PDA

View Full Version : FS100 post workflow.



cheezweezl
06-17-2011, 03:27 PM
OK, so I have been ingesting footage using the FCP log n transfer. I haven't experienced any show-stopping problems, just a few annoyances.

1. the camera seems to name the clips "clip #1, clip #2, etc. (that's how they show up in FCP) and starts over each time a new card is inserted. this makes for duplicate file names, which sucks. i am having to go rename each clip in the LnT window before ingesting, which also sucks. Is there a way to name the clips a different way in camera? I haven't found anything in the menus...

2. Timecode. Each clip seems to have a starting timecode of 00:00:00:00. What happened to the timecode I recorded with?

3. SLOW..... Log n Transfer AVD to Prores is horribly slow. Always has been. Does anyone know a better solution? Is there an app like mpeg streamclip that reads these .mts files? Is there ANY app that reads these files?


EDIT: I just figured out the logging section of Log n Transfer, which i have never touched before. This kind of helps with problem #1. However, the best solution would have the clips be named correctly on the cards, so when i am dumping/converting on set, I don't have to worry if it gets logged correctly.

harrisoncj
06-17-2011, 03:38 PM
for #1 - fcp usually fixes the clip labeling for me. The clips appear to start over at clip1 when I put in a new card, but once the transfer is done they show up sequentially in the browser - no repeated file names.

for #3 - Are you transcoding to prores HQ or LT?

cheezweezl
06-17-2011, 03:42 PM
for #1 The logging feature that I just discovered is actually pretty cool. I can give each card a custom reel name which will be very helpful when going from FCP to davinci via EDL.

for #3 ProRes HQ

The timecode thing is kind of a big deal. If each clip starts at 0, then that means a huge pain in the butt when sending from FCP to davinci or any other app using an EDL.

harrisoncj
06-17-2011, 03:50 PM
Try transcoding to prores LT and it should go faster. Prores HQ is overkill for AVCHD footage. You won't notice a quality difference at all.

Postmaster
06-17-2011, 04:16 PM
Have you set the FS100 to free running timecode?

Cosimo Bullo
06-17-2011, 04:22 PM
Try transcoding to prores LT and it should go faster. Prores HQ is overkill for AVCHD footage. You won't notice a quality difference at all.

This is completely incorrect. Do yourself a favor and use a professional codec for your project. At least Pro Res basic. Stay away from Proxy and LT.

MattDavis
06-17-2011, 04:46 PM
The timecode thing is kind of a big deal. If each clip starts at 0, then that means a huge pain in the butt when sending from FCP to davinci or any other app using an EDL.

Hmmm - how odd.

I'm getting timecode in FCP, using Log & Transfer, and from a demo copy of ClipWrap (I think I'll stick to L&T for now). In the images below, note the FCP TC Reader filter applied, and in the other screenshot, the Properties window lists a Timecode track in the ProRes movie.

Furthermore, I'm getting TC read out in the upper right hand box of the Viewer window in FCP, where I'd expect it to be.

The eagle-eyed (chicken eyed?) will say 'but the number in the top right hand window doesn't match the BITC!' - it's because that's the Canvas window, not the Viewer window.

3545335454

Yes, I set the TC Preset to the current time, and allow the TC to Free Run. For conferences, it's very useful and I'm now stuck in the ToD TC mode. Of course, if we had proper metadata support 'like wot FCPX is supposed to do', we could use the UB for this - and date too. But we must wait and see. Meanwhile, this will do me.

harrisoncj
06-17-2011, 04:49 PM
Could you please explain why this is incorrect? All I'm going off of is what I learned in film school and my experience. Even apple's white paper calls ProRes LT an "excellent choice for transcoding complex camera codecs like AVCHD." Unless your using the fs100 with an external recorder, I don't see the benifits of prores HQ. If you could share some facts as to why that's 'completely incorrect' your comment might be a little more helpful and a lot less snobby.

http://images.apple.com/finalcutstudio/docs/Apple_ProRes_White_Paper_July_2009.pdf

MattDavis
06-17-2011, 04:59 PM
Stay away from Proxy and LT.

I beg to differ.

LT is perfectly acceptable for non-broadcast work. By non-broadcast, I mean delivering high quality finished HD material rather than creating masters that will go through several further generations through the broadcast chain before hitting the viewers' screens.

