HDV - FILM OUT

CJ Henke III · April 8, 2009

A feature was made with an FX-1. (HDV format) and edited together on a Premiere Pro system. Now it is currently getting post sound work done, but in order to help save time and money what should be done now.

Here are the scenarios that will shortly become real situations.

As you know the FX-1 records in 1440x1080i, Not 1920x1080 square pixels nor progressive.

For a film out it should be at least 2K, so how to go about the post workflow?

Examples, They could give it to the post house as is, which will not be cheap.

1. I could convert the final film in (print-lock) to ApplePro Res 422 (HQ) and save them some money, but should it be converted (using compressor) to 1920x1080?, or should it be up-resized before hand? Should it be placed in a specific codec (DPX, Cineon, Animation, ProRes, etc.)?

I am really just confused and post houses are not going to tell me information that will take added money away from their work flow.

So can someone help? Should it be in DVCProHD? etc. etc. etc.

The final film will need to be ready for a Print (film-out) and a HD version meeting broadcast and blueray requirements. Other then a (film-out) it will have to be ready for display on digital projects (which format is that).

Thanks, I hope this helps other forum readers in the future.

MichaelB · April 26, 2009

A feature was made with an FX-1. (HDV format) and edited together on a Premiere Pro system. Now it is currently getting post sound work done, but in order to help save time and money what should be done now.

Here are the scenarios that will shortly become real situations.

As you know the FX-1 records in 1440x1080i, Not 1920x1080 square pixels nor progressive.

For a film out it should be at least 2K, so how to go about the post workflow?

Examples, They could give it to the post house as is, which will not be cheap.

1. I could convert the final film in (print-lock) to ApplePro Res 422 (HQ) and save them some money, but should it be converted (using compressor) to 1920x1080?, or should it be up-resized before hand? Should it be placed in a specific codec (DPX, Cineon, Animation, ProRes, etc.)?

I am really just confused and post houses are not going to tell me information that will take added money away from their work flow.

So can someone help? Should it be in DVCProHD? etc. etc. etc.

The final film will need to be ready for a Print (film-out) and a HD version meeting broadcast and blueray requirements. Other then a (film-out) it will have to be ready for display on digital projects (which format is that).

Thanks, I hope this helps other forum readers in the future.

Has the film been color graded?

The least expensive way to submit a finished piece for filmout would be in an uncompressed quicktime format 1920x1080 23.98, broken down into 20 minute reels. Make sure audio matches and make sure there's a 2 pop and tail pop on each reel.

If it has been color graded (I assume in apple color?) it may be worth a day in the DI room or daVinci room to do a final pass. If that's not a possibility due to cost, the submitted quicktime would be shot out as is, using an inverse lut (lin to log).

The reason uncompressed works best is because it is most compatible, but also because you don't want to recompress hdv into another codec.

If you don't have a filmout house give us a call or send me a note.

Mike Brodersen

FotoKem

8188463101

CJ Henke III · April 30, 2009

Has the film been color graded?

The least expensive way to submit a finished piece for filmout would be in an uncompressed quicktime format 1920x1080 23.98, broken down into 20 minute reels. Make sure audio matches and make sure there's a 2 pop and tail pop on each reel.

If it has been color graded (I assume in apple color?) it may be worth a day in the DI room or daVinci room to do a final pass. If that's not a possibility due to cost, the submitted quicktime would be shot out as is, using an inverse lut (lin to log).

The reason uncompressed works best is because it is most compatible, but also because you don't want to recompress hdv into another codec.

If you don't have a filmout house give us a call or send me a note.

Mike Brodersen

FotoKem

8188463101

Yes the film has been color graded, but just exporting a 29.97, 30p or even 60i file to 23.98 would cause the footage to be jittery/ jerky right? wouldn't if have to go through a strong frame rate conversion in compressor or an alternative?

Thanks for the reply.

MichaelB · May 2, 2009

Yes the film has been color graded, but just exporting a 29.97, 30p or even 60i file to 23.98 would cause the footage to be jittery/ jerky right? wouldn't if have to go through a strong frame rate conversion in compressor or an alternative?

Thanks for the reply.

yes. if you did not shoot the images in 24p (in hdv it' essentially 59.94 with a 3/2 flag) then you need to do a conversion process. There is a methodology in compressor but it's very slow, like 30 to 1 ratio or something. You could also do a teranex realtime conversion, which is what we often do for this type of work. 60i to 24p is a tricky process.

Eugene Lehnert · May 6, 2009

If you shot true interlaced material I would use the Teranex to do the 60i to 23.98 conversion. If not you could find a house with a Snell & Willcox UKON to remove the 2:3 pulldown in real-time using a Film to SF conversion. This system is not perfect but this can detect imperfect 2:3 cadences and restore the video stream to a true 23.98 format. I would suggest running your textless film through the UKON then get the files back as Uncompressed 10-bit files or ProRes files and add any graphics on top of that stream for a true 24p look. You can get some bad frames on cuts using this method so you may have to import some shots through the UKON with handles.

You could also try and batch everything through compressor but that will take a long time. The UKON can work in real-time.

Remember the first reel should be no longer than 15 minutes due to trailers and other material that can be added to the print. You also have to find good places to cut. Scene breaks where audio does not carry over is a good place. Don't do it on a fade either. I think your audio has to trail after the picture ends though too.

Peter Moretti · May 6, 2009

Yes the film has been color graded, but just exporting a 29.97, 30p or even 60i file to 23.98 would cause the footage to be jittery/ jerky right? wouldn't if have to go through a strong frame rate conversion in compressor or an alternative?

Thanks for the reply.

I've used TMPGEnc Xpress 4.0 to convert 60i to 24P with great success. Also DVFilm's DVFilmmaker does a very good job, FWIU. I also have to think that FCP has a decent converter.

Now how that will effect matching your sound, I'm not sure. I imagine you should add the new sound mix before doing the frame rate conversion.

MichaelB,

BTW, does it matter if your given 23.976 or 24 fps QuickTimes?

Eugene Lehnert · May 6, 2009

I've used TMPGEnc Xpress 4.0 to convert 60i to 24P with great success. Also DVFilm's DVFilmmaker does a very good job, FWIU. I also have to think that FCP has a decent converter.

Now how that will effect matching your sound, I'm not sure. I imagine you should add the new sound mix before doing the frame rate conversion.

MichaelB,

BTW, does it matter if your given 23.976 or 24 fps QuickTimes?

DVFilmmaker is a decent converter but you need to work on clips individually. Cuts will create mixed frames. You can also do frame rate conversions with Shake or Compressor. I do not suggest using Final Cut Pro at all. If converted properly all the audio should match up. If your edit is at 29.97 or 59.94 you want to go to 23.98 files. Then the place doing the film out will play back the audio and video at 24fps speeding up your movie by a small percentage.

Peter Moretti · May 6, 2009

I wasn't thinking about cuts. I've always converted to 23.976 before editing. Actually, doing the conversion after rendering could cause problems with effects and fades as well, now that I think about it.

It seems that all the clips should be converted to 23.976 and the entire project re-rendered. Sounds like a hassle, but I think it would be the best way to go.