Choosing a Codec for FCPX

Hello. New user here...

I am a cub videographer doing street journalism, and could use some help getting started.

My rig includes an iPhone 6S Plus with an XLR shotgun mic on a rig recording into a Zoom H6.

On my iPhone I am using the Filmic Pro app, and I, of course, would like to use Final Cut Pro X to do the video editing.

I have been watching lots of YouTube videos and reading up on things, but the more I research the farther down the "rabbit hole" I seem to go!!

So far, I was going to use these settings in Filimic Pro...

Frame Rate: 24 FPS
Resolution: 1080p (or possibly 4k)
Aspect Ratio: 16:9

But two places where Filmic Pro's help doesn't really help is with Bit Rate and Codec.

I have read (and watched) that the higher the Bit Rate the better, but since most of my videos will be posted on my YouTube channel, and because over half of Internet users surf on mobile phones, I'm not certain that "bigger is better".

And what I am most confused (and concerned) about is which codec to choose...

This seems like a really complex topic, and I am hoping that I don't need a Ph.D. before I can understand which codec to use!

I have most of my gear and the rest should come this weekend, and I would like to be out interviewing people on Monday, but until I can better understand all of the video settings in Filmic Pro, I am leery to start filiming because I have read some horror stories where people shot using the wrong codec and they end up losing the video or the audio or they have to do a bunch of maneuvering that might be unnecessary had they planned things out better.

Hope that doesn't sound too confusing, and I sure would appreciate some help!!

I shoot for a local TV station and a film channel as well as various indie productions, have been for over 20 years.
I use an iPhone XS and love it, use FilMIC Pro daily, love it.
I highly recommend the Saramonic wireless dual lav audio system, too. They make a dual-mic receiver that plugs directly into your iPhone.

I use the following FilMIC Pro settings without any issue, and with fantastic video quality..

30fps is best.
Shoot 4K with "FilMIC Quality".
AAC audio at 40.0 kHz, personally I use PCM audio, but either is good.
If shooting on a tripod, be sure to turn Stabilization off.
And I have it set to store all film clips in my Photos library, not in the FilMic library, to save time.
AirDrop that stuff to your Mac, edit!

I wish FCPX would have an AirDrop import feature...

And do not over-think things! Stay basic, stay clean, deliver a quality product with the least amount of hassle.

FCPX.guru wrote: I shoot for a local TV station and a film channel as well as various indie productions, have been for over 20 years.

Well FCPX.guru, hopefully some day I can make it to your level!

FCPX.guru wrote: I use an iPhone XS and love it,

Believe it or not, I have never owned a smartphone until this one, and I just bought it for responsive design, so I'm pretty illiterate when it comes to smartphones.

When did iPhone XS's come out? I assume that yours is newer than mine.

FCPX.guru wrote: use FilMIC Pro daily, love it.

There are a few things that I find clunky, but it seems like it will be a big improvement over the native Camera.app

FCPX.guru wrote: I highly recommend the Saramonic wireless dual lav audio system, too. They make a dual-mic receiver that plugs directly into your iPhone.

Funny you should mention that...

I was looking at the wireless setup for around $400 at B&H, but decided that lavs out out in a pandemic for safety reasons, PLUS even in normal times, I think it would be very hard to do man-on-the-street interviews and let someone mic them up.

Maybe next year when I have more money - I just blew about $1,000 on my current setup - I will get a wireless lav setup too.

FCPX.guru wrote: I use the following FilMIC Pro settings without any issue, and with fantastic video quality..

30fps is best.

Why is that?

Everthing I have heard says 24FPS is "cinematic".

FCPX.guru wrote: Shoot 4K with "FilMIC Quality".

Why do you shoot 4K?

Doesn't that take up a huge amount of space?

And why "Filmic Quality?
(I find it really annoying that they use cutesy name for this setting adn no call it what it is.

It took me a lot of reading to even figure out they were talking about "Bit Rate"?!

FCPX.guru wrote: AAC audio at 40.0 kHz, personally I use PCM audio, but either is good.

I think my OP was vague, so let me clarify some things...

