Hey Bob thanks for the reply,

You said,

(Saying 1080i and 24p, I assume you mean you shot at 60i and not 24CF?)

Yes I shot in HDV mode (60i) *not 24CF*, with my FXI set at 1/60th shutter speed.

(And you want to convert that to 24p and edit on a 24p timeline?)

Yes-- A big question...

Do I have to render the project to a 1080i intermediary file *before* I start editing in 24p so that I can work with the files easier?

You said,

(Then you (somehow) want to dump this out to HDCAM at 24p or 24PsF i.e. with pulldown)

Yes-- An even bigger question,

Does the conversion to 24p take effect just by opening the project in with the 1080i 24p w/ a 2,3,3,2 pulldown template selected in properties? And after the editing and fx, do I just render once to the Sony YUV codec at 1080 HD ?

Or, drumroll please...for the biggest confusing question.

Or, after opening the project in with the 1080i 24p w/ a 2,3,3,2 pulldown template selected in properties and my edits and fx are done, do I have to render to 24p and then re-render to the Sony YUV codec?

I'm totally lost in space and appreciate the help!!!
Thanks again, A.J.

Well you didn't shoot in 24p.

Pulldown refers to a way of getting 24p (originally designed for telecined film) into 60i. In that case it's possible to remove the pulldown and extract the original 24 frames per second. None of this applies to what you shot! Plenty of good articles on this on the web.

But you've shot 60i which is 30fps but also they're interlaced frames, each frame was taken in two parts (fields) 1/60th of a second apart. So the temporal resolution is actually 60fps, a long way from 24fps!

I'm assuming you want the finished project to have the 'look' of film's 24fps cadence?

If that's what you're after then the ideal is to convert the 60i footage to 24p. Edit that on a 24p timeline, render as 24p using the Sony YUV or BMD 2YUV codec, they both work at 24p. You can then get that transferred to HDCAM at 24p but only the high end CineAlta decks support 24p.

Alternatively you can convert 60i to 24, edit on a 24p timeline and render as above but adding pulldown to produce 60i which standard HDCAM can handle. If you want it on HDCAM for broadcast this would be the way to go as pulldown has to be applied one way or the other. If you want it on HDCAM for a film out still wouldn't matter, the lab will be able to remove pulldown anyway.

Your biggest single hurdle that'll have the most impact on the final look is the 60i to 24p conversion. I have no idea how much money you want to spend on this. If you've got a big budget this is probably best done on dedicated hardware boxes by a post house.

If not there's a number of software solutions also of escalating cost and quality you could look at.

I'd strongly suggest doing tests on short segements of your footage, one with fast motion. These processes are both expensive and/or time consumming.

Finally it'd be remiss of me not to point out that the biggest single factor in the success of how this'll look is how it was shot. If you shot the footage and lit the scenes as one would for film at 24fps then you're in with a good chance. If not, well the conversion to achieve the cadence of film will probably make things look not so good.

Bob.

Bob,
You're awesome!
Thanks so much for taking me to school on 60i to 24p conversion and all the how to's for HDCAM transfer...And yes 24p cadence is what I'm after.

Ultimately what I need, is the project on HDCAM tape for theater projection...So I guess I'll go with your second suggested alternative with pulldown...

Do I render with the Sony YUV codec in a 2,3,3,2 pulldown?

Also, should I render clips as 1080i intermediary files before I convert and edit them on the 24p timeline?

Thanks again you're a great help! -A.J.

You want the HDCAM recording in 23.98fps, so you don't need (/ can't have) pulldown in there. Pulldown is used when you try to record 23.98P in a 29.97fps interlaced format.

I think there is some confusion between 23.98PsF (which is what HDCAM can do) and needing pulldown (which you don't/can't).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_segmented_Frame

--I don't know if Vegas/Blackmagic can do 23.98fps over SDI... presumably it can.

--I believe the non-Cinealta HDCAM decks can do 23.98PsF, although this should be double checked. i.e. read the manual for the deck in question

Wow ok, thanks Glen--

Yeah that makes sense, so the only way I'd need to do pulldown is if, as Bob said, I was going out to broadcast...

And...as I only have interest in screen projection from HDCAM tape then I just render out to 24p in the sony YUV codec format and have it transfered...Right?

Would I have to apply pulldown in final render if I wanted the project on DVD?

