So does anyone shoot 24f HD and downconvert to SD?
- Thread starter Tom Films
- Start date
Stu Siegal
Well-known member
I've done it, working in FCP, downconverting in cam on capture. Not thrilled with the end result, (not thrilled with shooting SD with this cam), seems the conversion adds all the same artifacts that shooting in SD does.
Did you have any interlacing problems? Specifically regarding the added pulldown frames that Canon doesnt flag for removal by your NLE?
Stu Siegal
Well-known member
No, but I've strictly switched to working in hdv, a breeze with a Kona card.
scannon
Well-known member
I use Sony Vegas 7 ( now 8 upgrade) and Cineform Neo on a 2.66 core 2 duo with 3mbs ram and a 1 tb Raid (actually more than I need for most projects). I shoot in HDV with the A1 and when I need or want SD output I export from vegas. Canon 24f is recorded In a 60i wrapper but Vegae immediately recognized the 24f and treats the material accordingly. You can export as SD 24p (progressive) or NTSC 60i.
The benefit of this is:
You have the full HDV source material for use in the future.
You can Shift the HDV material around in the 4:3 frame to fine tune key subjects in frame.
The export is clean whether you output progressive or NTSC DV.
Negative
The downside is that the files are larger and require more disk space.
You need Cineform or Raylight to convert HDV m2t file to AVI or you will have long renders and other issues when editing m2t.
You can also down convert from the camera to SD on capture or you can select DV or DV Widescreen shooting mode in the A1 instead but you have no HDV material for the future.
Each way has a specific workflow and pros and cons. Your choice.
I set up to move to the full HD realm in the future with HDV as the intermediate for the work I do. Since SD 4:3 will be with us for a while my setup and workflow preserve all of my options and the additional cost for the cineform plugin was in my experience worth the investment.
Good shooting.
S Cannon
The benefit of this is:
You have the full HDV source material for use in the future.
You can Shift the HDV material around in the 4:3 frame to fine tune key subjects in frame.
The export is clean whether you output progressive or NTSC DV.
Negative
The downside is that the files are larger and require more disk space.
You need Cineform or Raylight to convert HDV m2t file to AVI or you will have long renders and other issues when editing m2t.
You can also down convert from the camera to SD on capture or you can select DV or DV Widescreen shooting mode in the A1 instead but you have no HDV material for the future.
Each way has a specific workflow and pros and cons. Your choice.
I set up to move to the full HD realm in the future with HDV as the intermediate for the work I do. Since SD 4:3 will be with us for a while my setup and workflow preserve all of my options and the additional cost for the cineform plugin was in my experience worth the investment.
Good shooting.
S Cannon
Last edited:
Just a minor point of correction is that when shooting and capturing in 24F HDV mode there is no pulldown frames added to make it 60i; 24F is unique in that it's actually captured as native 23.976 fps through the firewire. But you can indeed add pulldown frames if you wish to export it as 60i through an NLE.
I use Sony Vegas 8a. Sony is working on a memory problem and the capture problem that it has with the canon 24F (There are work arounds). I have noticed that the footage shot in HDV 24p and then down converted to sd (24p wide) looks great from a distance, almost like the WMHD version, but when I get close and look at the details I see bockiness and shimering in some places (shrubs, hair, strait lines, etc..) Someone sugested turning down the detail in the camera if you know you will be going to SD. I have not tried this yet so I do not know if it will help. Also I belive there are two different ways (once your HD footage is on the time line) you can go to SD form HD (I may be wrong) One is compress your HD footage to SD (THis is what I have tried so far. The benifit is it is faster ( I have a quadcore and I did not need to redo the text) and technically some say better color. The other is to frame your SD footage from the HD source. This would allow you to move your framing around a little, but you may get in some trouble if you framed only for HD when you shot the footage. My guess is that this way may remove some of the artifacts that I mentioned earlier. I need to do some more test. Can anyone else comment on their experience or the best work flow?
KyleProhaska
Veteran
Ok I'll just say this again because I've said it a bunch of times.
Shoot HD if you can and its convienient to convert later for you...simple as that.
When you watch a TV show on NBC or wherever, how do you know it was shot in HD? The detail and definition in the image just screams it doesn't it? Theres something about the image that just says it even if your watching it on a SD TV, heavily compressed digital signal...
