Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. Collapse Details
    #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Byron Bay, Australia
    Posts
    1,352
    Default
    I still can't see the GPU you're using listed anywhere? This will make a big difference with particular effects. Not all GPU's are created equal and simply stating you have a CUDA GPU does not tell us much. The number of CUDA cores is particlarly important when it comes to GPU-accelerated effects.

    8GB RAM is not enough - 16GB is better and 32GB is good More than that won't hurt! You say that trying to add a title causes the program to freeze - this sort of behaviour is indicative of a RAM shortage, though this is probably only one of your problems.

    You can also try lowering the playback quality. This will greatly improve performance particularly as your timeline becomes more and more complicated. There's a reason Premiere introduced the lower-quality playback options at the same time as they ramped up native support for AVCHD - quite simply, these codec's are processor intensive and playing back multiple streams at once is extremely taxing on the CPU.

    Rendering effects will not cause any degradation to the original files or to the final exported file, unless you've ticked the "use rendered effects" checkbox in the export settings, which is off by default. It may, however, result in a lower quality preview image depending on what render settings you have selected.
    VIDEO PRODUCER ON THE NSW NORTH COAST, AUSTRALIA
    Sony FS700 || Shogun Inferno
    Adobe CC 2018


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #12
    Junior Member alan665's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3
    Default
    The easiest way I can think to cut AVCHD is to not. Try transcoding to an intermediate codec such as DNXHD, cineform or ProRes. ProRes is pretty much the industry standard.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,404
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by alan665 View Post
    The easiest way I can think to cut AVCHD is to not. Try transcoding to an intermediate codec such as DNXHD, cineform or ProRes. ProRes is pretty much the industry standard.
    My take on it too. If you work on a Mac, Prores is a no brainer. You do not lose quality doing the transcode with a decent utility. Mezanine codecs were designed for efficient high quality editing and mastering.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    248
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Razz16mm View Post
    My take on it too. If you work on a Mac, Prores is a no brainer. You do not lose quality doing the transcode with a decent utility. Mezanine codecs were designed for efficient high quality editing and mastering.
    I've seen side by side comparisons of AVCHD vs ProRes 422 and there is quality loss. Although the video I saw didn't mention if they transcoded or if they had shot in prores 422.

    Video below

    AVCHD better than Prores?


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    248
    Default
    I was finally able to get AVCHD .mts files to work in Premiere Pro without having to transcode. I do have a few questions though.


    my cameras film in 4:2:0 color space. I'm guessing that's 8 bit. Is that correct? If so how come when I try color correcting AVCHD .mts file the picture becomes pixilated? If I do transcode which I did as a test where I transcoded the same .mts file to ProRes 422 the same color was applied to that ProRes file and it wasn't pixilated. Certainly there is no way the 4:2:0 color space is getting better when transcoding right? Why would color filters in ProRes look better than .mts when the color space is the same?


    I also did a test and set up my sequence setting to render out to ProRes 422 using the .mts footage files. Is this a good way of doing this or should I actually still be transcoding? It's nice I can use AVCHD .mts natively now without importing problems but the color is what confuses me.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,404
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by offbeatbryce View Post
    I was finally able to get AVCHD .mts files to work in Premiere Pro without having to transcode. I do have a few questions though.


    my cameras film in 4:2:0 color space. I'm guessing that's 8 bit. Is that correct? If so how come when I try color correcting AVCHD .mts file the picture becomes pixilated? If I do transcode which I did as a test where I transcoded the same .mts file to ProRes 422 the same color was applied to that ProRes file and it wasn't pixilated. Certainly there is no way the 4:2:0 color space is getting better when transcoding right? Why would color filters in ProRes look better than .mts when the color space is the same?


    I also did a test and set up my sequence setting to render out to ProRes 422 using the .mts footage files. Is this a good way of doing this or should I actually still be transcoding? It's nice I can use AVCHD .mts natively now without importing problems but the color is what confuses me.
    In 4:2:0 your R and B channels are half resolution horizontally and vertically. Transcoding doesn't improve the original quality , but grading adjustments in 4:2:2 10 bit are much less coarse than adjustments made in 8 bit 4:2:0. So yes it does improve the quality of your grades. Prores will produce far fewer artifacts if you are using complex effects too. You wind up with a better quality master that will stand up to recompression for delivery better.
    If you want to save disc space, rough cut your originals, transcode the rough cuts to Prores and finish your post with that.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #17
    Senior Member scorsesefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Queens, New York
    Posts
    1,602
    Default
    If you're working in PP 2015.3 (latest update), why don't you just use the new proxy feature? That's what I do with my AVCHD footage...


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    reply
    #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    248
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by scorsesefan View Post
    If you're working in PP 2015.3 (latest update), why don't you just use the new proxy feature? That's what I do with my AVCHD footage...
    wouldn't proxy not be in the 10 bit color space?

    I've tried doing proxy before. If I rename a file that's a proxy and organize all my bins and link my footage back to their original media the files I've named revert back to their original names


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    248
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Razz16mm View Post
    In 4:2:0 your R and B channels are half resolution horizontally and vertically. Transcoding doesn't improve the original quality , but grading adjustments in 4:2:2 10 bit are much less coarse than adjustments made in 8 bit 4:2:0. So yes it does improve the quality of your grades. Prores will produce far fewer artifacts if you are using complex effects too. You wind up with a better quality master that will stand up to recompression for delivery better.
    If you want to save disc space, rough cut your originals, transcode the rough cuts to Prores and finish your post with that.
    how do you trasncode your rough cuts without losing all the crossfades and titles when you transcode to ProRes?


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #20
    Senior Member scorsesefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Queens, New York
    Posts
    1,602
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by offbeatbryce View Post
    wouldn't proxy not be in the 10 bit color space?

    I've tried doing proxy before. If I rename a file that's a proxy and organize all my bins and link my footage back to their original media the files I've named revert back to their original names
    PP is just referencing your files while you edit. There is a toggle to turn on/off proxy. When you're ready to export you just do so with the full res files...


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •