to cut .mov without re-encoding software suggestions please

[kimberley]

I want to cut out the good bits from my .mov files

I have used quicktime pro which doesn't re-encode I suspect, but I cannot get precise cuts (always 4-5 seconds shorter end results than the previews) in quicktime


can you suggest any free or trial versions of software I could use just to cut without re encode/render please

kind regards

 

[henryqiu]

Adobe or Vegas trial versions?

 

[kimberley]

I have adobe premiere cs4 trial as well as vegas 11 trial (just downloaded yesterday)

did you also mean I could cut out .mov files without reencoding with either of them if so, how please
(PS. I'm a beginner and not familiar with these programs)

 

[henryqiu]

Adobe or Vegas trial versions?

 

[kimberley]

both

and one more thing:

I've tried "allok video splitter 3.1.1117 11/17/2009" which has no new version or a new product which enables the video files to be cut without encoding

how can we trust this software with the latest video formats such as hd and full hd .mov files?


What difference it makes to ( the end result in the current formats such as full hd or hd cuts without re encoding process) to tick the "add letterbox to keep aspect ratio" or not ?


kind regards

 

[David W. Richardson]

You can cut .MOV files just fine in Sony Vegas. At least, I am able to in Vegas Pro 8.0c. Of course, in order to see the video in Vegas, you have to have the right codecs installed. But if you're able to see the video in Vegas, then cut it in the Trimmer or put it on the Timeline and cut it there. I'm not understanding the problem you're having.

 

[kimberley]

You can cut .MOV files just fine in Sony Vegas. At least, I am able to in Vegas Pro 8.0c. Of course, in order to see the video in Vegas, you have to have the right codecs installed. But if you're able to see the video in Vegas, then cut it in the Trimmer or put it on the Timeline and cut it there. I'm not understanding the problem you're having.

What I want is to cut .mov files without being reencoded, which means, some programs I used in the past re-encode the whole part I cut which is a problem because
1)it takes longer to process
2) end result has different details than the original part due to rendering

if you know for sure that cutting in vegas doesn't render/process the part I cut by re encoding, --> then, that's the outcome I want

my second question was about "allok video splitter 3.1.1117 11/17/2009" whether to tick the "add letterbox to keep aspect ratio" or not if you know the program and if you are only happy with the result of the program

all the best

 

[David W. Richardson]

What I want is to cut .mov files without being reencoded, which means, some programs I used in the past re-encode the whole part I cut which is a problem because
1)it takes longer to process
2) end result has different details than the original part due to rendering

if you know for sure that cutting in vegas doesn't render/process the part I cut by re encoding, --> then, that's the outcome I want

my second question was about "allok video splitter 3.1.1117 11/17/2009" whether to tick the "add letterbox to keep aspect ratio" or not if you know the program and if you are only happy with the result of the program

all the best

Okay, maybe I'm not grasping what you're after here. Lord knows I'm no expert on some of this stuff.

When I edit .MOV files, I put them straight down on the timeline and trim them to suit. Or I pull them into the Trimmer, trim them there, then put them onto the timeline. If there's any encoding going on in that process, I'm not aware of it.

A lot of people are annoyed by the jerky preview playback from the timeline of HD files. I get that, since I'm not using a particularly high powered computer. The only solutions I know of for that problem are to either use proxy files, or use Selective Pre-render on small sections of the video on the timeline to make it more easily previewed. Or, of course, buy a high powered computer to edit on.

Naturally, rendering the edited video OUT from the timeline typically involves some kind encoding, though there are formats and options that render "uncompressed". The experts here can tell you whether or not "uncompressed" equates to "not encoded". I would assume it does, but I've been wrong before.

Best of luck!

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

What I want is to cut .mov files without being reencoded, which means, some programs I used in the past re-encode the whole part I cut which is a problem because
1)it takes longer to process
2) end result has different details than the original part due to rendering

I don't believe Premiere does a 'cut without recompression', at least with many codecs. The problem is that because the media is compressed 'now', the editor, to get frame by frame cutting capability has to decompress to full frames, then, once the edit/cut has been made, must then 'recompress' to the desired codec.

