HMC150 vs JVC HM100 (or perhaps something else?)

Okay, let me put it this way: JVC has the new quicktime recording file format, that FCP users seem excited about.

Would you still Log & Transfer the JVC's files?

No?

Why not?

The answer is probably "because I don't have to, the files just work directly. Logging and transferring would be a waste of time and a silly thing to do in that case."

To which I say -- welcome to my world. That's the way it is with EVERY file-based camcorder, in every editor other than Apple's iMovie/FCE/FCP: EDIUS, Vegas, Avid, Premiere Pro, Liquid, Ulead, Pinnacle, Nero, etc... (with the previously-noted exceptions.) Wouldn't it be nice and convenient if FCP allowed the same flexibility?

Why wouldn't someone want that flexibility? I don't get that.
 
Barry_Green said:
...welcome to my world. That's the way it is with EVERY file-based camcorder, in every editor other than Apple's iMovie/FCE/FCP: EDIUS, Vegas, Avid, Premiere Pro, Liquid, Ulead, Pinnacle, Nero, etc... (with the previously-noted exceptions.) Wouldn't it be nice and convenient if FCP allowed the same flexibility?

Why wouldn't someone want that flexibility? I don't get that.
Click to expand...

I feel your pain. Apple had a perfect chance to make FCP compatible with raw AVCHD footage. Looks like I'll just have to get Clipwrap 2.0 in order to do Same Day Edits.

Jack
 
If JVC recorded AVCHD someone might prefer Vegas to FCP, so FCP would lose market. If FPC supported AVCHD, some might prefer the HMC to the HM, so JVC would lose market.

JVC and FCP are in pure harmony now. Maybe this indeed makes sense to Apple's and JVC's marketoids. Why the HM does not offer AVCHD as an option? Last year's consumer JVC camcorders could record both in MPEG-2 HD and in AVCHD. Why the $3,500 professional camera cannot do what a $600 camcorder could?
 
Barry_Green said:
Why not just abandon the "everything must be quicktime" restriction, that no other editor places on you? That's my beef.

Why rewrap? Is there any benefit whatsoever to you, the end user? No. It just makes you take up time and disk space, and results in files that are then incompatible with 92% of the world's computers.

Nothing about the footage gets "better" by rewrapping it, or by transcoding it.

If you don't mind the rewrap/transcode process, then you have no beef with the FCP workflow, and that's okay for you. But I have a beef with it, a 30-pound steak in fact. :)
Click to expand...

As i said before, re-wrapping it in quicktime makes it automatically compatible with many more programs and with the OS. That is an advantage. For example, I can use iDVD to burn the files to disk if i want, that's much easier than DVDSP. I don't know how the licensing works, but I would imagine that it is cheaper from that point of view also.
 
JBH said:
I feel your pain. Apple had a perfect chance to make FCP compatible with raw AVCHD footage. Looks like I'll just have to get Clipwrap 2.0 in order to do Same Day Edits.

Jack
Click to expand...

How much footage do you have in a same day edit? remember you only need to transcode the bits you intend to use. That might be a 2 minute task!
 
SDE is fine with AVCHD on FCP, you could transcode only the clips you need and in case you have a long clip, you could set in and out points and transcode only a portion of it...

I don't understand what's so wrong about transcoding AVCHD to something else... even if i was working on windows i would do it this way, it's better if you want to do color grading or slow-mo.
AVCHD is very taxing on CPU's specially laptops!!!
 
Barry_Green said:
That's the way it is with EVERY file-based camcorder, in every editor other than Apple's iMovie/FCE/FCP: EDIUS, Vegas, Avid, Premiere Pro, Liquid, Ulead, Pinnacle, Nero, etc... (with the previously-noted exceptions.) Wouldn't it be nice and convenient if FCP allowed the same flexibility?

Why wouldn't someone want that flexibility? I don't get that.
Click to expand...

I am almost certainly going to get an HMC150.

So, seeing as I am starting form scratch with my editor here, what would you recommend?

I was going to go FCP because that seemed to be what everyone in this world was using...

But am open to alternatives.

also

a) Final Cut Express claims to do ACVHD, but I have also read it can't handle teh high quality that this camera puts out. Is this correct? Someone at B&H over the phone today was trying to tell me FCE was fine; someone else on the floor said FCP was essential.

b) How is the included Neo software?

c) What would be the ideal editing system for this balancing a) workflow and b) the fact that I want it in formats that broadcast people might want to use

If I was going to go the FCP route, and get a MacBook Pro, what would be the minimum specs you would recommend? (RAM, and processor).

[I currently have a PC desktop, core 2 duo 2.66, 2 gb ram, which I put together for gaming... what would I need to make this good for editing? extra 2 gb ram and a raid 0 external hard drive? What programme will give me the same kind of ease of use and acceptability as FCP?]
 
Last edited:
Final cut express is fine as long as you only need to edit 1080i footage. I've just upgraded from it to studio, and it's much better , so I'd recommend going for that.
 
a) FCE won't do 24p at all. And I don't know if it'll handle 30p. So if you want to go Apple Final Cut, and you want to edit 24p, then you'd need FCP instead of FCE.

b) Try it. Neo is a slimmed-down version of EDIUS 5, and you may find that you like it very much indeed. Especially since it's free. If you're shopping around for an editor, seems to make sense to me to try the free one you already get. EDIUS will handle any format you throw at it; Neo supports mainly AVCHD, HDV and DV.

c) What do you mean by "formats that broadcast people might want to use"? If you're talking about local broadcast, mostly all local broadcast is done in 4:3 SD, even the channels broadcasting HD news don't necessarily accept or deliver HD commercials. So what are your intended uses?

Your PC desktop, assuming it has a decent graphics card, could be fantastic for editing AVCHD. You wouldn't necessarily need more RAM and, if you're editing the native codec, you definitely don't need a RAID. Try Neo 2 on your system and see what you think. I doubt you'll get full realtime playback unless you use the free Canopus HQ converter; with the Canopus HQ you'll definitely get full-screen realtime playback.

If you want a suite that compares to FCP, look at the Adobe CS4 collection. Native AVCHD editing including graphics card acceleration, plus great integration with After Effects, and you can configure the keyboard shortcuts to run just like FCP, and it can even import and export Avid projects and it can import FCP XML projects. I believe you can download a trial of Premiere Pro CS4.1 and see what you think before having to commit.

But I'd still say just try the free Neo 2 before you worry about spending a bunch of money that may be unnecessary.
 
Mark Turner said:
[I currently have a PC desktop, core 2 duo 2.66, 2 gb ram, which I put together for gaming... what would I need to make this good for editing? extra 2 gb ram and a raid 0 external hard drive? What programme will give me the same kind of ease of use and acceptability as FCP?]
Click to expand...

If you get 4-8gb ram I would consider it (max it out, ram is cheap). You will need to transcode to work with the files easily. FCP makes you do that anyways so no difference. I use Vegas 9 + Premier on the PC and it does what its suppose to (on pretty much the same computer).
 
It's funny but the HM100 doesn't seem to get any play around here. Nor does JVC. Why is that? I saw the quality of the HM100 and I loved it. I like the HCM150 too, but it just seems like JVC can't catch a break no matter what they do or how good it is. On the flip side I can admit it's silly we need a camera to do this while everything else does it natively. And I hear ClipWrap isn't particularly the saving grace many think it will be. Transcoding seems to be the way to go.

-Nate
 
The new Sony vegas Pro 9 edits HM 100 footage without the need to transcode with Clip Browser. And damn fast to on a low spec machine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top