[videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering
hey thanks for all the info. what a pain. i'll stick with my XHA1 my Canon HV20, 2 months old, is now for sale. thx, eric.
[videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering
Yeah man. It's a drag, but considering that you can buy at least *FOUR* HV20s for the price of one XHA1, it's clearly the way to go for the budget-conscious that are willing to deal with the extra hassle. Bill Cammack http://billcammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Eric Rochow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hey thanks for all the info. what a pain. i'll stick with my XHA1 my Canon HV20, 2 months old, is now for sale. thx, eric.
[videoblogging] lapel mic advice needed
My job is increasingly about running around the world videotaping stuff for Sun, and I now have the opportunity to upgrade my kit (see http://blogs.sun.com/deirdre/entry/my_videoblogging_rig for what I currently have). I'd like to add a set of decent lapel mics, but need to strike a balance between quality and size/weight - I don't have a crew to carry equipment for me! Suggestions/experiences welcome. -- best regards, Deirdré Straughan living travelling in Italy (and other Countries Beginning with I) www.beginningwithi.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] You Tube user turns the tables, sues UMG for issuing takedown notice...
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Brook Hinton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/19/BUDH11RKQ9.DTLtsp=1 Could set precedent requiring consideration of likely fair use claims before takedowns. this is such a good story: There must be some requirement that a copyright owner both consider fair uses and determine honestly whether they exist before sending their (takedown) notice, Lenz's lawyer, Corynne McSherry, said in court papers. She said the video, which focuses on the toddler and contains only a snippet of the song, couldn't have any conceivable impact on the market Universal's copyright was meant to protect. But Fogel, at Friday's hearing, said he was concerned that requiring copyright holders to consider the possibility of fair use before ordering a takedown puts judges in the business of trying to read their minds and seems to be an expansion of the 1998 law. Universal's lawyer, Kelly Klaus, argued that even brief homemade videos have a potential commercial effect if they proliferate on a site like YouTube and that Lenz's posting flies in the face of the 1998 law, which allows copyright holders to order removal of work believed to be an infringement. Fogel observed, however, that the law is intended to prevent misuse of takedown notices. The Lenz video can be viewed at links.sfgate.com/ZEGD. -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering
1) I've only used a PAL HV20, but even with the US version, you don't *have* to shoot in Progressive, do you? It's just an option, isn't it? (And one that Canon has failed to implement properly - with no pulldown flags) So surely you can just shoot in the normal 60i mode without all this trouble and then add a film effect at the end? 2) I know the PAL version of the HV20 has a 25P option instead of 24P and I'm pretty sure that with 25P you don't have to go through this ridiculous circus. I don't see any reason why anyone should care whether they're shooting on PAL or NTSC for web use (or even for broadcast - you can export any res/format you like) - so perhaps if you *really* want to shoot in Progressive mode for whatever reason, it's a good idea to buy a European HV20 or HV30 from somewhere like Amazon.co.uk or Ebay. Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. I don't have a deep technical knowledge. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 22-Jul-08, at 7:43 AM, Eric Rochow wrote: hey thanks for all the info. what a pain. i'll stick with my XHA1 my Canon HV20, 2 months old, is now for sale. thx, eric. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Today the tape died - Canon HF11 HG11
Just saw this, posted today about the new HG11 and HF11 Canon HDD AVCHD cameras rivalling HV20 30 for quality. Her thoughts: Today the tape died, as far as I am concerned, with this fall of the HV20/30. http://eugenia.gnomefiles.org/2008/07/22/consumer-avchd-caught-up- with-the-hv2030/ Consumer AVCHD caught up with the HV20/30 Posted on Tue 22 Jul 2008 As I have said many times in the past, the HV20/30 are the best consumer cameras in terms of picture quality. Various high-end AVCHD models (HF100, SR11/SR12, SD9) tried to compete this year with the HV series, but they were still lacking that bit of extra quality that you can squeeze out of the HV20/30. Well, thats all the past now. Canon has just announced in Japan two new models, the HF11 and the HG11, which can record in 24mbps AVC, which is the highest bitrate that the AVCHD standard is asking for (higher bitrate is used by some prosumer camcorders, but thats not part of the official standard). With the HF11 and HG11 recording at full [EMAIL PROTECTED] MPEG4-AVC, the HV20/30 with its [EMAIL PROTECTED] MPEG-2 has no chance in hell to keep the reigns any longer. Today the tape died, as far as I am concerned, with this fall of the HV20/30. The HF11 is largely the same camera model as the HF10, but the HG11 was completely reworked compared to the HG10. It has a brand new body, better lens, better usability, 120 GB drive with ability to also record in SD card, 12x zoom instead of 10x. I would have considered the HG11 if it wasnt for the stupidity of Canon of going down to 37mm filter thread, and not staying with HG10s 43mm. I have a gazillion accessories for the HV20 that would have work with any 43mm camera. Step-down rings are not good in my case as large and heavy lenses and adapters would break the step-down ring and the cameras filter thread if I was to mount them in the HG11. It sucks to be stuck in something as trivial as a filter thread. - Typical Canon stupidity in screwing up a small detail like the filter thread. I love Canon, but they always do stuff like this (like leaving out the pulldown flags on NTSC HV20 or any number of small, needless but significant annoyances on the XL1) and it drives me nuts. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Things are changing for real.....(?)
Another doomsday scenario: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20330.htm *Adam Quirk* / Wreck Salvage http://wreckandsalvage.com / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / +1 551.208.4644 (m) / imbullemhead (aim) On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm surprised it got this far as well, but I still worry.they may not be able to block traffic but I do see the day when we are paying for what we download and I see the Verizon's, comcast, time warner, ATT etc somehow making their own content exempt from the bandwith consumption and making deals with other content providers who only produce professional content and that will all but kill user gen content yeah...I probably spoke too soon: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080716-martin-be-damned-cable-isps-want-network-management-freedom.html Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: Things are changing for real.....(?)
They try this, they won't know what hit them. I like how the article says Canada is a good test case because Canadians are more laissez faire and less politically motivated. Not my experience of Canada so far. They might seem laid back, but poke them with a stick and they're like hornets. And people here seem more reliant on the internet for communication and information than those in countries with greater population density. Britain would be a better test case. People are less gung ho about new technology computers there. Except there are 1000s of ISPs, and they all compete to offer more freedom and goodies. And even in Britain, when 3 mobile tried to do this with internet access on their 3G phones in England, it didn't work and they had to open it up so they could compete with Vodafone O2. AOL died in the UK for much the same reason. Wherever it's tried where there's competition, it won't work. Where I am on Vancouver Island, Telus and Shaw compete pretty aggressively with both rival ADSL Cable services available to most households. Whoever tries to introduce this kind of bullshit will lose most of their customers to a competitor who offers a better deal. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 22-Jul-08, at 9:56 AM, Adam Quirk wrote: Another doomsday scenario: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20330.htm *Adam Quirk* / Wreck Salvage http://wreckandsalvage.com / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / +1 551.208.4644 (m) / imbullemhead (aim) On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:36 AM, Jay dedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 6:57 AM, Heath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm surprised it got this far as well, but I still worry.they may not be able to block traffic but I do see the day when we are paying for what we download and I see the Verizon's, comcast, time warner, ATT etc somehow making their own content exempt from the bandwith consumption and making deals with other content providers who only produce professional content and that will all but kill user gen content yeah...I probably spoke too soon: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080716-martin-be-damned- cable-isps-want-network-management-freedom.html Jay -- http://jaydedman.com 917 371 6790 Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering
You're absolutely right, Rupert... However, in Eric's situation, he bought the HV20 to be a b-roll camera for his Canon XHA1. The reason he has to shoot 24p with the HV20 is to match the footage from the XHA1. Otherwise, he'd be able to skip 24p and shoot 60i and not have to deal with any extra conversion, time or drive space. It's one of those pre-production decisions that kind of snowballs or cascades. Once you decide to shoot your shows in a certain way, you have to get equipment that matches those particular specs or change your show so that you can utilize the features that are common to your new and old equipment. Bill Cammack http://billcammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1) I've only used a PAL HV20, but even with the US version, you don't *have* to shoot in Progressive, do you? It's just an option, isn't it? (And one that Canon has failed to implement properly - with no pulldown flags) So surely you can just shoot in the normal 60i mode without all this trouble and then add a film effect at the end? 2) I know the PAL version of the HV20 has a 25P option instead of 24P and I'm pretty sure that with 25P you don't have to go through this ridiculous circus. I don't see any reason why anyone should care whether they're shooting on PAL or NTSC for web use (or even for broadcast - you can export any res/format you like) - so perhaps if you *really* want to shoot in Progressive mode for whatever reason, it's a good idea to buy a European HV20 or HV30 from somewhere like Amazon.co.uk or Ebay. Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. I don't have a deep technical knowledge. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 22-Jul-08, at 7:43 AM, Eric Rochow wrote: hey thanks for all the info. what a pain. i'll stick with my XHA1 my Canon HV20, 2 months old, is now for sale. thx, eric. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering
ahhh. bummer. what are they thinking, making 24P so much hard work for North American users? On 22-Jul-08, at 10:21 AM, Bill Cammack wrote: You're absolutely right, Rupert... However, in Eric's situation, he bought the HV20 to be a b-roll camera for his Canon XHA1. The reason he has to shoot 24p with the HV20 is to match the footage from the XHA1. Otherwise, he'd be able to skip 24p and shoot 60i and not have to deal with any extra conversion, time or drive space. It's one of those pre-production decisions that kind of snowballs or cascades. Once you decide to shoot your shows in a certain way, you have to get equipment that matches those particular specs or change your show so that you can utilize the features that are common to your new and old equipment. Bill Cammack http://billcammack.com --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1) I've only used a PAL HV20, but even with the US version, you don't *have* to shoot in Progressive, do you? It's just an option, isn't it? (And one that Canon has failed to implement properly - with no pulldown flags) So surely you can just shoot in the normal 60i mode without all this trouble and then add a film effect at the end? 2) I know the PAL version of the HV20 has a 25P option instead of 24P and I'm pretty sure that with 25P you don't have to go through this ridiculous circus. I don't see any reason why anyone should care whether they're shooting on PAL or NTSC for web use (or even for broadcast - you can export any res/format you like) - so perhaps if you *really* want to shoot in Progressive mode for whatever reason, it's a good idea to buy a European HV20 or HV30 from somewhere like Amazon.co.uk or Ebay. Correct me if I'm wrong about any of this. I don't have a deep technical knowledge. Rupert http://twittervlog.tv On 22-Jul-08, at 7:43 AM, Eric Rochow wrote: hey thanks for all the info. what a pain. i'll stick with my XHA1 my Canon HV20, 2 months old, is now for sale. thx, eric. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering and a 24p rant
What they're thinking is they want you to buy an XHA1. The HV20 is one of those classic oops, we made a strictly non-pro item a little too good events (kind of like DV). It was never intended to become the low-cost hdv equivalent to a bolex for low-end pros or even a b-roll camera. But its image quality, sensor, low light performance, relatively (compared to Sony at least) acceptable mic preamp (you'd never know it from the horrid onboard mics) and, once you learn the tricks, manual capability made it the biggest camcorder-suitable-for-filmmakers bargain in history. But since it was never intended to be a pro or even high end prosumer camera, the 24p feature is designed to be used as is - with pulldown added to fit a 29.97 frame rate, just like film telecine'd to video. The higher end cameras that shoot 24p have flags built it to the datastream that, with the right software, make it possible to remove pulldown on capture, leaving you with a 23.98 file. Using the HV20 professionally - and 24p is really not a consumer format - means tweaking and hacking and working around the limitations of a consumer camera that has enough positive qualities (not the least of which is price) to make that process worthwhile for many. And now the 24p rant, so move on if you aren't interested! 24p is also something of a universal format. It can be converted to 29.97 NTSC, to PAL, to film, to higher end digital formats, all without any motion degradation. In this regard it is somewhat unique - 25p/PAL is close, but while 24p has to be sped up to 25p for one of these format conversions (to PAL), 24p only has to have a speed change for its PAL conversion - the others can be handled via pulldown. 30p, on the other hand, cannot be transferred to PAL or to 24p HD formats without serious motion degradation or softening. Even 60i is better for these. 