Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Exporting movies from Final Cut Pro X  (Read 6188 times)
Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 857


WWW
« on: October 15, 2013, 06:08:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I still seem to have issues when exporting films from FCPX.  I shoot with a GH2 and can make some okay films in FCP - in my opinion  Grin

The problems seem to be in getting the films out for others to see, and to store them for posterity-haha!  I have just tried exporting (sharing) as a Master File and used the default H264 setting.  The ten minute film becomes a 1.1GB file and plays on my Mac.  However it has a fine screen of horizontal lines across the whole film which to me is quite obvious, a bit like taking a still image from a TV screen.  I also tried exporting it as Apple ProRes 422, which becomes a 10GB file, which looks much smoother, however it appears to have no sound!

So my question to you experienced film-makers is

A, what is the best means of exporting to DVD. 

B, the best for say Vimeo, and

C, the best way for archiving the films.  The latter is so that I can basically eventually ditch all the original footage (is that the right term) and reduce storage.  The bulk of my works are short wedding films, plus some more personal stuff.

In case it helps, I do have Compressor, but I really struggle trying to understand how to make it work.  Perhaps I'm a bit slow with software, though I can handle Lightroom....
Many thanks in anticipation

Jim
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2013, 06:17:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Some wooly knowledge.

DVDs - can store files like 264 or prores, or be TVstyle DVDs - compressor is your friend for the latter DVD files are 1movie file, 1 audio file and some other bits and bobs.

H264 at maybe 5mbs - read thier guidlines

Prores.

--

Compressor is not intuitive, you drag a 'setting up to the top' and then hit export, there are settings for different formats bottom left.

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2013, 06:24:59 AM »
ReplyReply

And the stripes.

Check the settings of your sequence and that field dominance is set to none.

(Im an FCP6 user not X but that sorted some issues iv had of that nature)
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 857


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2013, 04:29:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello Morgan

Thank you for getting back to me on this.  As an experienced photographer I cope reasonably well with the shooting end of moving images - but struggle miserably with the file types and output.  There never seems enough time when you're busy to learn new stuff - and learning is mandatory with technology.

You guys chatting about video makes me realise how novices feel when I'm going on about colour spaces and raw files etc in still photography.

Best wishes

Jim
Logged
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2013, 05:01:25 PM »
ReplyReply

A & B  Just use the Share Option from FCPX.  If you have a Vimeo + (5GB/Week upload) account, use either 720 or 1080 (you'll need to change a setting in your Vimeo Profile for 1080) for Apple Devices.  Compressor *is* confusing, try playing with one of the built in settings and making changes, then be prepared to wait......  I'm sorely tempted to buy a Matrox encoder


C - Prores
« Last Edit: October 17, 2013, 05:06:39 PM by John.Murray » Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2013, 05:51:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Be aware that the Matrox card is HD only. It won't handle files from a future 4K camera.

Michael
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1189


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2013, 09:37:29 PM »
ReplyReply

If your working in FCP X remember even though you can view in real time, your always rendering, either in foreground or background, but still rendering.

To cut your render times in any Apple application transcode (encode) your footage to the Apple Prorezz Codec, prior to editing.

Yes it will increase your file size, but your working in a codec that doesn't require the NLE to do as much heavy lifting.

And going to prorez 4:2:2 from a 4:2:0 camera makes what seems to be a  more robust file for editing and color correction and if not more robust does make for faster editing as fcp 7 and  X defaults to the prores codec.

As far as transcoding your original footage from h264 you can use MPEG streamclip (free) and a few other free ones, though I find Wondershare's software the fastest and easiest to use, easiest to setup and make presets.  Think of it as Apple's compressor that is fast and easy and you can always move your footage and final edit to another machine to work while you do other things.  Some use Sorenson's squeeze which is very good, somewhat complicated and expensive.  For ease of use Wondershare is the best I've found.

_____________________


Now in regards to outputting in FCP X, burn your movie out in Prores 422 then encode it through one of the software suites I mentioned.  Keep the prores as your master output.

Wondershare has presets for everything from Vimeo (which I believe has a maximum size of 720 (vertical) and check with the vimeo stats and they will tell you the highest kbs for streaming.

It also has presets for dvd (mpeg2) blu ray, mobile devices, etc.