LT is equivalent to standard ProRes on the first couple of generations, then begins to degrade FASTER than standard ProRes. HQ is designed for workflows that require handing off rushes to compositing and SFX before being fed back into Edit, then onto Grading/Finishing, then to delivery on tape, on film, on whatever. If you're going to go from camera to NLE to web (a professional workflow lest we forget), especially in fast turnaround stuff, ProRes LT was designed for this.

A colleague suffered artifacting whilst experimenting with LT, something I've never experienced. We share identical cameras and workflows, often working together. It was something dodgy in his system (I'd like to blame Perian because it's caused me no end of troubles). I've found LT absolutely rock solid for long-form work, and especially great for DSLR stuff.

Rick Burnett
06-17-2011, 05:03 PM
This is completely incorrect. Do yourself a favor and use a professional codec for your project. At least Pro Res basic. Stay away from Proxy and LT.

I'm sorry but there is quite a bit of evidence to the contrary. In fact, Panasonic themselves released a white paper that also indicated that ProRes LT is more than sufficient for AVCHD material, and that ProRes LT is also 10-bit. LT is not a proxy codec.

White Paper: http://www.panasonic.com/business/provideo/includes/pdf/White-Paper-Editing-AVCHD-with-FCP7.pdf

Rick Burnett
06-17-2011, 05:06 PM
I use ClipWrap to do all my FS100 transcoding. The developers told me in the next version you will be able to supply a prefix for the clips. When I am in the field recording, the people who grab my footage I tell them to grab the ENTIRE directory structure and place it in a folder like "PROJECT - SHOOTER - CAM - CARD#". Then later, when the transcoding is happening, all the info they or I need to add is there.

harrisoncj
06-17-2011, 05:10 PM
Thanks Rick

MattDavis
06-17-2011, 05:12 PM
The developers told me in the next version you will be able to supply a prefix for the clips.

Aha! That's the version I should be trying! :)

Of course, I could bore them rigid with demands for 'XDCAM Transfer for AVCHD' but creeping featuritis is a horrible software disease.

'If only we could block-select ranges of clips on a card, giving them proper names, injecting metadata into QuickTime tracks just like XDCAM Transfer...'

But a great beginning for what may well be a cornerstone app!

Cosimo Bullo
06-17-2011, 05:20 PM
Could you please explain why this is incorrect? All I'm going off of is what I learned in film school and my experience. Even apple's white paper calls ProRes LT an "excellent choice for transcoding complex camera codecs like AVCHD." Unless your using the fs100 with an external recorder, I don't see the benifits of prores HQ. If you could share some facts as to why that's 'completely incorrect' your comment might be a little more helpful and a lot less snobby.

http://images.apple.com/finalcutstudio/docs/Apple_ProRes_White_Paper_July_2009.pdf

No reason to call people names now. My experience with the AVCHD codec is that there's a lot more hiding in those shadows than initially meets the eye and that the Pro Res LT codec starts to break up in the blacks much faster than standard or HQ. The point of my comment is to HELP keep another filmmaker out of trouble down the road.

harrisoncj
06-17-2011, 05:38 PM
No reason to call people names now. My experience with the AVCHD codec is that there's a lot more hiding in those shadows than initially meets the eye and that the Pro Res LT codec starts to break up in the blacks much faster than standard or HQ. The point of my comment is to HELP keep another filmmaker out of trouble down the road.

haha sorry your comment just came off that way. I guess my point is - your info is only help if you actually explain why to do things differently. When I'm doing smaller jobs, or hd web content with minimal color grading, etc. - waiting around longer for prores HQ to transcode would NOT be helpful. Time is money :grin:

cheezweezl
06-17-2011, 05:45 PM
This is completely incorrect. Do yourself a favor and use a professional codec for your project. At least Pro Res basic. Stay away from Proxy and LT.

Yeah, totally. Prores LT is a proxy format. I can't see why you would even use it unless you have a slow computer. No sense in doing an offline when most newer macs can handle prores hq no problem.

As far as it being no different, try grading LT with davinci or color. you'll see a difference fo sho.

EDIT: after reading the rest of the thread, i guess i see the point of saving disk space. just not for me though. HQ is it.

cheezweezl
06-17-2011, 05:51 PM
I had my TC set to record run. Could this be why it didn't embed into the clips?

