12/23/2023 0 Comments Clipwrap review youtubeMTS file onto the timeline is cheating you into thinking that this is the way it is supposed to work. So any software that allows to just drag and drop such an. MTS files are not video files! They are raw stream data! AVCHD is complicated! Watch the video I posted above! Whatever files you had must have been strange and very specific.Įveryone who reads this. I just tried dragging an MTS file into iMovie and, as expected, it doesn't work at all and shouldn't. Anyone who gets their eyes on such a file has been digging withing the AVCHD folder structure, which you just shouldn't do and which is much harder to do since Mountain Lion. Sure you can write clever programs that try to guess how it works, but this is not the purpose. You could compare it to a bunch of wood from IKEA without any screws or instructions how to assemble it. I want to clearly state: An ".MTS" file is not a complete video, it is just a very raw stream! Tons of information is missing. So, what I want to say: It sounds like Clipwrap is not worth the money for you. That's just 20 more bucks than Clipwrap, but it can do so much more. For $70, you will already get the pretty extensive Adobe Premiere Elements Editor. It will import and rewrap your AVCHD, and allow for some simple edits. If you just want to do a few trims and edits, you will be better off buying the Adobe Premiere Elements Quick Editor for $30. But that might not work for very long clips that span over several stream files. MTS files, I programmed a little tool myself that will rewrap the clips for you, ignoring all the missing metadata. If you lost your folder structure and are only left with the. The information that is lost (timecode) is not of interest to you unless you do some dual system sound recording and fancy stuff. And it's fine for converting and then getting rid of your AVCHD data. The free tool Free AVCHD to Mov Converter on the Mac App Store keeps just as much of the metadata and doesn't cost you anything. It does keep some of the metadata from AVCHD, but not all of it. If you are a professional editor, this is worth it, but if not, it is overpriced in my opinion. Just to be clear: Clipwrap will cost you $50. mov files from the camera but I also use other redundant backups and always have at leas one off site backup. Periodically I clear out those large files.īackup is an issue. The next step is to export it to some usable format for my Apple TV or iPod.Īfter the video is exported there is no need to keep the large ProRes files around unless I think I might re-edit. OK so then I have an edited vedio based on the ProRes files. I FCP X I can at any time trash the large prores files. In FCP X I can turn that off and edit with the original. the import/transcode process goes very slow. This can have the 5x effect you describe but those prores files are the best format for editing. I like to archive the video at this point, avetr it is converted to something quicktime can use. Some people do a rough edit just to cull out the total junk that is out of focus and whatever. You do have to decide at which point you do the archive. Clipwrape is as fast as a "copy" and I use it rathe than drag an drop to get video off the SD card. You cn also use "handbrake" but I'm pretty sue handbook will transcode the video. But when I do record in AVCHD I use some software called "clicpwrap" that can rewrap the video without transcoding. My canon HD camcorder has the option to record mp4 format video that quicktime can directly work with. But for those of us not about to shell out $$ for an external recorder (or who want to be super mobile), that's not much consolation.You need to develop a work flow that you like. I remember someone said the line artifacts were not there in the HDMI output (because it's not h.264 compressed). And unfortunately it seems to be hard to get the camera not to error out when shooting HBR at any bitrate high enough to mitigate those compression artifacts. This is also probably why the HBR image, especially vertically, is not as sharp as the 24p modes. This is just laziness or something on the part of panasonic because it seems like they should have first encoded HBR footage as progressive (camera already does that for 24H/L) then just simply tagged the stream as interlaced when writing to the card. When you have a lower bitrate (like the stock bitrates) the normal compression artifacts are significantly different between the two fields and result in every other line being slightly different giving an interlaced-like feel to the image. What's causing that, I'm pretty sure, is that even though the footage is progressive, panasonic's firmware sends it into the h.264 encoder already tagged as interlaced and therefore the encoder treats the 2 fields as separate images when encoding. That may be the case for you, but i for one, if i look closely, do notice little interlacing-like lines in HBR, at least in the 30p NTSC version.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |