CineForm

Tom -

Personally, no...but you may want to ask David at Spec-Comm. He may be able to answer any questions you have about it.

AC
 
sorry , but there are so many pages and i just want a yes or no

does it convert PAL 25P and 25PN MXF files, from the rather neglected HVX200e

reason i ask is because im having allot of problems with Raylight, perhaps you all know the infamouse

*NO DATA* grey screen of death, or stop the rendering message

:)

yes or no?
 
My own experience from my PAL HVX200E model, the tool (Aspect HD) works great on PPro 1.5, I tested it yesterday with my new P2 card. Realtime performance is great and conversion works really fast, I was able to see and edit all my slo-mo and regular clips just fine, tested it with 720p 25p timeline.

Some questions: when converting the file and with the "large" setting on HD link I get the exact same quality as the original? Why is the file smaller? If I wanted to export back to MXF could I be able to do that without a loss? This comes as a question for deliverables how would I work If I wanted a DVCPRO-HD or DVCPRO-50 downconvert master?

When playing back the footage in the timeline the footage looks a lot darker than stopped (looks pretty much like the overlay issue in AVID) does it happen for realtime performance? Or is it something tha I could do about it?

Oh and by the way any relation to Paul Newman the actor? :)
 
Digital Angel said:
reason i ask is because im having allot of problems with Raylight, perhaps you all know the infamouse

*NO DATA* grey screen of death, or stop the rendering message
Click to expand...

Sorry to sidetrack this thread but when support issues enter a public forum I feel obligated to respond there.

Some of the NO DATA gray screen of death is addressed in release 1.05d (you can get it at dvfilm.com/update). The other occurences of it I believe are due to a disconnect between the Raylight proxy and the original MXF files. We have a reconnect application that will fix that problem, but it's not part of the released software yet. Contact support@dvfilm.com for more info.
 
jazzx said:
My own experience from my PAL HVX200E model, the tool (Aspect HD) works great on PPro 1.5, I tested it yesterday with my new P2 card. Realtime performance is great and conversion works really fast, I was able to see and edit all my slo-mo and regular clips just fine, tested it with 720p 25p timeline.

Some questions: when converting the file and with the "large" setting on HD link I get the exact same quality as the original? Why is the file smaller? If I wanted to export back to MXF could I be able to do that without a loss? This comes as a question for deliverables how would I work If I wanted a DVCPRO-HD or DVCPRO-50 downconvert master?

When playing back the footage in the timeline the footage looks a lot darker than stopped (looks pretty much like the overlay issue in AVID) does it happen for realtime performance? Or is it something tha I could do about it?

Oh and by the way any relation to Paul Newman the actor? :)
Click to expand...

Large is the best setting, however the CineForm is not mathematically lossless -- it is visual lossless. You show use that you your benefit as not you can up-convert your images to 1280x720 (i.e. square pixel mastering resolution -- or higher) -- you can't do that with DVCPRO_HD as it has fixed resolution and bit-rate issues. The assumption we have made is acquistion formats are not good delivery formats. If you are going high-end to film, you exports might be DPX or Cineon at 2048x1556, if you going to boardcast you are looking at D5 or HDCAM. The reason CineForm AVI can be smaller (they are not always as this is a VBR not CBR codec -- note: VBR is better for post) is the image is compressed into a full screen wavelet rather than dividing the image into 8x8 DCT blocks, wavelet simply a more efficient image compressor.

Your darker overlay is you have an uncalibrated NVidia card -- see the readme.txt in the Aspect HD folder in the Start Menu, that will explain how to fix you NVidia card.

No relation to (that) Paul.
 
So if I buy "aspect hd", is the best solution for outputing hd to an hdtv,
through an "matrox parhelia apve" card? or is that any other card you would recomend. I been looking at the matrox parhelia apve card and it has 1080i/25, 1080p/25, 720p/60 but it doesn't say anything about 720p/50 or 720p/25 on the component output. Is this going to be problem?
 
