Home Editing

[<Ray Etheridge/Miami>]

I'd like to buy a home editing system
for doing simple projects in my spare
time. Which system will get me the most
bang for my buck, and is fairly simple
to learn?

[Wolfgang Achtner]

Ray,

I'd say go with Apple and Final Cut Pro 3.0. If your ambitions and projects start to grow, the system will be able to handle anything you can throw at it.

The new Powerbooks (www.apple.com) are dynamite (there even is a 17 inch screen model) and anyone of those would be sufficient for the kind of projects you have in mind. If you decided to work on bigger projects and needed more gigs you could always get a portable external hard drive.

One of most interesting features on FCP 3.0 is Offline edit mode. You can save space by capturing all your media for logging in low resolution in Offline RT mode and, after you've completed your edit, capture hi res media only of selected clips on edit decision list.

[<Burnedout>]

FCP is the way to go, for all the reasons stated above. But if you can't fork out the grand for the software, then apple has another for ya.

"Final Cut Express". It's about $700 cheaper. ($300) It's great if you're only going to be using DV. (and DVCAM) It uses the same great interface as FCP and allows MOST of the same functions. (keyframing being a biggie)

BUT you can't use "offline" or some of the other advanced features. The good thing is, as you grow so can Final cut. The sell an upgrade to FCP. (yes, it costs $700).

Here's some links.

http://www.apple.com/finalcutexpress

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/

If you're thinking of something less costly, then Avid is coming out with a free DV version this summer. With 2 video tracks and 4 audio. (I think) The only problem with this is the fact that you really can't grow. Next step up with Avid will set you back $3000 -$4000. (I think, maybe an avid user will correct me.)

You could also use "imovie" from apple. It's free when you buy a new Mac.

Anyway, I feel (others will tell you I'm wrong) that Apple is the way to go with video editing. Most PC's just can't keep up with the demand you're going to be putting on it. But if you can't get anything else then use the PC. It better than nothing.

Have fun.

[<Tom>]

I'm investigating the same route myself. My buddies who own them say that the Apples (G-4, 23 inch plasma screen) are the way to go. Getting started is about $6000. You can do it for more. You can do it for less.

There are ways to get Final Cut Pro on the cheap. One is with a student discount. They sell it cheaper to people affiliated with educational institutions. You figure it out.

As for the Apples "handling" video better than other computers. I think that's sort of up in the air. I read a tech review, side by side comparison of a PC and an Apple and the PC beat it hands down. I'm not saying all PCs are better. This test was done by seemingly objective people.

Bottom line, you have to do a lot of investigating. In the end you have to actually touch the thing you are interested in buying before you buy it.

[canuckcam]

I'm not sure what that "comparison" was comparing, but yes it's true that the PC does beat the Mac in raw processing power. But...

If you're looking for pure power, get a PC.
If you're looking to get a job done without major hassles, get a Mac. That's what I've found - it's not the speed of the computer that really matters, it's the competency of the operator, and how intuitive the interface is. Workflow.

I have a G4-400. Other than rendering effects slower than the current Macs, everyday operation (surfing / email) and for cutting in FCP, it works as fast as any other faster Mac.

[<PC>]

Apple seems more interested in having a pretty box, rather than having a system that can get things done. You can almost spend half the amount on a PC, and it will run twice as fast. Now it's like 3 to 1, in speed. Avid costs 500 bucks more, than FCP though. I would wait for 4.0 for Avid and FCP to come out, before choosing.

[Sycophant]

The stupid little numbers mean nothing though, a 3GHz Pentium4 is NOT three times faster than a 1GHz G4. Well, it's clock speed is, but that doesn't relate necessarily to processor performance.

A 800MHz G4 will still perform many tasks better and faster than a 2GHz Intel/AMD CPU.

Another thing Macs have over PCs, especially in complex and fiddly areas like high-end video, is that they are uniform. Where a PC can be made of components from any number of vendors (of which there are literally thousands) everything that goes in an off-the-shelf Mac is an Apple or Apple-approved product. It's all supported and tested. (Well, that's not 100% true, but much more so than in PCs)

I have sucessfully edited a 120-minute DV feature, on a Mac G3/350MHz with FCP 2.0 - a feat I could not have achieved on a 350MHz Intel box.

