Pansonic works in mysterious ways! AVCHD to DVCPRO HD decoder

Status
Not open for further replies.
So the client is willing to work with RED footage, which has not always been easy, but required coming up with a new work flow, but they are not willing to go through the effort of figuring out what the best work flow is for AVCHD? I mean honestly, is it really that hard? Couldn't you use a utility like mpegstreamclip on the PC side and batch convert to whatever codec you have installed that you want? We use it on the mac side with every camera we use to get the same starting files before we go into the NLE. For the AVCHD files we convert with clipwrap first, but still, it's really not that hard.

Given you are on a PC, can't you still just use CS5 native with AVCHD as well? I really don't see the problem. I know NO ONE that uses DVCPRO HD for ANYTHING in their NLEs. Why reduce the quality of what you are capturing. Seems like a waste to me.
 
Vegas Video 10 works perfectly with AVCHD. It is nonsense to convert it to anything else when you can do it natively. Color correction works perfect in Vegas natively. All this conversion stuff is getting old.
 
Shooter said:
Exactly around the time Panasonic releases a new camera that shoots AVCHD..
they drop their support for the decoder.

"Providing of this utility has ended from November 26, 2010"

https://eww.pavc.panasonic.co.jp/pro-av/support/desk/e/avc_download.htm

Coincidence or just WTF!

I am rapidly losing interest in this camera for my purposes. Starting to think its just a camera for the YouTube generation of film makers!
Click to expand...

Why in the world would you want to transcode AVCHD from the AF100 to DVCProHD? It's an old codec with lower resolution and non-square pixels. If you're on Windows use Premier Pro CS5 and edit natively or use AVI (if that's the right one). If you're on Mac use Premiere Pro CS5 to edit natively or transcode to ProRes or use FCP and transcode to ProRes. I think Panasonic has very good reasons to discontinue the utility, primarily that there's really no point in using it anymore.
 
Mike@AF said:
Why in the world would you want to transcode AVCHD from the AF100 to DVCProHD? It's an old codec with lower resolution and non-square pixels. If you're on Windows use Premier Pro CS5 and edit natively or use AVI (if that's the right one). If you're on Mac use Premiere Pro CS5 to edit natively or transcode to ProRes or use FCP and transcode to ProRes. I think Panasonic has very good reasons to discontinue the utility, primarily that there's really no point in using it anymore.
Click to expand...

I repeat and repeat this endlessly. FFS!

I dont want to transcode to anything at all.
I dont need to transcode to EDIT AVCHD in Adobe CS5 . Fact.

I am trying to find a workflow that includes high end post production in the pipeline. This aint about editing in an NLE!

FWIW this I can do with DVCPRO HD. It is yet to be proven to me from anyone that I can do it with AVCHD source files.

Everyone talks about transcode, transcode, transcode to ProRes (FCP) yet when I suggest I may need to transcode to DVCPRO HD to make this work in a pipeline its a big deal and a bad idea. I have hundreds of TVC shot DVCPro Hd and broadcast without issue.

Heres the thing..

Can any one tell me that you have had the experience of taking AVCHD source files into a FLAME SUITE or a CC Lustre Suite. or Da Vinci or AEFX or 3D suite... ?

How did it go for you / them?

Thats were I need to go with some of what I produce.

Repeat....Im not talking about FCP Color or Colorista or Synthetic Aperture or MB Looks etc...in a desktop NLE (Mac or windows).
 
grimepoch said:
So the client is willing to work with RED footage, which has not always been easy, but required coming up with a new work flow, but they are not willing to go through the effort of figuring out what the best work flow is for AVCHD? ....
Click to expand...

Its not the clients choice. I am paid to do this and provide a problem free experience and get a result. I have shot lots of Red and Film and DVCPro HD and DV and tape(digital /analogue). Never screwed up for any client yet.

I am figuring out the workflow in this brave new world of AVCHD. Thats why I am asking you all. I keep hoping the pros will respond with experience.

