FCP users . . . Convert MTS to prores?

Michael Solomon

Michael Solomon

Well-known member
Hey guys,

My editor is an FCP guy. He was wondering if there's a way to directly convert .mts (files off the fs-100) to pro-res 4:2:2 without a quality hit. Free programs are best, though will go with a paid program if it's needed.

Any advice would be much appreciated.
 
If you shooting anything but 1080p60, you can covert using fcp log and transfer. Only other real option is clipwrap, it works great only 50 bucks.
 
Clipwrap = #1 option. If not that, you can also use handbrake to convert the .mts files into one of the formats they offer and then use mpeg streamclip to convert to prores. Both are free.

And I'm assuming you have some kind of plugins too to make MS work better..
 
ok so is clipwrap better or prores 422hq transcoding for avchd? will final cut pro x still covert h.264 or natively work with it? wich is the best way to go? need the most lossless quality, or should I just bring in my fs100 files directly into finalcut pro x and let it do it's thing??
 
I've been working with FCPX on a 2011 Top-o-the-line MacBook Pro using FS100 rushes, and I'm letting FCP-X transcode to ProRes when I'm in a hurry. It's fast, but mostly because it's in the background. You're editing pretty quickly which is the main thing in many of my circumstances.

However, if I have time, I prefer to use ClipWrap to output to ProRes LT - smaller file sizes.

So that's another +1 for ClipWrap! :-)

What I don't do is try and edit natively. Been there, done that, didn't like it. Native AVCHD editing is all fine and dandy for 'home movies', but with lots of rushes, skimming and tapping through dozens of hours of material, multiple Project versions, stacking up Colour Boards, getting things done and quickly exported, it's ProRes all the way. I hate spinning beachballs and hesitations, which are frequent with AVCHD material. Even on a fast Mac.
 
MattDavis said:
What I don't do is try and edit natively. Been there, done that, didn't like it. Native AVCHD editing is all fine and dandy for 'home movies', but with lots of rushes, skimming and tapping through dozens of hours of material, multiple Project versions, stacking up Colour Boards, getting things done and quickly exported, it's ProRes all the way. I hate spinning beachballs and hesitations, which are frequent with AVCHD material. Even on a fast Mac.
Click to expand...

With FCP 7 even a wrapped native AVHCD file, it's almost impossible to edit. I actually now use Premiere Pro CS 5.5 on a Mac to edit native AVCHD files, drag and drop them into the PPro browser. It's very similar to the FCP7 experience. I'm also on nearly 4 year old Mac Pro, and I'm able to edit pretty efficiently this way. Not as buttery smooth as prores transcoded on FCP7, but usable.
 
kmoreau893 said:
With FCP 7 even a wrapped native AVHCD file, it's almost impossible to edit. I actually now use Premiere Pro CS 5.5 on a Mac to edit native AVCHD files, drag and drop them into the PPro browser. It's very similar to the FCP7 experience. I'm also on nearly 4 year old Mac Pro, and I'm able to edit pretty efficiently this way. Not as buttery smooth as prores transcoded on FCP7, but usable.
Click to expand...

I dunno why you would ever want to edit native avchd anyways, even with adobe i feel like I would want to transcode, mts files suck IMO.
 
eheath said:
I dunno why you would ever want to edit native avchd anyways, even with adobe i feel like I would want to transcode, mts files suck IMO.
Click to expand...

Actually, there are a lot of reasons to edit native of any format if at all possible, and the 2 main reasons are:

1) Time
2) Storage and Archiving

1) Time: Editing native means you don't have to take time to transcode footage. You download the footage to your hard drive, then work with it directly from there. Transcoding from AVCHD to Prores (or anything else) takes time

2) Storage and Archiving
AVHCD files are from 17mbs to 28mbs. The lowest quality Prores files you'd want to use are 100mbs or more, some, much, much more. This means for every GB of storage your original AVCHD files used, you might create 4-6 times extra Prores data. If you're shooting with a lot of camcorders at once and doing daily shoots this can add up quick and you wind up spending a lot of money buying and taking care of hard drives. 4 times more than what you would without transcodes.

I think that as computing power gets better, 'native' becomes more practical. Remember, in the early days of editing, people used 'proxies' for editing, they would make postage sized proxies of the original beta cam or DV footage, and edit that way, because computers were not powerful enough. Then later you'd put your tapes in and capture the 'real' high res footage and assemble the edit from your 'offline' edit. Then computers started to become powerful enough to edit "DV" natively. Then HDV came along and the same evolution happened, and now we can edit HDV natively if you have enough power. Now, because computing power has advanced and some software can take advantage of it, we can now edit AVCHD natively. It's just evolution.

Right now editing MTS files 'sucks' because your computer or NLE isn't up to it. Guaranteed, in a couple of years, you will be editing native AVCHD. THen it will be onto "4K" or something that "sucks" to edit, until computers catch up.
 
Last edited:
Im am editing natively in Premiere CS5.5 and the mts files definetly don't "suck". It's as fast as using cineform or prores files and I don't have a super fast computer, just a good old quad core computer witn 4gb of RAM from 2 years ago.
 
kmoreau893 said:
Actually, there are a lot of reasons to edit native of any format if at all possible, and the 2 main reasons are:

1) Time
2) Storage and Archiving

1) Time: Editing native means you don't have to take time to transcode footage. You download the footage to your hard drive, then work with it directly from there. Transcoding from AVCHD to Prores (or anything else) takes time

2) Storage and Archiving
AVHCD files are from 17mbs to 28mbs. The lowest quality Prores files you'd want to use are 100mbs or more, some, much, much more. This means for every GB of storage your original AVCHD files used, you might create 4-6 times extra Prores data. If you're shooting with a lot of camcorders at once and doing daily shoots this can add up quick and you wind up spending a lot of money buying and taking care of hard drives. 4 times more than what you would without transcodes.
Click to expand...

Two very good reasons but neither of them really effect me. Plus, im obviously using fcp so prores is much easier to work with than mts. To each his own.
 
eheath said:
Two very good reasons but neither of them really effect me. Plus, im obviously using fcp so prores is much easier to work with than mts. To each his own.
Click to expand...

If you are on FCP7 you HAVE to transcode, there isn't an option. And if you HAVE to transcode there are several choices, Log and Transfer, Mpeg Streamclip, and ClipWrap. But this transcoding thing is something to consider in the future, for everybody. It's one of the reasons I switched over to Premiere Pro, which isn't perfect by any means, but it got me past that step. Right now I have about 25TB of fast online RAID storage, and it's mostly filled with non-transcoded source media. If I had to transcode it, I'd have to have about 100TB to 200TB. I'd have to develop a different workflow.

Anyway good luck with the FS100, it's a great camera, I'm just scratching the surface of it's capabilities.
 
Just randomly stumbled upon this topic..I didn't read all the way through, but I can confirm with you that on a MacPro 6-core 3.33ghz with 32GB of RAM with a regular 7200rpm 3TB for media and the OS on a SSD, the edit is smooth as butter with the native AVCHD footage..I have no stops, beachballs, stuttering, etc.

The #1 reason I bought FCPX was to learn it and see what it was all about and the #2 reason was working with AVCHD natively. I thought I had enough power to make it work and I do. However, on my old MacBook Pro..forget about it..can't even move the mouse without it locking up.

It's all about your equipment. Regardless, at the end of the day, most are going to have an easier time editing with ProRes anyway.
 
I edited my last 27 min doc with mostly native AVCHD in Premiere (using the fastest iMac you can buy with an SSD and a Promise Pegasus Thunderbolt RAID array). It worked and looked great (Premiere uses an internal lossless proxy). But ProRes converted to thumbnails a lot faster I noticed. Layering effects on ProRes files was also faster; AVCHD needed to be played back at 1/4 res (with no external monitoring) to even get an idea of what it would look like without rendering. Of course an NVIdia card would help there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top