Questions for lossless HDV transfer to PC

[metazone21]

I want to transfer my HDV (MPEG-2 25 Mbps video) video from my Canon HV20 camcorder to my computer without loss. Because the video is already in digital form on the miniDV tapes (HDV format), I was hoping that I wouldn't need to 'capture' the video but, instead, treat it the same way I would if I were restoring digital files stored on a backup tape. But I didn't find anything that seems like it could do that -- instead, you have to 'capture' the video/audio as it's streaming from the camcorder to the firewire port on the PC. [1] This is correct, right?

So ... my question then is ... I just want to get the miniDV onto my computer in as lossless a way as I can. In the past, I tried HDVSplit on an older computer and lost some video during capture (when I set it to 'no split' and it created a single file). It created an m2t file - I don't know if this was lossless with, for example, the video being MPEG-2 25 Mbps in the m2t file. [2] I assume m2t is just a container for the actual video and audio data that have been formatted by a codec?

I now have another, newer computer but am ok w/ investing in a commercial video editor w/ capture capability. [3] If I used Cyberlink PowerDirector or Adobe Premium Elements, will they capture lossless similar to HDVSplit? [4] Do I have to play around with settings for these products? [5] What will the video and audio format be after I capture from these products? [6] Can I save the captured video and audio in the 'captured' format (would it be MPEG-2 25 Mbps for video)? [6b] or is that impossible and, instead, I have to save it into a selected format AFTER it's been captured & in some 'unsavable' format in memory, waiting to be converted to whatever format I select?

Thanks,
Bill

[Krane]

The simplest way to achieve your goal is to switch to an HDMI out capture device and bypass the heavy camera compression. You can say good buy to bulky linear tape and hello to NL virtual lossless video--as good as your camera gets. The only obstacle is a bit more complexity and the cost.

Here's one example:

[cgbier]

You would want to transcode your footage to an editing format. Cineform or whatever it is on the Windows side. The format you have on tape is not really suitable for editing.

The two software packages you mentioned aren't really anything that'll allow for using a better format. Sony Vegas in its different flavors or Pinacle/Avid Studio are the better choice.

You don't lose any quality during the capture process. It is a one to one transfer of bits, as long as you stay with .mts, so yes, the software you are asking for will do what you want. However, intermediate codecs, like the aforementioned Cineform, will decompress your long GOP mpeg2 to an intraframe format that is better suited for editing. It will take up more hard drive space, but it will put less burden on your hardware.

[HV30MAN]

@ Krane,

Hey, thanks for the video.
---------

[Halsu]

@ Krane,

Hey, thanks for the video.
---------

The only problem with Krane's advice is that it is wrong ;-)

If you already have the footage on tape, the only way to get it to your computer without any further loss is through firewire. The firewire tape transfer is actyually just a file copy operation - you copy the video from the camera as is, it's bit for bit exactly the same. No loss whatsoever.

If you record the camera's playback to Ninja (or some other HDMI recorder), you uncompress the footage in-camera, resize it from 1440*1080 to 1920*1080 in-camera, then record it to your format of choice - which is usually a compressed one. This introduces an unnecessary compression cycle, which means you lose quality, at least in theory. Also, the scaling of the image is done in real time in the hardware, which is possibly not optimized for quality but rather for performance. You are likely to get better results if you do the scaling on the computer.

If you can avoid using an intermediate codec, avoid it. It's an unnecessary lossy compression step. Most decent NLE:s should be able to handle HDV as is just fine. Use an intermediate ONLY if you get a poor performance when editing in native format.

This said, devices like the Ninja have their place - if you record the LIVE camera output to the device, you can indeed bypass the in-camera compression. But as said thet does not apply to footage that's already on tape.

[Krane]

The only problem with Krane's advice is that it is wrong ;-)

Are you implying the information contained in the video I provided as a supporting source is wrong? I think the OP can be his own judge. Don't you?

If you already have the footage on tape, the only way to get it to your computer without any further loss is through firewire. The firewire tape transfer is actyually just a file copy operation - you copy the video from the camera as is, it's bit for bit exactly the same. No loss whatsoever.

In fact, every camera uses some measure of compression.