For Audio codec, why are you recommending AAC?

And why 40 hZ which seemslike a weird choose. (I was told long ago that 44.1 hHz is "CD quality", and that 48 kHZ was pretty common in the digital space.)

And why do you use PCM and not AAC?

My concern is that various people online report that certain audio codecs don't play well with (mostly) Premier Pro, and so I am afraid videos will end up not being editable.

Now I will be learning Final Cut Pro X, so I'm not sure if the same issues I read online will apply to FCPX?

Here was one thread...
community.adobe.com/t5/premiere-pro/film...rem-pro/td-p/8823193

And here is another one...
community.adobe.com/t5/premiere-pro/ipho...ere-pro/td-p/9896924


Another thing I wanted t clarify is which Video codec I should be using?

I see people talking about things like H.264 (?) and HVEC(?) but I don't know which one to use, and furthermore I don't even see where you select those things in Filmic Pro, but again, people seem to make it sound like it's really important to select the right video codec upfront!!

FCPX.guru wrote: If shooting on a tripod, be sure to turn Stabilization off.

Do I do that in Filmic Pro?

FCPX.guru wrote: And I have it set to store all film clips in my Photos library, not in the FilMic library, to save time.

I have been told - and Filmic Pro also reports - that this can cause a loss of quality, so it is best to store things in Filmic Pro and then export from Filmic Pro to your Mac.

Using Filmic Pro and iTunes only take a few seconds to transfer things to my Mac...

FCPX.guru wrote: And do not over-think things! Stay basic, stay clean, deliver a quality product with the least amount of hassle.

I over-think everything!! *LOL*

I just know from years of working in IT that often if you don't choose the correct settings up front then you will be hating yourself later on.

Kind of like if you chose to shoot all of your photos in the lowest JPEG setting...

It will take me years to become an expert in things like FCPX or Premier Pro - which seems to be more advanced than FCPX, and things like color correction and what-not, but I still want to choose settings that will allow me to transition into advanced level video editing and video production, so I figured I should come here and check out my settings before I screw things up!

Interesting, I retired as an IT engineer and project manager 20 years ago in Oct. I always did music and video on the side as hobbies. Then one day decided to change professions, cause I wasn’t really happy in IT. Never looked back…

And PPro is not more "advanced" than FCPX, let's kill that myth off right now.

48kHz audio sample rate is a video/broadcast standard. All NLE's default to this sample rate for a reason. We're not burning CDs here (consumer-level audio, not audiophile-level audio), we're editing video. So stick with 48kHz and you won't go wrong. If you do multi-cam shoots and your cameras are all on different sample rates, you'll get some of them drifting out of sync over time.

Yes, turn off stabilization inside the app when on a Tripod. That goes for any camera! The camera will be making an effort to stabilize when it's already stable and could cause some image glitches.

Lav mics are perfectly safe with the pandemic, we use them daily, and we stay masked-up at all times with latex gloves. Wipe off surfaces with an alcohol-wipe when done, super easy to do. 


But more specifically, the Saramonic “Blink 500 B2” kit lets you use the included wired lav mic, or the built-in mic. So micing up a man-on-the-street as I do weekly, is super fast and easy using the built-in mic. I prefer the wired lav mic it comes with, better quality, but the built-in mic is good, too, and easier during the pandemic and in run-and-gun situations. Clip it on their collar, done! 


I also got Saramonic’s “Blink 500 RXDi 2.4GHz Apple Lightning Micro-Wireless Dual-Receiver for iOS Devices”. Simply plugs directly into your iPhone to make it even easier to use. And the sound quality is really amazing.

24fps is a huge myth. Because celluloid film is shot at 24fps some videographers think shooting at 24fps will make their video look like film. It doesn't, not at all, period. To look like film you need to first light like film, block like film, use lenses like film. Frame rate alone simply doesn't cut it to make your video look like film. There are dozens of articles by professionals over the years explaining this. And consider that film is not shot digitally (no factories make the large celluloid film cameras any longer) 30fps gives you smooth motion, and easily converts to 24fps or 59.94fps, depending on your delivery.

