Here's some other possibilities. First, you could shoot in 1440 X 1080 (1.33) and buy NEO HDV, which is a lot less expensive. Go here for for even a small discount ($199 US, no tax, direct download):

http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=3992

Or, you could just download the demo of NEO HD (1920 X 1080) and do your work and then render out in your final format. The demo is full-featured (no watermark, at least not when last I looked at it, which was a while ago), but has a 15 day time limit. After 15 days, you could still download the free NEO Player (just the decoder) and you could still work with the Cineform files, but just not be able to re-encode them to CFHD.

I do agree that NEO HD is terribly overpriced, considering that all AVCHD cams shoot in full 1920 X 1080. Cineform should drop NEO HDV altogether (or sell it for ~$50, since the HDV market is drying up anyway) and price NEO HD in the $200-250 range. In fact, I'm guessing that there is virtually no difference in the two packages, except that the NEO HDV license has the 1920 X 1080 resolution disabled.

BTW, is your present computer fast enough to work with CFHD AVI files? They are certainly better than working with AVCHD, but they aren't speed demons on older computers either.

I installed on a second computer, and it doesn't crash on this one, but the converted 10 second sample only has a few seconds of audio, which is the bug most people are reporting. I guess Blue hasn't released the patch. Therefore, since I cannot go ahead with this project without actually being able to make it work myself on one of my own computers, I am going to cancel using the AVCHD SR11 and just use my old SD backup cam. Too bad, because it promises to be a very useful product, if in fact it eventually works, and if the video doesn't have glitches or artifacts compared to the original, something I always worry about when converting/rendering/transcoding.

Thanks for the offer to convert, however. I appreciate that.

Interesting idea on using the NEO HDV demo. I didn't realize it could convert from AVCHD, given that the product name is HDV, and also because they have a separate product that is HD. Using the free trial period is an interesting idea.

As for speed, my computer is a single-thread, single-core, six-year-old 2.8 GHz P4. It's still pretty fast at a lot of things (not rendering though), and the last time I used Cineform HD intermediates created (using the template in Vegas 7.0d), they worked really well on the timeline and I got very good performance (this is just cuts-only with some simple color correction in order to match the two cams).

Thanks for the ideas!

Unfortunately, the CFHD that's included with Vegas is Version 2.8 and it is not compatible with the NEO versions which are now up to V3.4 or so. I'd be hesitant of going the Cineform route with anything less than a dual core CPU, but you can always try the NEO demo and see what happens. You also have to temporarily rename the file CFHD.DLL (the 2.8 version of Cineform) that's in the Vegas folder , or you might fall into multiple version hell.


EDIT: I also thought of one other item. Does your PC have an decent AVCHD decoder installed? You get one with software like Nero, but the only good inexpensive one is CoreAVC HD:

http://www.coreavc.com/

More often than not, AVCHD work fails, because of either weak or a non-existent AVCHD decoder. That might be what messed up Upshift in the first place.

The version of AVCHD UPSHIFT I have (1h) and received yesterday from Blue is working okay with avchd files. There is a minor audio problem in that the wave file it makes separately from the video clip is a few ms shorter (I am communicating with them about this currently). If you are shooting one long continuous shot it should be fine and present no editing problems.

The demo is a very old version from what I can tell.

John,

I just checked something for you. You can convert any AVCHD file that's in 1920 x 1080 with NEO HDV by just using the resize option in Cineform HDLink (the conversion program) and resizing to 1440 X 1080. It works like a charm with either the Adobe AVCHD encoder or CoreAVC HD. The only potential problem might be if the AVCHD file has 5.1 sound and then you might need to install an AC3 decoder or you won't get any sound in the converted file. Google "AC3Filter" for a freeware 5.1 decoder.

Honestly, the difference between 1920 x 1080 and 1440 x 1080 (with a pixel aspect ratio of 1.33) is negligible for most purposes.