MattDavis
06-17-2011, 05:54 PM
Alas no. I've tried Rec Run and Free Run - all got timecode correctly ... AND I used ProRes LT! :-P (grins, ducks and runs)

MattDavis
06-17-2011, 06:11 PM
Hey, actually guys, found something odd. Has anyone got 1080p50 or 1080p60 to work yet, using ANY ingest mode?

I'm not talking S&Q mode 1080p50, just the new 1080p50 mode that ups the bitrate of AVCHD.

I've got a 1080p50 clip which plays in VLC (like - you could play a coffee stain in VLC such is its amazing powers of awesomeness), but if I wrap or transcode it in ClipWrap, it is unplayable. It comes up as a sound file in MPEG StreamClip, and Log and Transfer barfs, then refuses to encode anything after it.

I guess it is rather new and may not be supported by most software yet, but...

But 720p50 is fine. Just 1080p50.

eheath
06-17-2011, 06:37 PM
Yeah, totally. Prores LT is a proxy format. I can't see why you would even use it unless you have a slow computer.

Because its completely unnecessary, why would you have a large file size for a clip at the same quality level? the fs100 is shooting 8bit 420, not 10 bit 422/444, there no point using HQ, its overkill for avchd. LT is perfect for avchd and keeps file sizes down.

Rick Burnett
06-17-2011, 06:41 PM
And it's 100Mb which is between 3 and 4 times the data as AVCHD on the FS100.

cheezweezl
06-18-2011, 03:04 PM
Because its completely unnecessary, why would you have a large file size for a clip at the same quality level? the fs100 is shooting 8bit 420, not 10 bit 422/444, there no point using HQ, its overkill for avchd. LT is perfect for avchd and keeps file sizes down.

i guess everyone has their priorities. to me, storage is dirt cheap. and i have seen the difference when grading. to each his own i guess.

MattDavis
06-18-2011, 03:28 PM
everyone has their priorities. to me, storage is dirt cheap... to each his own i guess.

Just to put these valid comments into focus: some of us do fast turnaround stuff, and the time to copy and back up footage, the time to ingest and transcode footage, these are all importan things. If the client wants to walk away with footage in a format that's usable, I can include the ProRes codecs for QuickTime in Win & Mac formats, and not have to deal with the support issues of dealing with MPEG4 or H.264. If you're asking me to save 30-60% of copying time for 5-8 hours of rushes per day onto USB drives in NTFS format from a Mac, I'll go with the quickest yet safest option.

5 hoursworth of rushes depicting a guy strutting up and down a stage? In ProRes HQ? Back it up AND provide a client copy? No. To each our own - no guesswork required. We love ProRes LT! :)

cheezweezl
06-18-2011, 03:31 PM
Just to put these valid comments into focus: some of us do fast turnaround stuff, and the time to copy and back up footage, the time to ingest and transcode footage, these are all importan things. If the client wants to walk away with footage in a format that's usable, I can include the ProRes codecs for QuickTime in Win & Mac formats, and not have to deal with the support issues of dealing with MPEG4 or H.264. If you're asking me to save 30-60% of copying time for 5-8 hours of rushes per day onto USB drives in NTFS format from a Mac, I'll go with the quickest yet safest option.

5 hoursworth of rushes depicting a guy strutting up and down a stage? In ProRes HQ? Back it up AND provide a client copy? No. To each our own - no guesswork required. We love ProRes LT! :)


totally valid. i don't deal with getting clients their rushes so i guess i missed that point.

maarek
06-19-2011, 03:57 PM
5 hoursworth of rushes depicting a guy strutting up and down a stage? In ProRes HQ? Back it up AND provide a client copy?

That's why you should use an editing system that can edit these files NATIVELY if you are doing professional work. The time saving is humongous. It's odd that people still use outdated systems where you wait overnight before you can really start editing. BTW, transcoding to LT is not any faster than transcoding to basic prores.

Support issue of dealing with mpeg4? The same support as for dealing with prores, you still have to get them to install the codec and make sure they use a harddrive system that can play it back in realtime. All of our client material goes to them straight as the original files, they can do what they want with them afterwards.

harrisoncj
06-19-2011, 04:45 PM
That's why you should use an editing system that can edit these files NATIVELY if you are doing professional work.

