Exporting and Shooting vs Bitrates

Discussion in 'Amateur Video Production' started by Gary Eickmeier, May 27, 2013.

  1. This guy in the Videomaker blog asks:

    "Yes I have outdated cameras

    Permalink Submitted by millerclayb on 05/27/2013 - 2:59pm.
    I am still shooting with Sony, FX1's which shoot interlaced HDV on tape.
    Yes, I know I need to upgrade. Still waiting for that ship to come in.

    So anyway, I always output progressive.



    Here is what i wish this article would have addressed:

    When outputting HDV to a DVD (for clients) it doesn't look as good as SD
    looks. I have tried everything I can think of I have and followed many
    tutorials, but still can't get the HDV footage to look real good on a DVD.

    So what is the secret?"



    I know tht DR has given us a way to output SD the best possible way, but I
    forget what it was. I just go out MPG2 progressive widescreen and get the
    best resolution and crisp graphics.

    Gary Eickmeier



    Should I be shooting 30i or 60 i? Is that the problem?
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 27, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Gary Eickmeier

    Frank Guest

    Neither.

    If you're shooting 1080-line HD video that you know is going to wind
    up on a DVD-Video disc (and ONLY on a DVD-Video disc), then shoot
    1080i59.94, ingest and edit the footage as 1080i59.94, downconvert the
    final edited footage to an NTSC-friendly non-square-pixel
    720x480i59.94 format, and then author and burn the DVD-Video disc.

    And for the record, there's no such thing as 30i (or 29.97i), at least
    not in the world of normal television video. 30i, for example, would
    mean 15 interlaced frames per second, which doesn't exist. If one were
    shooting 15 frames per second, it would be progressive, not
    interlaced, and it would be intended for computer display and not for
    television display.

    HTH.
     
    Frank, May 28, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Something got lost in the quote tree there. I was not the one who asked
    about 30i or 60i, it was the guy in the Videomaker blog. I have given my
    method before, but here it is again:

    I shoot everything in Hi Def 1920 x 1080 60i. I then make Hi Def Blu-ray
    discs by exporting to a file, an MPG 2 Blu-ray file, and importing to Encore
    and burning directly without a need to transcode. For SD DVDs, I export to
    MPG 2 DVD progressive widescreen file, then import to Encore and once again
    I can burn to disc with no transcoding necessary. Exporting as progressive
    gives me graphics that are razor sharp and have no interlace artifacts. It
    is something like deinterlacing to make sharper stills in SD. The result is
    widescreen so that it plays on any flat screen with no distortion and gives
    them the full picture.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 28, 2013
    #3
  4. Why do you keep hammering on that? I think we all know that it's called 60i
    but its secret identity is 59.94.
    What I said was that there is no transcoding in Encore. As for the export,
    there has to be some sort of transcoding - you can't put the raw camera
    footage onto a DVD or Blu-ray. I just haven't had great luck exporting as
    h.264, but MPG2 works great. What is your method?
    As I said.
    But if you are not deinterlacing the SD material, then you have the nasty
    interlace artifact of lines. Why would you advocate that? "Dammit Jim, I'm
    an artist, not a doctor."
    OK, I give up - what is HTH?

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 28, 2013
    #4
  5. Gary Eickmeier

    Frank Guest

    Hope this helps.

    I'll come back later for the other questions when I have time. Running
    out the door now.
     
    Frank, May 28, 2013
    #5
  6. Gary Eickmeier

    Frank Guest

    Exporting and Shooting vs Bitrates>,

    Okay, I'm back, at least for a while. Sorry for the delay.
    a. It's technically inaccurate to say 60i when what's intended is
    59.94i.

    b. It's the influence of what I do, which is almost never for myself
    but almost always for others, who virtually always provide detailed
    specs for the deliverables.

    c. I'm anal retentive - and proud of it. :)

    Take your pick!

    Or, for all that I know, you hit the lottery and purchased a PMW-F3,
    which offers both 59.94i and 59.94p. Or maybe you hit the lottery BIG
    TIME and purchased a PMW-F55 and you're suddenly shooting 16-bit
    linear raw 4K footage with a global shutter. Or maybe you hit the
    lottery VERY BIG TIME and you're now shooting with an F65, which
    offers both 59.94p and 60p (in 16-bit linear raw RGB mode!).