J

John,
With all respect for your experience and knowledge, I have a maxim for my own endeavors: "Never field-test new equipment or software on the job." This comes from too many unrecoverable mistakes made on pro music gigs dating back to my early twenties (and you know how long ago that was!)

I am reminded of a clarinet player in a small ($30K) show I produced in '06 -- he blamed his repeated mistake in one solo spot of the score on his instrument; and, instead of learning the part, went out and bought a new $800 instrument the day before final dress rehearsal. Not only did his strategy not correct the wrong notes, it caused a whole bunch more.

A lengthy allegory, I admit, but it sets up my advice to you nicely, if I may be so bold.:
Shoot SD 16:9 and love the results!

If you can, instead of that AVCHD whatever, rent an XLH-1, set it as your wide (fixed) cam in 16:9 DV mode (you will love the clarity on your wide shots!), and use your XL1 for the cutaways and closeups (it will match nicely). Keep that 3rd cam as a backup, set up and ready to roll at any time, JIC.

You will have results that will look fantastic on anyone's DVD player, 720 or upscaled. And, you will have peace of mind from square 1. Worth it? I think so. If, by chance, you think that shooting in a "better" format somehow trumps the benefit of your experience and comfort level, I doubt it.

John, if you haven't done so, try again with version "h" as was mentioned:

www.newbluefx.com/downloads/AVCHDUpShift/AVCHDUpShiftTrialSetup10h.exe

John, I have a pentium 4, 3Ghz with 2GB memory, XP and Vegas 8.0c. I have had good success transcoding AVCHD footage using the included Cineform intermediate codec, and then using that on the timeline.

One trick that works (for me at least): I put my avchd clips end-to-end on the timeline, create a region that includes all the clips, then use the batch render template that comes with Vegas and select the render region option. I've never had this fail with AVCHD and I have rendered several hundred clips to the cineform intermediate. When I tried to render in the normal manner (i.e., not using the batch script) it would often fail and clip boundaries.

I have also bought a new I7 computer and hope to have it up and running next week with Vegas 8.1 (Vista 64). Then I expect to mostly work directly with the AVCHD footage.

Jerry

>I am reluctant to upgrade to 8.x (old computer, too many bugs, etc.)

TeeTime,

Do you edit the Cineform intermediate and then do a final render on the timeline, or is the Cineform a placeholder for the original AVCHD?

Can you say what the difference in resolution would be if you were to burn to BD and view on a PS3 (or other player) compared to viewing the AVCHD directly on a plasma TV?

Thanks,
Dave

Thank you all for the quick and useful responses. Since the transcoding doesn't work with the version I downloaded just yesterday from the Blue site, I don't want to mess with Upshift anymore. The Cineform might work, but their products are just too overpriced for what they provide. I guess I could use the demo for 15 days, as suggested.

I am still very reluctant to install 8.0c because of all the continuing complaints, especially related to AVCHD.

But the most important reason was the advice that I would be stupid to try something new on a paid assignment. So, while I was hoping to finally have an HD version to deliver in addition to my usual delivery on 16:9 DVD, since I still haven't had a single request for HD delivery -- even three years after I purchased my FX1 -- I'll just shoot the wide coverage with my old SD camera, set in 16:9 mode as one of you suggested. The Upshift solution seemed to be the only near-painless way to do this, and since that quite clearly does not work, I'm reluctant to spend lots of time exploring too many other avenues that will, even if they work, entail more time, and possibly more cost.

I'm just getting too old to have to constantly try to find ways around all these stupid roadblocks put up by companies that release products that don't work. That's why I still use the XP that came with this computer six years ago (XP PRO SP1) with no updates since then.

It works, and as a result, I get work done.

Once again, thank you all.

I am still very reluctant to install 8.0c because of all the continuing complaints, especially related to AVCHD.

8.0c works with 1080i60 and 720P30 AVCHD, but none of the other variants like 720 60P or 720 24P.

But the most important reason was the advice that I would be stupid to try something new on a paid assignment.

Yep, it would be a bummer to shoot in 720P24 because you wanted the low light advantage and found you couldn't edit the footage later.

My primary cameras are HMC-150 AVCHD and I have a reliable 8.0c editing platform. But, I never did an important shoot until I edited a few test projects. I agree I wouldn't try it for now. The AVCHD issues may be fixed in 8.0d if SCS has any employees left.

A note to J, 1440X1080 and 1920X1080 are actually the same space footprint. The 1440 are just non-square pixels. They seem to be effectively the same thing. I have been using the Canon A1 (1440) and HMC-150 (1920) on multi-camera shoots and you can't tell any difference in the final product and Vegas renders them both to HD or SD fine.

Just a final update for anyone that might stumble on this thread in the future. The short version of this final post is that I finally developed a workflow that works just fine.

First, I did finally get Upshift to work. It apparently doesn't like all AVCHD files. In particular, it didn't work with those that I downloaded from various sites, but I then borrowed the Sony SR12 AVCDH HD cam and tried all four AVCHD qualities which that camera can produce. All four versions, including the 1920x1080 version, converted just fine.

Next, I tried Cineform NEO. This didn't work at all. Despite what their marketing literature says, this doesn't work on AVCHD files unless you own some sort of AVCHD decoder, and the one they recommend using costs another chunk of money. So, I removed NEO and did a system restore to get back where I started.

Finally, I installed Vegas 8.0c. Up until now I just haven't had a reason to do this, and have been reluctant to do so (even though I have a valid serial number), given all the problems reported. I cannot yet comment on those problems (I have had no problems whatsoever so far). Also, I can say that I haven't discovered anything remarkably better about the performance with HDV files -- something I was expecting given all the marketing hype. On my laptop (not the most powerful computer in the world), 8.0c seems exactly the same as 7.0d, neither faster nor slower.

However, Vegas 8.0c plays all four flavors of AVCHD files from the SR12, directly on the Vegas timeline, including the 1920x1080 version. I used the built-in Cineform codec to render all of these to an intermediate. The 1920x1080 took a long time to render, because it had to be resampled down to 1440x1080. I tried to render to 1920x1080, but I got a cryptic error message, and it immediately halted. I don't have time to look into this, but knowing how Cineform markets their stuff, I expect that 1920x1080 render is crippled or removed in the Vegas version of Cineform's codec.

But, the three other quality levels the SR12 can shoot all rendered quickly and they playback on the timeline with good performance. I did a quick A/B between the original and Cineform and the AVCHD version, and while at first I could see a huge difference, I realized that in Preview quality in the playback window, Vegas must be sampling the native AVCHD and the Cineform version differently, so they don't have the same apparent sharpness and color. However, switching to Best made the two look absolutely identical.

So, bottom line: Vegas 8.0c is definitely the way to go. Except for disk space, I see absolutely zero advantage to using Upshift. The render time to Cineform was faster, and the playback time of the intermediate was as fast or faster. So, the only reason to use Upshift is if you want to use AVCHD with earlier versions of Vegas, which is what I originally was trying to do when I started this thread.

So, I'm going to go ahead and set up the SR12 as a third camera (I usually shoot with two). If it works, I'll use that instead of my old TRV-11 SD cam.

Thanks again for all the help.

John, good luck with your shoot, and welcome to V8.0.
Now all you need is that Core i7 machine to really help with your editing.

I'd appreciate more information, John...I have footage from every AVCHD camcorder out there, and can't make UpShift crash on my MacBook/Bootcamp, nor on my new Dell 6400. Can cause audio problems from the SD9 from Panasonic, no issues at all from Vixia or Sony cams. The newest build should address the 5.1 audio problem some users have had.

...I have footage from every AVCHD camcorder out there, and can't make UpShift crash on my MacBook/Bootcamp, nor on my new Dell 6400See my 12/17/2008 3:24:41 post. I got Upshift to work by actually getting a camcorder (SR12) in hand, so I was in complete control of everything. Like everything else, you don't know what you are getting on the Internet ...