So if you are a professional, just forget FCP and Avid and go for the more professional iMovie, vegas, or pinnacle... lmao

waiting on fcp x!

Rick Burnett
06-19-2011, 05:20 PM
So if you are a professional, just forget FCP and Avid and go for the more professional iMovie, vegas, or pinnacle... lmao

waiting on fcp x!

I am editing on my iPad all my movies from now on. It's so portable I can edit ANYWHERE. It's HD enough for me :P

Until FCP allows native MTS files, I have no choice.

cheezweezl
06-21-2011, 12:27 AM
ok so i tried out clipwrap (thanks rick), and it wraps my files with timecode intact. i take the avc clip into fcp and it sees the timecode. however, log and transfer does not see the timecode. every clip starts at zero. so just to make sure i'm doing this right, and correct me if i'm wrong, i insert the sd card, open up log and transfer, it sees all my clips, i select them and drag them to the bottom and they transcode. is this what everybody else is doing?

Rick Burnett
06-21-2011, 12:32 AM
I don't use L&T but I wonder if there is a flag somewhere you have to set?

cheezweezl
06-21-2011, 01:00 AM
i've been through every option in the l&t window. i'm at a loss. does clipwrap do transcoding as well, or just qt wrapping of avc?

Rick Burnett
06-21-2011, 01:02 AM
It does transcoding as well.

tanega
06-21-2011, 01:08 AM
anyone using Adobe Premier 5.5

Postmaster
06-21-2011, 01:24 AM
anyone using Adobe Premier 5.5

I do. Just like with about every other file format, you throw the files at the timeline and start editing.

Though AVCHD isnīt really a editing codec and not half a smooth and snappy as uncompressed in the timeline.
Thatīs why I sing the gospel of uncompressed recorders.
I know the files are larger and some folks have problems with disk space and throughput when the absolutely think that a laptop is a great editing machine.
But disk space is dirt cheap and I bet, 80% of the computers owned by the DVXuser community is absolutely capable to work with uncompressed material just fine.
Itīs the fastest end easiest format you can work with. It works even with a simple software raid from 2 cheap striped HDDs.

Frank

cheezweezl
06-21-2011, 04:09 PM
anyone using Adobe Premier 5.5

i may be adding myself to that list. i just downloaded the new fcp and i am wondering why this program even shares the same name as the old. this has no resemblance to fcp. i guess i will have to try premiere, avid, and anything else out there and decide what is best...

gilzoo
08-18-2011, 08:45 AM
So let me get this straight, you can't capture timecode from the FS100 with FCP's Log and Transfer? You need to shell out another $50 for Clipwrap?

Postmaster
08-18-2011, 09:19 AM
Yeah, what was the "P" in FCP for? :violin:

eheath
08-18-2011, 11:55 AM
So let me get this straight, you can't capture timecode from the FS100 with FCP's Log and Transfer? You need to shell out another $50 for Clipwrap?

You can capture everything but 1080p60 shots. 1080p60/24fps(overcrank) works though. For 1080p60 you need clip wrap, but if you're shooting 1080p24 its no big. 1080p60 is an interesting beast, sure adobe you can drop it right in but final cut you just need to encode in clip wrap and it works but you have to render it. Im sure fcp just needs a plugin for 1080p60 prores, but i doubt that'll come anytime soon seeing as apple has completely forgotten about its professional customers.

morgan_moore
08-18-2011, 01:01 PM
-

Postmaster
08-18-2011, 01:05 PM
Have you tried my new profiles and workflow?

http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/new-glencolor-picture-profiles-for-the-sony-fs100/

Frank

morgan_moore
08-18-2011, 01:25 PM
frank - we are in the wrong thread - sorry to the OP!

Postmaster
08-18-2011, 01:56 PM
ooops

Nodar
10-20-2011, 03:04 PM
Hello everyone, my first post here.
I've been shooting with this camera for already few months, now its time to edit. I've been FC user for already 5 years, but this project I decided to cut with Premier, as it handles the footage natively.
So here is what I can not figure out myself.
when I create a timeline in premiere and make it as 1080p AVC HD, and I put some clip on the timeline, it appears to have a red bar on top. I tried to create a sequence with automatic settings, and its seems to be ok, it has yellow bar on top. But the sequence which was created with automatic settings has upper field and is 1080i. So which settings should I go with? 1080p or 1080i? I was shooting 25P.

bkmvincent
10-20-2011, 05:58 PM
Hello everyone, my first post here.
I've been shooting with this camera for already few months, now its time to edit. I've been FC user for already 5 years, but this project I decided to cut with Premier, as it handles the footage natively.
So here is what I can not figure out myself.
when I create a timeline in premiere and make it as 1080p AVC HD, and I put some clip on the timeline, it appears to have a red bar on top. I tried to create a sequence with automatic settings, and its seems to be ok, it has yellow bar on top. But the sequence which was created with automatic settings has upper field and is 1080i. So which settings should I go with? 1080p or 1080i? I was shooting 25P.

You should be using the preset AVCHD 1080p25 - that should work. Which version of Premiere do you have?

AtticusLake
10-21-2011, 07:46 AM
Hi Nodar,

The red bar simply indicates that playback performance while editing is likely to be poor, because the clip has more pixels / frames / layers / effects / whatever than your computer can comfortably handle in real time. Render the sequence to "preview" clips to be able to play it back smoothly while editing -- this is in the "Sequence" menu, IIRC, but just hitting enter with the sequence selected will do it. (It may take a while.)

Essentially when you play back a sequence with effects, layers, etc., the computer has to compute the contents of every pixel in every frame while you're playing back. This is a LOT of computation -- in your case, 51.8 million pixels per second. Up to a point this will work, but at some point playback is going to get choppy. Even without effects and layers, high-res footage can be too much for some computers. Pre-rendering to preview clips does this computation once and saves the results in temporary, lower-resolution clips which can be played back in real time -- these previews stand in as proxies for the real footage during the editing process. This does not alter the process or the results of editing, except that you pay a time penalty to render the clips, but then things are faster.

Lower-resolution footage can be played back smoothly without rendering -- that's what the yellow bar indicates. Green indicates that you rendered it. No bar (grey) indicates that it can't be rendered to anything more "lightweight" than it already is.

A faster computer, more powerful graphics card, more RAM, faster hard drive / solid state drive, can all help. There are particular graphics cards that Premiere can use to accelerate things farther. Make sure your drivers are up to date -- check the graphics card maker's web site.

Without spending money, previews help a lot. Check your sequence settings and make sure that your preview resolution is lower than the clip resolution, but something you're happy editing with -- I typically use 1280x720, but lower certainly works too. You can switch to higher-resolution previews when you're fine-tuning the edit, for example.

None of this affects the quality of the final movie in any way. You should certainly NOT shoot interlaced just to make the editing software happy!

I would normally say "read the manual", but given Adobe's documentation, I'm more than happy to forgive you.... ;-)

Hope this helps!

Nodar
10-22-2011, 03:39 PM
bkmvincent (http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?71406-bkmvincent) I'm using CS5.
That is what I think also, I am just confused the way Premiere decided to create sequence. It is still 1080i.

AtticusLake

(http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/member.php?84228-AtticusLake)Thank you very much for your detailed post. It will definitely be useful for somebody thats starting to get interested in NLE software.
But my question was toward more specific matter that I mentioned in my first post.

AtticusLake
10-23-2011, 08:57 AM
But my question was toward more specific matter that I mentioned in my first post.

Oh, I'm sorry, I misunderstood.... my bad.

If you shot 1080 @25p, that's what you should be editing with, exactly as bkmvincent says. Switching to interlaced when the footage is progressive can't be good.

But I don't get how the auto settings would give you 1080i if you were shooting 1080p.... unless it's a bug with PP handling 25p wrong??? If it thinks that the clips are interlaced, the red bar could be because of the de-interlacing it thinks it has to do...? I'm shooting 29.97p and not seeing this.

If for some reason PP is mis-interpreting the footage then you can override PP's default interpretation. Right-click a clip, or multiple selected clips, and select "Modify" -> "Interpret Footage...". Then under "Field order" select "Conform to: Progressive". I'd be interested to see in this dialog what it says the original field order is -- that could give you a clue as to where the problem is.

Hope THAT helps... ;-)

AtticusLake
10-23-2011, 09:08 AM
You weren't by any chance using Smooth Slow mode?