Your camera films in AVCHD which is an incredibly demanding format and you need quite a powerful computer to be able to both edit and play it smoothly. Brian's suggestion is to use SmartProxy which creates a standard definition copy ("proxy") of your high def original. You do your edits on that, and it should play back smoothly. When satisfied with all your edits, they are applied back to the high def originals.
Statistics: Posted by Ken Berry — Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:50 am
Statistics: Posted by BrianCee — Mon Feb 24, 2014 8:36 am
I'll let you know how the vids with the 720 setting turnout.
Statistics: Posted by Davidk — Mon Feb 24, 2014 6:45 am
Statistics: Posted by Schwarzenegger — Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:05 am
Statistics: Posted by Ken Berry — Mon Feb 24, 2014 4:40 am
Concerning the bit rate - this is a screenshot of the clip properties, and I am perplexed about how you arrive at the 12Mbps bitrate when nothing I can see in the properties list comes out at that number (there isn't a bit rate statement, so it has to be something like frames/sec x bits/frame, and with 24bits per pixel that came out at something like 1.4Gbps which is ridiculous. I've got it wrong somewhere).
Statistics: Posted by Davidk — Mon Feb 24, 2014 3:49 am
I'm not with the logic of how a lower resolution image taken at twice the speed improves the quality of the result, so some clarity on that point would be appreciated.
Curious that the camera is not on the Migear website (I double checked!) But Dick Smith at least confirmed that the 1280 x 720p format films at 60 fps. Leaving aside just for the moment the question of quality/resolution, having more frames per second notionally means better output, especially in videos which have high action content, which yours presumably would. Having 60 full frames of the same action every second will give a tad more clarity than 30 fps.
But my point above was really about quality flowing from bitrate, rather than frame format/resolution size. Unfortunately, Dick Smith (and all the other sites I quickly looked at about this camera) don't mention bitrates. So I guess the only way to go is for you to set it at 1280 x 720p, test it, and then see in its Properties in VS what the bitrate is. If it is significantly higher than 12 Mbps, then together with the 60fps, you might get (much?) better quality than you are currently getting, regardless of the smaller frame size. (And I have to say I have some 1280 x 720p footage which looks simply great on my 46 inch HDTV -- I can't tell the difference between it and 1920 x 1080 footage!) But in the end, only you can decide if it is satisfactory to your needs or not.
Statistics: Posted by Ken Berry — Sun Feb 23, 2014 8:02 pm
Statistics: Posted by jukka — Sun Feb 23, 2014 7:36 pm
Otherwise, if you stick with X4, the only thing I can think of would be to use some third party video converter and convert the WebM into some format recognised by X4 such as the 'old' .flv or .swf formats. But I'm afraid I personally don't know which converters might do that. However you might want to start with a freeware program like Handbrake. Unfortunately I don't have any WebM files to try out...
Statistics: Posted by Ken Berry — Sun Feb 23, 2014 7:22 pm
in corel video studio x4 ??
Statistics: Posted by jukka — Sun Feb 23, 2014 7:18 pm
Thanks for the feedback.
This is really my 1st venture into the world of HD, so whilst I generally am expecting a finer quality picture (as compared to a standard camcorder) from a camera with that ability, I really have nothing to compare with. And I certainly would not want to rig up any normal camcorder on these models. One attraction for this item is the waterproof case. And it may be I'm expecting a bit much, but OTOH, it doesn't have the things that takeup space and $ in a standard camcorder like lens protectors, zoom switches, re-play facilities etc. For that, take the recorded image to a computer with the necessary software. So while $130 (98 for the camera and 30 for the memory card to go in it) isn't really expensive, it's not cheap either. Compared to GoPro, its a much more cost effective unit. And I would not be surprised to find that both of them are made in the same factory . . . .
As to the camera, it has 3 video modes and 2 photo modes. The lens is a fixed focus thing (which is what I'd expect) and it's labelled "fixed focus lens F3.1 f=2.9mm". It's mounted in a clear plastic casing, and I suppose that extra layer of plastic in front of the lens has an impact. There's a lot of adverse comment on the camera's microphone on the migear forum but for an item intended for use in xtreme conditions, a watertight casing is guaranteed to reduce the sensitivity of the mic, which is the usual pinhole in this sort of equipment.
The video modes are:
HI (or full HD): 1920x1080, 30fps
Lo: 1280x720, 30fps
HILO: 1280x720, 60fps
There's no comment in the limited doco supplied on which one to use in any circumstance. My understanding is that the image size (eg 1920x1080) is the resolution, fine detail, textures et al of the image and the frame rate is simply how many copies of it per second the camera takes. Which was why I set it at that rate out of the box. A faster frame rate would smooth out or slow down something that was quite fast (slow motion cameras simply take frames at a very fast rate and then replay them at the usual 25 or 30fps, which is why the resulting view is "slow motion") or very jerky, but ordinarily 30fps ought to do. I'm not with the logic of how a lower resolution image taken at twice the speed improves the quality of the result, so some clarity on that point would be appreciated. The file on the onedrive site was taken with the 1920x1080 setting.
View sizes? No, at least there's no control for that (eg 16:9 or 4:3). There may be one defaulted to the image setting. But what you saw is what you get for the full HD setting.
Some of the larger files have motion over water sections, but they are much bigger and getting them on to the site for access is just so time consuming - that 16 sec 26Mb item took about 10 minutes to upload. Would using VS to create a 20 sec file with that sort of action be useful?
The manufacturers site doesn't list this item, so it may well be a branded item for Dick Smith (which is where I got it) and it is on their website here
http://www.dicksmith.com.au/point-shoot ... sau-xg8230
Statistics: Posted by Davidk — Sun Feb 23, 2014 1:33 pm
If you need any more information please let me know, really appreciate your help. The computer I'm using is being used solely for this software. Is there anything I can do which would help the smooth running of the software, ie, turn things off/on
Statistics: Posted by mariobradley — Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:32 am
And certain there is an upload facility. If you look at the attached image, and where the red arrow is pointing, then essentially you use that. Works fine.
Statistics: Posted by Ken Berry — Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:25 am
I went to :- http://www.online-stopwatch.com/
where there is an online stopwatch which you can set to full screen if you wish - I then used the screen capture option from VideoStudio to create a video which I can just put in an overlay track and set to whatever size you want - like this :-
Statistics: Posted by BrianCee — Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:25 am
Statistics: Posted by Ken Berry — Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:20 am
it may be worth upgrading then, if I don't upgrade now from X4 to X6 I think I will have to pay full price for the next release.
Statistics: Posted by alanball — Sun Feb 23, 2014 9:33 am
I'd like to include a screenshot but there doesn't appear to be any way to upload.
Statistics: Posted by racedowling — Sun Feb 23, 2014 6:49 am