Realising its kind of futile asking Post Prod questions in a camera oriented forum though ..but this camera will eventually live or die by the entirety of its concept . (includes post)

Panasonic chose AVCHD for it. They had choices that are arguably better. THey chose a price point for the camera that deserved better .

I dont need to know or understand what or howt his CODECt works for a YouTube workflow which is unlikely to use Flame or Lustre or Da Vinci Suites in general.
 
Converting a lossy codec to an other lossy codec for post, that will be converted to an other lossy codec for delivery is a bad idea IMHO.
We work uncompressed from shooting to finishing AND THAN output to a delivery codec, whenever possible.
In your case, I would convert the AVCHD files to uncompressed, edit, CC, post whatever - makes a big difference in quality and everyone can handle uncompressed, since it is system agnostic.

my ct2, Frank
 
lpowell said:
This is actually fairly old news, hasn't it been about six months since Panasonic first put up the notice about discontinuing this DVCPRO HD transcoder?

I'd suspect their reason for dropping it was that few people have a need to downsample their 1920x1080 AVCHD footage to DVCPRO HD's 1440x1080 squeezed resolution. Perhaps if you wanted to archive your files to videotape?
Click to expand...

+1

For 720p it's even worse, the real pixel resolution would result in 960x720.
 
Shooter said:
I repeat and repeat this endlessly. FFS!

I dont want to transcode to anything at all.
I dont need to transcode to EDIT AVCHD in Adobe CS5 . Fact.

I am trying to find a workflow that includes high end post production in the pipeline. This aint about editing in an NLE!

FWIW this I can do with DVCPRO HD. It is yet to be proven to me from anyone that I can do it with AVCHD source files.

Everyone talks about transcode, transcode, transcode to ProRes (FCP) yet when I suggest I may need to transcode to DVCPRO HD to make this work in a pipeline its a big deal and a bad idea. I have hundreds of TVC shot DVCPro Hd and broadcast without issue.

Heres the thing..

Can any one tell me that you have had the experience of taking AVCHD source files into a FLAME SUITE or a CC Lustre Suite. or Da Vinci or AEFX or 3D suite... ?

How did it go for you / them?

Thats were I need to go with some of what I produce.

Repeat....Im not talking about FCP Color or Colorista or Synthetic Aperture or MB Looks etc...in a desktop NLE (Mac or windows).
Click to expand...

Well you started the thread complaining about Panasonic discontinuing this utility. You didn't ask the simple question "What would be the proper codec to transcode to and proper workflow if I need to go to a Flame, Lustre, or DaVinci system for finishing." You just complained about the utility being discontinued. No one here can read minds and figure out the real reason you were complaining about the utility being discontinued from what you said initially.

So based on what you did say, the point I and others were trying to make is it doesn't matter about the utility because you're better off not transcoding to DVCProHD. Find something else to transcode to. You may have hundreds of shows in DVCProHD, and you're welcome to transcode to DVCProHD if you still want to, but keep in mind you're losing resolution when you do that and also have to deal with non-square pixels with that codec.

So to answer what you're really questioning, it would need to be known what you intend to edit on: FCP, PP CS5, Avid, Edius, etc.?


EDIT: Thinking about it a little more, if you're going to be editing natively (meaning you're not going to transcode at all) and then taking the project to one of those finishing suites you may want to consider DPX or some other type of image sequence. That may be overkill, but as far as finishing suites go, image sequences such as DPX are pretty universal and cross platform compatible. They'll take up a lot of space, but you'll lose virtually nothing in the transfer. You'll probably find it likely at this time that those high end suites won't work with AVCHD natively as AVCHD is really an acquisition codec and not really meant to be edited or finished with. It may work with Premiere Pro, but that's not what it was designed for.
 
Last edited:
Shooter,

Flame, et al my not like AVCHD, but clearly they work with other codec than DVCProHD.

BTW, the subway scenes in "Black Swan" were shot on a Canon 7D. So if your post house hasn't thought about how deal with AVCHD, even if it means transcoding, they probably should. Just my two ¢'s.
 
