playback pain

hi,
i have been posting this problem some time ago, but haven't been able to show a picture to visualize my problem, so i will try once again, because the problem is still around:

i am currently working on a project that i shot with the canon xha1 in hdv/25f , captured it into final cut pro 6 using the native hdv codec (hdv 25p).
my problems are thin lines that occure when i watch footage, especially when there is movement in the scene.
now the problem i have with playback in the canvas and also using the cinema display-option, is not occuring because i am editing with hd but also with sd, which is important because at first i thought that this might be a problem of processing-power (that the picture can't be build up fast enough). but even premiere did a better job from this point of view 6 years ago on my old pc.

does anyone has the same problem, or knows a solution?

here is a shot from inside final cut, SD footage:
http://www.photoshop.com/accounts/c9e7738bc735422290882c048e1ab768/assets/963ae024ed314c1483b9aaa0bdceb0da

and here another shot, this time from quicktime. i am playing a mpeg2 file, and the same problem here:
http://www.photoshop.com/accounts/c9e7738bc735422290882c048e1ab768/assets/024d26d3c84d41e89f8f4ab60345f19a

i am working with RT and dynamic quality, and don't know what else to do. those lines are all over the place, no single events.

thanks

MBPro/2,4GHz/4GB RAM

I can't tell anything from blurry photographs of a computer screen, unfortunately.

But I can tell you that it's not possible to monitor HDV over Firewire. It's only possible to monitor a real-time DV downconvert that way. Whether this has anything to do with what you're trying to describe, I don't know.

yeah, they are a bit blurry but you can clearly see the lines i am talking about. i updated the pictures above, marking the spots.
and i know about the impossibility to monitor HDV over firewire, that's not the problem. the problem is fina cut pro OR quicktime not being able to playback media proberly.

Heh. No, what you're seeing isn't some massive flaw in Quicktime. What you're seeing is an entirely normal artifact that results from playing back your footage on a computer monitor. What you're seeing is part of one frame displayed beside part of another, because the frame rate of the footage does not match the sync rate of the monitor.

This is why broadcast monitoring is basically mandatory.

why than can i play the same footage outside final cut pro in quicktime or any other player without having these artifacts?

Your original post included a photograph of a computer screen with Quicktime Player on it.

yeah, but only when i try playing mpeg2-encoded material. just wanted to give another point that quicktime might have something to do with this. doesn't final cut pro use quicktime in its canvas/viewer windows?
anyway, quicktime doesn't show these artifacts when watching the same footage on the same monitor.
any other ideas? because i don't think that if everybody working without broadcast monitors had this problems, final cut pro would be such a widely used programm:-)

>because i don't think that if everybody working without broadcast monitors had this problems,
>final cut pro would be such a widely used programm

Most of us use FCP with a broadcast monitor, we'd use Avid with a broadcast monitor. And if I was cutting on Premiere for professional projects, i'd get a broadcast monitor. In short, get a proper broadcast monitoring system and when you realize that your problems go away because you are monitoring your footage properly, you'll be a much happier man.

Also, are you seeing the problem on a parked frame?



www.strypesinpost.com

no, i don't see the lines on parked frames.
and i know that i don't have the most professional gear in terms of monitoring, but if the quality of the playback using quicktime outside final cut on the same monitor is enough for me, something must be wrong with final cut not delivering the same quality (i know this is highly subjective but i think the only area my monitor really can't hold up with broadcast monitors is in terms of the correct color-temperature, which for me is not of such importance at the editing stage and therefore not part of my problem).
i think the ultimate question is how does final cut work differently in comperison to quicktime in bringing the footage on my screen?
it is just like in the situation where on the same track (monitor) one sprinter (quicktime) is able to run 100 meters under 10 seconds and another (final cut) isn't you don't blame the track, right?


sorry for my english-style
thanks for your help

Look, I don't mean to be rude, but it's important that this misinformation stop here.

What you are seeing is not any kind of problem with Final Cut or with Quicktime. Based on the photographs you provided, and your annotations to them, I told you that it's a natural artifact of the mismatch between broadcast frame rate and computer-monitor refresh rate.

You will not see this on a proper broadcast monitor. Period.

Get a broadcast monitor. It's not a question of quality; get a cheap, B-grade broadcast monitor or even a consumer television if you prefer. It's a question of the fact that a computer monitor can only simulate a television picture, because they're totally different devices.

My Brother,
QuickTime windows are not used in Final Cut Pro, so you can't try to compare the imagery you see in both applications. The FCP Canvas will always show lower quality video in comparison with the original, that is, unless your Canvas is set to 100% precisely. That's just the way FCP works, always has been that way. Please, even though it's confused thousands of users before you, just accept these facts.

The only way you can troubleshoot anomalies in your video is with a broadcast monitor. Period and end of story! Ideally, you need an monitor that accepts broadcast HD and a video capture card to run it. Many that are new to the game refuse to accept this, but it is the bottom line truth. You need a monitor!

There are ways to use cheaper LCD panels with cheaper video cards, but you must purchase these at the very least in order to get into "what you see is what you get" mode. In the mean time, set your Canvas to 100% precisely and see what you get.

Hope that helps you get your head wrapped around this issue.

Kevin Monahan
Social Support Lead, DV Products
Adobe
Adobe After Effects
Adobe Premiere Pro
Adobe After Effects and Premiere Pro Community Blog
Follow Me on Twitter!

alright,
what kind of a setup would you recommend using a macbook pro to get decent results?

thanks

I'd go for an MXO on budget, haven't used it personally though, as most of my monitoring is done via HD-SDI/SDI. You may have to check whether your MBP will be able to work well with the MXO. (hopefully someone else chimes in here).

With a modestly good budget, I'd go for an AJA IOHD and an LCD broadcast mon.



www.strypesinpost.com

I don't wanna put words in Strypes' mouth, but I'm pretty sure he meant to type "MXO2." The MXO is not the right choice here, since it only converts video to DVI. It's just another type of simulation, albeit a very good one. If you're not clear on the limits of that kind of simulation, it's kind of a waste of money.

The MXO2, on the other hand, provides SDI, composite and component monitoring. It's actual television, as opposed to a simulation of a TV picture.

A cheap, off-the-shelf consumer television won't be good enough for color grading, but at least it'll show you what your footage actually looks like.

I actually meant the MXO. Yes, it's simulation (DVI signal), but it's probably good enough for most purposes.

The MXO2 better, but it runs off the expresscard slot, which not all lappies have these days. There's also the V4HD from MOTU.



www.strypesinpost.com

is there a quality difference between the mxo2 and the mxo2 mini version? looking at the monitoring cappabilites.
i have a lcd monitor with hdmi, component, rgb and dvi-d inputs