"From what I can tell, there is absolutely no reason not to extract the mts files from their folders."
I wouldn't be so sure about that. At the beginning I used to do just that with the lowly Adobe Bridge program, which (unlike LR) is able to import and rename .mts files. Then I noticed that Adobe Premiere Pro did not take too kindly to these imported and renamed files. Apparently, unless the files exist in the original folder structure and with their *original file names*, Premiere Pro will not create an xmp file for them. Which is kind of annoying for a Premiere Pro user. There may be other side effects, too. There are programs out there that try to recreate the folder structure for you. Re-enveloping might solve this issue, but my day only has 24 hours in it. And for every issue solved another one or two are created.
Right. mts files look broken when sans folders, but if re-enveloped as mp4 they would look normal. So the question would be: is there any stuff in those folders that's worth saving. From the little bit of experience I have with it, the answer is "no", and if there was anything, perhaps it could be carried over to the new envelope.
It actually seems like Adobe may be doing their users a favor by leaving the AVCHD baggage behind (rather than trying to implement support for original mts files in original folder structure).
I don't know enough to be sure about this, but so far nobody has come along and said "that would be a bad idea...".
I mean AVCHD is kinda like DVD. If I had camera that shot:
AUDIO_TS
VIDEO_TS
-- asdf_1.VOB
-- asdf_2.VOB
(basically, mpeg2 video in vob files in funny folders...)
I'd be grateful if Lightroom re-wrapped the videos in standard mpeg containers upon import.
Well, I guess you don't care too much since you traded in your AVCHD camera, but I think it would be good for users to voice their opinions about whether it would be better to support AVCHD with folders intact or re-envelope. The former is what Adobe was stumbling upon prior to Lr3 release, the latter would be straight forward for them to do (and could be done manually or by a plugin in the meantime), and might be a better solution anyway(?)
I got rid of the camera because the support in the Adobe family of products--Lightroom, Bridge, and Premiere Pro--is not adequate. If I could have gotten rid of the software products instead, I would have, but you have to be pragmatic.
I have the feeling AVCHD shooters have no idea whether the folders have anything of value in them, or whether they'd rather them be mp4 once they come out of the camera. I've posed this question before but I don't remember whether there is a good answer.
The reason I ask is two-fold:
1. It might save Adobe some effort to implement support by rename & re-wrap, *and* be better for the users too.
2. Users may be able to take advantage of a workflow now that would be easily migrated if Adobe adopted the same approach in Lr4.
But, hey - I don't shoot AVCHD, so I don't know why I can't seem to just stay out of this... ;-}
Summary:
========
Lightroom, Bridge, and Premiere Pro have adequate support for mp4, so why not rename & rewrap AVCHD to mp4, and be done with it.
Lee Jay - I tried stream copy of video *and* audio but Lightroom did not like the ac3 audio that was in it, or something (transcode audio to aac and all is well). Is your audio in a different format? or am I doing something wrong? I tried media-coder (gui) & ffmbc (command line) - same problem. Dunno where the mts file I was testing with came from.
b.t.w. wmp12 can't play the mp4 with ac3, but vlc can.
(wmp12 *can* play the mts with ac3 though - go figure)
I'm guessing Adobe is using wmp guts for video support on Windows, eh?
Here is what Julie said: "we're using native OS libraries (i.e. QuickTime) to create the thumbnails in grid and to play them. QuickTime doesn't support .MTS files, and coverage on various Windows versions was spotty."
It's not spotty on Windows 7, AFAICT. Maybe they didn't want to support Windows 7 when so many people are still using older versions.
Any thoughts from Adobe on translating .MTS to .MP4 instead of trying to keep them in original containers? My (rather limited) experience indicates the folders & mts format is more nuisance than desirable for the users even if Lightroom could handle it without translation.
I don't know how many camera models support the option to not shoot AVCHD in the first place, but that sounds like the best solution when available. Are there *any* advantages to AVCHD over mpeg-4/mov...?, or only disadvantages......(?)
I mean, perhaps people should be pressuring camera manufacturers to *not* use AVCHD, instead of (or along with) pressuring Adobe to support AVCHD.
Fortunately my new Lumix LX5 does offers MPEG-4 in addition to that wacky AVCHD format. The RAW images by the way are not shabby at all for a compact camera in this class. Now that AVCHD is out of the picture, integration with Lr is once again right on!
Lightroom needs to support AVCHD files. HD is the trend for digital camera's, and lightroom's organizational abilities could be put to great use by supporting this current format. camcorders/ dslrs/ etc. thanks
UPDATE: I see you are having a problem with sound. Dunno 'bout that part. 'RC Importer' will often import AVCHD without sound problems - not recommended if Lr4 native support is working satisfactorily, but otherwise may get you through 'til next dot release fixes it.
I'm sure other video-savvy people know more about this, and there may be a better solution/work-around today/right-now.