Create optimiza media,agrees or not?

Hello everyone, I want to ask you video professionals, with a PC with performance like mine, I7 4790K + 32 gb ram + gtx 960 2 gb + hd system 256 gb SSD.

Can you work on projects with native AVCHD MTS files to create 1-hour videos without converting to pro-res?

or your pc struggling and making effort with shots and the non-fluid timeline you have to convert to 422 pro?

thanks to those who will answer me, and happy new year 2018 to all of you.

:woohoo:

I would think you wouldn’t need to optimize.

And instead I always work in prores 422 otherwise with the native MTS files after having put in the timeline of the clips for a total of about 20 minutes, the timeline begins to go jerky! it does not work smoother and the colored mouse wheel starts spinning!

while in prores no problem everything runs smoothly but I create flie with many gb, so I ask you to know if you happen to the same thing.

otherwise what should I take a pc with I7 6 cores?
thank you

"with the native MTS files"

Why on earth are you doing that? If you import AVCHD correctly from the camera card or an archive, the files are rewrapped to QuickTime and work perfectly well.

You say "PC" which commonly refers to a Windows based computer. What specific Mac model are you using? What are the specs? And what camera is all this footage coming from? That information could help.

So, I use a hackintosh with el capitan and fcpx 10.3.4 and I work the lumix gh2 files with flow-motion then files with even 90M / bit sec.

I unload the SDHC card on the PC and then with I take the mts files in the avchd / BDMW / Stream folder and the amount with fcpx.

:blink:

Once you've get the card onto the computer, you should just use the import window to access the card and its content. Is that not working for you?

I've never tried the method described now by you, but now I'll do a test and see if anything changes.
do not give me of you we are in forum of friends and therefore let's give of you I say well?
thanks and just finished my test with the method described by you I will let you know how it went.

click wrote: ....Can you work on projects with native AVCHD MTS files to create 1-hour videos without converting to pro-res?...

You have two possible problems:

(1) If you are dealing with bare MTS files, IOW files which have been removed from the AVCHD package and imported with "leave files in place", that may cause severe performance problems due to how FCPX handles the I/O.

AVCHD material should *always* be imported from the folder tree, in which case you normally don't see the bare .MTS files. When importing that way, it will not allow "leave files in place" but will copy and re-wrap (not transcode) those those files to the library. Usually performance is good when using that method, although it takes more space due to the file copy.

If all you have left are the bare MTS files I'd suggest re-wrapping them externally before import using EditReady: www.divergentmedia.com/editready

If you have already imported bare MTS files with "leave files in place" those must be removed and properly re-imported, otherwise it will always be slow, even if the MTS files are only a small % of the overall content. The performance issue scales upward with library size so with small libraries it might not be noticed but with increasing size it rapidly becomes apparent.

(2) You are using a Hackintosh which usually do not have Quick Sync capability -- regardless of CPU. This is because Hackintoshes can normally not switch dynamically from the on-chip GPU (where Quick Sync is implemented) to the external GPU. Thus the on-chip GPU must normally be disabled in the BIOS which also disables Quick Sync.

AVCHD is a form of H264 and without Quick Sync all encode/decode must be done in software. However AVCHD is only 1080 resolution and normally 1080p is not that difficult but lack of Quick Sync due to using a Hackintosh could be an additional slowdown factor.

thanks I will follow your advice, but I wonder, at this point instead of converting in mores 422 files with edit ready I should do as before, ie with final cut pro x tick the "create optimize media" option and let it come also copied to the library, although I will have many GB in the end no matter since I use a 1Tb HD.
what do you say?
thanks again and good 2018 from an Italian.

click wrote: ... I wonder, at this point instead of converting in mores 422 files with edit ready I should do as before, ie with final cut pro x tick the "create optimize media" option and let it come also copied to the library, although I will have many GB in the end no matter since I use a 1Tb HD....