Thanks A.J.

Well certainly converting to the CF DI will give you smoother playback and be easier to edit.
I'm no guru on things 24p however I recall someone saying that the 24p (i.e. 2:3 pulldown) looks better than the 24pA (2:3:3:2) pulldown. 24pA is used because the pulldown can be removed with no loss.

As Glenn has rightly pointed out the NTSC film frame rate is 23.98 not 24.00 fps. Probably not an issue but it has tripped people up big time, usually only happens when the vision and audio are worked on separately, one on a 23.98 T/L and the other on a 24.00 T/L resulting in several frames sync offset over a movie.

I'd again strongly suggest doing LOTs of research and testing. You're potentially looking at spending a fair sum of money. Running a 30 second test project through your entire post chain all the way to checking how it looks in the / a cinema is going to cost you some money but way, way less than doing the whole project only to find that something has gone wrong and having to pay 3rd parties again. Trust me I've seen stuff come out of post houses where it was bleeding obvious that something was wrong with what they were given and they just blindly went ahead and spent the clients money.

If you're planning on cinema projection also pay attention to your soundtrack, mixing for cinema is different to what you'd do for TV. Cinema sound systems can make any defect sound way, way worse than a typical TV, I'd go so far as to say the soundtrack can be a bigger challenge than the vision even though it's way cheaper to get HiDef audio than HiDef vision, if you know what I mean.

Bob.

Bob,

I appreciate the insight, very helpful, and plan on following through with your suggestions.

I am finally convinced that I should convert to CF DI...

Should I apply the 2:3 pulldown only if I'm going back out to DVD?

Thanks again, A.J.

Theoretically that should work... they'd need the sonyYUV codec though, and it would have to be compatible with their editing system (FCP? Avid? other?). sonyYUV probably doesnt work with FCP. Ask the transfer company what format they like.

2- DVD players can read 23.9_p DVDs and add pulldown. Done all the time for Hollywood movies.

3- Scripting tools like Gearshift might help your workflow. I should know more about this but I don't. (Sorry.)

But basically the general workflow is:
Convert everything to 24p cineform (or DV); 24p conversion is Vegas' which is reasonable quality
Edit, lock picture.
Replace intermediates with higher quality versions if necessary.
Output to the right data file format

Glenn,

Thanks a mill' for the basic workflow, and telling me about replacing the intermediates...I've been doing tests all afternoon and I THINK I have found a workflow to keep the integrity of HDV intact, without converting to NTSC 24p DV Widescreen, but just changing the framerate to 23.9 in "PROJECT PROPS" and "RENDER AS" and rendering out as an AVI in 1080 60i YUV...

It seems to be working good, except for the massive files YUV creates. For one min. of footage I'm using almost 2 gigs!

Thanks again,
A.J.

Curious: What happens in the 24p file at the transition points where cuts are? Would you end up with some frames where there's a little bit of the cut?

Glenn

I know what you mean, I did have some artifacts in between cuts (1 frame very transparent between cuts) in earlier renders, but after making sure I had everything correct in "Project properties" i.e. HDV 1080 60i project, framerate 23.9 etc., and then in "Render as" AVI and 1080 60i YUV codec, then click custom tab and selecting correct 23.9 framerate, and match output of HDV 1080 60i, the artifacts stopped.

Does this pose any potential probs. that you might know of?

From HDV is it better/safer to start a project in the 24p DV Widescreen timeline?

Thanks, A.J.

Does this pose any potential probs. that you might know of?
Performance may be poor unless you work with 24p intermediates (so convert them from 60i to 24p while going from HDV-->intermediate). In the case of Cineform, you could likely leave the intermediates there and do your final output from them.

I don't believe you should use a 24p DV widescreen timeline... stick with 24p 1920x1080.

"In order to convert from 1080i to 24p with final output to HDCAM...What is the workflow? "

Vegas can handle the conversion, but do you really need to create a 24p HDCAM master? Is 60i (29.97/interlace) not acceptable for "look" or other reasons?

Glenn thanks for the info.

You said:

Performance may be poor unless you work with 24p intermediates (so convert them from 60i to 24p while going from HDV-->intermediate)

That's the way I was doing it-- but then I thought after I finish editing etc., I have to replace the intermediates with the M2t's before final rendering to 23.9. The native format of the M2t's, as you know, is29.9...So wouldn't that nullify any rendering I do in 24p to the M2t's?