30p means you are NTSC or the Web, for good, forever. It's less hassle, but less flexible. But Rupert's right. If your just shooting for the web none of this matters much - except for 3rd party flash transcodes. Different places (blip, vimeo, youtube, etc) transcode to different frame rates, and this can cause all kinds of weirdness. A [EMAIL PROTECTED] file on vimeo HD is going to look really really weird. But a 24p file @24p, which will look great on vimeo hd, will look really weird in flash on blip (unless they've changed the way they do flash transcoding). Then there's the whole interlace artifact nightmare (at least in HD you can deinterlace for the web without much meaningful resolution loss - unless of course you're trying to serve hd as a final format.). I use 24p because of its flexibility, its efficiency for transcoding (progressive and fewer fps both make for better quality encodes at a given data rate), and because I like the slower motion signature. Heck, I like ONE fps in the right context, but never got used to 60i in any but the most pure content situations. Aesthetics is all about transformation of the real. 60i is much closer to the way our eye sees motion than slower motion signatures. Hence many of the aesthetic challenges of interlaced NTSC video. Brook _ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
Re: [videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering and a 24p rant
Wow - thanks, Brook. Clear and comprehensive. On 22-Jul-08, at 11:07 AM, Brook Hinton wrote: What they're thinking is they want you to buy an XHA1. The HV20 is one of those classic oops, we made a strictly non-pro item a little too good events (kind of like DV). It was never intended to become the low-cost hdv equivalent to a bolex for low-end pros or even a b-roll camera. But its image quality, sensor, low light performance, relatively (compared to Sony at least) acceptable mic preamp (you'd never know it from the horrid onboard mics) and, once you learn the tricks, manual capability made it the biggest camcorder-suitable-for-filmmakers bargain in history. But since it was never intended to be a pro or even high end prosumer camera, the 24p feature is designed to be used as is - with pulldown added to fit a 29.97 frame rate, just like film telecine'd to video. The higher end cameras that shoot 24p have flags built it to the datastream that, with the right software, make it possible to remove pulldown on capture, leaving you with a 23.98 file. Using the HV20 professionally - and 24p is really not a consumer format - means tweaking and hacking and working around the limitations of a consumer camera that has enough positive qualities (not the least of which is price) to make that process worthwhile for many. And now the 24p rant, so move on if you aren't interested! 24p is also something of a universal format. It can be converted to 29.97 NTSC, to PAL, to film, to higher end digital formats, all without any motion degradation. In this regard it is somewhat unique - 25p/PAL is close, but while 24p has to be sped up to 25p for one of these format conversions (to PAL), 24p only has to have a speed change for its PAL conversion - the others can be handled via pulldown. 30p, on the other hand, cannot be transferred to PAL or to 24p HD formats without serious motion degradation or softening. Even 60i is better for these. 30p means you are NTSC or the Web, for good, forever. It's less hassle, but less flexible. But Rupert's right. If your just shooting for the web none of this matters much - except for 3rd party flash transcodes. Different places (blip, vimeo, youtube, etc) transcode to different frame rates, and this can cause all kinds of weirdness. A [EMAIL PROTECTED] file on vimeo HD is going to look really really weird. But a 24p file @24p, which will look great on vimeo hd, will look really weird in flash on blip (unless they've changed the way they do flash transcoding). Then there's the whole interlace artifact nightmare (at least in HD you can deinterlace for the web without much meaningful resolution loss - unless of course you're trying to serve hd as a final format.). I use 24p because of its flexibility, its efficiency for transcoding (progressive and fewer fps both make for better quality encodes at a given data rate), and because I like the slower motion signature. Heck, I like ONE fps in the right context, but never got used to 60i in any but the most pure content situations. Aesthetics is all about transformation of the real. 60i is much closer to the way our eye sees motion than slower motion signatures. Hence many of the aesthetic challenges of interlaced NTSC video. Brook _ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[videoblogging] Re: HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering and a 24p rant