Shooter said:
Its not the clients choice. I am paid to do this and provide a problem free experience and get a result. I have shot lots of Red and Film and DVCPro HD and DV and tape(digital /analogue). Never screwed up for any client yet.

I am figuring out the workflow in this brave new world of AVCHD. Thats why I am asking you all. I keep hoping the pros will respond with experience.

Realising its kind of futile asking Post Prod questions in a camera oriented forum though ..but this camera will eventually live or die by the entirety of its concept . (includes post)

Panasonic chose AVCHD for it. They had choices that are arguably better. THey chose a price point for the camera that deserved better .

I dont need to know or understand what or howt his CODECt works for a YouTube workflow which is unlikely to use Flame or Lustre or Da Vinci Suites in general.
Click to expand...

Hey Shooter. If you have the budget to shoot RED or even film, and finish it on a post house, I can't see why you are considering shooting your pieces on a $5000 cam.

Anyway, if you have the need to send your material to a post house without transcoding (I usually work on DPX or TIFF sequences, regardless of the codec i shot), you can still just rent an AJA. It's simple, and especially for a studio shot, hassle free.

But if you can pay for a RED rental, it means the client is expecting the most quality you can give him. So just rent it! :)

If you are complaining about the daily hassle of AVCHD on a regular scale of productions for the camera (like productions for TV, or weddings same day edits, etc), I agree, it's a slight hassle having to transcode to get out of MPEG-4. Personally I'll take any hassle over having to pay exorbitant amounts of money for P2 media, but not everybody has to agree to that.
 
Shooter said:
Your reponse interests me as well but whatever.

I have been trying to evaluate this camera from a shoot POV as well as a Post POV

I need a camera that fits in a professional workflow. ie Broadcast TVCs

I want to understand the CODEC ..specifically AVCHD for professional editing workflows ...and I have posted about it here and elsewhere.

AVCHD aint much loved anywhere.

Check out this thread I started http://forums.adobe.com/thread/765204?tstart=0

Heres a real world example:

I have 21 TVCs to shoot end of next month. Ideally suited for the AF102 I thought. (Table top food)

Today I am doing my homework in the post house we will use. eg Flame and Autodesk Lustre CC

AVCHD as a source file ... (once they find out what it is and do their own homework). Forget it they say . Just like they say about DSLR footage.

So previously I have been giving these guys DVCPRO HD and there is never an issue at any stage. Go figure.

So I start thinking about transcode AVCHD to DVCPRO HD.

Thwarted by Panasonic! They dont want me / us to do that. WTF?

As far as my comment goes:

"Starting to think its just a camera for the YouTube generation of film makers!"

I am just not getting why Panasonic put this CODEC in this camera.

Sell me the same camera with a decent CODEC and I will pay a higher price for it if thats what it takes .

Long story short. I am shooting this next project on The RED (and I am going to do some tests on the AF102)
Click to expand...

Strange; you start the thread by slamming Panasonic for discontinuing a transcode program, and then rant about not wanting to transcode?

When your post house isn't willing to accommodate you (the customer) maybe it's time to take your business elsewhere?
When the HVX200 came out I had a job for MacLaren McCann and one of their clients - we were shooting in a remote location with lot's of travel and it was decided that the small form factor of the HVX was best for the job. The post house said no-way! Only if we shoot to tape in SD. HD footage from that camera is too hard to edit. "We don't have the 'specialised equipment". 'It's going to cost XXX more". You get the picture… So I suggested a small test with the Agency - which I then edited on a laptop while we ate lunch. Post house was fired.

I guess my point is this: Times change, tech changes, and people are afraid of what they don't know - you seem to want to hang on to an outdated codec / workflow and don't want to change. If you have the budget to shoot these on a RED, then shoot them on a RED. If the budget is that strong then use an ALEXA. If you don't want to forge a new workflow and be out on the bleeding edge - then the AF100 isn't the camera for you right now.

