Any advantage to transcode AVCHD P2?

Similar Questions

• About the RAM, I have 32 GB...... is there any advantage to allocate a large amount of this, or is there a limit that really MAKES a DIFFERENCE...?

  About the RAM, I have 32 GB...... is there any advantage to allocate a large amount of this, or is there a limit that really MAKES a DIFFERENCE...?

  @

  It depends on what you are doing and the rest of your system.  Eventually, if you like the video, it will impact.  But for still images, it is unlikely you will come anywhere close to that.  You can check it by placing the bar at the bottom left of the screen to show effectiveness.  As long as you use only RAM it will say 100%.  If you go below, you use your drive to work.  But even in this case, use to scratch a little, if you have an SSD, is not a big deal.

  Even my laptop 8 GB rarely gets bogged down (but I close the old files).  My 16 GB Office doesn't happen nearby.  But I'm not video.

• What is the best way of transcoding AVCHD high-quality archive?

  I have a bunch of images of different events on a SD card and want to ingest them in different folders by event. What format and preset should I use to ingest these AVCHD files? I use a PC and to maintain the best possible quality for long term storage. Thank you.

  UH... Just transfer the files instead of transcoding them. The files directly from the cam usually are the highest quality you can get.
  You could transcode DNXHD or ProRes depending on your operating system, but there will be no increase in quality.

• Transcoding AVCHD to highest resolution?

  I work with files (extension MTS) Panasonic AVCHD to a c-130 Hercules aircraft. I prepare a large project where I will need to prepare hundreds of clips with DVE and compositing prior to installation in the final video. It is more that I think that nesting PP was really designed to manage, so I think to each processing sequence and export the results to a workfile for this clip. I'm going to do my editing of the workfiles and continue from there.

  I am concerned about the loss of quality with the extra layer of rendering (raw images-> workfile-> Assembly edit). So here's my question: what would be the format of minutes of best quality for my workfiles? Ideally, I would like to find something of absolutely no loss. Any suggestions greatly appreciated.

  Lossless codecs:

  Lagarith Lossless Video Codec (pc only)

  http://lags.leetcode.NET/codec.html

  UT Video Codec Suite (pc or mac)

  http://www.videohelp.com/tools/UT-video-codec-suite

  'Virtually' lossless codec:

  Codecs Avid 2.3.7 - DNxHD (pc or mac)

  http://Avid.force.com/PKB/articles/en_US/download/en423319

• Any advantage of using Photoshop with Premiere Elements (instead of Photoshop CS4)?

  Soon, we are about to buy a Mini-DV with Premiere Elements camera. We currently have Photoshop CS4. Question: Is there a technical advantage to buy a copy of Photoshop Elements and Premiere Elements? Are there specific tools in Photoshop Elements that would make video editing more easy than using Photoshop CS4? Thank you.

  The biggest advantage to using Photoshop Elements with Premiere Elements is that you can transfer some projects — namely slideshows - from one to the other. In other words, you can start a slide show in Photoshop Elements, and then send it to Premiere Elements for the finishing and DVD release.

  But, if you have CS4, I wouldn't bother with Photoshop Elements otherwise. It will feel like a toy compared to the pro version.

• What are the benefits (if any) of transcoding to an intermediate editing for post production format?

  I have searched for an answer final to this day and impossible to get something useful.

  My recordings to the AVCHD format that is 24mbps H.264 video and audio camera (I record audio separately so audio is not a cause for concern). I use the following Adobe CC on Windows. I do a lot of green screen work.

  I read on many intermediate codecs designed for video editing. Include DNxHD of Avid, Apple ProRes, Cineform of GoPro, MXF OP1a, among others. As I understand it, these formats offer excellent features help video publishers to do their work.

  I was able to edit files directly AVCHD with Premiere Pro and after affects.

  My question is, what are the benefits, if any, I'd get if I converted my content from AVCHD to one of the intermediate formats before as I have start to change? It would speed up Adobe software? It would provide the best quality in the end? It would make various effects function better?

  Ultimately, all the videos I do will be encoded in the format h.264 for web distribution.

  Please note: I am not asking the workflow easier or more obvious (which is just to work with AVCHD files directly). I want to know if I can gain advantages in transcoding in another format before I in post-production and that these benefits are specifically for each of the different intermediate codecs.

