Rendering an AVCHD file...?

[Ted]

Hello all,

Well, I finally broke my Canon HFs10 out of the box and did some test footage in MXP (which they say is 30 FPS)...

I FINALLY figured out how to get it into PE 7 (lol!) and didn't do any transitions, etc. to it... just wanted to see if I can save it.

A few questions, please:

1. I'm using the AVCHD preset... should I NOT be using that?
2. When I save it, I am saving it to my computer as a .wmv file? Should I NOT be doing that? I know there's a YouTube setting, but not sure if that's what I want. I figure I would save it as Windows Media and then just upload to YouTube?
3. The footage was over 3 minutes and it's taking about 30 min to render (including both passes). Is this normal? Please know I'm NOT complaining, I just want to know if that is what I could expect? Is there some type of ratio? like 10 min. of rendering for every 1 min. of footage?
4. Can PE 7 get my footage from my S10? Or do I need to import it through Windows FIRST and THEN "Get Media" from PC folder or file?

Thanks for any help you can offer!

[Steve Grisetti]

It's an AVCHD cam, Ted, so it looks like you're using the righrt preset. Why do you ask?

You can certainly save it as a WMV file if you'd like and if you'd like to save it to YouTube.

But, yes, I can understand your concern over a 3 minute video taking 30- minutes to render. And I'm assuming you've got a decently powered machine.

That time could just be Premiere Elements downsampling the video, which may be taking as long as re-encoding it a WMV.

But let's see if someone with similar experience with AVCHD is seeing transcoding times that long.

[Ted]

It's an AVCHD cam, Ted, so it looks like you're using the righrt preset. Why do you ask?

You can certainly save it as a WMV file if you'd like and if you'd like to save it to YouTube.

But, yes, I can understand your concern over a 3 minute video taking 30- minutes to render. And I'm assuming you've got a decently powered machine.

That time could just be Premiere Elements downsampling the video, which may be taking as long as re-encoding it a WMV.

But let's see if someone with similar experience with AVCHD is seeing transcoding times that long.

Thanks for responding, Steve...

Well, I guess I thought "Surely, it can't be as easy as using the AVCHD preset!" LOL! I figure it has to be harder than that!

Re: rendering - it seems that the 2nd pass is taking longer than the first pass.

Re: format - is .wmv the optimal format? Or would you (or others) suggest something else?

Is transcoding the same as rendering? I ask because there seem to be some free AVCHD transcoders and wondering if it would be better for my workflow if I transcoded the AVCHD into something else before putting it into PrEl 7.

I guess I'm not sure of the difference between downsampling, rendering, transcoding, and all that other jargon.

[alaskamovieguy]

Hello Ted. Looks like your barking up my alley again. I have uploaded a number of things to youtube in HD from my avchd files edited in PE7. The settings I have found that work well are the H264 Mpeg4 1280 x 720, quality 100, 8000kbps. Here's a sample of what that looks like on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZyy_HjmTKc Unfortunately the transcode does take at least as long as what your experience is, on my system anyways. The avchd is highly compressed as is the H264. You can actually upload 1920 x 1080 to youtube now but I haven't done it. When I was trying different codecs for burning avchd to DVD and also blu-ray I was advised to try Mpeg2 1920 x 1080 instead of the H264, the Mpeg 2 being less compressed. It did make quite a difference in my burn times. Also note on youtube you have the option of viewing in 360, 480, or 720, assuming the upload was done in 720. You will see it on the tool bar at the bottom of the viewer.

[ChancyRat]

Hello Ted. Looks like your barking up my alley again. I have uploaded a number of things to youtube in HD from my avchd files edited in PE7. The settings I have found that work well are the H264 Mpeg4 1280 x 720, quality 100, 8000kbps. Here's a sample of what that looks like on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZyy_HjmTKc Unfortunately the transcode does take at least as long as what your experience is, on my system anyways. The avchd is highly compressed as is the H264. You can actually upload 1920 x 1080 to youtube now but I haven't done it. When I was trying different codecs for burning avchd to DVD and also blu-ray I was advised to try Mpeg2 1920 x 1080 instead of the H264, the Mpeg 2 being less compressed. It did make quite a difference in my burn times. Also note on youtube you have the option of viewing in 360, 480, or 720, assuming the upload was done in 720. You will see it on the tool bar at the bottom of the viewer.

I have rendered my AVCHD files this way as well, but at the end, with the .mts result, I manually change the extension to .mp4. That has uploaded to youtube and SmugMug without problems.

[alaskamovieguy]

I

have rendered my AVCHD files this way as well, but at the end, with the .mts result, I manually change the extension to .mp4. That has uploaded to youtube and SmugMug without problems

Interesting....I haven't tried that. From PE7 I export using the share/computor/quicktime/h264 1280 x720 which results in a .mov extension. Seems they are able to handle either. I'll try the change to .mp4 next time to see if there are any differences.