    Side note: Speaking of "4K", my SO (significant other) just told me
    that I ought to get a UHD (Ultra High Definition) telly. Ha! I refuse!
    Another gimmick, like "3D"!
    What you said was: "I then make Hi Def Blu-ray discs by exporting to a
    file, an MPG 2 Blu-ray file, and importing to Encore and burning
    directly without a need to transcode. For SD DVDs, I export to MPG 2
    DVD progressive widescreen file, then import to Encore and once again
    I can burn to disc with no transcoding necessary."

    I point you to the phrases "without a need to transcode" and "with no
    transcoding necessary".

    Perhaps one of us needs to gain an improved mastery of the English
    language?
    Unless you simply want to create a DVD-ROM or BD-ROM disc to store the
    AVCHD files.
    See below.
    What you said was: "Exporting as progressive gives me graphics that
    are razor sharp and have no interlace artifacts. It is something like
    deinterlacing to make sharper stills in SD."
    How did "SD" (standard definition) get into this. I thought that you
    were shooting high def?

    Oh, for creating a DVD-Video disc. Okay.

    Here's the story: for the best results, whenever starting out with
    interlaced footage, which is what I understand you're shooting, it's
    best to keep the footage interlaced throughout the entire post
    production process, especially for SD-sourced material (or for
    HD-sourced material that's being downconverted for use on a DVD-Video
    disc).

    When it comes to DVD-Video disc players, we live in a different world
    today then we did just a few years ago, BUT, for maximum compatibility
    with old players and old SD televisions, it's much better to put out
    the usual interlaced 59.94 field per second disc.

    Most of today's DVD-Video disc players have the built-in ability to
    upscale the SD footage on the disc to HD, and deinterlace it as well,
    and output it via HDMI, but older players completely lack this
    capability. Older players will have composite baseband video output,
    maybe S-Video output, and sometimes analog component YUV output jacks,
    but that's it. And all of those output signals are interlaced, just
    as god intended. And those interlaced signals were designed to be
    displayed on an old-style standard definition interlaced television,
    just as god intended.

    Lot's of people still have players like this today, and old SD
    televisions to go along with them. If you were creating a commercial
    disc intended for general distribution, that's what you would be
    creating. No customer can validly complain about such a disc, as it's
    a standard (interlaced) NTSC DVD-Video disc.

    I have put progressive video on a DVD-Video disc a few times, and
    DVD-Video players handle it just fine (and still, of course, put out a
    pseudo-interlaced signal intended for display on a regular standard
    definition television), but there is visible judder in fast moving
    scenes. The only reason why I ever created such a disc is because the
    original source footage from which I worked was progressive.

    Note that even when you have a customer who asks for a high-def
    Blu-ray Disc, you can still feel confident putting interlaced content
    on the disc, as their modern high-def flat panel television, which is
    natively progressive, will be more than happy to deinterlace the video
    prior to displaying it on-screen.
    I should have made you look that one up!
     
    Frank, May 30, 2013
    #6
  7. Frank, like you last night, I am reading this a little too late so I will
    pass until tomorrow. I want to address two things in particular, the
    communication because I pride myself on that, and the mystery of
    deinterlacing.

    Gary

    PS - two unbelievable events shopping today. The first was in shopping for
    some SDHC cards for the weekend shoot. While in Radio Shack to look for a
    power cord for my mother in law's computer, I looked at their SDHC cards.
    They had some Sandisk 32G jobs for $29, and some 64G for $49. Pretty good,
    so I got two 32G cards. I went over to Best Buy next to look for the
    promised 4k Ultra monitor, but there was none. Then I perused their SDHC
    card rack for bargains, and I found the IDENTICAL Sandisk 32G cards for $69
    ! The 64G jobbies were $99! I think I may go back to RS tomorrow and
    "invest" in some more cards.

    Disn't find a suitable power cord for Grammy's computer at RS, so I went
    online to Dell. One search and a phone call later, I got a quote from them.
    This is a power cord for a computer - they call it a "power adapter." It is
    a cord and a wall wart that powers the computer. Dell wanted $119 for one! I
    said no, and went to Amazon and found one for $27! You ever had a shopping
    adventure like that?
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 30, 2013
    #7
  8. Gary Eickmeier

    Frank Guest

    Okay, I _may_ still be around tomorrow, but one never knows for
    certain. :)
    See comment below wrt (with regard to) power cords.
    What mystery?