For what it's worth, I now tend to use PCs running XpressDV, and they go great. However they can be very tricky to get going smoothly - but once they are going, they tend to be just fine.

If I had the money at the moment, I would go for a Mac running FCP and XpressDV - I like them both :)

[ February 17, 2003, 01:33 AM: Message edited by: Sycophant ]

[Noozer]

I use an Apple G4 Powerbook (667MHz) with FCP 2 and a Lacie 60GB external firewire drive and it works great. I use it for news editing and small side projects. In all, I love it! It's plenty for what I need.

I think a major consideration in what you buy is how you're going to use it. I bought my Apple because of the portability, firewire support, FCP and also because it came highly recommended from other video professionals. It is also more expensive than a PC. Some questions to ask yourself are: what format will you be working with and what NLE program do you want to use? This will go along way in what direction you need to go in.

One last piece of advice: don't buy the Ferrari if you plan on driving it like a Taurus. It's easy to get caught up in the "you need the dual 1.25 GHz processors" game. Just buy what you need. The way technology is these days, the entry level computers are MORE than fast enough to handle video editing.

PS - I saw iMovie mentioned in a previous post...I would NOT recommend using that. Although it comes free with an Apple computer, it doesn't function like a true NLE. It's more of a "fun with home movies" kind of program. Learn the real deal, like FCP or Avid.

[<Ray Etheridge/Miaimi>]

Thank you all for taking the time to
help. This really narrows the list of
products to wade through. I appreciate
it.... :)

[<Editor>]

I use a Sony VAIO (2 internal HDs) and Pinnacle 7 software.

Cheap, fast, easy, and I use the results on the air all the time.

[<IMOVIE>]

I have done several vidoes over the years. The best, yet most basic, were done on I-Movie I and II. Took less than a week to learn on the back of my hand. After that it became very easy. I have tried to learn Final Cut, yet haven't had the time do it lately. Good luck on your decisions.

[<Gone&Forgotten>]

Editor,
I have the same system. How do you split the audio. ex: edit only ch 1 or edit only ch 2? I know about the audio track lock and how to move into the other audio track, but I can't split the channels. Any advice? P7 is soooo easy!
thanks

[ShooterTim]

Don't know anything about Apple or FCP, but I picked up a great Avid PC based system. The XDV can do everything I need and then some. Cool thing is, we use Newscutter at the office, so I pretty much knew everything about how to run my system the minute I got it.
Good luck and keep rollin'

timmy :cool:

[Terry E. Toller]

You can get into PROFESSIONAL editing at home for less than $2,000. You can use a PC and Ulead's Media Studio Pro 7. Don't confuse it with their 'Video' studio.

The Ulead product has a much better titles than FCP or Adobe. You can add up to 99 overlay tracks. It comes with video paint where you can add some very cool effects like fire, explosions, fog and more.

MSP7 is realtime! I have been using version seven for a couple of months now and love it. I think it will be released to the public later this month. It also comes with a good audio editer and the ability to author DVD.

Check it out at http://www.ulead.com I would also suggest a converter to digitize your video if you aren't using firewire. They are down to about $200 now. I think www.videoguys.com (http://www.videoguys.com) has them. They have S, composit and component in and out.

[Cambot Mk. II]

Are all firewire ports the same, meaning that it doesn't matter where the port is, just that you have one?

For Windows compatible PC's, you might try the Soundblaster Audigy with the drive bay attachment panel. It has a firewire port built in.

I have this along with the ATI All in wonder video card.

Unfortunately, I don't have a DV camera yet, so I haven't had a chance to try out the firewire port, but the audio quality of the card is incredible.

You might be able to kill 2 birds with 1 stone if this actually works as advertised.

[kfatica]

Originally posted by Cambot2000:
Are all firewire ports the same, meaning that it doesn't matter where the port is, just that you have one?Yes and no. All FireWire ports operate the same, but there are two types of connectors: 6-pin and 4-pin. The 4-pin connectors are generally found on all small Digi-8/DV/DVCAM camcorders and the wider 6-pin connectors are found on PCs and Macs as well as professional size/grade digital camcorders. Sony's DSR-500/570, for example, has a 6-pin FireWire connector on the back of the camera.

