate timelines in your NLE. Use PluralEyes to sync them up (single button push -- very nifty software). Output each trimmed and synced video to separate MPEG-2 files and then import them into a DVD authoring package which support angles (I use DVD Architect which is part of Vegas Pro). DVD Architect takes care of multiplexing the multiple video streams into a single file, and also lets you develop the switching logic, with menus and/or shortcuts, so you can easily toggle between the different views.

I am not aware of any way to do this with h.264/MP4 or any other more modern format.

[jagabo]

MkvToonNix will let you multiplex several concurrent video/audio streams in a single file. Some players will let you switch between tracks, VLC for example. But most people won't notice there are multiple tracks to choose from. And the audio may not switch with the video.

[Cornucopia]

AVI, MOV, MPG (both PS and TS), MP4, MKV, can all multiplex multiple video as well as audio streams. Look at my past posts regarding this with stereoscopic material.

But, @marciano99, ALL of these kinds of options require more work than you seem to be willing to put into it. I'd recommend option #1.

There are software-based custom apps/drivers that allow for multiple simultaneous audio or video sources ("VJ" type apps), but they aren't common, so you'll have to do some research on your own, as I am too swamped to devote more time to this.

Better and simpler overall to use real live hardware.

Scott