    Deinterlacing sucks and should be avoided whenever possible. Even the
    world's finest and most sophisticated deinterlacing algorithm will
    cause a loss in perceived resolution (detail). It's as simple as that,
    although it should be noted that modern HDTVs, even most of the
    lower-priced models, include very good deinterlacing capability - as
    they should given that almost all 1080-line content, whether delivered
    via cable or OTA (over-the-air) transmission, is interlaced and must
    be deinterlaced by the television if it's a flat panel design as all
    flat panels are natively progressive.

    Of course, if you watch only the Fox channels, then this isn't an
    issue as the Fox network is 720p.

    The solution to that would have been to stay with direct-view CRT
    technology, which is neither natively interlaced nor natively
    progressive, but who would want a 70-inch 400-pound CRT television in
    their living room, if you get my drift?

    If your primary deliverable will be interlaced, then acquire your
    imagery in interlaced form.

    If your primary deliverable will be progressive, such as for Web use,
    then acquire your imagery in progressive form.

    The problem with the interlaced versus progressive issue is that
    compared to interlace at say 59.94i (which is 29.97 frames per
    second), one needs to double the frame rate if going progressive
    (29.97p doesn't look very good to many people), but if you double the
    frame rate you should also (almost) double the datarate. (I say
    "almost" because progressive footage compresses better than equivalent
    interlaced footage.)

    But you'll notice that the datarate on your camcorder doesn't double
    when switching from interlaced mode to progressive mode.

    At least UHDTV (3840 by 2160 pixels), if it really ever gets here,
    will be progressive and not interlaced.

    What's your primary application, wedding videography, right? Have you
    considered 23.976p over 59.94i (with the so-called 3:2 pulldown)?
    That's how we in NTSC countries have been watching motion pictures
    (sourced at a true 24 frames per second rate) on television since
    before the flood, you know. Maybe a more cinematic look would please
    your clients. Mr. Ruether may have some comments on this.

    If you're not familiar with the pulldown concept, please read the "2:3
    pulldown" section of the Wikipedia Telecine article.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine

    Of course, that only complicates matters if you also have to produce a
    high-def Blu-ray Disc, as you may want to extract the original 23.976
    cadence from your "over 59.94i" footage and not all software is
    capable of this. Not to mention that during editing you may
    unknowingly cut inside of a frame sequence and will therefore upset
    (break) the cadence.

    Progressive or interlaced. Don't ask me. Flip a coin.
    Well, there are resellers who have a very good reputation for "good
    prices", but it does sometimes pay to shop around.

    Two recent experiences:

    1. Memory (256 MB) for an HP color ("colour" for Brian in NZ) laser
    printer.

    a. $500.00 direct from HP. Plus sales tax and shipping.

    b. A seller on Amazon with the same (Kingston brand) 256 MB memory
    module for $10.50 and free shipping.

    Needless to say, I bought the memory through the Amazon seller
    (IOquest in City of Industry in California) and was 100 percent
    pleased with the results. And it was *exactly* as advertised, no
    fooling around whatsoever. Compared to HP's price, it was almost like
    getting it for free.

    2. Toner cartridges for the above-mentioned HP color laser printer.

    a. Some ridiculous price at a local Staples store over on Broadway.

    b. $25.00 less (per cartridge), and with free shipping, from B&H.

    Needless to say, I'll be ordering all four of them (CMYK) through B&H
    and not buying at Staples. Staples has acceptable prices for *some
    items*, but not for all. It pays to check.
    Okay, so what exactly were you saying about pride in communications?

    Sir, you have not indicated whether this is a simple power cord such
    as would be used with a desktop or workstation computer or whether
    it's a power adapter (cord with transformer or switching power supply)
    for a notebook/laptop form factor computer.

    If it's just a cord, try RatShack ($10.99 and a choice of colors).

    Catalog #: 61-205 (black)
    http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3875423

    Catalog #: 61-206 (white)
    http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3875424

    And if "Grammy" is going mobile and wants to take her desktop along
    with her, here's a 300 footer from B&H for $66.00.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/867509-REG/

    OTOH, if it's a power adapter, be sure to get one that meets OEM
    specs.

    And if you ask me what "OTOH" or "OEM" means...
     
    Frank, May 30, 2013
    #8
  9.  
    David Ruether, May 30, 2013
    #9
  10. Usually the term "power cord" for a laptop means a cord with a
    transformer inline. The prices mentioned corroborate that.

    Sloppy, but common, usage.
     
    Gene E. Bloch, May 30, 2013
    #10
  11. Also, possibly, when I said "they call it a power adapter" "sir" might have
    got a clue.

