Import a MXF file (issue)

Report · Jan 15, 2020

Hi, I have a question regarding importing a MXF file to Premiere Pro.

I encoded a mxf file from a mkv original source file I had, to import it and edit it in Premiere Pro. The mxf file is DNxHR 444 10 bits. The thing is that the original had 5.1 DTS audio, and when I import the file Premiere recognizes the six audio channels, but places them as independent mono channels. I've always edited with 5.1 tracks, obviously it's a lot more convenient than editing with six separate tracks, but I'm jumping on the HDR wagon and went with DNxHR 444 as video codec for editing. Seems that the mxf container doesn't support 5.1 audio as a single track, but only 6 pcm channels in this case.

Any ideas? Any way to make a single 5.1 track with the six separated ones inside Premiere, since mxf container aparently doesn't support it? I think mov container supports it, but I've yet to try a mov file with DNxHR 444 10 bit and with aac or ac3 audio and see if Premiere recognizes it as a single 5.1 track. And I really don't want to use Prores, since encoding in PC seems to be difficult, and I prefer cbr. Thanks in advance.

Report · Jan 15, 2020

You could try Modify clip/ audio channels.

Right click the clip in project panel before adding to a timeline.

Report · Jan 16, 2020

Double post by mistake, Sorry.

Report · Jan 17, 2020

UPDATE: I'm facing another issue regarding HDR. I decided to make a little test between two workflows:

1) Original file (h.264) as the main file (h.264 HDR movie rip I made a while ago), made some cuts with a DNxHR HQX 10 bits 720p proxy, and exported directly from the source file to an h.264, main 10, level 5.1, cbr, UHD video file, with all the necessary HDR settings enabled.

2) Transcoded the original h.264 file to a DNxHR 444 10 bits UHD video file using FFmpeg, used that one as the main file, and worked with DNxHR HQX 10 bits 720p proxy. The same as before as settings for exporting. So the only difference between the two tests was the main file used as source for exporting.

The exported file from the first workflow looks good, but the second one looks very washed out. The source file in the second case was almost a lossless transcoded file from the original (used DNxHR 444, same bit depth) and the rest of the settings were all the same, so I don't know what's happening. Then I opened both "source files" (the original h.264 file, and the DNxHR 444 file) on VLC, and found out that the colors on the second one were washed out too. So the problem was, for a reason I don't know, the encoding from the original file to the DNxHR 444 one.

I know that it's always better to avoid innecessary transcoding steps, so I should go with the first workflow, work with DNxHR proxies and export directly from the source file, but since I'm learning I wanted to know why the DNxHR file looks that way. Both the source file and the DNxHR 444 file are 10 bits, UHD, same frame rate and CBR, all of that checked with Mediainfo. The only difference would be the chroma subsampling, since the source file is 4:2:0 and the DNxHR 444 file is, well, 4:4:4 (I don't think it should make such a difference in colors, though).
The other thing is that there's a very little sync issue between the h.264 and the DNxHR proxy (less than a second, I guess it's because the h.264 is a compressed file). I think I can live with that, but it will make the workflow a little harder for me because I usually edit making a lot of cuts, and some of them need to be very precise. In other words, and since I don't have a problem with having large file sizes, I would prefer working with a DNxHR 444 file as the main file, because that one doesn't have the slightest sync issue with the HQX proxy, so when I make the final export I won't have a video with extra frames that I don't want, or missing frames that I did want. That would be a little frustrating, since encoding times usually take several hours, and only then I would know about those extra or missing frames, and after that I will have to correct them and export again.

Thanks again.

Any ideas?

Thanks

Report · Jan 17, 2020

UPDATE: I'm facing another issue regarding HDR. I decided to make a little test between two workflows:

1) Original file (h.264) as the main file (h.264 HDR movie rip I made a while ago), made some cuts with a DNxHR HQX 10 bits 720p proxy, and exported directly from the source file to an h.264, main 10, level 5.1, cbr, UHD video file, with all the necessary HDR settings enabled.

2) Transcoded the original h.264 file to a DNxHR 444 10 bits UHD video file using FFmpeg, used that one as the main file, and worked with DNxHR HQX 10 bits 720p proxy. The same as before as settings for exporting. So the only difference between the two tests was the main file used as source for exporting.

The exported file from the first workflow looks good, but the second one looks very washed out. The source file in the second case was almost a lossless transcoded file from the original (used DNxHR 444, same bit depth) and the rest of the settings were all the same, so I don't know what's happening. Then I opened both "source files" (the original h.264 file, and the DNxHR 444 file) on VLC, and found out that the colors on the second one were washed out too. So the problem was, for a reason I don't know, the encoding from the original file to the DNxHR 444 one.

I know that it's always better to avoid innecessary transcoding steps, so I should go with the first workflow, work with DNxHR proxies and export directly from the source file, but since I'm learning I wanted to know why the DNxHR file looks that way. Both the source file and the DNxHR 444 file are 10 bits, UHD, same frame rate and CBR, all of that checked with Mediainfo. The only difference would be the chroma subsampling, since the source file is 4:2:0 and the DNxHR 444 file is, well, 4:4:4 (I don't think it should make such a difference in colors, though).
The other thing is that there's a very little sync issue between the h.264 and the DNxHR proxy (less than a second, I guess it's because the h.264 is a compressed file). I think I can live with that, but it will make the workflow a little harder for me because I usually edit making a lot of cuts, and some of them need to be very precise. In other words, and since I don't have a problem with having large file sizes, I would prefer working with a DNxHR 444 file as the main file, because that one doesn't have the slightest sync issue with the HQX proxy, so when I make the final export I won't have a video with extra frames that I don't want, or missing frames that I did want. That would be a little frustrating, since encoding times usually take several hours, and only then I would know about those extra or missing frames, and after that I will have to correct them and export again.

Thanks again.

Any ideas?

Thanks