Issues rendering as AVCHD

[fender7802]

Hi,

I recently purchased a Panasonic HC-V500 camcorder. The camera records in AVCHD (.mts) at 1920x1080, 60fps. I have done two tests with VideoStudio Pro X5, and both have small glitches in the rendered files. The issue is (1) stuttering - a few frames will repeat, and (2) a clicking sound between direct cuts from one shot to the next.

In VS:

I am simply using the browse option to put the video files in the library, and then dragging them onto the timeline.

I have selected "Enable 60P/50P Editing" before starting my project and checked back variously to see that it has remained enabled.

I am rendering using the template AVCHD (1920x1080 60p). This seems to work better than "Same as First Video Clip".

Project Properties: maybe someone can clear this up for me, because I'm not even sure what these properties represent. The Edit file format is listed as Microsoft AVI files, which contains:

NTSC double (60 fps)
Microsoft AVI files
24 bits, 854 x 480, 60 fps
Frame-based
Uncompressed
PCM, 44.100 kHz, 16 Bit, Stereo

Given that these settings are not at all what I want as my rendered file, maybe this is part of the issue?

Info for Panasonic users: for my first movie, I used the HD Writer software to transfer the videos from my camera onto my hard drive. For the second movie, I copied them directly from the SDHC card. In both instances I have the same problems with glitches in the rendered file.

My computer specs:

I have tried this with two computers. My laptop and a desktop. The desktop is the more powerful of the two and therefore I'll put the specifications of that down since the same problem exists with both machines.

Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
AMD Quad-Core Processor
10GB RAM

A little more info:

I am burning the rendered AVCHD file to a DVD-RW with ImgBurn. Correct me if I'm wrong but VSPX5 cannot burn at 60 frames per second? I see no way to adjust the frame rate in the Create Disc wizard. When played back on the a Blu-Ray player, the video has the aforementioned problems. But when played back on a computer, the video is much worse. There are many more graphics glitches including full out pausing of the video for several seconds.

Thank you very much.

[Ken Berry]

I am not sure which video you are talking about at the end -- original or rendered -- but the simple fact of the matter is that if you are down-converting high def AVCHD to standard def -- and DVD compatible -- mpeg-2, then there is no such thing as 60P for that format. By international standard, a video DVD can only play at 29.97 or 24 frames per second (NTSC) or 25 or 24 fps (PAL). So going from a fully progressive 60P (60 full frames per second) to half that will mean that VS (and any other similar editing package) literally has to throw away half the frames...

[Terfyn]

Ken is right. I have the HC-V700 (UK) I record in 1080/50i HA1920 quality and produce SD DVDs. There is no problem with this process. You may find that recording in 1080/60i is a better option.

[fender7802]

Thanks for the responses.

I brought up the burning capabilities of VideoStudio just as a side question. But I am burning the 60 fps rendered file with ImgBurn which (I believe) is keeping the properties of the video when I burn it on a DVD as AVCHD.

Ken - in the last paragraph I was saying that these problems exist with the rendered file only (either when played back on the computer or put on a DVD as AVCHD with ImgBurn, just much worse when played on the computer), the original video is fine.

Terfyn - I would prefer not to lose the 60fps if I don't have to.

[Terfyn]

We are different this side of the pond. We have 50 you have 60. The point I was making was that 60i may be less problematical than 60p.

[Ken Berry]

I would prefer not to lose the 60fps if I don't have to.

And the point I was trying to make was that if you are down-converting to DVD-quality mpeg-2, there are no ifs or buts -- you will definitely lose the 60 full frames a second and revert to 60 half frames a second, meaning 30 (or really 29.97) full, interleaved frames per second. That's the international standard and that's how it works.

If you want to keep the full 60 fps quality, then you have to render in that quality and produce a new AVCHD using 60 fps. But as I say, that can't even be used at the moment even for a Blu-Ray disc (unless you down-convert a little to create a 1280 x 720P video).

Personally, I seldom these days bother about burning to an actual disc, whether BD or DVD, except when a family member or friend really wants one. Instead, I render my HD projects out in their original format and then copy them to an external hard drive, or even USB stick drive with sufficient space, and plug that into my Blu-Ray player. If your home network has sufficient speed and your BD player is part of it, you might even be able to play the videos from the computer. Unfortunately, my HDTV is a little older so cannot play video on USB stick drives or external hard drives plugged into its USB port. But more modern HDTVs of course can.

[pvreditor]

Also, you can upload 1080p AVCHD files to YouTube, which can then be watched by anyone anywhere with a computer and an Internet connection. YouTube (and other online video services) has different levels of security, so you can let specific people view certain videos -- that's pretty easy to do, actually. I recently did this with a commercial project... I shot videos at a student music recital, then uploaded each student's performance to YouTube. Each student must have the link to his/her video in order to watch it, and any one student can't view any other student's video. If the student wants to share the video with friends & relatives, all s/he needs to do is send the link. Without the link, however, the video can't be searched and found.

The quality of 1080p video on YouTube is not as good as 1080p video played directly on your computer, but it's MUCH better than DVD-quality video.

Bob Kovacs
http://www.bobkovacs.com

[fender7802]

Thanks for the help again. Do you know exactly what the feature "Enable 60P/50P Editing" does? I ask because I did another test, this time with that option disabled, and the video came out near perfect. There were no graphics glitches, and only one time did I hear that clicking sound between shots. I'm still editing and rendering as 60fps.

[dan]

If you want to keep the full 60 fps quality, then you have to render in that quality and produce a new AVCHD using 60 fps. But as I say, that can't even be used at the moment even for a Blu-Ray disc (unless you down-convert a little to create a 1280 x 720P video).

If there is not one single player hardware capable of playing an HD disc at 60 fps, then why do some camcorders record at that frame rate?

Things like those are senseless to me. Please explain.

Something similar that was senseless (some years ago) was that most video capture applications captured video in AVI, forcing you to render the video later to MPEG2, and the fact that it captured in AVI represented null advantages, and double time of rendering.

[pvreditor]

If there is not one single player hardware capable of playing an HD disc at 60 fps, then why do some camcorders record at that frame rate?

Things like those are senseless to me. Please explain.

Something similar that was senseless (some years ago) was that most video capture applications captured video in AVI, forcing you to render the video later to MPEG2, and the fact that it captured in AVI represented null advantages, and double time of rendering.

YouTube will upload and display 1080p, so that's why I use it. I don't have a Bluray player, but I upload lots of videos to YouTube.

Bob Kovacs
http://www.bobkovacs.com

[Ken Berry]

And I play 90% of my HD footage, including 50p footage -- via either a USB stick drive or external hard drive, connected to my blu-ray player (PS3) which is connected to my HDTV via HDMI. It plays the fully progressive 50p files without problems. Indeed, if I transfer the HD 50p files to a DVD (or BD disk) as archives, as opposed to a Blu-Ray BDMV structure, again the PS3 has no trouble in playing 50p in its original form.

In other words, it is not so much the hardware player that has the trouble -- it is that the international Blu-Ray standard has not yet included 1080p (50 or 60 fps) as part of it, though 1280 x 720p at either 50 or 60 fps is in fact part of the international standard.

[canuck]

If you want to keep the full 60 fps quality, then you have to render in that quality and produce a new AVCHD using 60 fps. But as I say, that can't even be used at the moment even for a Blu-Ray disc (unless you down-convert a little to create a 1280 x 720P video).

If there is not one single player hardware capable of playing an HD disc at 60 fps, then why do some camcorders record at that frame rate?

Things like those are senseless to me. Please explain.

Something similar that was senseless (some years ago) was that most video capture applications captured video in AVI, forcing you to render the video later to MPEG2, and the fact that it captured in AVI represented null advantages, and double time of rendering.

Capturing in avi may be senseless to you but it is the preferred format for many. It captures in higher quality then mpeg2 and it is also easier/quicker to edit avi files.
If you have DV tape then that is the recommended method of capturing as that is the format was recorded.. If you capture DV to mpeg then the rendering has to be done on the fly which can create dropped frames and problems with syncing video and audio.