    DR, stop kissing his ass. He is starting to sound to me like a sophomoric 17
    year old with a subscription to Wikipedia. To suggest to me that I shoot
    weddings at 24 p or that I don't know what 3/2 pulldown is, is
    disrespectful. As for deinterlacing, I think we all remember in the SD days
    that if we have a still frame from any source in our video, it can sometimes
    have horizontal lines in it that flicker up and down annoyingly because of
    the interlacing, so we just deinterlaced it and it was smooth again. In
    converting from 60i to SD I made the simple observation that it has the
    effect of taking the interlacing line pattern out of the video, which is
    most obvious on graphics with smooth edges.

    I am just trying to share some techniques that have proven successful, not
    argue about semantics or the technical specs of a power cord.

    Gary
     
    Gary Eickmeier, May 31, 2013
    #11
  12. Huh??? Where in the above (or elsewhere) have I, um, "kissed
    [Frank's] ass"??? Do keep your attributions straight...;-)
    I did make a bit of fun of my (our?) Asperger obsession with
    precision, but.....!;-) And, BTW, who gave you the right to
    tell me whose ass I may kiss?! 8^) And, also BTW, while Frank
    may be (self-described) as somewhat anal about video issues,
    he is also VERY knowledgeable about such things, and I do
    value what he has to say, even if it may be "picky" at times
    (but I take this as being done to be both thorough and accurate,
    a rare thing!).
    Oh, hey, a little mutual disrespect can be healthy!;-) None of
    us is perfect in every way, and it can help to insert alternative
    ideas to the ones already discussed, especially since none of
    us knows everything about video, and none of us knows the exact
    knowledge-level of everyone else here. Better to supply additional
    information than to not do that - and better to not take doing
    that as any sort of intended insult...;-)
    This was more thoroughly stated this time...;-) In *general*,
    though, Frank's observations were more relevant...
    No one currently here is intentionally annoying, condescending,
    or disrespectful (and only "Smarty" ever held that "honor" in the
    past, that I can recall...;-). So, hey, just lighten up a bit...
    (that's my being annoying, condescending, AND disrespectful, all
    at once!;-).
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, May 31, 2013
    #12
  13. David,

    We are a relatively small group of friends who inhabit this group and banter
    back and forth with humor and mutual respect. There is Brian, you, me, Gene
    "Blockhead" Bloch who is very knowledgeable and polite, Smarty once in a
    while, Frank, Herhusband, Mike Kujbida (sp), Paul, Steve King, a few others.
    After a long period of corresponcence you get to know each other and our
    levels of knowledge and you know where to step in to help and where it isn't
    necessary. For example I wouldn't presume to lecture you on video frame
    rates or how to use Vegas or how to achieve video quality. I did step in
    when you got on the DSLR for video tack, because you were obviously
    beginning to explore that as a replacement for your fabulous TM700. But we
    know each other and you know that I am just expressing opinion, usually with
    humor.

    I thought Frank knew me a lot better than that, and to be addressed as "sir"
    and lectured about my use of the language and correct my 60i to 59.94i and
    notify me that I am transcoding when I export to a file and that progressive
    is deinterlacing, and... I just couldn't take it any more. Sometimes an
    "expert" can get such a bloated sense of himself that he loses all
    perspective unless you stop him in his tracks. I ask a lot of questions and
    float a lot of ideas in this group, so Frank must have thought I was a
    beginner or something, even though I have been very helpful to some in some
    areas - I hope. As for your "kissing up," I just thought you were tiptoeing
    around his ego to keep from incurring his technical wrath and getting on the
    wrong side of him.

    Frank, I am a 69 year old man, retired Air Force officer, technical writer
    in the navigation training program when there was such a thing, known expert
    in sync sound editing in the film days when we used flatbeds and fullcoat,
    been doing video for some 40 years now, going thru the various stages of
    development along with everyone else, cutting with two or three VCRs (that
    doesn't mean cutting the tape) and doing multiple track mixdowns, the
    digital revolution, authoring DVDs, and finally the Hi Def era with all of
    the multiple file types and constant upgrading of computer power. I use
    Premiere Pro CS4 and Encore, shoot weddings, dance recitals, commercials,
    documentaries, and have done amateur feature films in those days. I shoot
    double system on most jobs with a Tascam DR-07 picking up the extra sound
    sometimes off the sound board, sometimes directly with microphone near the
    subject. I am also a recording engineer, using either spaced omnis or ORT-F
    or M/S techniques and editing with Adobe Audition 2.0. I project my video
    onto a 13 foot screen in my home theater in Hi Def and surround sound. At
    the office we edit on a Windows 7 64 bit PC on a 39 inch monitor with second
    monitor for program output. We have purchased two of the little Sony
    HDR-TD-10 3D video camcorders because I stumbled upon one on sale at Best
    Buy and was amazed at its 2D quality. They shoot all the way up to 28
    Mbit/sec 1920 x 1080 60p and are superb in low light, showing no noise under
    any conditions, and I am in hog heaven being able to dispense with tape and
    shoot on SDHC cards for 4 hours at a time and not even needing to change
    batteries. Even our little LED video lights last forever or around 4 hours,
    whichever comes first.