David, tnx for your replays, have another question;
can one use HDlink from commandline? if not, can we expect such utility/wrapper in future?
 
Last edited:
No Data

No Data

I understand MVP, but im afraid te NO DATA issue doesnt just happen when u claim it happens, its after rendering for 30mins or less, etc. There are still some bugs to be ironed out im sure. As with any programe no matter how far forward it may be. I have faith in raylight and will continue to use it depending on what im doing.

Il give Connect HD a shot, im assuming that has the HVX support for PAL like Aspect. And we will see what happens. I thank the guys at raylight for offering the first solution for me. And i have thanked you many times on the forum before
 
A scriptable shell version of HDLink.exe is possible -- never thought of that before. How would you like to use it?
 
Hmm trying out Connect HD with the HVX. The conversion tool works well, im not sue why i have to set , re-size to 720-1280 when the orignal MXF files are that size anyway. im worried i may be loosing quality because of that. This is illiminating my take into vegas and compress approach witch is nice, although you have some buggy start stop buttons on the converter.

Oh and my HVX is not detected by the programme but its ok. Appart from the buggy start stop button it seems to be good. The compressed files are nice, a bit more washy than the originals but u have to expect that.

Any tips to use the programe?

oh and one more thing, gives me an error allot about *P2 Viewer Missing?* i have P2 viewer installed i dont know what it means
 
Last edited:
Digital Angel said:
im not sue why i have to set , re-size to 720-1280 when the orignal MXF files are that size anyway. im worried i may be loosing quality because of that.
Click to expand...

The native MXF size you get from HVX200 is 960X720 In order to see the proper size-aspect ratio you have either to open the file on a 1280X720 NLE timeline (that doesn't affect the size permantly) or resize it using a programm like connect HD. The quality issues has to do only with the conversion to avi, I to have some questions about that prosedure, but it seems OK, althought David said that it is not mathimaticaly loosless.
 
About the lossless thing. I think its noticable when you move the camera.

As for the size of the frame, if i convert normaly without resize It would come out at 4:3, surly putting that on a bigger framed timeline, on say vegas would cause quality loss no?

this is confusing me haha
 
Convert 960x720 to 1280x720 is never lossless (if you want it to look good,) but you have to do it at sometime -- we think it is best to do up front. "Native" system might allow you to post in 960 for a while but in the end you are in a lower resolution than your final master -- which is a silly idea as all your additional elements are scaled down (960x720 is not a broadcasted or delivery resolution).

Mathematically lossless is not desirable as your bit-rate would climb so significantly that might as well go uncompressed if maintaining source compression artifacts (DVCPRO-HD) is important to you. :) I'm not being inflamatory as every lossly compression system has artifacts, the trick is to make them invisible -- we do a very good job at that. We balance file size/quality, multigeneration quality (which we excell) and decoding performance and optimize this for post.

D.A. There is no motion compression exploited such camera motion is an artifact. Yes, if you put 960x720 on the Vegas timeline, Vegas now has to do the scale to 1280x720 -- the scale is happening at some point in every work flow (even if you master to DVCPRO-HD -- its HDSDI output (for boardcast) has to scale.)
 
David Newman said:
"Native" system might allow you to post in 960 for a while but in the end you are in a lower resolution than your final master -- which is a silly idea as all your additional elements are scaled down
Click to expand...


You put me in to serious thoughts here. The way you put it it makes a LOT of sense that we should be resizing before we start editing. I really mean that it sounds like a MAST DO. What are your suggestion, comments for someone like me that is won by Canopus and planning to edit native DVCPRO-HD ? We somehow been over this before, but please explain a little more, are you suggesting that using connect-HD from the beggining and converting-resizing our footage will give better quality in the long run, plus the overall boost up ?
You realy put me in some serious thoughts here... Please analyze the most that you can...

Thanks again
Andreas
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top