If you record the camera's playback to Ninja (or some other HDMI recorder), you uncompress the footage in-camera, resize it from 1440*1080 to 1920*1080 in-camera, then record it to your format of choice - which is usually a compressed one. This introduces an unnecessary compression cycle, which means you lose quality, at least in theory. Also, the scaling of the image is done in real time in the hardware, which is possibly not optimized for quality but rather for performance. You are likely to get better results if you do the scaling on the computer.

If you can avoid using an intermediate codec, avoid it. It's an unnecessary lossy compression step. Most decent NLE:s should be able to handle HDV as is just fine. Use an intermediate ONLY if you get a poor performance when editing in native format.

This said, devices like the Ninja have their place - if you record the LIVE camera output to the device, you can indeed bypass the in-camera compression. But as said thet does not apply to footage that's already on tape.

To provide an alternate path to a destination doesn't necessarily make that path wrong. If the OP has already acquired his footage on tape it merely renders my suggestion as one he cannot use on this occasion. But its not wrong.

[Janke]

If the OP has already acquire his footage on tape it merely renders my suggestion as one he cannot us. Not wrong.

I assume you mean "acquired" and "cannot use".

Then your info is totally irrelevant. Who needs a suggestion for a method he cannot use???

The OP says in post #1 that

I want to transfer my HDV (MPEG-2 25 Mbps video) video

That implies it's already on tape. But you keep on babbling without listening...

Oh, before you reply to this, see this: http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?4...499#post448499

[Krane]

I assume you mean "acquired" and "cannot use".

Is that your purpose here? Grammar correcting posts? And do you preform this task for everyone or am I special?

Then your info is totally irrelevant. Who needs a suggestion for a method he cannot use???

At the moment? Lots of people.

The OP says in post #1 that



That implies it's already on tape. But you keep on babbling without listening...

Oh, before you reply to this, see this: http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?4...499#post448499

I don't know about the other children, but I think you're are mature enough to realize that communicating a "personality" via cyberspace has it's limitations. This exchange is an example of one of them. You presented a conflict in terms and some other things as well. But on the slim chance that your position is authentic, I'll leave it at that.

[Janke]

am I special?

Yes. Read other people's comments (similar to mine) about your posts, and maybe you'll understand.

the other children

Growing old is mandatory, growing up is optional. Relax!

Oh, BTW, I looked at your profile, it says: "Krane has not made any friends yet " while mine says "Your friends list is empty" ... I wonder what the difference is?

[Krane]

I want to transfer my HDV (MPEG-2 25 Mbps video) video from my Canon HV20 camcorder to my computer without loss. Because the video is already in digital form on the miniDV tapes (HDV format), I was hoping that I wouldn't need to 'capture' the video but, instead, treat it the same way I would if I were restoring digital files stored on a backup tape.

Okay OP, here we go I will try to assist you again. The only way to get your video from tape to your computer is via capture.

But I didn't find anything that seems like it could do that -- instead, you have to 'capture' the video/audio as it's streaming from the camcorder to the firewire port on the PC. [1] This is correct, right?

Right. That is the inherent linear nature of tape.

So ... my question then is ... I just want to get the miniDV onto my computer in as lossless a way as I can. In the past, I tried HDVSplit on an older computer and lost some video during capture (when I set it to 'no split' and it created a single file). It created an m2t file - I don't know if this was lossless with, for example, the video being MPEG-2 25 Mbps in the m2t file. [2] I assume m2t is just a container for the actual video and audio data that have been formatted by a codec?

Not sure what you mean by "lost some video"? Are you referring to dropout: a momentary loss of data? If so, then that is most frequently a tape quality and/or dirty heads issue.

I now have another, newer computer but am ok w/ investing in a commercial video editor w/ capture capability. [3] If I used Cyberlink PowerDirector or Adobe Premium Elements, will they capture lossless similar to HDVSplit?

The video recorded to tape is lossy. However the resulting video regardless of capture product should be identical. Although some capture tools are simpler to use and less buggie than others.

[4] Do I have to play around with settings for these products?

That's a personal preference. But most people I know just want to get the video into the computer as quickly and simply as possible.

[5] What will the video and audio format be after I capture from these products? [6] Can I save the captured video and audio in the 'captured' format (would it be MPEG-2 25 Mbps for video)?

Yes

[6b] or is that impossible and, instead, I have to save it into a selected format AFTER it's been captured & in some 'unsavable' format in memory, waiting to be converted to whatever format I select?

Thanks,
Bill

I'm not sure what you mean here. Unless you are referring to transcoding and/or converting for editing?