Speaking of delivery, shoot what you're final delivery needs are. If you're going to the web, 30fps gives you nice video. If you're going to TV broadcast, shoot at 59.94.

4K video is awesome! File size doesn't really matter much as H.264 compression has evolved a great deal. Then I edit on 1080 or 720 frame size Projects, depending on the delivery needs. Then I can set Spatial Conform (in the inspector) to Fill or None. I set it to None to get those close-ups that give the work some polish, without losing image quality. Since I'm usually using only one camera, it gives me more options for cutting the final product.

ACC audio is native to the H.264 compression, gives you great quality with smaller file size. PCM is uncompressed audio and you're not going to hear the difference when editing, trust me. But I came to video from spending my youth in audio recording studios around New Orleans. I still have some unfounded prejudice towards uncompressed audio, even though I know it won't make a difference.

H.264 is a wonderful codec for video work. HVAC is high dynamic range stuff, which I'm not fooling with yet. If you have a camera that will shoot it, and you have a need for it, cool beans, use it. But for local TV broadcast, we don't touch it yet, as we can't transmit it yet (until ATSC 3.0 becomes standard).

As for the articles you linked to, that’s a universal. Most smart phones, especially iPhones, shoot variable frame rate video, which is a headache for NLE’s so far. But FCPX does a pretty good job with it, considering.

As for saving to the Photos album, I have that option set permanently in FilMIC Pro. I’ve tested both, and don’t see any difference in image quality. And it’s easier and faster to AirDrop from my iPhone to the Mac from the photos library.

So, there’s my lecture for today, I’ll email you the invoice… HA!

As for saving to the Photos album, I have that option set permanently in FilMIC Pro. I’ve tested both, and don’t see any difference in image quality.

I recently had a problem with FilMIC Pro corrupting a file due to the phone overheating. The support from FilMIC was excellent and they managed to recover it. However they do mention in the recommendations they sent me that saving to the Photos album is NOT recommended as they have had reports of corruption. Something to do with Apple permissions in IOS....

@FCPX.guru,

Why did my post not show up last week?

Since I posted like 3 days ago, and it never showed up, I nearly gave up on the site. Have also sorta forgot my original questions...

FCPX.guru wrote: And PPro is not more "advanced" than FCPX, let's kill that myth off right now.

Good to know - it just seems that most of the videos/pro on YouTube prefer Premiere Pro.

FCPX.guru wrote: 48kHz audio sample rate is a video/broadcast standard. All NLE's default to this sample rate for a reason. We're not burning CDs here (consumer-level audio, not audiophile-level audio), we're editing video. So stick with 48kHz and you won't go wrong. If you do multi-cam shoots and your cameras are all on different sample rates, you'll get some of them drifting out of sync over time.

Okay.

FCPX.guru wrote: Yes, turn off stabilization inside the app when on a Tripod. That goes for any camera! The camera will be making an effort to stabilize when it's already stable and could cause some image glitches.

Does my iPhone 6S Plus with iOS 13.5.x have image stabilization?

Does Filmic Pro have image stabilization?

Which one should I be using?

FCPX.guru wrote: Lav mics are perfectly safe with the pandemic, we use them daily, and we stay masked-up at all times with latex gloves. Wipe off surfaces with an alcohol-wipe when done, super easy to do. 


Interacting with dozens of strangers close up can't be safer than maintaining distance with a shotgun mic...

And, I highly doubt strangers would like me mic them up in normal times let alone now?!

Either way, I bought a shotgun mic and when testing it this weekend it seemed like a big improvement. (Would have helped even more had I hit "record" on my H6!!!)

FCPX.guru wrote: Clip it on their collar, done! 


What do you do when you have a female subject with a tight t-shirt on? Then it's not so easy...

FCPX.guru wrote: 24fps is a huge myth. Because celluloid film is shot at 24fps some videographers think shooting at 24fps will make their video look like film. It doesn't, not at all, period. To look like film you need to first light like film, block like film, use lenses like film. Frame rate alone simply doesn't cut it to make your video look like film. There are dozens of articles by professionals over the years explaining this. And consider that film is not shot digitally (no factories make the large celluloid film cameras any longer) 30fps gives you smooth motion, and easily converts to 24fps or 59.94fps, depending on your delivery.

Everything I have read and seen deals with the natural blur we see in motion, and 24FPS mimics real life...

FCPX.guru wrote: Speaking of delivery, shoot what you're final delivery needs are. If you're going to the web, 30fps gives you nice video. If you're going to TV broadcast, shoot at 59.94.

This will all go on my website or on YouTube.

FCPX.guru wrote: 4K video is awesome! File size doesn't really matter much as H.264 compression has evolved a great deal. Then I edit on 1080 or 720 frame size Projects, depending on the delivery needs. Then I can set Spatial Conform (in the inspector) to Fill or None. I set it to None to get those close-ups that give the work some polish, without losing image quality. Since I'm usually using only one camera, it gives me more options for cutting the final product.

One YT video I watched said to always shoot in 4K and Flimic Extreme because you can always reduce the quality (and file size) later on.

is that true in general?

Is that true for FCPX?

Or since I am targeting the web and YouTube is that not true?

FCPX.guru wrote: ACC audio is native to the H.264 compression, gives you great quality with smaller file size. PCM is uncompressed audio and you're not going to hear the difference when editing, trust me. But I came to video from spending my youth in audio recording studios around New Orleans. I still have some unfounded prejudice towards uncompressed audio, even though I know it won't make a difference.

I think this was my main concern in my OP.

So where does the VIDEO codecc get set in Filmic Pro? That is not clear to me, and maybe I wouldn't be so confused if they would drop the marketing terms like "Filmic Extreme" and have a field called "Bit Rate", although it still isn't clear to me where you even choose the VIDEO codec if you even can?!

Likewise, where does the AUDIO codec get set? Is that was ACC is?

While quality is important, my larger concern is making sure the VIDEO codec and AUDIO codec don't paint me into a corner and prohibit me from being able to edit things in Final Cut Pro X - or Premiere Pro for that matter.

So which ones should I be working with?

FCPX.guru wrote: H.264 is a wonderful codec for video work. HVAC is high dynamic range stuff, which I'm not fooling with yet. If you have a camera that will shoot it, and you have a need for it, cool beans, use it. But for local TV broadcast, we don't touch it yet, as we can't transmit it yet (until ATSC 3.0 becomes standard).

As for the articles you linked to, that’s a universal. Most smart phones, especially iPhones, shoot variable frame rate video, which is a headache for NLE’s so far. But FCPX does a pretty good job with it, considering.

So if I had a true digital video camera or maybe if I was using a DSLR as a vdieo camera, then it would use FIXED rate video??

And the point of the articles above was to show where people were complaining that if you don't choose the correct video and audio codec then you cannot edit both the video and audio in your shot material.

I would be pretty pissed if I travel out of state, get some get interviews, and then get home to find out my video or audio is missing or needs a bunch of massaging so i can edit it in FCPX!!!

So how do I prevent that from happening?

FCPX.guru wrote: As for saving to the Photos album, I have that option set permanently in FilMIC Pro. I’ve tested both, and don’t see any difference in image quality. And it’s easier and faster to AirDrop from my iPhone to the Mac from the photos library.

I'm content for now going from Filmic Pro to my Mac using iTunes.

FCPX.guru wrote: So, there’s my lecture for today, I’ll email you the invoice… HA!

Glad my post finally got displayed and that someone finally responded...

edumusik wrote: [
I recently had a problem with FilMIC Pro corrupting a file due to the phone overheating. The support from FilMIC was excellent and they managed to recover it. However they do mention in the recommendations they sent me that saving to the Photos album is NOT recommended as they have had reports of corruption. Something to do with Apple permissions in IOS....

Right! This is explained on tehir website, so I trust Filmic Pro knows things better than I do!

Then don't save it to the Photos library. I've done it for years without issue. But if they say there are issues, then don't do it.