If used to re-wrap AVCHD, EditReady does not convert this to ProRes. It does not take six times the original space like ProRes does, and does not take long periods to transcode -- like creating ProRes optimized media does. It simply puts the existing .MTS files in a compatible wrapper so FCPX can properly handle those. This includes the ability to properly import them with "leave files in place".

If you have plenty of disk space, and don't mind waiting to create optimized media for your already-imported MTS files, then it would probably work to select all the MTS files in your library, right-click and select Transcode>Create Optimized Media.

However if you will be dealing with more AVCHD content in the future, I suggest you re-wrap that with EdityReady then import with "leave files in place". It is vastly faster to import and takes much less disk space.

Now I understand, but then how should I use Edit Ready? what parameters should I put so that it does not convert to prores?

I took edit ready today since the cost is not high, but I open it and ask me in what format to convert, what should I set?
Thanks again

Very well my friend I was able to understand how to do, with edit ready, look at my attachment and tell me if I did everything right.

in this way I have the lighter files of the 422 prores but the quality of the image is the same, right?
thank you

I tried to use edit ready and I must say that it works well, but a single doubt assails me!
do clips made with edit rerady in rewrap have the same quality as the original MTS clips?

thank you

click wrote: I tried to use edit ready and I must say that it works well, but a single doubt assails me!
do clips made with edit rerady in rewrap have the same quality as the original MTS clips?

If by "native MTS clips" you mean naked clips, isolated from the original card structure: the correctly rewrapped clips - from card! - have much better quality! In theory, rewrapped originals also have better quality than ProRes copies, because ProRes is visually lossless but a copy nonetheless.

In the real world, there is indeed a chance that by using EditReady (or any other third-party-app) to transcode clips to ProRes for editing you seriously damage your footage. Camera manufacturers implement important metadata within their proprietary codecs, and when an app decodes the underlying Mpeg4 this doesn't mean that those data are respected. At least you should compare the externally encoded ProRes clips to the originals in FCP. Any idea what's going on here:

???

AVCHD doesn’t use a proprietary codec. EditReady doesn’t transcode unless you want it to. Looks like FCP is automatically applying VLog. 10-bit H.264 or HEVC from the G5 needs to be optimized in FCP.

Well then I realized that you do not lose quality with rewrap and I'm happy about this.
thank you all for helping me


:lol:

Tom Wolsky wrote: AVCHD doesn’t use a proprietary codec. EditReady doesn’t transcode unless you want it to. Looks like FCP is automatically applying VLog. 10-bit H.264 or HEVC from the G5 needs to be optimized in FCP.

Well, those are MOVs ("H.264 Level 10") of which QT player X says: unsupported file type, unable to play video. Because being HLG, FCP does not apply a V-Log LUT. You can change the appearance dramatically by going to >inspector >info >settings >override color space. Set to "none" by default. You can manually set it to "rec_709". If you choose "rec_2020HLG" manually, it's the same as none.

Since Kyno doesn't support the HLG, I can't test an external ProRes transcoding (don't have EditReady). If I transcode GH5 or S7rii LOG clips using Kyno and look at them and the originals side by side in Browser or Timeline, I immediately see differences (no LUT, no color space conversion), I'd say slightly different gamma. If I duplicate and re-import the internally encoded Transcoded Media >High Quality Media and put them beside the originals, they appear ab-so-lutely identical.

Obviously I can't trust Kyno in encoding ProRes (or do I have to be wary about FCP???). I'd test this same thing with EditReady, just to know if there is a potential problem. My explanation ("proprietary codec" or some specific flags as to how the data are to be interpreted) may be naive or faulty. But I'm aware there is something wrong.

The HEVC 10-bit does play in the QT player. The HLG H.264 doesn't; I think because of embedded metadata. You're right about the VLog. If you're going to 709 from HLG, I think you get a result using VLog and HDR Tools to go from HLG to 709 then just changing the color space.