  Thank you.

  Well, every format has its own advantages and disadvantages. Higher end codecs tend to be very large and take much more space, but behave better when apply effects or greenscreen work.

  However, you cannot really improve the quality that comes from your camera, it is an indispensable part of the workflow. You CAN transcode to, say, ProRes HQ and get better results with your fx work, but it will be as good as something turned on a higher end camera.

  Maybe do some tests on a small piece of video. Transcode into several codecs and do exactly the same treatment to all clips, including your original. Then compare them and see if the improvement is worth your time and additional hard drive space.

• Help editing AVCHD in first Pro CS5

  I've been editing on Final Cut Pro since 2001 but I plan to move to Premiere Pro. I bought the Production Premium CS5 earlier for AE and Photoshop but not much used Premiere Pro.

  I shoot AVCHD and have been transcoding to ProRes 422 to work with him at the FCC.  However, while Final Cut Pro X edit AVCHD without having to transcode to ProRes, it lacks some features that I need.  Then I opened to the top of the first, has imported the .mts files I shot in 1080 p 30 fps, and when I drag the files in the timeline that they need immediately (red bar above them, assuming that this means the same thing as in FCP).  When I visited the images, he plays very well and looks great.  However, when I go then playback is jerky, includes elements of the video to move in "blocks", and it seems that it would be difficult to work with.

  I am running CS5 on a new Macbook Pro 15 "with 2.0 ghz quad core i7 and 8 GB of RAM.  Then my what I was wondering it is... that's what everyone feels when they first AVCHD video playback?  Is it possible to edit images without having to make clips in order to obtain a clear image during playback?  I spoke with someone at Adobe briefly, and I think she told me that normally two AVCHD rendered must flow, but a single stream is normally not.  Tell me some good news so that I can take advantage of editing AVCHD natively and not to transcode everything I push.

  Thank you

  Mike

  Then I opened to the top of the first, has imported the .mts files I shot in 1080 p 30 fps, and when I drag the files in the timeline that they need immediately (red bar above them, assuming that this means the same thing as in FCP).

  No, who does not necessarily mean you have to return, but is the area code of your source footage does not match your sequence. What predefined sequence do you use? You can also drag a clip to the button new item at the bottom of the project Panel to automagically create a sequence that corresponds to your images. And read here to learn more about this that colorful bars mean in the body: Red, yellow and green make bars and what they mean "Premiere Pro workspace .

  However, when I go then playback is jerky, includes elements of the video to move in "blocks", and it seems that it would be difficult to work with.

  Right click on the program monitor or click on the exit button (three circles) and go to the playback resolution > full. This will force the full resolution of the AVCHD video decoding; requires more system, it will look better. This setting has no effect on the output - it's just for previewing.

  Bottom line: you should not have to make. Try the above and report if back is not fix things.

• Take advantage of the desktop connection using a Wi - Fi connection?

  My Mac Mini is connected to my router via a network cable directly by Wi - Fi. I am considering the turn off Wi - Fi because it offers another point of entry for the pirates. If I have understood correctly, Wi - Fi is required to get my location to the map application. Are there other benefits or the inherent risk to it takes precedence over any advantage?

  Thank you.

  Ethernet is usually faster than wifi.

  Yes, wifi is necessary to locate the computer... However, once you have used wifi Mac to remember its location.

  As you say, the wifi is a possible door. However, it has more to do with the network rather than individual computers. If you only turn off wifi on Mac and let the wifi on your router that is little or no improvement

• No advantage to run a vi developed by LabVIEW 32-bit on windows 64-bit with 64-bit LabVIEW?

  The vi is developed with LabVIEW 32-bit on a 32-bit computer, windows 7.

  It is going to be any advantage to run this vi on a 64-bit on a 64 - bit windows machine LabVIEW 7?

  THX.

  Only if you are running out of ram and if you use one of the kits of tools that has a 64-bit version that can make use of the extra RAM.

• Cannot access the microsoft Web site using any browser

  Access Web sites

  Try all 3 browsers... Chrome IE7 and Mozilla. I can't to any microsoft Web site. No problem to do anything else.