All of the advice FCPX.guru gave is great although I'd question the reason for 30fps (29.97) here. I agree that's what you should shoot but it's because 29.97 is the industry standard for news delivery. Saying that 24fps (23.98) doesn't look more "cinematic" is not accurate. There is a visible difference between the two (with pros and cons of each). If you shoot 29.97 and put it on a 23.98 timeline it will work just fine but the motion blur will not be the same and it will still have a "news look". You can add forced motion blur (in AE for example) but it doesn't look as natural in all cases. It really just depends on the look you are going for. Best of luck!

JarrodMFay wrote: ... If you shoot 29.97 and put it on a 23.98 timeline it will work just fine but the motion blur will not be the same and it will still have a "news look"...

Gerald Undone discusses using 29.97 in a 23.98 timeline at 9:15 into this video "Mixing Frame Rates":

JarrodMFay wrote: All of the advice FCPX.guru gave is great although I'd question the reason for 30fps (29.97) here. I agree that's what you should shoot but it's because 29.97 is the industry standard for news delivery.

And what does that mean?

JarrodMFay wrote: Saying that 24fps (23.98) doesn't look more "cinematic" is not accurate. There is a visible difference between the two (with pros and cons of each). If you shoot 29.97 and put it on a 23.98 timeline it will work just fine but the motion blur will not be the same and it will still have a "news look". You can add forced motion blur (in AE for example) but it doesn't look as natural in all cases. It really just depends on the look you are going for. Best of luck!

What is the "news look"?

And why would someone want that over the traditional "cinematic look"?

What other advantages does 2997 FPS offer?

While I am doing news and documentary type things, I want things to look natural/traditional.

Examples I have seen with faster FPS - usually like 60 - look very UN-natural and like a strange video game?!

Television broadcast is 59.97.
HD video is usually 23.98 as it conforms 24fps film to NTSC for broadcast easier.
29.97 is simply the NTSC version of 30fps.

24fps does not make your video look like it was shot on film. It only makes your video look like 24fps video. There are dozens of articles explaining this by very experienced professionals. Frame rate is the least of the many factors that go into making your viideo look like film. 24fps on an iPhone will never look anything like film. And if you really want the retro-film look, shoot 16fps.

Motion blur is also a bit more complex than simple frame rate. Shutter speed, sensor size, lighting, speed of the action going across the frame, etc.

I have found over 20+ years that 30fps is a good medium, allowing me to go 24fps and achieve a film look, or conform to 59.97 television broadcast, and still look good.

And it's all very subjective, too.

But 24fps by itself will do nothing to make your video look like film. Not all cameras will give you the motion blur mentioned even at 24fps.

FCPX.guru wrote: ...Frame rate is the least of the many factors that go into making your viideo look like film. 24fps on an iPhone will never look anything like film...

Agreed -- the main problem with frame rate is NOT 23.98 vs 29.97, it is getting so obsessed with "24" you end up with a mix of frame rates, then try to conform those in post. Or else you have only 29.97 material and due to the drumbeat of 24, you cram that on a 23.98 timeline.

Almost no viewers, unprompted, will notice the difference between a production that is shot, edited, distributed and viewed in 24 fps vs 30 fps (or 29.97) fps. However many people will notice a mixed-rate production because of the motion cadence issues. Interlaced broadcast TV has an advantage of 3:2 pulldown so they can do 24p>29.97i (59.94 fields/sec, interlaced) with less problem.

But with progressive digital video there is simply no perfect way to mix 24p (inc'l 23.98p) and 30p (inc'l 29.97p). Optical flow rate conforming can handle some things but it's a gamble due to risk of artifacts and incurs high computational burden when rendering. Broadcast TV has expensive rack-mounted rate converters: www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1485343-R...0_hd1_hd_single.html

Even with prior prompting of the viewer in a controlled A/B test ("can you see any difference between scene A and scene B?") most viewers won't notice the difference between 24 and 30 fps. But in a prompted A/B test between a pure 23.98p or 29.97p production vs a mixed-rate production (using software rate conforming), they will notice jerky motion cadence due to mixing non-multiple frame rates.

This situation happens exactly as posted previously in this thread: without prior planning you end up with a bunch of 29.97 material and due to the drumbeat of 23.98, you try to cram that on a 23.98 timeline.

In the documentary or news gathering genres, you naturally end up with contributed material and make the best of it. But in a planned production you ideally want the frame rates for shooting, editing, distribution and viewing to all match or be an even multiple of each other. A pure all-29.97 or all-23.98 production will look much better than a mixed production where that's crammed on a 23.98 timeline.

joema wrote:

FCPX.guru wrote: ...Frame rate is the least of the many factors that go into making your viideo look like film. 24fps on an iPhone will never look anything like film...

Agreed -- the main problem with frame rate is NOT 23.98 vs 29.97, it is getting so obsessed with "24" you end up with a mix of frame rates, then try to conform those in post. Or else you have only 29.97 material and due to the drumbeat of 24, you cram that on a 23.98 timeline.

A few things...

1.) I don't plan on mixing film rates and am not sure how I could easily even do that.

2.) I thought this video was excellent explaining things...

Filmmaker IQ: A Defense of 24 FPS and Why It's Here to Stay for Cinema

3.) You guys never explained what the "broadcast look" is.

4.) Even if choosing 24FPS alone isn't enough to replicate the "cinema look", after watching the above video plus the otherone you suggested above, it seems like 24 FPS is the way to go if you want to get a "traditional" look - which I do.

It sounds like FCPX.guru prefers faster film rates, but is there any compelling reason why I should *not* shoot in 24FPS if that is what I am comfortable with?

If you plan to distribute to a medium that can play true 24fps, and you really want the film look, then shoot everything on 24fps.

I deliver to seveal different mediums at the same time almost daily. Television broadcast, digital signage, web VOD platforms, so 30fps is a happy medium for me, and many of my colleges.

What folks are calling the broadcast look (never heard that term before now) is simply the natural look of digital video. Much of what you view on traditional television is just that. But due to the many delivery methods to a TV set these days, not everything (even broadcast TV) looks like it used to.

But again, if you are producing work that will be viewed by an audiece wathcing via a 24fps capable medium, then go for it. Your choice. But some of us produce work for a paycheck and have bosses and clients dictating the variables that then dictate how we shoot and edit. It's all subjective, it all depends on your personal situation.

And the guy in your linked video misses a few facts and seems to be slanted in his argument. So, shoot 24fps, no law says you can't. Depends on what you want in your final output, and where it's going to be shown.

CubVideographer wrote: 1.) I don't plan on mixing film rates and am not sure how I could easily even do that...

If you shoot or obtain any material shot at 29.97 or 59.94 (e.g, GoPro, drone, contributed stuff, iPhone video shot by anyone else not using Filmic Pro, etc) then you have a mixed-rate situation.

Gimbal and drone shooters often like 59.94 fps because it smooths out their rapid moves. Of course in most cases they shouldn't be yanking the frame around anyway. Hollywood uses 24 fps on SteadiCams all the time with no problem, but they know the guidelines about motion and panning rates for each composition.

There are no hard and fast rules, but traditionally news gathering and short-form material was shot at 29.97 and long-form, serious or narrative material at 23.98 or 24 fps.

Both 23.98 and 29.97 are both fine and can look great. The problem is when you try to mix them. Those issues can be solved (to varying degrees) but it introduces significant complexity and post production workload.

joema wrote: There are no hard and fast rules, but traditionally news gathering and short-form material was shot at 29.97 and long-form, serious or narrative material at 23.98 or 24 fps.

Both 23.98 and 29.97 are both fine and can look great. The problem is when you try to mix them. Those issues can be solved (to varying degrees) but it introduces significant complexity and post production workload.

Well, like most things, I guess I just need to gain more experience before I can come to my own conclusions about this topic.

For now, I am going to play it safe and go with 24FPS.

But as I grow in this field and get into fancier things like gimbals, drones, slow motion, etc., then I will definitely have to revisit stuff.

Thanks everyone for all of the thoughts so far...

P.S. It would be nice if I could get help with this other thread...

Camera settings?