The never-ending search for right 7D import/export settings

J

jordy2324

Well-known member
Hey all,

When it comes to technical specs, I'm still learning when it comes to HDSLR footage.

So I'm STILL looking for the right settings for my video to look smooth and crisp. It's gotten better as I've experimented with a few different settings.... but by the time I export out of FCP7 it's still not even as sharp as it looks on the lcd of the 7D. At times it looks like crap. So, I need a tad bit of help. I'm sure I'm still doing something(s) terribly wrong.

So, here's a run-down of my settings from beginning to end.

IN CAMERA
Shooting 720p 60fps

IMPORT
Bringing onto external with CF card reader

CONVERT
Converting 7D movie files with MPEG streamclip
For compression, I choose Apple ProRes 422 HQ, set quality at 100%, frame size at 1280x720 and I un-check interlaced Scaling

IMPORT
I import these transcoded files into FCP7

EXPORT
For best quality, I:
Export to Quicktime move --> ProRes HQ 1280x720 60p

For HD YouTube upload, I:
Export to QuickTime Conversion:
Video Settings --> H.264
Key Frames every --> 24 frames
Data rate restrict to --> 3500 kb/sec
Optimize for --> download
Size --> 1280x720 HD
Prepare for Internet Streaming --> Fast start

So, what newbie mistake am I making here? What should I change?
 
I think a good thing would be is to post like 15-20 seconds of the original file, then the same amount after you have converted it so we can see exactly what is going on and how far it differs from the original
 
First off are you set on using 720p or is 1080 an option? I only ask because it's usually better to start off with the best quality and then go down/smaller from there. If 720p is your final output to go to youtube, then I'd still shoot 1080p24 or 30, or just upload to vimeo...they're less compressed to boot.
 
The only reason I was shooting in 720 60p was for slo-mo. However, I haven't really used it a lot and I've been rather disappointed with FCP's built-in speed-changer.

Maybe there's a plug-in that will do a better job. Also -- what about slo-mo with 1080 30p? Does anyone have any examples?
 
jordy2324 said:
The only reason I was shooting in 720 60p was for slo-mo. However, I haven't really used it a lot and I've been rather disappointed with FCP's built-in speed-changer.

Maybe there's a plug-in that will do a better job. Also -- what about slo-mo with 1080 30p? Does anyone have any examples?
Click to expand...

...and in response to the original post:

Shooting 720p on the 7d, while fun for slo-mo, can cause some problems with your footage. It's my understanding that shooting 720p forces the 1080p native chip to downscale into 720p, thereby potentially causing more banding and noise issues.

In response to your footage on the computer not looking as good on the LCD, well, it's hard to see problems on a ~4" screen, whereas even a minor eyesore is apparent on a computer monitor.

If you're exporting your final product to the web, then you can probably get away with some quality loss; but if you're going for a high-res, high-quality professional look, you might want to shoot 1080p30. There are some tutorials on YouTube and other sites (I didn't bookmark them for some reason...) that discuss how to produce decent slo-mo with the 7d at 30fps. To be honest, though, if you're going to be doing a lot of slo-mo, the 7d might disappoint you.

It just depends on what you're going for, and a lot of times it's your subject matter that determines what the appropriate frame rate is for slowing down in post. For example, if you're shooting, say, waves crashing, you could shoot at 30fps, slow it down, and blur it a little and it would still look like waves crashing really slowly, since waves are extremely organic, fluid objects with no predetermined form. If you were to try to shoot a person running or something dynamic moving very fast, however, even at 60 fps your slo-mo might look a little blocky because we all know exactly what a person is supposed to look like, and any aberration would stick out.

That's just my 2c from my experience with 7d slo-mo. Don't quote me on it, 'cuz I bet I'm wrong on something.
 
jscottprice said:
It's my understanding that shooting 720p forces the 1080p native chip to downscale into 720p, thereby potentially causing more banding and noise issues.
Click to expand...


The 'chip' (image sensor) isn't natively 1080p. If it were, then it wouldnt be able to take 18MP still shots. 18 megapixels is the 'chip's native resolution which is 5184x3456 = 17.9 million pixels = 18MP. 1080p is only a little over 2 megapixels. yuck

When you shoot ANY video mode, 1080 or 720, you are 'down-scaling' from the chip. The only mode that doesn't do this is the 640 crop mode where it just records from a cropped portion of the sensor. No downscaling or interpolation.

The actual method canon uses isn't really downscaling, but it takes every 3rd line of the sensor to record the image for video.

Nino explains it best:

When shooting 1080p video on the 5D Mark II, only every third line of the 3,159 lines of the 16:9 area of the sensor is recorded, which results in 1,053 lines (in total, the sensor consists of 3,744 lines, but the additional lines are only used for the different aspect ratio of still images).
Every line consist of 5,616 pixels each and is downsampled to 1,920 pixels, while the 1,053 lines are interpolated to 1,080 pixels. The final 1,920*1,080 raw video is immediately compressed into H.264 in a QT-MOV container and then written onto the CompactFlash memory card
Click to expand...
CMOS_HD_recording_small.jpg


The same exact method is used on all Canon DSLRs that can capture HD footage, 7D, T2i etc l


Nino Film

I just read that the native ISO for the T2i is all of them !!

 
Last edited:
milkMADE said:
The 'chip' (image sensor) isn't natively 1080p. If it were, then it wouldnt be able to take 18MP still shots. 18 megapixels is the 'chip's native resolution which is 5184x3456 = 17.9 million pixels = 18MP. 1080p is only a little over 2 megapixels. yuck
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. I think I was borrowing logic from a conversation I had about the 18 MP chip scaling down for video and misspoke.

What I actually meant was because of how the chip downsamples to 720p, from what I've read and what little experimenting I've done, the video is prone to problems when shooting 720p more so than it is at 1080p, namely aliasing and artifacts. Some of this can be corrected in post, but aliasing can be a nasty enemy.
 
jscottprice said:
You're absolutely right. I think I was borrowing logic from a conversation I had about the 18 MP chip scaling down for video and \\]\\\misspoke.

What I actually meant was because of how the chip downsamples to 720p, from what I've read and what little experimenting I've done, the video is prone to problems when shooting 720p more so than it is at 1080p, namely aliasing and artifacts. Some of this can be corrected in post, but aliasing can be a nasty enemy.
Click to expand...

Yea that makes sense. The more you downsample, whatever method, the more room for artifacting and quality loss..that's a given with any medium. But downsampling is always better than upsampling, so it doesn't look too bad.

I shoot all my surf footage in 720/60p and dump it into PPro CS5 (I love how it handles the native MOV files, no trans coding). I then use re-interrupt footage at 24p or use the speed tool at 40% (exactly 24p). I can't tell which method is better, but just based on the terminology I think interrupting footage is the better method. But I've used both in the same timeline/sequence and couldn't tell the difference.

If you want to see some footage, send me a pm. Its a private youtube link so I can't really just post it for sharing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top