Thats my take on shooting in HD for SD output. When downconverting to HD, even if alot of the details are lost, most of them are retained and even though your shuving it into a SD frame size, the detail is noticeable when compared to shooting SD flat out. The definition in the image is just incredible and its worth shooting in HD first, and dealing with all the downconversion and such.
I never liked in the in camera downconvert, I always prefer a heafty software conversion. I don't shoot HD and downconvert to edit SD because I can edit HD just fine, but if I wanted to I would capture HD directly then use a program like MPEGstreamclip on Windows to convert to SD DV NTSC, or if on a Mac I would just use Compressor...
- Kyle
Shoot HD if you can and its convienient to convert later for you...simple as that.
When you watch a TV show on NBC or wherever, how do you know it was shot in HD? The detail and definition in the image just screams it doesn't it? Theres something about the image that just says it even if your watching it on a SD TV, heavily compressed digital signal...
Thats my take on shooting in HD for SD output. When downconverting to HD, even if alot of the details are lost, most of them are retained and even though your shuving it into a SD frame size, the detail is noticeable when compared to shooting SD flat out. The definition in the image is just incredible and its worth shooting in HD first, and dealing with all the downconversion and such.
I never liked in the in camera downconvert, I always prefer a heafty software conversion. I don't shoot HD and downconvert to edit SD because I can edit HD just fine, but if I wanted to I would capture HD directly then use a program like MPEGstreamclip on Windows to convert to SD DV NTSC, or if on a Mac I would just use Compressor...
- Kyle
Resizing footage in an SD timeline yields absolutely the sharpest SD picture, but depending on your NLE it might be a pain. Certainly is when doing it in Premiere.
I'm been shooting on HD all the time, down-converting to SD and play it on DVD, some time, you can even tell the different. I lot of people came to see asking if that image is in HD. if you have the right color and right settings. the image come out really clear and nice. and when I use 24p it looks better.
sorry for any miss-spelling
sorry for any miss-spelling
Clintizzle
Member
My workflow for HD down-conversion is:
- Shoot in HD 24P
- Don't down convert in-camera, capture via Fire wire into Final Cut with the 1080p24 HDV Codec. (NOT the apple intermediate codec)
- edit in Final Cut in HD
- export into .M2V's using Compressor for DVD (90 mins DVD quality pre-set)
- import .M2V's into DVD Studio Pro and then burn.
I just did 4, 3-minute vignettes all stylized quite differently. All the Color Correction and effects was done in FCP in HD, distribution was on DVD for Video projectors.
The final DVD product looked great and i really feel that downconverting in FCP will get you better results than down-converting in camera. Compressor definitely takes a while to encode, but its quality is pretty great.
I'm editing on a 3.0ghz quad core with 5gigs of Ram and 1 TB of HD space.
- triple stacking CC and a vignette effect and a tint layer on a 4 minute clip did make the render times pretty long however. 20 min -ish for 3-4 minute clip
Hope this helps
- Shoot in HD 24P
- Don't down convert in-camera, capture via Fire wire into Final Cut with the 1080p24 HDV Codec. (NOT the apple intermediate codec)
- edit in Final Cut in HD
- export into .M2V's using Compressor for DVD (90 mins DVD quality pre-set)
- import .M2V's into DVD Studio Pro and then burn.
I just did 4, 3-minute vignettes all stylized quite differently. All the Color Correction and effects was done in FCP in HD, distribution was on DVD for Video projectors.
The final DVD product looked great and i really feel that downconverting in FCP will get you better results than down-converting in camera. Compressor definitely takes a while to encode, but its quality is pretty great.
I'm editing on a 3.0ghz quad core with 5gigs of Ram and 1 TB of HD space.
- triple stacking CC and a vignette effect and a tint layer on a 4 minute clip did make the render times pretty long however. 20 min -ish for 3-4 minute clip
Hope this helps
Psynema
Well-known member
Anyone know how to capture Canon XH A1 24F HDV footage downconverted to SD 23.98? In Final Cut Pro.
Heard it downconverts to 60i - but so far, cannot get SD 23.98 footage out of the camera without rendering/messing it up. Cinema tools slows down the audio when I try to convert it there.
Heard it downconverts to 60i - but so far, cannot get SD 23.98 footage out of the camera without rendering/messing it up. Cinema tools slows down the audio when I try to convert it there.
Right click the video clip, select properties and then "reduce interlace flicker". I can't get it show any difference in preview mode, but that's what you need to do. Those artifacts are precisely why downsampled HDV is always sharper than the best DV - to remove those artifacts, you need to soften your image!