To connect your camera to a PC/Mac you will most likely need a 6-pin to 4-pin cable. A six-foot cable, if not provided with your editing software, will cost you about $25-40 depending on the manufacturer.

As much as I love Apple Macintosh computers, one of the most irritating things about their tower models is the FireWire and USB connectors are in the back of the box. When you want to do a quick connection, you have to reach around (or in my case, open up the storage in my desk, pull out the unit, etc.) and plug in the cable...a real pain. My H-P Pavilion has the USB and FW connections right up front. Very convenient.

Regards,
Kim.

[<Home Editor>]

Originally posted by Cambot2000:
Are all firewire ports the same, meaning that it doesn't matter where the port is, just that you have one?

For Windows compatible PC's, you might try the Soundblaster Audigy with the drive bay attachment panel. It has a firewire port built in.

I have this along with the ATI All in wonder video card.

Unfortunately, I don't have a DV camera yet, so I haven't had a chance to try out the firewire port, but the audio quality of the card is incredible.

You might be able to kill 2 birds with 1 stone if this actually works as advertised.I have the Audigy, and the ATI All In Wonder 7500 also, and I have to admit, it works great. I have a Panasonic Mini DV cam, and I've never had a problem with the various programs I use, being MediaStudio Pro 6.5, Adobe Premiere 6.0. Hell, even the lil NLE that comes with Windows XP does the job quickly. The computer never locks, never drops frames, and is quick as hell.

[<Nematode>]

Don't get too hung up on processor speed. There are a lot of other factors to consider. The Mac OS is simpler and many believe more elegant than Windows and therefore does not need the processor speed.
Or as my Mac head pals like to say "dump trucks need bigger engines than Ferraris".
Each system has it's strengths and weaknesses. My son swears by Windows and Linux for gaming but will admit that OS X is better for graphics and video editing.
That does not mean that if you go with Ulead or Avid you are going to be doomed. If the system is DV native and you keep your work that way the final results will be fine.
Right now FCP owns the entry level professional video editing market. It probably has the largest installed base and that means it is a safe choice but it is not the only choice.
I started out editing on Ace and Grass 141 editors and back then an edit suite cost twice as much as a house. Now they give away basic edit systems with the OS.
You newts don't know what wonderful times we live in. Go forth and have some fun!!!

[Terry E. Toller]

My first 'home' editing computer was a 200mhz Cyrix with only 32mb of RAM. However, if you want to take advantage of the realtime abilities of Ulead's Media Studio Pro 7, you will need a much faster chip.

With that old Cyrix, I produced commercials for State Legislators, a candidate for Sheriff and one for a man running for Mayor of Sacramento. I also did regular TV commercials and news packages.

A friend of mine has the ATI All in Wonder. It is a rather difficult capture card to use and it drops frames. He gets much better results by using a converter that changes S, composit and component video into DV. I only use firewire for everything I produce. Even Betacam shoots are converted to DV and captured via firewire.
As for firewire boards: the board you put in your computer is six pin. The camera is only four. If your firewire connector is in the back of your computer like mine is, just leave the cable plugged into the computer all the time. No problem!

Ray, some of the Dell computers are good enough for what you need. I have seen them for under $600! You should add a D drive. The best setup is a motherboard that has RAID ability. If you install a couple of 80GB drives, your D drive will be 160GB and fast as ****!

[ February 19, 2003, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: Terry E. Toller ]

[Mike]

Firewire Converting: Starting with Beta SP and ending with Beta SP

What do you guys suggest if I want to import Beta tapes into a PC, edit them using one of the DV programs (Avid Xpress DV) and then dump it back to Beta SP? Is it going to make a big difference if I am using component, as opposed to composite (which I have built-in to my computer) hook-ups? FYI, I also have the availability of SDI with my Beta SX decks.

--Mike

[ February 19, 2003, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]

[<twsepion>]

To bring in any analog tape, Beta SP, VHS, S VHS, MII and so forth, you need to get a digital to analog converter box. I think it's around $300. It has S Video in and outs as well as RCA plugs.

Final Cut I think is the way to go. Macs aren't that much more expensive as you won't need a billion mega hertz or something like that. I don't have Firewire on my iMac, I bought one just before they put them on the iMacs. I'm running on 333 Megahertz with no problems with speed, but I'm not doing any editing on it.