End of January I'll be shooting tabletop food and food client advertising here in our kitchen studio with the AF100. My post house is excited to see how well the CODEC holds up, if it doesn't do the job we'll end up with one of the external encoders; in the end we'll roll with it, learn and make adjustments. We think that this camera will accommodate clients / jobs that don't have budgets for film.

As for the Youtube comment… I work in advertising, and if 2010 was an indicator then 90% of what we do in 2011 will be straight to the web & IPTV (that's Internet Protocol TV). So it doesn't offend me 'cause Youtube is paying for my retirement.
 
Last edited:
Hi all,

As with so many threads this one seems to be getting emotional and not rational. The reason for the transcoder drop is that it is not compatible with the Windows 7, and they, the folks that wrote it didn't want to update it. So where does that leave folks, well when that transcoder was launched there was not widespread support for AVCHD editing, but today it is everywhere. Please check this reference page, scroll to the bottom and pick put the paper that references your system, www.panasonic.com/AVCCAM. If your edit system is not there, then a transcode to like a Cineform codec to take it to an I frame, might do the trick as well.

None the less, it isn't personal that it is was dropped as I started to there as well, remember I get to introduce the camera to a market place and help people figure out how to move it into their systes, but it is technology moving forward and not trying to take all of history with it. Is there a way through it, yes, there are a lot of avenues. And as far as the comment on it being the same as the DSLRs it is not, yes they both are H.264 but there are many permutations in the implementation and the AF100 has one of the more robust and the DSLRs are just playback codecs, no where near the same.

Hope this helps,

Jan
 
thats weird.. on my win7 systems it runs perfectly!?!

and the target group of this camera will perhaps get some problems to handle avchd with after effects/color correction... if they don´t own cs5 and want to go with sd card workflow ...
 
Last edited:
soeren_hh said:
thats weird.. on my win7 systems it runs perfectly!?!

and the target group of this camera will perhaps get some problems to handle avchd with after effects/color correction... if they don´t own cs5 and want to go with sd card workflow ...
Click to expand...

Thanks, I will go back to the factory with that, And I am not sure what you mean by the rest of your statement?
 
hi Jan,

the statement should only say that with a uptodate win7 pc setup for editing and using cs4 i have to convert avchd to dvchdpro with the panasonic decoder to make color correction and and get a smooth preview ...

best regards

Soeren
 
Shooter - You keep saying:

1. I want to edit native
2. I want have the same workflow (for post house).

Let me tell you something: YOU CAN'T HAVE BOTH!!!!

If you want to edit natively, that's easy. CS5 will cut it up no problem. If you don't use any intermediate renders, your post-house will be getting AVCHD and they will have to figure it out.
On the other hand, if you transcode to ProRes or some other high quality codec (DNxHD, Cineform) you can edit in any NLE, and your post-house should love the footage and codec.

What I'm getting at is, there ARE simple solutions! But you don't want to hear them because they aren't exactly what you want. You want to edit natively with a newer codec and hand it off, which you can do. But your post house is complaining, so you are complaining about it here.

My advice, grow up. Tell your posthouse, they better learn to deal with AVCHD. Hit the bull on the head. AND, deal with the fact that transcoding is perfectly acceptable, and get over the fact it maybe be more work. If you want shallow DoF with stunning cinematic quality for less than $5000 with no moire/aliasing issues... AF100 is your only choice! So figure out which compromise to make because you don't have any other choices.
 
If you care about the quality of your footage, do not transcode your AVCHD to DVCPro HD! My comment has nothing to do about being on a MAC or PC. Really Lossy to less Lossy, makes no sense. So it doesn't matter if that utility works in Wiindows 7 - it's not an ideal workflow. As Jan said, there are better solutions today.
 
I too only work virtually on the native files of my DSLR, in Premiere and in After Effects and then I only master to TGA, no compression to deal with and the only compression was in the original. Your post route is wrong if you're downsizing the resolution of the master and recompressing. You've got to think about that. If you can work on the originals, work on the originals.

The AF100 is an interesting camera, 4:2:0, variable fps, interchangable lenses. Not for me. I want to use a higher color resolution and until then I'll use the 7D.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top