[Ted]

Thank you, AK and Chancy...

Much of what you both said was Greek to me. LOL

In changing the extension, do you simply change it when you're saving it to your computer? Or is there a different method?

That footage was simply beautiful. Breathtaking hike... definitely God's country. Just stunning!

[Ted]

Also... AK... when you save via Quicktime... do you own a Mac, or are you still able to upload that .mov to YouTube?

I realize I don't have any Quicktime components, so downloading that from apple.com as I type this.

[ChancyRat]

Thank you, AK and Chancy...

Much of what you both said was Greek to me. LOL

In changing the extension, do you simply change it when you're saving it to your computer? Or is there a different method?

That footage was simply beautiful. Breathtaking hike... definitely God's country. Just stunning!

You render the file with the chosen specs, don't do anything odd with that. After it's saved on your C drive, it has the dot extension .mts. Click the file to rename it just like you rename any file any which way, except remove the mts and replace that with mp4.

[Ted]

Thank you, AK and Chancy...

Much of what you both said was Greek to me. LOL

In changing the extension, do you simply change it when you're saving it to your computer? Or is there a different method?

That footage was simply beautiful. Breathtaking hike... definitely God's country. Just stunning!

You render the file with the chosen specs, don't do anything odd with that. After it's saved on your C drive, it has the dot extension .mts. Click the file to rename it just like you rename any file any which way, except remove the mts and replace that with mp4.

Wonderful! Easy enough to even somebody like I can do this.

Thanks, Chancy!

[ChancyRat]

Thank you, AK and Chancy...

Much of what you both said was Greek to me. LOL

In changing the extension, do you simply change it when you're saving it to your computer? Or is there a different method?

That footage was simply beautiful. Breathtaking hike... definitely God's country. Just stunning!

You render the file with the chosen specs, don't do anything odd with that. After it's saved on your C drive, it has the dot extension .mts. Click the file to rename it just like you rename any file any which way, except remove the mts and replace that with mp4.

Wonderful! Easy enough to even somebody like I can do this.

Remember this method has worked (for me) on Bob's rendering specs:
264, 1920 x 1080 m 30i, which is what results in mts files. I'm not sure if other rendering choices end up with mts files, and or whether changing to .mp4 works. I know very little, actually. And it was agonizing to get this much.

[alaskamovieguy]

Also... AK... when you save via Quicktime... do you own a Mac, or are you still able to upload that .mov to YouTube?

No, I don't own a Mac. That method is simply something that was suggested to me and it worked fine so I stuck with it. I don't think you need quicktime to do it. It is simply an extension that youtube handles fine along with the H264 codec. If all this terminology sounds kinda wierd to you...a codec, like H264, avchd, and many, many others are simply compression algorithims to make file sizes smaller. Then they are placed in a package for lack of a better term, like Mpeg4, Mpeg 2 etc. Each of these packages has different characteristics which allows for different things like menus, scene searches etc. You could Google these terms and get a better understanding of them. Even wikipedia offers some pretty good definitions. Glad you liked the video, it is beautiful country and within 10 min of our house so makes for a good summer and winter playground.

[ChancyRat]

I

have rendered my AVCHD files this way as well, but at the end, with the .mts result, I manually change the extension to .mp4. That has uploaded to youtube and SmugMug without problems

Interesting....I haven't tried that. From PE7 I export using the share/computor/quicktime/h264 1280 x720 which results in a .mov extension. Seems they are able to handle either. I'll try the change to .mp4 next time to see if there are any differences.

Would love to know which method is better to achieve highest HD quality + lowest size. Wouldn't my method work better because it gets 1920 x 1080?

[Ted]

This little 3:33 min. video I created can get 1080...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00qXpbUb628

However, it took me about 2 hours to render and about 2 hours to upload to YouTube.

I, too, am interested in learning about settings that can be optimum HD quality with minimal time rendering/uploading.

Also, one drawback I've noticed with having a HD video on YouTube, I find that I have to pause the movie and let it buffer a bit before I hit play... there's probably no way around that.

[ChancyRat]

This little 3:33 min. video I created can get 1080...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00qXpbUb628

However, it took me about 2 hours to render and about 2 hours to upload to YouTube.

I, too, am interested in learning about settings that can be optimum HD quality with minimal time rendering/uploading.

Also, one drawback I've noticed with having a HD video on YouTube, I find that I have to pause the movie and let it buffer a bit before I hit play... there's probably no way around that.

I was able to play your video on youtube, and even though my computer could keep up with the buffering, it did stop-start every 15-20 seconds. As far as I know, there's no way around that for viewers for HD unless they have a fast internet connection and lots of RAM (and other stuff about which I'm uneducated?).