To get FCP, check out E Bay. People buy the educational versions and sell them on there. That is if you can't find a way to get it from a student.

The school I'm at now uses both FCP and iMovie. I don't understand why they push iMovie over FCP though. The kids that are really doing good work use FCP though.

Good luck on your ventures.

[Mike]

My question is, will importing and exporting Beta SP tape be better if I invest in a component converter or should I just use the composite one which is built-in to my PC?

[Busabomb]

My question is, will importing and exporting Beta SP tape be better if I invest in a component converter or should I just use the composite one which is built-in to my PC? If you invest in the component you will definitly see a difference. More over, most professional clients WILL be able to tell if anything Beta is not layed down in component...Your pretty much defeating the purpose of BetacamSX/SP if you use composite.

Will composite work...Yes it will. But I'd definitly go with Component if you have the money to get a component card.

[imported_blank]

My question is, will importing and exporting Beta SP tape be better if I invest in a component converter or should I just use the composite one which is built-in to my PC? Mike, Mike, Mike - and people wonder why everyone is buying Japanese electronics instead of Domestic. hack it hack it hack - no one can tell - the American way, but I guess people can tell and that is why they are buying Japanese.

All kidding aside,

First of all - the built in composite thingy on your PC is designed to take in grandma's funniest home video NOT designed for a veteran broadcast network cameraman of your caliber using a D600. NO KIDDING MIKE!!!

You may want to look into purchasing a COMPONENT to FIREWIRE by-directional converter. The problem with this is you will get converted to 4:1:1 which is nasty when duping and especially when adding graphics. The good think is (if you can call it that) it will be 25 meg per sec and most home PCs can handle that. plus you will stay in component - that is good

Your best bet is to purchase a SDI or COMPONENT video card but be aware if you take in full D1 bandwidth (270 megs a sec) you may need to get new (fast and large space) hard drives. You may purchase hardware that will "on the fly" (before laying on hard disk) convert the D1 signal into studio profile MPEG-2 at 4:2:2 50 megs or lower, most home PCs (incliding HDs) should be fine with that.

Will your SX decks PB analog SP material via SDI? I don't think all decks will, if not get component. Also if you want to dump back to SP you need component -- SDI will be useless for this task.

I must ask Mike, since you purchased SX editing why the hell would you use DV??? Please I must know.

----------------------
people on this board will say I'm crazy thinking - the same people will insist the video out of a 4k prosumer camera will look as good as the video out of a BVW-400. I ask you - who is really crazy???

[ February 20, 2003, 12:50 AM: Message edited by: Ivan ]

[Sycophant]

Ivan, you are right!

But one thing comes to mind - if you go with the Component/SDI card, you will find that XpressDV is no longer an option - it will only talk 4:1:1 or 4:2:0 MPEG, and only through an OHCI Firewire source.

So the best bet if you want to stay with XpressDV or a basic FCP setup is to get a convertor - something like this (http://www.promax.com/Products/Detail/27012) looks ideal. It will even convert Firewire deck control to RS-422 control.

Of course D1 video is going to keep the quality way up, but you're in mighty expensive territory there when it comes to hardware and software.

I still happy to go either way on the whole XpressDV/FCP thing... I like them both, and think they are both equally capable of putting out good video.

[Mike]

Ivan, my friend!

The reasons that I am wanting to use a computer edit system include:
1) self-promotion demos and reels
2) archiving older Beta tapes onto DVD
3) working with Beta SP tapes to do more than cuts-only editing.

As you can see, the reasons really do not center around cutting tape for my broadcast clients. Honestly, I don't have time to edit, but I am trying to hone my editing skills, which in turn hones my shooting/story-telling skills.

Also, yes, my SX laptop editor will playback SP tape via the SDI out. Case in point, I use the left deck on my laptop to play SP tape into the right deck to make an SX dub via SDI.

--Mike

[ February 20, 2003, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]

[imported_blank]

Mike,

I would strongly advise against archiving on DVD. The DVD format is designed for final delivery, its fine for that purpose but the transfer rate is way too low for archiving - if you plan on doing any future post production work from the archive, look out. If you do archive on DVD at least to it in a proper manner. Once you archive using composite, there is no way to recover the data back into true component. The archive will only be as good as your composite input :P .

