Need Help with DVX/HV20 Workflow!

E

e-steve

Well-known member
Hey gang,

Hopefully someone here can give me a little guidance on our workflow. We are working with footage shot in 24pa on a DVX100 as well as HV20 footage shot in 24p.

The current plan is to do our offline edit at SD, using the ProRes 422 codec in FCP.

1) The HV20 workflow seems fine, after capturing the 1080i footage, we run it through compressor to do the inverse telecine, and bring it down to 720x480 in ProRes, with HDV aspect ratio.

2) When we capture the DVX100 footage using the Advanced Pulldown Removal Setup, there seems to be a discrepancy. When we preview the captured clips, while the log bin says their vid rates are 23.98, when we jog through the footage, we see the TC goes past 23 frames per second...so it seems like it is at 29.97 to us. The HV20 footage run through compressor does not exhibit this behavior.

Are we missing something? Something seems wrong.

3) Just to verify we are doing this part ok...our sequence is set to 720x480 using ProRes and we have the Anamorphic box checked, to adjust the HDV footage. Everything looks right when we drag it into the timeline.

Can anyone help with our issue in #2? Also, can anyone confirm that our workflow is sound, if we plan to ultimately go to HD or 2k in our online edit process?

Thanks in advance!

-Steve
 
The DVX-100 records all video at 29.97fps. When you remove the pulldown, redundant frames are removed. Look at the time code...step thru it. Notice there are missing numbers? Those are the redundant frames that have been removed.

Shooting DV and HDV mixed...editing the HDV as DV (why?)...and you want a high end HD or 2K finish? Well, the DV won't look well, nor will the HDV downconverted to DV. If I were you, I'd work with the HV20 footage natively. FCP 6 has a mixed format timeline that allows you do mix the formats fine....I am doing that with DVCPRO HD and DV (although the DV footage is ALL temp).

Talk to the post facility you plan on finishing this at to get pointers from them. Personally I think this workflow is backwards.
 
Workflow

Workflow

Thanks Shane -- we did look at the frames and you are right...I guess I expected to see the frames sequentially represented rather than frames being skipped.

In terms of our workflow, the reason why we are going down to SD is because we have so much footage, and it is a drive space consideration. We have two 2TB RAIDs for now set to Raid 5, so we effectively have about 1.4TB of storage. The plan was to edit in SD res and then export the EDL and have the full HD upres done in post, which would mean only the required tapes would be loaded at that time -- is this a flawed way of thinking?

Thanks again for your advice. I am also going to talk with some post facilities ASAP.

Thanks,
Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top