Premium Codec Advice???

P

pifemaster

Well-known member
Hello,

I am using Adobe CS6 Production Premium suite. I am looking for the best codecs available to render video to BluRay & DVD.

Has anyone used this h264 Pro codec http://www.x264pro.com/

Is it worth the money?


Is there a better MPEG 2 codec than the one included with CS6 to create standard definition DVDs?

Thank you,
Robert Pfeifer
www.pifemaster.com
 
The x264 encoder is often considered one of the best available. It can be had for free, so I would not recommend paying for the plug-in. XviD4PSP is able to encode Blu-ray legal H.264 video files that work just fine in Encore without transcoding. This method does require an Intermediate file to be generated first, but exporting out an MXF OP1a using the AVC-I 100 codec will produce stellar results.

http://www.videohelp.com/tools/XviD4PSP (Grab version 5, not 6)

For DVD I recommend the free HC Encoder, which does a visibly better job than the MainConcept encoder Adobe uses, especially when in CQ mode.

http://www.bitburners.com/hc-encoder/
 
Jim,

Thank you very much for the reply.

Please bear with me as I am very much a novice at this and have several questions about your responses.

First, let me tell you what I am doing:

I am shooting highlight videos at weddings where I perform.
I am using a Panasonic AG-AC160A video camera.
I am shooting in 1080/60P.
I then import the footage and edit in Adobe Premier CS6.
I use Adobe Dynamic Link to Send to Encore where I create DVDs & BluRays which include custom menus that I purchased from www.precomposed.com
I am moderately happy with the quality of the final video on BluRay and not happy at all with the down-converted quality on DVD.

Now to my questions.
Regarding BluRay, I think I understand you to say I would export the clip directly from Premier using an MXF OP1a format and then import that to XviD4PSP and render as a H.264 which would be imported to Encore to create the BluRay disc. If this is the case, I do see an export preset in Premier for video codec AVC-Intra Class 100 1080, but under frame rate it only offers the option of 23.976, 25, 29.97. It does not give me an option for 59.94. What would I do in this situation? Also, would you be able to tell me the proper export setting for XviD4PSP to create the needed file to import into encore.


Regarding Standard DVDs, would I use the same MXF OP1a that I export from premier for the BluRays and import that into HC Encoder to create the mpeg 2 files needed for DVD. Can I then import that file into Encore to create my custom Menu, etc?


Sorry for sounding like a nooob, but I am :-)

Thank you,

Robert Pfeifer
Pifemaster Productions
www.pifemaster.com
 
For starters, neither Blu-ray nor DVD can hold 1080p/60 video, so stop shooting in that format. You're only making it necessary to convert the video for disk, and any conversions add the possibility of degradation. I recommend shooting everything 1080p/24, mostly because I prefer the look of film over video. But if you want or need the video look, shoot 1080i/30 instead. Getting this right will eliminate your export frame rate issues and eliminate one conversion step.

As for using that same export for HC Encoder, let me get back to you. I haven't tried that yet.
 
The reason I have been shooting at 60 frames instead of 24 is because of the nature of the Panasonic AC-160A. Autofocus at 60 frames is poor and Autofocus at 24 frames is almost unuseable. I recall seeing a post a while back from Barry Green that the reason Autofocus worked better at 60 frames was due to the fact that the camera was being fed more data per second (over 24 frames) hence a better auto focus.

That being said, Can I shoot in PH 1080/60i and achieve the same results you indicated above? My camera gives the following options: PS 1080/60p - PH 1080/60i - PH 1080/30p - PH 1080/24P

Thank you,
Robert Pfeifer
Pifemaster Productions
www.pifemaster.com
 
pifemaster said:
Has anyone used this h264 Pro codec http://www.x264pro.com/

Is it worth the money?
Click to expand...
I bought it and think it is worth it because it is better than the built in MainConcept H.264 and because it is convenient to export directly from the Timeline.

For shooting i recommend 720p60 instead of 1080i30. Interlaced 1920x1080 don't look near as good as 60 progressive 1280x720 frames. Do some tests between the two, burn a BD-disc and sit your self down in the sofa and look for yourself. :)

Higher resolution is not always better and interlacing will always look bad on a modern televison.

/Roger
 
Just thought I'd chime in here with my experience -- yes, X264Pro is a bit pricey, but the integration is very good, and I'm happy to have bought it.

Just having presets that say "Match source settings" is a huge benefit -- instead of having to have presets for all the frame sizes I work with, multiplied by all the frame rates, multiplied by all the quality settings I use, I just have 2 -- "medium quality" and a "high quality", and they both say "match source" for the frame size and rate.

I've had a couple of issues with my installation, but they both turned out to be caused by Adobe -- in once case, PP didn't set up the registry keys correctly; another issue was caused by having both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of media encoder, and PP was picking the wrong one. In both cases the support from the company has been absolutely superb. I just (Thanksgiving morning) got my latest issue sorted out by email. Good work 3am Studios.
 
Jim Simon said:
For starters, neither Blu-ray nor DVD can hold 1080p/60 video, so stop shooting in that format. You're only making it necessary to convert the video for disk, and any conversions add the possibility of degradation. I recommend shooting everything 1080p/24, mostly because I prefer the look of film over video. But if you want or need the video look, shoot 1080i/30 instead. Getting this right will eliminate your export frame rate issues and eliminate one conversion step.

As for using that same export for HC Encoder, let me get back to you. I haven't tried that yet.
Click to expand...

1080i/30 doesn't technically exist. It's either 60i, or 30p.

To the OP, 60i would have the same smooth lifelike motion cadence of 60p. 30p is sort of an in between to 24p and 60p/i

If you want to output 30p, then you can still shoot 60p. I'd argue that it's preferable... 60p to 30p is an easy conversion. The encoder just drops every second frame. Plus you have the ability to conform your shots to 30p for perfect 50% slow mo playback.
 
Don't NOT shoot 1080/60p just because Blu-ray and DVD can't hold 60p. Shooting progressive is always preferable to shooting interlaced; you can always deliver an interlaced output. Your frame rate choice is (nearly) independent of your final delivery.
 
David Jimerson said:
Don't NOT shoot 1080/60p just because Blu-ray and DVD can't hold 60p. Shooting progressive is always preferable to shooting interlaced; you can always deliver an interlaced output. Your frame rate choice is (nearly) independent of your final delivery.
Click to expand...
I agree but, 1080p60 downconvert beautifully to 1080i with the smooth motion preserved. 1080p24 is to stuttery for some situations. When sitting in the sofa there is hard/impossible to see the difference between 720p60 and 1080p24 when it comes to details in the footage. The difference is in the non-stuttery motion in 720p60 vs the stuttery motion in 1080p24. I have compared all those formats on Blu-ray discs i have made and i look at a 50 inch television. :)
 
Averdahl said:
1080p24 is to stuttery for some situations. When sitting in the sofa there is hard/impossible to see the difference between 720p60 and 1080p24 when it comes to details in the footage. The difference is in the non-stuttery motion in 720p60 vs the stuttery motion in 1080p24. I have compared all those formats on Blu-ray discs i have made and i look at a 50 inch television. :)
Click to expand...

That would be a choice of preference, and also of what works best for your project. An artistic choice, not a technical choice.

Also, being in Sweden, 24p has to be converted to 50i for display, and that can exaggerate the strobe of the movement. You really want to stay in the 50/25 standard, rather than 60/30/24.
 
David Jimerson said:
Also, being in Sweden, 24p has to be converted to 50i for display, and that can exaggerate the strobe of the movement. You really want to stay in the 50/25 standard, rather than 60/30/24.
Click to expand...
- Broadcast = Yes.
- Home = Never. Our standard equipment can handle 24p without any issues. We can view PAL *and* NTSC material on commercial DVD's/BD's on the same player/tv set without any quality issues.
 
DBP said:
1080i/30 doesn't technically exist. It's either 60i, or 30p.
Click to expand...

That's exactly backwards. The convention is to list only frame rates, never field rates. So technically 60i doesn't exist, as it means 60 interlaced frames per second, and there is no such animal. 1080i/30 is the proper and correct term, 60i is the often used but incorrect term for the same format, 30 interlaced frames, which is part of the Blu-ray spec.

30p is not part of the Blu-ray spec.
 
Jim Simon said:
That's exactly backwards. The convention is to list only frame rates, never field rates. So technically 60i doesn't exist, as it means 60 interlaced frames per second, and there is no such animal. 1080i/30 is the proper and correct term, 60i is the often used but incorrect term for the same format, 30 interlaced frames, which is part of the Blu-ray spec.

30p is not part of the Blu-ray spec.
Click to expand...

Actually the convention is, when 'p' comes after the number it determines frames. If 'i' comes after the number it determines fields.

30p = 30 frames per second
60i = 60 fields per second

I have never seen a camera list a framerate as 30i. Cameras will always list 30p for progressive recording, and 60i for interlaced recording.
 
Jim Simon said:
That's exactly backwards. The convention is to list only frame rates, never field rates. So technically 60i doesn't exist, as it means 60 interlaced frames per second, and there is no such animal. 1080i/30 is the proper and correct term, 60i is the often used but incorrect term for the same format, 30 interlaced frames, which is part of the Blu-ray spec.
Click to expand...

It's a convention that is changing, and it should, because it's archaic, inaccurate, and deeply confusing. 60i video has 60 movements per second, 60 separate pictures, not 30. Smashing two separate pictures together and calling them a "frame" is actually pretty silly. No one should ever confuse 60i and 30p, because they're totally different things, and look totally different, but because they're both called "30" or "29.97," tons of people do. 60i looks live, and has the same "live" movement as 60p. 30p doesn't. Insisting that two fields which were imaged at different times somehow make up a single, coherent "frame" makes no real sense.

Just about the only thing anymore which still refers to "30i" is legacy software, and then, only for SD material. Even Premiere calls 1080 video "60i," not "30i." It's "30i" which needs to go away as a designation.
 
Jim Simon said:
That's exactly backwards. The convention is to list only frame rates, never field rates. So technically 60i doesn't exist, as it means 60 interlaced frames per second, and there is no such animal. 1080i/30 is the proper and correct term, 60i is the often used but incorrect term for the same format, 30 interlaced frames, which is part of the Blu-ray spec.

30p is not part of the Blu-ray spec.
Click to expand...

My reply is basically what David Jimerson said above. It's a misinterpretation that's been around a long time. Not 100% sure on this, but I think Avid lists their sequence settings as 1080 / 30i which probably did a lot to promote the confusion.
 
pifemaster said:
Is there a better MPEG 2 codec than the one included with CS6 to create standard definition DVDs?
Click to expand...
The codec for DVD is MPEG2, so there isn't a better codec, but what I think you're really asking is if there is a better MPEG2 encoder?
Yes. But you also have to be reasonable here. You're taking a 1920x1080 source and scaling it to 720x480 and then probably playing it back scaled back up to 1920x1080. Getting it to look like the original footage is a tough trick to pull off. That said, you need to make sure that the initial down res scaling is done well. Compressor was notorious for botching this with the default settings, and most of the other bundled apps don't do a whole lot better.
If you're doing this a lot and charging for it, take a look at the Cinemacraft encoders: http://www.visiblelight.com/cinemacraft/ They take a little learning to get good results with and they ain't cheap, but they're a bargain compared to what they used to cost and they can produce excellent image quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top