  With Chrome... I get OOPS! and an error message. IE7 displays a page similar to AI "browser down" page and just microsoft

  sites.

  Thanks for any info

  I can't to any microsoft Web site.

  Sounds like a DNS issue.   Use nslookup to check.   Use ping n 1 w 1 to attempt to cache a browser search.  Use ipconfig/displaydns to check if the search is cached.   A problem with many Microsoft research is that they have several alias and have very short life values.   It is very difficult to take any advantage of cached searches.  An alternative is to substitute the search using your HOSTS file, but then the IP addresses of host Microsoft tend to be transitory.  In fact, this point suggests something to check first: make sure that there are no replacement of microsoft in your HOSTS file.   Remove them and do an ipconfig/flushdns, if there is.   ; )

  HTH

  Robert Aldwinckle
  ---

• Sony NEX - 5N AVCHD files

  Sony NEX - 5N is a great compact devices which has the ability to capture HD video in 1080/60 p. This makes for smooth movement. With the recent update to Final Cut Pro X and AMC 6, hoping that the two programs would be add support for AVCHD 60 p/50 p; seems, however, that he did not. Therefore, work with the video from the cameras filming sequences AVCHD 2.0 60 p (like the Sony NEX - 5N) brings a bit of a problem when you import files from my camera. So how do you solve the problem?

  The quick solution is to wrap the Sony NEX - 5N 1080/60 p AVCHD files. As to keep the HD video quality and to avoid rendering, I would use the codec ProRes of Apple the FCP and the DNxHD codec in AMC. The two codecs are the best codec for each editing software, so the best way is to convert the Sony NEX - 5N format AVCHD to the ProRes FORMATS for FCP or Transcode AVCHD to MOV DNxHD for Avid Media Composer on Mac.

• 790 with dual Radeon HD 6350 - any benefit to using both on a monitor?

  I have a Dell 790 Office i5-2400 with double cards AMD Radeon HD 6350.  Is there a way, or any advantage to use two cards to power one monitor?

  I was wondering if I can combine cards to get best performance GPU.

  So I guess I wonder if Crossfire works on this Dell and AMD cards.  It has an Intel Q65 chipset

  The 790 does not support the crossfire so there is not any advantage.

  If you want better performance using a better card as a 6450.

  2 x greater number of shaders and Vram.

• First Pro CC is supposed to work correctly with AVCHD?

  I have recurring problems trying to edit with AVCHD. I have a processor 17 imac with 8 GB of ram. I'm on Yosemite 10.10.5. Whenever I try to edit AVCHD, video has frame jumps to the Middle the clips which were divided when recorded. Sometimes an audio of another element is automatically joined with the video clip bad when I drag from the project panel into a timeline.

  It's really supposed to be this much trouble? I also clip numbering issues when I get my SD card in first. It will start turns off fine recording with file 000. MTS, but sometimes after obtaining a random number in the sequence of the clip as 004. MTS, it will make a new clip go back to 000. MTS everywhere and I'll absent fottage because it will overwrite the clip that was supposed to 000.mts. None of this happens as the clip after that 004. MTS is 005. MTS in the finder window, but not in the first.

  bryced87 wrote:

  Yes, I did. I hear some people all transcode AVCHD to prores on Mac

  Yes, if the project has value I. If it is very simple or non-consecutive, I have not.

  Because Adobe can't handle AVCHD with large maturities.

  I found that this was the case. You must have a fast computer with a good graphics card and fast storage for your media.

  I am currently working on an iMac of 2013 with 3.5 Ghz i7 CPU, Nvidia 780 M with 4 GB of VRAM and 32 GB of memory, connected to the drive via Thunderbolt and not having problems bays.

  Also read that the color correction is not as good with AVCHD and AVCHD is rendered every time or an effect is applied it degrades the quality in first.

  This is because AVCHD is an acquisition very, very compressed and, to a lesser extent, the codec of the delivery. It is designed mainly for the purpose and is far from the ideal editing codec.

  Your original image from the sensor was shattered tightly in a very tiny package, with 8 (or more) images stuck like a saw jumping puzzle in each box.  Your computer, on the fly, must unpack every box, rebuild management (separating each one from the other) 30 times per second. Compare that to ProRes, resembling a giant shipping cases, each case containing 1 full frame. Your computer has to work much less to display and manipulate images ProRes - but the trade-off is a much larger file size.