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Brook Hinton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What they're thinking is they want you to buy an XHA1. lol, Absolutely. Spot-On. THAT'S the bottom line. :) The HV20 is one of those classic oops, we made a strictly non-pro item a little too good events (kind of like DV). It was never intended to become the low-cost hdv equivalent to a bolex for low-end pros or even a b-roll camera. But its image quality, sensor, low light performance, relatively (compared to Sony at least) acceptable mic preamp (you'd never know it from the horrid onboard mics) and, once you learn the tricks, manual capability made it the biggest camcorder-suitable-for-filmmakers bargain in history. Agreed. But since it was never intended to be a pro or even high end prosumer camera, the 24p feature is designed to be used as is - with pulldown added to fit a 29.97 frame rate, just like film telecine'd to video. The higher end cameras that shoot 24p have flags built it to the datastream that, with the right software, make it possible to remove pulldown on capture, leaving you with a 23.98 file. Using the HV20 professionally - and 24p is really not a consumer format - means tweaking and hacking and working around the limitations of a consumer camera that has enough positive qualities (not the least of which is price) to make that process worthwhile for many. And now the 24p rant, so move on if you aren't interested! 24p is also something of a universal format. It can be converted to 29.97 NTSC, to PAL, to film, to higher end digital formats, all without any motion degradation. In this regard it is somewhat unique - 25p/PAL is close, but while 24p has to be sped up to 25p for one of these format conversions (to PAL), 24p only has to have a speed change for its PAL conversion - the others can be handled via pulldown. 30p, on the other hand, cannot be transferred to PAL or to 24p HD formats without serious motion degradation or softening. Even 60i is better for these. 30p means you are NTSC or the Web, for good, forever. It's less hassle, but less flexible. But Rupert's right. If your just shooting for the web none of this matters much - except for 3rd party flash transcodes. Different places (blip, vimeo, youtube, etc) transcode to different frame rates, and this can cause all kinds of weirdness. A [EMAIL PROTECTED] file on vimeo HD is going to look really really weird. But a 24p file @24p, which will look great on vimeo hd, will look really weird in flash on blip (unless they've changed the way they do flash transcoding). Then there's the whole interlace artifact nightmare (at least in HD you can deinterlace for the web without much meaningful resolution loss - unless of course you're trying to serve hd as a final format.). I used 24p on the blip shows for two reasons, style of motion and low light performance. 24p on the HV20 gets you better performance in low light, and since I was shooting without lights, it made it easier for me to set up a decent-looking shot. Having done 20-some-odd episodes in 24p (except for the Grace Piper interview, where I shot 29.97 and in aperture mode in order to match the second camera I used for the video http://blip.tv/file/1044561/ ), my advice is to NOT SHOOT IN 24p unless it's necessary for your style. Loading 10 minutes of footage and then re-encoding that same 10 minutes of footage takes up time and drive space. As far as blip's flash conversion, I make my own FLVs with VisualHub and upload them to blip at the same time I load my mp4 file, so they look and move exactly the way I'd like them to. Again, as I mentioned in my response to Rupert's question, this is the kind of thing you want to figure out before you start shooting a show so you don't change the look/feel of it mid-stream. It all depends (with the HV20, anyway) if you're going for style or speed. If you have all the extra time and drive space, do your thing with 24p. :) Otherwise, shoot 1080/60i. Bill Cammack http://billcammack.com I use 24p because of its flexibility, its efficiency for transcoding (progressive and fewer fps both make for better quality encodes at a given data rate), and because I like the slower motion signature. Heck, I like ONE fps in the right context, but never got used to 60i in any but the most pure content situations. Aesthetics is all about transformation of the real. 60i is much closer to the way our eye sees motion than slower motion signatures. Hence many of the aesthetic challenges of interlaced NTSC video. Brook _ Brook Hinton film/video/audio art www.brookhinton.com studio vlog/blog: www.brookhinton.com/temporalab
[videoblogging] Re: lapel mic advice needed
I love these. I use them all the time. Light. Great quality and easy to use. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/324228- REG/Sennheiser_EW100ENGG2_B_Evolution_G2_100_Series.html Kerry
Re: [videoblogging] HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering
Michael, can you recommend any books for me to read on what you just commented on? Jimmy CraicHead TV Video Podcast about Sailing, Travel, Craic and Cocktails www.jchtv.com --- On Mon, 7/21/08, Michael Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Michael Verdi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [videoblogging] HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, July 21, 2008, 6:18 PM So here's the deal... The Canon HV20 really does shoot in 24P - it just does it in a weird way. The stuttering you are seeing is partly because that's what 24P looks like compared to 60i and partly because you have to do a reverse telecine to put the progressive frames back in order. Here's my shorthand notes on how to do it: Ok, it seems that FCP (at least v 5.1.4) doesn't support the 24p mode of this camera. There is a way to make it work but it's a pain in the ass and you probably don't want to do it unless you're a little crazy like me. Here's how it goes: I had to make my own easy setup in FCP that looks like this: Sequence Preset - take the HDV 1080p24 preset, duplicate it and change the compressor to Apple Intermediate Codec. Helps to give it a snappy name like AIC 1080p24 Capture Preset - HDV - Apple Intermediate Codec Device Control Preset - HDV Firewire Basic The crappy part (at least I think so - maybe not a problem for you) is that you can't log capture - it just lets you name your clip and it starts recording. So it's kind of like iMovie here. Then once you've captured your clips (if you stopped and started recording on the tape you must make a new clip), you have to open them in QT Pro and figure out the pulldown cadence, ie, interlaced frame, interlaced frame, progressive frame, progressive frame, progressive frame. There are these possibilities: p-p-i-i-p p-i-i-p-p i-p-p-p-i p-p-p-i-i i-i-p-p-p If you find that the clip is that last one, i-i-p-p-p, then you have to remove those beginning interlaced frames by using the arrow keys to move through those first frames till you hit the first progressive frame, then hit 'o' then apple x and then save. Now this clip is p-p-p-i-i. Ok then open up Cinema Tools. and open a clip. The go to the Clip menu and select Reverse Telecine. Here are the settings Capture Mode: F1-F2 File: New (smaller) Conform to: 24.0 Standard upper/lower (checked) Fields: p-p-i-i-p = AA p-i-i-p-p = BB i-p-p-p-i = BC p-p-p-i-i = CD Style 1 on the drop down. Click Ok to start the process. Then back in FCP import your new 24p clips and stick them on your new AIC 1080p24 sequence! Exporting once you're done editing Now for some reason exporting using quicktime conversion to apple tv or ipod get's all messed up. So instead, export as a QuickTime Movie (it can be a reference movie if you want) and then open that up with QuickTime Pro. Then export for Apple TV and iPod and you will be amazed. BTW, the Apple TV export will be at 1280 X 720! Verdi On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 4:47 PM, Eric Rochow [EMAIL PROTECTED] tv wrote: hi all not sure what i'm doing wrong all of a sudden. i'm asking if any of you have suggested export - compressor settings for this setup. I'm shooting on a Canon HV20, in the '24P' mode ( which isn't really 24P ) editing in FInal cut 5.4 on a 1080 60i timeline exporting to Compressor using iPod setting and Apple TV setting and I keep getting this weird stutter - frame sync problem. you can watch a clip here: http://tinyurl. com/6oxo4g http://realworldgre en.com/RWG_ sprinkler_ timer.mp4 does anyone else shoot on an HV20 in the 24P/film mode and export to iTunes via FCP Compressor? thx, eric. - - -- Yahoo! Groups Links -- http://graymattergr avy.com http://reportsfromt hefuture. com http://michaelverdi .com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [videoblogging] HV20+Compressor+m4v = frame stuttering
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 8:05 PM, John Coffey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael, can you recommend any books for me to read on what you just commented on? I don't personally know of any/haven't really looked for any. Usually, for info on the latest, latest stuff - Google is your friend. That's how I came up with my little formula. - Verdi
Re: [videoblogging] lapel mic advice needed
What's your budget? :) Jan On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Deirdre Straughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My job is increasingly about running around the world videotaping stuff for Sun, and I now have the opportunity to upgrade my kit (see http://blogs.sun.com/deirdre/entry/my_videoblogging_rig for what I currently have). I'd like to add a set of decent lapel mics, but need to strike a balance between quality and size/weight - I don't have a crew to carry equipment for me! Suggestions/experiences welcome. -- best regards, Deirdré Straughan living travelling in Italy (and other Countries Beginning with I) www.beginningwithi.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links -- Jan McLaughlin Production Sound Mixer air = 862-571-5334 aim = janofsound skype = janmclaughlin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