Remember my frozen friend DVD, DV and analog SP are all component formats. The digital broadcast signal is also transmitted in component unlike the analog broadcast signal.

Sycophant,

Yes that converter you supplied a link to looks like a good tool. However I would only convert SP to DV as a last resort only and I would never do it if planning to make DVDs. Remember DVD is a MPEG-2 format and all that transcoding will only add unnecessary gen loss.

You are correct. working with D1 will run you into more money however many newer video card manufactures are starting to make MPEG-2 4:2:2 studio profile cards, (for DVD and broadcast purpose) the hardware will take SDI or COMPONENT and convert it on the fly (before entering the HD) meaning no need for heavy duty D1 hardware. These cards start around $2,000, come with editing software and you can purchase an external PCI adapter to hook into any laptop, some laptop adapters will take PCI, ext. bat and external HDs for full blown D1 quality in a portable box or you can stay with the cheaper MPEG-2 4:2:2 studio profile. .

Some manufactures are coming out with "true IMX" MPEG-2 cards for around $5,000. I think MATROX has one.

If you do plan to make DVDs or master tapes for broadcast then MPEG-2 is the way to go because there will be no need for further format converting, many PC/MAC editing tools will take in SDI or COMPONENT, on the fly convert to MPEG-2 studio profile edit and output to IMX or DVD without further unnecessary gen loss.

[Mike]

Ok,
maybe I'll just play around with computer editing.

:)

[Terry E. Toller]

Mike, you will get better quality if you use component over S or composit. BUT, you can't see the difference. Consider this, we use composit to do live shots and our video looks just as good as our edited component stories.

If you buy a converter, get one that has component, S and composit. They cost as little as $200. they convert and feed into your computer via firewire which is up to 400mbps, tons of bandwidth!

After you edit, you can feed back to Betacam via firewire to the converter then component out to the recorder. Simple.

As for FCP, they have an amazing marketing team! So does Adobe. But, if you want to do professional work and not spend alot of time waiting to build preview files and rendering, get Ulead's Media Studio Pro 7. It is realtime with instant previews. It allows up to 99 layers plus your A and B roll. The titler gives you 3D and 2D effects with totally controlable moving paths in X,Y and Z. IT comes with video paint that allows you to add fire, explosions, snow, and many other cool effects. MSP gives you many more transitions, video and audio filters as well as a very good audio editor. In capture, you have a vectorscope and waveform monitor that helps keep your video levels and color correct. You can also add realtime voice over in the editor mode. PLUS, you can author DVD with chapter points and custom menus. MSP even does Mpeg4, if you want it...?

I have Adobe and FCP. I don't use them and they aren't even in my coputer anymore. My clients demand more than those programs can offer.

WITH MSP, you can also use After Effects, Boris, Hollywood FX and many others. I also have the full set of Jump Backs from digital juice. Very useful!!!

A friend of mine paid $13,000 for a Matrox turnkey system and is has not worked even once in almost a year. He pays me to do his non-linear work.

Archiving to DVD is NOT a good idea like Ivan said. DVD is MPEG2 and highly compressed. However, you can archive raw video to the DVD but it won't play back in a DVD player. BUT, you can use it later to pull the files into your time line for editing.

[ February 21, 2003, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: Terry E. Toller ]

[<Avid>]

FIRE...SNOW..Who do you work for?!!? What the hell are you talking about. Why would anyone making anything for the real world use these????

As For editing at home I'd go with something everyone knows and loves..Avid.

Look it's going to cost you but you get what you pay for. And by the way..I've worked with FCP many times and if you've got it and you're not using it (unless you have acess to an Avid) your crazy. I know may Avid users that would kill me, but FCP ain't half bad!

[<jimmy>]

Take a look at Pinnacle's Pro-one, it's about $600-$800 on ebay. It has component inputs and outputs as well as firewire. You can add a pro-one into almost any system and has quite a few real-time effects. Comes with Adobe Premiere. Pinnacle makes pretty good products for damn cheap. Ulead is crap. Apple is good, but so damn expensive. Good luck

[Terry E. Toller]

Avid, you are right. FCP ain't half bad... but with just a little effort, they can get there some day. I have used the fire and explosions for TV commercials, in the real world. I do have FCP and the reason I don't use it anymore is because most of my clients demand more than it can offer. Mostly in the area of titles. With MSP, I don't need third party software to make 3D titles. Just because 'everyone knows and loves.." a product, doesn't make it good when you need more than it can give you.

Jimmy, you obviously know NOTHING about that of which you speak! I have introduced several FCP and Adobe users to Ulead and they have ALL switched! If you can settle for flat transitions and titles, they are both OK editors. But if you are competing with other production companies and need high impact productions, you need something like Ulead, its faster and better! AND, you don't need to spend the money Avid or third party effects programs cost to get amazing results. Before you post, read about Ulead MSP7 then compare with Adobe and FCP. Ulead has left them in the dust!

This board is where we can share information and HELP eachother. If you don't know what you are talking about, sit back and learn!

[ February 22, 2003, 07:08 AM: Message edited by: Terry E. Toller ]

[imported_blank]

Originally posted by Terry E. Toller:
Consider this, we use composit to do live shots and our video looks just as good as our edited component stories. Terry,
All analog broadcasts are T/R in composit form to our homes therefore a good analog live hit should look better then an edited analog broadcast due to the fact that the live feed isn't dropped a generation nor does it generate any tape flaws since it never makes it to tape.

If you really want to compare then

1) Tape the live shot off the air at the station (it will be in composite) into a betacam and dub that footage into another tape.

2) Tape the same live shot into the beta camcorder taking the live shot (it will be component) and dub that footage into another tape.

Anyone at this board technically informed (aware) will tell you that the tape out of the beta camcorder will look a lot better then the off air tape fed from the same beta camera.

Consider this, digital transmissions are T/R in component form to our homes therefore as more stations transmit in digital and as more viewers receive in digital (even with an analog TV hooked to a digital tuner via component) the all more it will be noticeable to the average viewer. BTW, SX live hits should be via SDI in D-component.

Originally posted by Terry E. Toller:
After you edit, you can feed back to Betacam via firewire to the converter then component out to the recorder. Simple.Well it's not that simple if you "ALREADY MIXED" the components together when you brought them into the NLE via composite. If you brought it in via component to firewire converter then it will stay in component BUT it will convert to 4:11 so if you already have a universal converter you will get better results bringing it in via component to component. You can never truly recover the components any longer. The more you dub or deliver via an interface the more you lose and should stay in component (or native) until final analog air delivery for best quality. For digital air delivery it should never leave D-component preferably it should stay in MPEG-2 via the chain..

People need to realize that final delivery and post production delivery are two different beasts that should be treated differently (final delivery is not studio quality)and the fact that you can't fix everything in post as in truly separating a signal back into component when it fact somewhere in the chain it was already mixed into composite.

Also,
it is incorrect to treat all MPEG-2 the same. There are dozens of profiles from highly compressed DVD to SX to IMX and even HDcam the beauty is that if working in studio profile you will stay compatible (edit in 50meg 4:2:2 deliver to IMX or SX or even DVD or digital broadcast.

I respect your right to your technical views however you need to back them up with data in order to be more convincing.

[Terry E. Toller]

Here we go again!

When we send our Betacam signal live via a BNC cable (composit) it looks great! If you feed a firewire converter via composit, it will also look great. I would think that a component conversion might even look a little better, if you can even see the difference...?

Once you have captured your video, it is digital. DATA! You can edit till the cows come home and there will be no generation loss.

THEN, you feed from the computer via firewire to the converter. At this point, the signal is DATA not video! The converter changes the DATA into composit, component or S video.

Ivan, you make it sound like manufacturers of live transmitters should make them component in instead of composit. Composit works just fine. World wide.

[imported_blank]

With all due respect Terry,

Historically, composite NTSC was standardized for black-and-white recording and was more than adequate for "live transmission". Color, as approved by the FCC in the late 1940s, was a troubling afterthought for the composite NTSC system. Engineers struggled to "fit" color information onto its existing and very limited black and white composite signal. The resulting "compromise" meant that interference between chroma and luminance, and color instability due to multiple generations or amplifications, became synonymous with the NTSC standard. Engineers argued that the production process should not remain hostage to the limited bandwidth of broadcasters, but could take advantage of superior--even if incompatible--alternatives, as long as the end product was compressed back to NTSC before broadcasting. Component recording, then, emerged as a production, rather than transmission, format. By maintaining the integrity of signal components throughout the production and post production chain. Component signals eliminated the cross-interference that degrades NTSC composite image quality.