  Box of ProRes being much larger, when you add graphics, composites, etc. of your sequence, the resulting video image has no need to be smashed down to fit in a small box - the shipping case ProRes adapts easily. If the color correction, compositing, graphic overlays, etc. ' "less pain during editing.

  "Degradation" of decompression of the frame of AVCHD, add a graphic and recompression of the frame to AVCHD happen not matter what NLE you use.

  Video to ProRes or Cineform benefits far beyond the subsequent use of more disk space and the camera card. That's why many productions use outboard recorders that will record in ProRes, typed cameras that shoot AVCHD natively. They are much better production formats.

  MtD

• How much ram can take advantage of first 14 elements?

  So I'm looking to upgrade my computer, for most working with 4 k video in first 14 elements (and also for 3d rendering).  I have a new dual processor MB and will get used two Xeon e5-2670 and used ddr3 ecc.  I can get 32 GB for $50, or "Follies" and download 64 GB to $100.  I don't mind spending the extra money on RAM if it will make things run a little more fluid or faster.

  The last big project that I worked on had about 250 gigabytes of media for a 2 hour video - she included several tracks of 4 k and 2 k video.  I think that Premiere Pro would benefit all RAM than available memory, but I do not know if the Premiere Elements has a cap of some sort and would benefit all that RAM.  Anyone know? 

  It's really the CPU more RAM or GPU which determines the video processing 4K first Elements. Fortunately, you have a processor good, hearty.

  I can't imagine that you will see any advantage a jump from 32 GB to 64 GB of RAM. Not with Premiere Elements in any case.

• At an i7-2820QM no advantage on workstation running i7-2720QM?

  Guys and murder,

  I replace my desktop computer with a Sandy Bridge Mac Book Pro 17 or a Sandy Bridge HP Envy 17 3D (if HP ever releases it to the Netherlands).

  I have 2 licenses of VMware Workstation 6.5 (Win), I will move to 7 when I bought the laptop.

  With Workstation 7 (Windows) in mind, there will be any advantage to get the i7-2820QM instead of the i7-2720QM?

  I'll be switching between:

  3-4 simultaneous 512 MB Ubuntu Server VM (windowed and reduced) and Aptana Studio into an Ubuntu Desktop VM (full-screen or windowed alternating).

  and

  1 oracle DB Express with logical server in a VM Ubuntu (with windows and reduced), Oracle Fusion Middleware, Oracle's Tuxedo and Oracle JDeveloper in a Ubuntu Desktop VM (full-screen or windowed alternating).

  And I'll also have IBM Access Client running on the host computer with up to 6 terminal/printer sessions open at the same time (negligible impact).

  When the VMS works do not, I will be modeling in cinema 4 D first Sketch & Toon, drawing in Illustrator CS4 and Photoshop CS4, some Unity free 3D, navigation, watch the movie (3D) occasional strange, not HARD drive and not to make any game.

  Looking at the specifications of Intel, except the price and comparing the differences between the two, illustrated below, the only significant difference is with the "Intel® Smart Cache and all the remaining specifications do not below are identical."  The obvious differences and expected, clock speed, frequency Turbo Max and Bus Ratio/base, are insignificant when you compare two processors when there is only a difference of 0.1 GHZ between the two.

  Number of processor	i7-2820QM	Number of processor	i7-2720QM
  Clock speed	2.3 GHz	Clock speed	2.2 GHz
  Max Turbo frequency	3.4 GHz	Max Turbo frequency	3.3 GHz
  Intel® Smart Cache	8 MB	Intel® Smart Cache	6 MB
  Bus/core ratio	23	Bus/core ratio	22

  The real question should therefore be ready to pay the price difference to win such a marginal increase in clock speed, the Turbo Max frequency and the Bus/basic Ratio for the 2 extra MB of Intel® Smart Cache.

  I doubt really would be able to perceive a difference of 0.1 GHZ to which however 2 MB of Intel® Smart Cache extra is a significant speed and for a power user this can make a difference but let face it goes down the price so I say buy as much computer you can afford everything in getting system that has all the other features need/want.