Save Trimmed Video and Workflow

[railroadguy]

I have read some of the suggested work flows and have a question.

I place a captured video on the time line, DV-AVI, drag the slider to a mark in point and then to a mark out point. Now I Save Trimmed Video. That small piece of saved video has virtually no loss as compared to the original clip, is that right?

[heinz-oz]

Right It is not saved as a separate clip, I think. The VS project will apply the mark in/out points and the file remains as it was. Only when you go to the >Share step is a new file generated. If you stay with DV-AVI for the new file, the possible quality loss is minute and only in areas where titles, transitions, filters etc. have been applied.

That's my understanding of it.

[railroadguy]

That's what I thought. I also understand that work flow is very personal decision. I read one workflow on editing which made no sense to me. http://phpbb.ulead.com.tw/EN/viewtopic.php?t=20224

When I created my simmer 2007 video http://ribbonrail.com/Videos/summer_2007a.html I knew I had bits of video I wanted to use scatted across four or five large (20 minute) clips. So taking one large clip and marking the bit I wanted and Saving The Trimmed piece I now have a new piece of video, which the then rename to something the means something to me, and relink it. Then move on to the next bit. When I am finished I have a Library window of all the bits I need. Then I can decide how to put them together, what fits and what does not. I save this to a Project file. As long as I don't go near the Share Tab, I can play to my hearts content with timing, filters, moving clips.

Coming from the age of 16mm, I like to see these clips spread out, not knowing yet how they will be put together or even if the whole clip will be used. That is one reason I don't like Multi Trim as it places all the clips on the time line and since I don't know yet just how these clips will be used, much less in what order, that is no good.

If all one wants to do is remove commercials from a TV show some of the work flows I have seen are fine. But trying to create a "movie" to tell a story, my way seems more logical.

Does this make sense or am I "3 clowns short of a circus" ?

[Ron P.]

What does not make sense about that workflow? If it confuses you then it possibly confuses others. Steve could clarify this to eliminate the confusion.

Basically the workflow is just

1. Capture--Getting video onto your PC
2. Edit--Trimming, cutting, filters, effects, transitions, titles, audio etc...
3. Sharing/Creating/Rendering---Video file of your project, or skipping to the next step without doing this.
4. Sharing-->Creating a Disc---Burning a DVD, or creating files on your system that you can use to make multiple DVDs, or test prior to burning (Video_TS).

Steve just provides an in-depth explanation on it..

[Black Lab]

As a former poster's signature line used to read, "It's not what works best, it's what works best for you."

[railroadguy]

Basically the workflow is just

1. Capture--Getting video onto your PC
2. Edit--Trimming, cutting, filters, effects, transitions, titles, audio etc...
3. Sharing/Creating/Rendering---Video file of your project, or skipping to the next step without doing this.
4. Sharing-->Creating a Disc---Burning a DVD, or creating files on your system that you can use to make multiple DVDs, or test prior to burning (Video_TS).

Steve just provides an in-depth explanation on it..

Don't get me wrong here. I was not knocking the approach. Maybe I was reading to much into it.

I guess I was reading the jump from "What this means is that you place your source materials from step 1 onto the timeline or overlay tracks. make your cuts, add your transitions, titles and extra backgrounds sounds - generally you tidy it all up, cut out the rubbish and put in all your Steven Spielberg Special Effects." and then straight to "Method 1 which is my preferred method, is to create a brand new video file on your hard drive with all of those edits processed. It is no longer a project file it is now a standalone and playable video."

Rereading that I see know that he really does not touch on the editing process itself but after your editing is completed, then you render to a stand alone video.

For me, and others I am guessing, the Project file is Gold. If I have to make two versions, which I did have to do for my example, I go back to the project file, give it a new name and make the changes for a Web version. Now I have two project files of the same video, but with small changes based on what the final output will be used for.

And Black Lab is correct, it is what works best for you.

Is there a workflow type of document for the editing process itself?

[Ken Berry]

I think we should also clarify that using 'Save Trimmed Video' as described by railroadguy DOES in fact create a new file. That is precisely why I use that command since I have had problems in the past when I have not created a new file.

If you simply insert cut points, but don't then 'Save Trimmed Videos', then in fact the cuts are only virtual and stored away in the Project VSP file. The actual cuts are not made until, as Heinz says, you actually go to Share > Create Video File.

However, to repeat, in your work flow, you are in fact creating new files.

BUT -- since they are still in DV/AVI format (which is not a lossy format), you are in effect maintaining exactly the same quality.

The other thing you have to be aware of is that after using 'Save Trimmed Video', the original file in the timeline remains totally unchanged. The new file appears in the Library pane. But then, I usually physically delete the cut bit from the timeline and drag and drop the newly created 'Trimmed Video' into the same space. Otherwise, the new file will be ignored, and only the virtual cuts will be taken into account...

This may in fact amount to the same thing in the end result. But as I say, I experienced some minute problems around the 'virtual' cut points, particularly when transitions were inserted there. Using Save Trimmed Video has avoided those problems, at least in my own case.

[sjj1805]

..........
Rereading that I see know that he really does not touch on the editing process itself but after your editing is completed, then you render to a stand alone video...........

Hi guys - thanks for the feedback.
Rather than trying to put too much into one thread which would confuse newbies, I have split things up into smaller parts. The 'suggested workflow' post is an overview of the process and nicely summarised by Ron above.

For hints and tips about editing I am half way through a lengthy thread
From Camcorder to DVD with Video Studio - Editing Phase.

As a former poster's signature line used to read, "It's not what works best, it's what works best for you."

Absolutely and I hope I made that point clear in the suggested workflow.

[brodwidr]

Hi -

I am just a few weeks past total newbie myself but I think I might be able to shed some light on the possible confusion here, and perhaps these issues could be clarified in future workflows and other guides.

I hope I have gotten this right; I've skipped some of the nuances to keep it as simple as possible. Please advise me if I've missed anything important.

There are several possible sources of quality degradation and irreversible changes in the video editing process. These are similar and easily confused. But they are different, and need to be understood in order for the work flows to make sense.

1.) It is important to understand that any time video is compressed to distribute it, a codec is involved, and that some codecs are inherently lossy while others are lossless. A lossy codec is one where the video -- after being compressed -- will never look as good as the original. And a lossless codec means that the video, after being compressed, is visually indistinguishable from the original. Of course, it's not all a matter of extremes. Some codecs are slightly lossy and others are very lossy. Generally speaking, the more you need to compress the video (e.g. to post it on YouTube you need to compress it further than to burn a DVD with it.) the more lossy the codec. But there are important exceptions. It is crucial to understand that regardless of how many times you change the video from one format to another (a process variously referred to as "transcoding" or "rendering" and discussed below) if you output your project to a lossy codec you will lose quality. There is no free lunch.

MPEG is lossy, but the miniDV format used by default in files taken off your camcorder is relatively lossless. That is why, even though the files are bigger with DV than with MPEG, DV is the recommended format to use most of the time.

2.) When you have video in a lossy format and you have to process some change to it (like a crossfade, or overlaying a title) the software actually has to translate the software from that format into something else in order to process the effect. What the "something else" is, isn't that important, what is important is that each trip back and forth out of a lossy codec and back again, or from one lossy codec to another further degrades quality. Think of it as similar to what happens when you make a fax of a fax. And then you fax that fax of a fax to someone else. Pretty soon it's illegible. A fax is to the original document what a lossy codec like MPEG is to the original video. Use it when you have to , but don't use it more than you have to. And when you have the choice between sending a document by email (lossless) or photocopy (slighly lossy) or fax (very lossy) choose the most lossless method possible under circumstances.

That is why the work flows take such great pains to avoid unnecessary format changes between MPEG, DV, and other formats. Not only is it very tiresome to wait while you computer does the processing, it is damaging to the quality of the project.

3.) The above should *not* be confused with what happens when you simply make a digital copy of an MPEG video. In that case, you are just copying the bits, in the same digital format, from one storage device to another. To continue the fax analogy -- it's a bit like taking a fax you've received and copying it on a very high quality copier, then sending the copy to someone else. It doesn't make it less legible, but it doesn't improve it either.

4.) Another issue, completely unrelated to this, has to do with how VS actually executes the changes you make (such as trims, overlays, titles, etc.) The confusion here arises because everyone understands word processors and most people assume that video editing works analogously to word processors. But it doesn't, and the difference is the source of much confusion:

In word processor, your original document file is changed whenever you make a change on the screen, such as add or delete a word. Those changes are then stored whenever you hit "file>save" or when your program auto-saves, as many do, on regular intervals. Thus, the user has the assumption that she or he can't go back to an earlier version of the document unless that document has been saved under a different name, or unless the user clicks "undo" repeatedly.

VS, and most video editors, operate under a completely different principle. VS never ever changes the original document (the clip you started with) unless you explicitly tell it to do so. Until then, all the things you do with your video (such as trimming, titling, video effects, audio effects, etc.) are simply stored in a separate file. this is the VSP project file. The general name for this type of file is an "edit decision list" -- becuase it is a list of the decisions you make during editing. Nothing more and nothign less. The advantages of doing it this way are: (1) it is much harder to accidently destroy the video you spent hours, perhaps millions of dollars creating. (2) if your project is really huge, you can make most of your editing decisions on a low resolution copy of the original video (this is a "proxy") and then only apply the edit decisions list to the real video at the end. This saves time and equipment cost. (3) If you later want to make several derivative works from the same original footage (the director's cut, the regular theatrical release, the TV version, the airplane version, the DVD, and the trailer) all the original video is there for you and you are not making copies of copies of copies.

Because of the way VS works, using an edit decisions list, not much actually changes until you get to the "share" step. It is only at this step that the edit decision list is actually processed against the original files to produce whatever output you have asked it to produce. Clips aren't actually trimmed, but your desired trim points are stored in the project file. New video isn't produced (except for previews.) You can always go back to source clip and start over completely and you've lost nothing. You can have multiple different project files that all are based on the same clips. (Imagine trying to do this with MS Word!!! - it would be a version control nightmare.)

To conclude, much of the work flow issues that strike the new user as confusing or weird are the result of two fundamenntal design issues that are unique to video editing (as compared to text editing.) The first is the lossy nature of many codecs, particularly the codecs needed to distribute video in DVD or online, and the need to minimize transcoding or rendering. The second, is the need to track the editors' changes in the "edit decision list" rather than make the changes instantly in the video files themselves.

With these issues in mind, the work flows make a lot more sense.

[railroadguy]

MPEG is lossy, but the miniDV format used by default in files taken off your camcorder is relatively lossless. That is why, even though the files are bigger with DV than with MPEG, DV is the recommended format to use most of the time.

Correct. As far as I am concerned the MPEG or what ever the render format is totally a saprate work flow from editing. And that may be some confusion. There is a hierarchy in work flows. One for the over all process and then individual processes.

That is why the work flows take such great pains to avoid unnecessary format changes between MPEG, DV, and other formats. Not only is it very tiresome to wait while you computer does the processing, it is damaging to the quality of the project.

Agreed

The above should *not* be confused with what happens when you simply make a digital copy of an MPEG video. In that case, you are just copying the bits, in the same digital format, from one storage device to another. To continue the fax analogy -- it's a bit like taking a fax you've received and copying it on a very high quality copier, then sending the copy to someone else. It doesn't make it less legible, but it doesn't improve it either.

What I tend to forget is that people use this program for widely different reasons. I want to focus on editing, building a video from many parts of many other videos and placing them in an order to tell a story. Others simply want to capture videos, cutting out the bad parts adding transitions and titles and then making a DVD, not necessarily rearranging the parts. Others still want to transfer PVR (DVR) recordings cutting out the ads and making a DVD. Three totally different uses within the editing process requiring three somewhat differing work flows.

Because of the way VS works, using an edit decisions list, not much actually changes until you get to the "share" step. It is only at this step that the edit decision list is actually processed against the original files to produce whatever output you have asked it to produce. Clips aren't actually trimmed, but your desired trim points are stored in the project file. New video isn't produced (except for previews.) You can always go back to source clip and start over completely and you've lost nothing. You can have multiple different project files that all are based on the same clips. (Imagine trying to do this with MS Word!!! - it would be a version control nightmare.)

Agreed. My only point in this is and asking the original question is that I can't (don't want to) work from large (30 minute plus clips) with a lot of editing points. I want to save the part that I want or think I want and then begin again with the new time line in order to work with those parts only.

I guess the bottom line here is don't go anywhere the SHARE tab until you have saved your project and then want to see the results for farther editing and then even when finished, save all the bits of video that you did cut and save along with the project file. If you blow all that away you are left with your end MPEG or whatever format, and will have real problems if you find a need to go back and reedit the video.

[Black Lab]

Wow, I've been using this software for 5 years and now you guys have me confused.

[brodwidr]

You make an excellent point, railroadguy. It would be great if there could be different work flow recommendations designed specifically for the different kind of uses such as you describe. It's not as if there is one right work flow for everyone.

- David

[railroadguy]

First off let me say that all the information members have put together are fantastic. A lot of work by some very dedicated people.

So maybe it's time that people like me to put up or shut up and try to write a work flow for the specific type of editing I am doing?

Having said that, is it possible to have a sticky on the top of the forum pointing to all these in house work flows and other tutorials? People often times point them out and I bookmark them, but maybe one page where all are listed. If there is such a page, maybe place that on top as it may help all of us from time to time.

An an example, sjj1805 fantastic thread on the Editing Phase. I had never seen that before he pointed it out.

[railroadguy]

Wow, I've been using this software for 5 years and now you guys have me confused.

¡§If you cannot convince them, confuse them.¡¨

Harry S Truman

[Black Lab]

Just make sure your post doesn't elude to any potential bugs in the system - or all he## will break loose.