Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

CANON 60D to FCP HELP

profile picture
BayArea
Posts: 310 - Karma: 111
hey ns,

I have a Canon 60D and I edit using FCP, but I was wondering what everyone uses to convert their footy to work in fcp. I currently use MPEG Streamclip, which offers the ProRes422 which is amazing.
Jul 23 2011 1:23PM
0 0
profile picture
DAPSKI
Posts: 414 - Karma: 141
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TtXN5iKyH0&feature=player_embedde

Maybe a little more detail for you, but it seems like you got it.
Jul 23 2011 1:41PM
0 0
profile picture
BayArea
Posts: 310 - Karma: 111
thanks bro!
Jul 23 2011 1:45PM
0 0
profile picture
[evan]
Posts: 5628 - Karma: 117
OP can I threadjack my issue is very similar to yours?
Jul 23 2011 1:52PM
0 0
profile picture
BayArea
Posts: 310 - Karma: 111
sure idc
Jul 23 2011 1:58PM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
Mpeg streamclip is the way to go for changing codecs. Whenever I change codec from h.264 I go prores 4444 which has a higher bitrate than 422 HQ
Jul 23 2011 2:16PM
0 0
profile picture
B.Snow
Posts: 1859 - Karma: 92
do you convert all your footy to 4444 before even editing? Or do you convert it to 422, then edit with that format and then export it in 4444?

hopefully that made sense...
Jul 23 2011 3:06PM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
Usually I just edit in h.264 and export in h.264. If I'm doing a more serious project I'd convert to 4444 before I export the footage. I know people that start in 422 proxy and at the end convert to 4444 for the sake of rendering time.
Jul 23 2011 3:14PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61601 - Karma: 123,020
Dude, converting to prores 4444 is absolutely pointless. Your footage is already at 24mbps (or less) and bumping it up to 200mbps does nothing but make your file bigger. My advice is to use prores 422 LT, same quality and your files wont be multi gigs.
Jul 23 2011 3:32PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
Why are you doing ProRes 4444? You are actually degrading your footage by doing so. In fact, anything over ProRes LT degrades footage.
Jul 23 2011 8:15PM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
Is it really that bad? This is where im getting my info from:

Instructional Video: DSLR Workflow from UCF Film Department on Vimeo.

Jul 23 2011 8:22PM
0 0
profile picture
WillStart
Posts: 3955 - Karma: 3,192
you should actually probably do 422 LT as landis said. trying to encode to any codec higher than that will try to get more out of your footage than is possible (since DSLR footage obviously isn't the highest quality footage out there). it won't help your footage, it will just make your file sizes bigger.

i think i even remember hearing 422 HQ was unnecessary for DSLR footage
Jul 23 2011 8:22PM
0 0
profile picture
[~_~]
Posts: 20239 - Karma: 1,273
What people don't seem to understand is that not only is 4:4:4:4 or HQ unnecessary, but it actually degrades image quality. This is because the format have much more headroom, and by transcoding a weak DSLR codec into this format, you have inconsistent control over your image. If you try to do any sort of grading or major adjustments, you will experience banding. It's the video equivalent to trying to print a JPEG. Oh, and it takes up a ton of space.

Moral of the story: don't go higher than ProRes LT if you're working with DSLR footage.
Jul 23 2011 8:43PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)