Please let me know...Thanks

Also, am I to understand that the only way to NOT have to replace the Intermediates would be using CF HD connect that came with the software?

Sony,

but do you really need to create a 24p HDCAM master? Is 60i (29.97/interlace) not acceptable for "look" or other reasons?

Yes I would like to have a 24p master for the look...

That's the way I was doing it-- but then I thought after I finish editing etc., I have to replace the intermediates with the M2t's before final rendering to 23.9. The native format of the M2t's, as you know, is29.9...So wouldn't that nullify any rendering I do in 24p to the M2t's?
You could just stick with the cineform files... they should be fairly transparent compared to the original. The increase in quality is neglible, and your time is likely better spent doing something else.

If you really want to know, do a test where you compare the two not knowing which is what. I doubt I'd be able to tell the difference.

FWIW, my workflow is thus:

Capture as CineForm codec from cam, or capture as BMD codec files from cam via analog outs.

Convert to 24p. This doesn't take very long if you're using BMD, but storage space is of course, much larger as is CineForm.

Edit in 23.976 timeline

Print to tape via BMD card.

I caanot see any advantage to replacing the CF DIs with the source m2ts, in fact that might make things worse. The CF DIs are optimised to produce way less quality loss then m2t when going through multiple generations.

You can buy a faster version of the CineForm tools, as far as I know the only advantage is speed, no quality jump, well not for the ones that'll work in Vegas and given what you've shot on pretty irrelevant anyway.

So capture m2t, convert to CF DI, render to CF DI at 24p, edit on 24p T/L. Sounds simple to me so far. Encode to mpeg-2 at 24p for DVD, encode to BMD 2YUV at 1920 x 1080 for output to CineAlta HDCAM or encode the same with 2:3 pulldown for output to regular HDCAM.

Of course one could avoid the grief and just do the project at 60i. Have you done any tests, does the conversion to 24p really make THAT much difference?
For my money if I ever wanted output in 24p I'd start by shooting 24p, XL H1 or even HD100.

Bob.

Spot,

Thanks for the workflow, Iv'e scoured your posts since V4, thanks.

I fell like I'm missing something, and appreciate the help...

Here is my workflow and I'm adding more questions because I'm not quite clear...If this sounds right please let me know

My final project is 23.9

1) capture HDV as M2t

2) Render M2t as 1080 60i intermediate

When I open this M2t in the timeline, should I select a 23.9 in project properties?

And when I render the M2t should I go into custom tab and select 23.9 as well?

Or should I just leave everything alone in Default which is HDV 29.9?

3) Open 1080 60i Intemediate in new project in 23.9 timeline, Edit

4) Before rendering, replace the M2t's, by clicking the M2t file in Media Project, and following prompts.

If I've rendered the M2t's to Intermediates with a 23.9 framerate...Should I replace the Intermediates or NOT replace them, as the M2t's are native 29.9.

5) Render final as 23.3, 1080 60i...And in my case, HD1080i YUV as I'm going to transfer to HDCAM tape at a post house.

Whew...I think I'm losin' it.

Bob

I just read your post after posting my feeble minded questionable workflow...I've been scouring your previous post's as well...

Thanks-- that was exactly what I've been looking for an, A to Z if you will, as I'm pressed for time with a deadline etc...

It seems the final mistake I was making or would have made is the final render in HDV sony YUV, but I guess what everybody is saying is 1920 x 1080 in HD...The thing is I don't think I have BMD 2YUV ... Can I do my final render in HD SONY YUV?

Thanks much

Bob,

You said,

Have you done any tests, does the conversion to 24p really make THAT much difference?

No I havn't tested, I can't even render right, just of yet...until now thanks to all who answered my pleas.

The good news is,

We like the HDV look with filters and 24p after effects, the reality effect, but just softened a bit, lends itself nicely to this specific project.

So we lit for it and panned for it and hopefully have something to show for it.

In the end it's all about content I gather.

Thanks much, A.J.

AJ, the other option if you're printing to HDCAM, is to capture m2t, do rough cuts only, then use GearShift to create 4:2:2 YUV files for HDCAM output.
then cut the show together as you normally would, and you'll not have to do a render from the CineForm, although the quality of the CineForm render is very, very good, and a bit more efficient than the YUV.