    I am a user, not a kibitzer, and I like to be creative and use Hollywood
    techniques wherever possible. I use technology as a means to an end, to make
    the videos that I want to see on the screen. I am still learning the amazing
    capabilities of Premiere and experimenting a little with the shooting frame
    rates and bitrates, but have pretty much settled on what I have related when
    doing a job. I have sent a few discs to DR for comparison with his camera
    and techniques. My weak areas are After Effects and web sites, but I am
    working on it.

    I mention all this by way of introduction and hope maybe others might do the
    same.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Jun 1, 2013
    #13
  14. I use (maybe too many...;-) ";-)s" to indicate some degree of
    "tongue-in-cheekedness" after finding in my early days of
    writing in the NGs (EVER so long ago - I started writing about
    1995[!]) that some people often would read my posts literally
    (including the parts that were not intended to be read that
    way), and they sometimes took offense when none was intended...
    I think several of us here may be Aspergers, and some notable
    characteristics of that is that we tend to be "literal" in our
    interpretations, and very thorough (often to the point of
    obsession...;-) not only in our particular areas of interest,
    but also in our communications about them (often without
    realizing the nuances of the effects such communications may
    have on other people). As an Asperger, I've found that (while
    there may be few other things to commend these;-) aging, and
    also a long-term disability, have given me a MUCH greater
    understanding of (and appreciation for...) people who are
    different from me (except maybe for Republicans!;-), more
    wisdom in dealing with them, and, heck, MUCH greater wisdom
    in general! ("That's a GOOD thing...!";-) I now understand
    much that was mysterious to me most of my life... WHEW! 8^)
    As for the first part, see above; as for the second, you don't
    know me very well or you wouldn't have written that...! Hey,
    I was in politics for a while, and I took no "guff" from
    ANYONE! (As I also never did at any other time in my life!;-)
    And, I consider Frank as "special" regarding video, since his
    knowledge about it is both wide and detailed, and he knows
    far more about video technical issues than I ever will (or
    even care to know...;-). If occasionally he deigns to pass on
    information to me that I already know during the process of
    passing on to me things I don't know, so what? I don't expect
    anyone here to know me or the state of my knowledge and
    experience sufficiently to tailor a "filtered" response to me,
    and I also understand that any response to a post of mine is
    written for general consumption (by people at many levels),
    and not just for me - and that therefore it would likely be
    written as logically, *completely*, and accurately as possible.
    Well, OK, since you started this, uh, here goes........! 8^)!
    I've been a photographer since the early '60s, with some early
    successes in getting many museum shows (and also in getting
    my work into some notable museum collections), having magazine
    articles written about my work, and with teaching at the
    college level for several years (without a degree...;-). I
    also supported myself (at a modest level...;-) with location
    photography. Early-on, I dabbled in 16mm film, electronic music
    in the Moog factory studio, and eventually with video (Hi-8,
    then Mini-DV when it appeared, and now HD), and I soon added
    video as part of my free-lance business. Through it all, I
    considered myself primarily a "gear-head" (well, heck, honesty
    is one of those odd Asperger aspects...;-), and assembling the
    best gear I could afford on my modest income was a bit of an
    obsession (witness this article on my rather bloated website:
    http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/slemn.html 8^). So, I freely
    admit that new (and GOOD!) gear is often my inspiration for
    producing my own work (this late winter until now I've taken
    thousands of photos with the new gear I've been assembling for
    video work - and I've had so much fun doing it that so far I've
    so far skipped the video part). I've had MUCH FUN rediscovering
    my past interest in photography! I've also done audio recording,
    audio gear designing and manufacturing, politics, and probably
    other things I've forgotten about... (oh, I started out in, uh,
    architecture..., and at 71, I still don't know what I will be
    when I grow up - but I've had fun on the way to finding out! 8^)
    --DR
     
    David Ruether, Jun 1, 2013
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.