GH13 What is best render (GH1/GH2) output in Sony Vegas to be viewed on High Quality TV

M

meinyvr

Active member
What is best render settings (GH1/GH2) output in Sony Vegas to be viewed on High Quality TV?

I have a hacked GH camera and it looks great on the tv via the raw MTS file; but when I edit it in Vegas pro it just does not look as sharp.

I've been using the mainconcept AVC setting at 15 000 bitrate. However my MTS files are well over 40 000-50 000 bitrate scenes.

Can some suggest a solution; I don't mind big files. I just want to see high quality on the TV.

Thanks
 
Thru a media box, asus. via hdmi.

ps...most footage is 720p 60fps...but when rendering it seems like render wants to change fps to 30..issues with that - shouldn't it maintain the fps as the original recording - if it drops fps to 30..won't it be jerky?
 
Last edited:
If you're going to render out to h.264, I'd put the bitrate higher. Try 30,000kbps. At least.

I'd prefer to use the avid DNXHD codec, if the media box will play it. The file sizes are much bigger, but the quality is basically lossless. The codec is free, just google it.
 
thanks DBP; what about the frame rates..i shot it in 720p 60fps...do i keep it as that in the render..it seems to want to default to 29.97
 
meinyvr said:
thanks DBP; what about the frame rates..i shot it in 720p 60fps...do i keep it as that in the render..it seems to want to default to 29.97
Click to expand...

I would keep it at 60 if you want 60. Technically it'd be 59.94fps. Your device might not be able to play that back, though I would imagine it should be able to, since that's one of the HD standards. Make sure your TV is set to 720p for playback, as there is no 1080 60p playback on any TV, to the best of my knowledge.

peximus said:
@DBP do you use the avid DNXHD codec as an edit format or final output format?
Click to expand...

Right now, both. I always use it as a final output format. Sometimes I'll transcode to it prior to editing, and sometimes I won't. Depends on the project. I find myself transcoding to DNXHD prior to editing more and more with the hacked GH2 files. Even on my system, which is quite fast, the raw MTS hacked files are quite sluggish.
 
@DBP Thanks bro. Conceivably, could you convert to DNXHD prior to edit, and then use the replace footage function in AE/PP just prior to final output to replace with the original MTS files..... and then convert to DNXHD for the final output? Would that extra step be worth it in terms of retaining most of the original quality?
 
peximus said:
@DBP Thanks bro. Conceivably, could you convert to DNXHD prior to edit, and then use the replace footage function in AE/PP just prior to final output to replace with the original MTS files..... and then convert to DNXHD for the final output? Would that extra step be worth it in terms of retaining most of the original quality?
Click to expand...

You could that. I found with lower bitrate files, like the 24mbps files from my HMC150, I got slightly better quality by using the original MTS files. This was mostly to do with anti aliasing on certain objects when color correcting.

With the GH2 hacked files, which for me are 100mbps, transcoding has no visual loss. And I've zoomed in like 400% to check. Even with the 150 files, the difference is pretty negligible. Editing the raw MTS files on my sandy bridge 2600k processor isn't too bad though. Chugging through the GH2 files is a different story however.
 
DBP said:
You could that. I found with lower bitrate files, like the 24mbps files from my HMC150, I got slightly better quality by using the original MTS files. This was mostly to do with anti aliasing on certain objects when color correcting.

With the GH2 hacked files, which for me are 100mbps, transcoding has no visual loss. And I've zoomed in like 400% to check. Even with the 150 files, the difference is pretty negligible. Editing the raw MTS files on my sandy bridge 2600k processor isn't too bad though. Chugging through the GH2 files is a different story however.
Click to expand...

hmmm...that sorta makes sense, although in my brain (i am still new to this), the higher the bit rate of the original files, the more difficult it would be to transcode losslessly (or close to lossless) without equally difficult to edit output. But, I'll take your word for it and do some tests myself..... I do have one or two last questions: Which encoder do you prefer when transcoding to DNXHD? I know Adobe Media Encoder is a little shaky sometimes, but do you think AME could handle the task? Also, what are your thoughts on Cineform Neoscene? I bought Neoscene when i was using a 5dMkII, and have been toying around with the MTS files. Seems decent and I haven't been able to see too much loss, but its been difficult for me to understand which is the best way to go.... I tried 5dtoRGB but I wasn't in love with that..... i am on windows so ProRes is a no go for me... Any suggestions?

Thanks a bunch for answering my questions, and I promise no more...lol!
 
peximus said:
hmmm...that sorta makes sense, although in my brain (i am still new to this), the higher the bit rate of the original files, the more difficult it would be to transcode losslessly (or close to lossless) without equally difficult to edit output. But, I'll take your word for it and do some tests myself..... I do have one or two last questions: Which encoder do you prefer when transcoding to DNXHD? I know Adobe Media Encoder is a little shaky sometimes, but do you think AME could handle the task? Also, what are your thoughts on Cineform Neoscene? I bought Neoscene when i was using a 5dMkII, and have been toying around with the MTS files. Seems decent and I haven't been able to see too much loss, but its been difficult for me to understand which is the best way to go.... I tried 5dtoRGB but I wasn't in love with that..... i am on windows so ProRes is a no go for me... Any suggestions?

Thanks a bunch for answering my questions, and I promise no more...lol!
Click to expand...

Haha no worries man. I was actually going to suggest 5DtoRGB until you mentioned you weren't a fan. How come? The only thing I don't like is that there's no way to batch encode in windows. I've used cineform. Actually, now that you mention it, that's what I used to test against my native HMC150 files. So what I said about the HMC150 native files vs transcoding may not apply to DNXHD. Never tested it.

Cineform is easy to use, encodes very fast, edits very fast and the quality is good. Two thumbs up. Only downside is that it costs, compared to DNXHD + 5DtoRGB.

The reason higher data rate files transcode with better quality is because there's more data there to begin with. With AVCHD files that are 24mbps, they're already pretty highly compressed. Since transcoding is throwing away more info (even if it's a small amount), the image is affected more than it would be with a source file so that's compressed so much less. High data rate codecs like cineform and DNXHD are generally harder on the harddisks, but much easier on the processor...whereas AVCHD and other highly compressed codecs are the opposite...easy on the disk, very hard on the processor. DNXHD/Cineform are much more friendly to older systems.

Oh, and yes AME could transcode to to DNXHD or Cineform no problem. I'd just make sure that Maximum Render Quality and Maximum Bit depth are checked.
 
I download the avid codec and installed it on my windows machine; but it's not showing up as a render option....what did i do wrong?
 
meinyvr said:
I download the avid codec and installed it on my windows machine; but it's not showing up as a render option....what did i do wrong?
Click to expand...

ahh..i had to install stupid quiktime (i hate apple btw)...and it worked but my files are HUGE..10x larger the mts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top