At first, the advantages of component recording were only fully realized in editing systems that were also entirely component. While the shift was expensive, the 1980s saw widespread changeover to all-component processing in editing suites across the country. For over two decades now the majority of television and post production houses engineer a facility as a component system. This includes camera outputs, tape machines, digital NLEs, routers and switchers, and the remainder of the system. This approach greatly improves the quality of the image and makes for a much more robust editing format for greater post-production flexibility and quality. Most engineers will argue that an all component product will look far better even though final analog delivery will be in composite.

Composite video signals have a number of unavoidable image problems because of inherent limitations of the PAL and NTSC systems. The problem is, once the color (C) and the black and white (Y) information have been put together, they can no longer be perfectly separated due to fundamental design limitations of the two systems. Whilst a detailed description of these image problems would bore most of you there are two specific artifacts which I will mention which are readily demonstrable and not even an all digital NLE can correct.

Dot crawl. This occurs on the boundaries between two colors where you can see moving blocks of incorrect color information. The simplest way of demonstrating this artifact is to look at a test pattern on your TV. Take a look at a color bar pattern. In particular, look at the vertical edges between the color bars. You will notice that the edges are smeared, with little blocks of moving colors throughout in a regular pattern. If you then compare this same test pattern via a component input, you will see that these blocks have disappeared, and the edges of the colors are sharp and clear. What applies to a test pattern also applies to normal images that are displayed with composite video. They, too, will exhibit dot crawl at the boundaries of different colors on the screen. Digitizing into an NLE via composite will introduce dot crawl, digital post production work will not fully fix this artifact thus editors should avoided digitizing into an NLE via a composite input.

Cross coloration is the presence of false color in an image. This artifact may be very noticeable as fine lines (usually purple) in scenes that have a lot of neutral colors in the video. This mostly affects video that has been processed in composite format rather than being processed in component format. Cross coloration will be apparent if you digitize into your NLE, using only composite, thus an component interface should always be used when digitizing into an NLE.

Today, most digital formats are component and so is the MPEG-2 broadcast transmission, including digital live shots.

Terry, you are a king of good lighting tips and other stuff but as long as you post false tecnhical statements I shall try and explain why I say what I say - no offence.

[<Jimmy>]

Terry,

I've worked for both apple and Pinnacle testing software and hardware... so I know some stuff... however I have NEVER used anything other than Ulead's consumer software, I have several friends who worked for Ulead and they would consistenly consider their software sub-par. I was replying with that as my background.

[Terry E. Toller]

that clears it up then. Ulead does make consumer software. "Video Studio" is a cheap editor for the housewife to edit the kid's birthday party. In fact, it comes free with some of the pyro firewire cards. Video Studio is like Apples iMovie, it's for kids...

MEDIA STUDIO PRO 7 is a professional editing tool that offers much more than Adobe or FCP. More transitions, video and audio filters and REALTIME.

Ivan, you have done your homework, that is for sure! But, if you take all that information, roll it up in a dollar bill, it will be worth about 90 cents (US). When compairing composit, component and S with firewire and digital, it's apples and oranges.

When I edit a Betacam shoot, I feed the BC into a converter via S video. It goes directly onto the hard drive. I edit than feed from the computer through the converter back to BC via S video. The results are outstanding! Keep in mind, I am competing with the TV stations and some pretty awsome production houses here in Northern CA. Alot of the work I get is from bids. Along with the bid, I have to provide samples of my work with new clients. One competitor uses a component converter and his work doesn't look any better than mine does. Sometimes he gets the job and sometimes I do. I used to have an edge on him but I talked him into trying Media Studio Pro and now he uses it more than Adobe. That's what I get for sharing...

[ February 24, 2003, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: Terry E. Toller ]

[<dvcpro>]

what about a dvcpro camera? would it have the same issues as the betacam, or is there some way to send the digital info to an adapter or soemthing?

I don't know a whole lot here, but i want to put some of my stuff on dvcpro to the computer and maybe a dvd or 2. quality is not a huge issue.