The only way you would have the ability to 'cut' without recompression, is if you had output the media in a form that was an 'uncompressed' format, or a sequence of JPEG/TIFF/JPEG2000 images, which are 'intraframe' compressed, but not timewise compressed. And that is just for a 'straight' cut, no transition or effects, and closely matches the olden days of splicing segments of movie film together at specific frames, with tape or glue...

There may be other codecs that do that, but I don't know which.

Definitely any thing that has been compressed to consumer codecs such as AVCHD, H.264, etc. have been compressed 'timewise' and need to be decompressed, and recompressed, as required.

The way Quicktime Pro may work is that it will only allow a 'cut' on a compression boundary that is 'good', so one may have up to seconds of slop for cuts as you have noted.

 

[Noiz2]

Lets get some basics down.

First QuickTime is NOT a video format. It is a wrapper that can include anything from an MP3 sound only file to a 4K video file with multiple channels.

Second many video formats are compressed (h.264 for instance), these will always need to be rendered because the frames are built consecutively in a very specific way. You my not notice that it is re-rendering but it is.

Time should be quite minimal unless you are changing format or doing some other video processing (fades, color correction,...). And should have NO effect on the look if it is just edits.

So if you are getting long render times and a change in the look/ quality I would bet $$$ you are transcoding to another format unintentionally.

You need to set all this up in the NLE you are using so that your output format, aspect ratio, frame rate, et all are all the same as you raw footage.

As to free. You seem to be on a Mac so iMovie generally comes with the computer and may even come with OS updates. If not it's part of the "iLife" bundle for like $50. QTpro doesn't exist anymore so that isn't an option. If your on a PC??? I'm sure there are free/ cheap options.

 

[kimberley]

Definitely any thing that has been compressed to consumer codecs such as AVCHD, H.264, etc. have been compressed 'timewise' and need to be decompressed, and recompressed, as required.

Thank you 1clark@ucsd.edu for the excellent coverage.
I appreciate very much.

Does that mean a kind of bad news that we can never (almost) have a cut part which is identical to the original quality we have filmed in the first place ?
Does the quality of the "original take" degrades after the cut?

That's a really concern when re-encode "degrades" the "original take"

that was kind of my starting point to try to find the best "cutter" in order not to loose any quality before starting the full edit process

what are your thoughts on that please ?

can you suggest a better cutting program which doesn't degrades the quality of the original through rendering/re-encoding, ideally without rendering/re-encoding, please ?

 

[kimberley]

You need to set all this up in the NLE you are using so that your output format, aspect ratio, frame rate, et all are all the same as you raw footage.

QTpro doesn't exist anymore so that isn't an option. If your on a PC??? I'm sure there are free/ cheap options.

Thank you Noiz2 for helping me out on my second endevour. I've learned so much in such a short time from you I could never know otherwise.

I don't want my raw footage - (that's a better term than my explanation in the previous message) to be degraded in anyway with this simple cut process if I could get away with it

Because the real edit will start after I simple cut & collect these good bits from my raw footage

And the real edit will involve vegas or adobe which will definitely render/re-encode, thus change the raw footage quality if I am not mistaken

I'll appreciate any suggestions you could make under these circumstances, very much

kind regards

(PS. I am a pc user and I believe QT pro still exists in my pc -even if it may not available in anywhere else- if I am not mistaken

 

[kgimedia]

Your issue seems to be you used to cut with Quicktime Pro but your new raw footage is compressed differently so QT Pro is not frame accurate. Adobe Premiere CS5 or higher will work but it will be much more complicated then cutting with Quicktime Pro. The problem is your source footage. If you need quick edits without transcoding then you need to use a camera with a different compression/codec.

 

[kimberley]

Your issue seems to be you used to cut with Quicktime Pro but your new raw footage is compressed differently so QT Pro is not frame accurate. Adobe Premiere CS5 or higher will work but it will be much more complicated then cutting with Quicktime Pro. The problem is your source footage. If you need quick edits without transcoding then you need to use a camera with a different compression/codec.

Thank you kgimedia,

I am afraid I cannot change the camera or the source footage for now or in the very near future

by the way,

1) I am experimenting the MPEG_Streamclip_1.2 to cut at present and I'm not 100% sure if my cut output with MPEG_Streamclip_1.2 is somehow degraded or not

2) I may not be able to use Adobe Premiere CS5. I may have to settle with CS4 or Vegas 10 the latest, if I need to

all the best

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

Thank you kgimedia,

I am afraid I cannot change the camera or the source footage for now or in the very near future

by the way,

1) I am experimenting the MPEG_Streamclip_1.2 to cut at present and I'm not 100% sure if my cut output with MPEG_Streamclip_1.2 is somehow degraded or not

2) I may not be able to use Adobe Premiere CS5. I may have to settle with CS4 or Vegas 10 the latest, if I need to

all the best

Here's what I would suggest.

1) Acquire either CS5 Premiere, or Vegas of recent vintage. I've not used Vegas but there are people here that do, and seem to be pleased with it abilities.
2) Forget various 'widgetry' tools. I've looked at 'open source/free' video editors for years, and most of them fail to deliver even the basic stuff one would get form iMovie. If you are on a Mac, then perhaps getting iMovie would be good for your purposes.

3) Accept the fact that a 'compressed' format will have some loss. There are lossless compression techniques, but none in the 'consumer/prosumer' market, and even with 'high end' equipment there often is still the use of a 'lossy' compression codec.

Raw is expensive for transporting the data around, and raw is expensive to store... for the foreseeable future.

4) Given that the codec the camera produces has 'loss', don't introduce further loss by multiple recompressions. In the case of Premiere and I believe Vegas, while one is editing the material there is no 'further loss', the media is decompressed for frame by frame editing, then when the edits are done, effects, and transitions placed, the final result is compressed for the delivery format. Typically these days it is H.264 and in some 'container'.

Quicktime MOV is a 'container' format. That means there is a large number of codecs that can be placed in the file. One could have a series of lossless TIFF frames, Uncompressed "animation" codec frames, or H.264 frames. I'll not go into to depth about these, you should read up on them via Internet searches.

So, if you import your camera's media, say for the moment is AVCHD which is a popular format for low end cameras, you can maintain only one 'recompression' generation loss, or 'two' compression losses, from original 'image' to delivered 'viewing image'.

Now, you may not be aware of it, but back in the film film days, there were often 3-6 generations worth of 'loss' from the original negative to the print that was viewed in the theater. While the loss was minimized, when films began to be made with only one or two generations of loss from negative to projection print, 'defects' such as 'poor make up', or the like, began to be very noticeable.

With that in mind, if you keep the 'loss' to one generation beyond the original compressed camera media, you are doing as best as possible, and should not worry.

If the result is 'soft', or looks like there was 'loss', it is most likely due to other reasons such as 'poor lighting', camera stability, such as 'hand held', poor focus, such as the 'auto focus' decided that the subject you wanted, was not the focus point it 'selected'.

 

[J Davis]

+1 on what Noiz2 said, he is 100% correct.

There is one thing I will add. In FCP with an iFrame codec you can cut and place back into the container without re-encoding.

With premiere you can't --> LINK

 

[kimberley]

In case you have needed this info for any related suggestions/amendments

( I have amateur compact Nikon camera coolpix S8000 )

mediainfo view of a typical file example:

DSCN1001.MOV
Format : MPEG-4
Format profile : QuickTime
Codec ID : qt
File size : 465 MiB
Duration : 8mn 28s
Overall bit rate : 7 682 Kbps
NCDT : NCTG

Video
ID : 1
Format : AVC
Format/Info : Advanced Video Codec
Format profile : Main@L3.1
Format settings, CABAC : Yes
Format settings, ReFrames : 1 frame
Format settings, GOP : M=1, N=8
Codec ID : avc1
Codec ID/Info : Advanced Video Coding
Duration : 8mn 28s
Source duration : 8mn 28s
Bit rate : 7 545 Kbps
Width : 1 280 pixels
Height : 720 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 16:9
Frame rate mode : Constant
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Color space : YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth : 8 bits
Scan type : Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.273
Stream size : 457 MiB (98%)
Source stream size : 457 MiB
Language : English


Audio
ID : 2
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format profile : LC
Codec ID : 40
Duration : 8mn 28s
Bit rate mode : Constant
Bit rate : 128 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : Front: L R
Sampling rate : 48.0 KHz
Compression mode : Lossy
Stream size : 7.75 MiB (2%)
Language : English

ps
1) adobe cs5 does only support 64-bit I don't have.
2) I have a pc, so I cannot use imovie, if I am not mistaken
3) adobe cs4 does support my 32-bit pc, if I am not mistaken, so that could be the only version -cs4- I could use and I have a trial version
4) I have the latest vegas (10) trial

 

[j1clark@ucsd.edu]

ps
1) adobe cs5 does only support 64-bit I don't have.
2) I have a pc, so I cannot use imovie, if I am not mistaken
3) adobe cs4 does support my 32-bit pc, if I am not mistaken, so that could be the only version -cs4- I could use and I have a trial version
4) I have the latest vegas (10) trial

Then I'd suggest getting the pro package of Vegas. I've never used Vegas, but if 'price' is a sticking issue, then Vegas is cheaper than buying a new computer + CS5...CS5.5... CS6(whenever it comes out...).

The reason for this is, CS4 did not do well with AVCHD from the GH-1. There was an updated that did support AVCHD and play back during editing, but it never really got 'smooth', it was always sort of halting for me.

I think I recall people indicating they had better AVCHD playback from Vegas.

In your case, the MOV file is just a container, and the media is encoded using the AVC set of encodings. You also have a lower resolution than 1080... so you could play 'smoother' due to the use of 720p

 

[kimberley]

Noiz2:

"This (simple cuts) should have NO effect on the look if it is just edits"

That's a comforting news, somehow. I'll also have to reduce the 're-compressions' as much as I can, Thank you for that, Noiz2



j1clark:

I should remember all the essential information you have provide below, Thank you indeed:

"Accept the fact that a 'compressed' format will have some loss"

"Given that the codec the camera produces has 'loss', don't introduce further loss by multiple recompressions"

"Premiere and I believe Vegas, while one is editing the material there is no 'further loss', the media is decompressed for frame by frame editing, then when the edits are done, effects, and transitions placed, the final result is compressed for the delivery format"

with AVCHD (I guess this one as same as my avc1), you can maintain only one 'recompression' generation loss, or 'two' compression losses, from original 'image' to delivered 'viewing image'.

if you keep the 'loss' to one generation beyond the original compressed camera media, you are doing as best as possible, and should not worry.

I think I recall people indicating they had better AVCHD playback from Vegas.

the media is encoded using the AVC set of encodings, You also have a lower resolution than 1080... so you could play 'smoother' due to the use of 720p

I appreciate very much for all the above eye-opening information you have provided, j1clark

I'll try very hard to reduce the total 're-compression' generations to the minimum (say, no more than 2 max), by planning ahead enough as you have provided such very crucial facts/information

Thank you for helping me and offering me simply the best education I have in the field here

all the best

 

[blazer003]

For AVI files, virtualdub has the Direct Stream Copy option. That's what I want for my mts AVCHD files from my GH1 and GH2. And it's not the the interframe compression specifically, because XVID mpeg4 is an interframe codec as well, and VirtualDub has no problem chopping it up (maybe it just re-encodes those last few frames that wouldn't otherwise have the information, or maybe it changes the cut point to correspond with the GOP.) By doing this you're losing absolutely no quality as it is the exact data stream as before, just without the information around it. You could run these AVI clips through this process 1000 times and they would look the exact same.

With all the other methods mentioned (except for transcoding to ridiculously large lossless video files) you're going to get at least some compression data loss.

I would be greatly interested in a solution to this as well, whatever the approach.