______________________

There are dedicated hardware encoders for final conforming and they usually run about $5,000 or more minimum, but that's beyond what your asking.



_______________________

4k has a lot of options new ones coming per day  I think the only graphics card for mac that assists with 4k processing is the quadro that will even work with RED files, though there may be more.

________________________

so if I've confused you don't feel bad because it's the wild west out there when it comes to standard video specs, but I'd start with prores, stay in that format, export your final lock edit in that format and then transcode to the various codecs and devices.

IMO

BC
Logged

John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2013, 03:08:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Although FCPX  renders in the backround, it's not necessarily "always" rendering.  FCPX gives you three options:

Native:  leave in h264 format and let FCPX render on the fly.
Optimize:  transcode to Prores 4:2:2
Proxy: about 1/3 the space of optimize

The last two will backround render until completed.  On my Mac Pro 2006, I use Optimize, and can begin working immediately, even with 2 angle multicam projects. 
Logged

bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1189


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 18, 2013, 04:47:11 PM »
ReplyReply

John your right, sorry.  I'm always set to prores so I'm always rendering and I'll admit fcp X is not my strongest knowledge base.

But in reality, if I ever find the time to get up to speed on fcpX (I have inquired about booking a in studio instructor to go through it with me and hopefully make the transition faster and easier) I probably will start working in proress 444 and soon 4444 probably in 4k.

I'd much rather work in the largest and most complete file my system can handle, because drive space isn't free, but it's better to work ahead of the curve than behind it.

BC
« Last Edit: October 18, 2013, 08:12:47 PM by bcooter » Logged

Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 857


WWW
« Reply #9 on: October 20, 2013, 11:06:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Russell and John, thanks for your information - though it starts to give me a headache! Grin

I do get the message that Prores is good though.  I will eventually understand it all I'm sure.

Jim
Logged
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2013, 10:23:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Jim:  Watch Guide to Cinematography for Photographers

https://shop.platformpurple.com/?shop=2083#moreInfo/tll_cinema

Michael and Chris do a great job sorting it out....
« Last Edit: October 21, 2013, 11:42:18 AM by John.Murray » Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2013, 12:15:14 PM »
ReplyReply

I do get the message that Prores is good though.  I will eventually understand it all I'm sure.

Jim

does this make sense.. This is the simple description/slang I would use for photographers..? Im sure it is not technically correct but gives a concept

H264 = jpg (mainly jpg2)
ProRes = Tiff
raw = raw

H264 = easy to send online, falls apart when graded, takes longer (than a tiff) to open and may therefore be hard to edit (stresses the computer more)
Prores = hard to send online, more robust, easy to edit
Raw - usually needs some unstuffing before it can be worked, may stress the computer, too large to send, storage issues

S

« Last Edit: October 21, 2013, 12:17:20 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« Reply #12 on: October 23, 2013, 02:51:04 PM »
ReplyReply

nice explanation!  i'd amend to add

AVI = jpg
H264= jpg keyframes with differences recorded between ....
Logged

bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1189


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #13 on: October 23, 2013, 07:51:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Russell and John, thanks for your information - though it starts to give me a headache! Grin

I do get the message that Prores is good though.  I will eventually understand it all I'm sure.

Jim

Jim,

Thanks.  I suggest doing what works for you, especially if your working in a closed loop where you are the director, dp, camera opertor, editor, colorists, etc.

If your working with other's then go for the best file possible.

The real thing is you'll get more respect for your videos if you shoot with distinction, edit a compelling story and learn how to really color a video to keep it interesting.

And keep in mind there is no one way to do any of this.

Heck I can color, key, track and blend in the old slow fcp7 timeline with great effect, though few people would work in the style I do.

Since your video is going on the web for view, nobody is ever going to know if you edited in h264, mp2 or proress.

IMO

BC
Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2013, 02:27:14 AM »
ReplyReply

nobody is ever going to know if you edited in h264, mp2 or proress.


This is true... but with a stills cam analogy if you shoot a perfect jpg it looks great, if you get it a little bit wrong or a lot wrong you (the OP) will be aware that the jpg will break when manipulated - same is true for 'jpg' video codecs

Incidentally that logic (and empirical experience) leads me to believe that log and flat and other home-brew source image 'looks' on 'jpg' (h264), motion cameras should be avoided

S

Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1189


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #15 on: October 26, 2013, 06:44:04 AM »
ReplyReply

This is true... but with a stills cam analogy if you shoot a perfect jpg it looks great, if you get it a little bit wrong or a lot wrong you (the OP) will be aware that the jpg will break when manipulated - same is true for 'jpg' video codecs

Incidentally that logic (and empirical experience) leads me to believe that log and flat and other home-brew source image 'looks' on 'jpg' (h264), motion cameras should be avoided

S



I think you want to be somewhere in between, even in raw.   A flat log and gamma can fool you and makes decisions harder to make as to where the image is going, a crushed out file gives you no room to move, so somewhere in between kind of covers both bets.

What would be nice is the ability to really fine tune the  on camera monitors and viewfinders to match what is in the computer.  I hate zebras in camera, but have begun to use them more and more, even in color grading, because the camera monitors just aren't zero'd enough to let you know your blowing a highlight where you don't want to and we all know it's much easier to recover some shadow than try to pull in highlight detail.

IMO

BC
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #16 on: October 29, 2013, 04:13:49 AM »
ReplyReply

This is true... but with a stills cam analogy if you shoot a perfect jpg it looks great, if you get it a little bit wrong or a lot wrong you (the OP) will be aware that the jpg will break when manipulated - same is true for 'jpg' video codecs

Incidentally that logic (and empirical experience) leads me to believe that log and flat and other home-brew source image 'looks' on 'jpg' (h264), motion cameras should be avoided

S



Yeah. I do think that luts in post should be avoided with h264
But trying to get the closest possible look from capture
And just require to fine tuning in post.

It seems that bitrates (following the still analogy) acts
Like the quality numbers on jpegs. A very high bitrate would be like a
12 quality jpeg.
But it's not as simple. In the gh2 era, I tested almost all the
Possible hacks between a similar range of bitrate and it's
Not just about the highest bitrate but very much about
The matrix and other oscur technical reasons.
There were hacks that virtually didn't bring any serious
Improvements with just a higher bitrate, and others where
Yes a clear, visible improvement was immediatly
Noticiable.

But then, I'm not sure we should think still into motion.
The brain doesn't catch a fixed image but a succesion of
Stories. What really matters are the conections between
Each scene, the transitions. What would be an unaceptable
Quality in still imagery can be absolutly irrelevant
Into a motion context.
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 29, 2013, 05:11:29 AM »
ReplyReply


But then, I'm not sure we should think still into motion.. What would be an unaceptable quality in still imagery can be absolutly irrelevant Into a motion context.

Also noise and moire that might be OK on a still dances in motion. So some things can be worse, but some things need to be better..

Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #18 on: October 29, 2013, 08:25:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Also noise and moire that might be OK on a still dances in motion. So some things can be worse, but some things need to be better..



True, it works the other way too.

But it's funny.
While half of the planet is seeking film look, bombing the web with
 garden's fence dollied and shallowed dop, graded like
Billionaires hollycrap, sorry, hollywood productions,

What's getting huge market parts are those realities. You know
Things like "wheeler dealers". The latest fuckery that litteraly
Gets huge audience is "hamish mafia"... If you don't know
About it is that GB is still more civilized than Spain.
This cultural wave, ı'm convinced, is going to affect the
Perseption of the audience, putting the documentary video
Look on-the-cheap as the norm.
What makes money is less and less the sophistication
But the dit look. In fact, the lack of look.
But I must say that most of those realities are often
More entertaining than a bad drama.
Logged
Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 857


WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 29, 2013, 02:01:02 PM »
ReplyReply

does this make sense.. This is the simple description/slang I would use for photographers..? Im sure it is not technically correct but gives a concept

H264 = jpg (mainly jpg2)
ProRes = Tiff
raw = raw

H264 = easy to send online, falls apart when graded, takes longer (than a tiff) to open and may therefore be hard to edit (stresses the computer more)
Prores = hard to send online, more robust, easy to edit
Raw - usually needs some unstuffing before it can be worked, may stress the computer, too large to send, storage issues

S



Thanks Sam - I like simple explanations!
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad