-
Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
-
Brett, so are you saying that you found no difference between option #1 and option #2 in my original question with your test?
-
I’ve been editing NLEs for 20 years and I’m just as much a curmudgeon as anyone, but I don’t find it lazy to edit in h264. Completely the opposite actually. Seems to be a waste of client time and resources no edit in the actual native file format without incurring any more generation loss. You can of course transcode in the background in X, or if your’e sending a sequence out for grading, there are quite a few ways to transcode JUST the footage used before you do that. Just duplicate the sequence and make a new event of just the clips used (they’ll now be links not duplicates as of 10.0.6) and then transcode that entire event.
I’ve always had the luxury of editing everything in online suites, and only sending out stuff for protools or maybe a shot or two for some 3D. Although I’ve been testing color grading in Resolve 9, and it seems to get by just fine with my h264 sequences.
-
[Bret Williams] “Seems to be a waste of client time and resources no edit in the actual native file format without incurring any more generation loss.”
For me, the point isn’t just transcoding. It’s organizing the files, adding proper TC and reel IDs and logical renaming. Transcoding is a part of that process. Sure you can do that in X, but I need a system that’s independent of any NLE. Simply run through a few threads on various forums here at the COW and look at the folks moaning about duplicate clip names, etc. because they failed to follow this practice. The results are projects that have become disasters.
[Bret Williams] “Although I’ve been testing color grading in Resolve 9, and it seems to get by just fine with my h264 sequences”
You are working in your own controlled environment. That won’t fly when you send the footage out of house to another colorist and they specify QuickTimes in ProRes with proper TC or reel numbers and an accompanying EDL.
I think we’ve veered too far off topic 😉
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
No, my bad. I misread your option #2. I would definitely conform to 24p in a 24p sequence. That is, if your final product is supposed to be 24p. But even if you’re editing it in a 60p or 30p or 30i sequence, I’d conform it in a 24p sequence which will give you that exact 40% speed you’re looking for that you just can’t dial in since it’s not a preset. Then copy it from there into the actual 60p, 30p or 30i sequence. In the case of the 30i sequence FCP X will actually add the dead on perfect pulldown as well. Something just completely unfathomable in FCP legacy.
-
Yeah, not saying there’s no reason to ever do it. Compatibility being an issue always. If people are editing on older systems there’s certainly no getting around it. But even in legacy it was all about project management and labeling folders of media, folders of cameras and camera angles, etc. Every project is different. In my world, even working with other team members putting together other segments, it’s still a better option to edit with native media. Having multiple copies of files that have been transcoded or renamed or re time coded just seems to lead to errors as well. I’m very glad to see the days of a project folder having folders that say “originals”, “transcoded”, or “plural eyes synced/exported”, etc and them potentially having duplicate names.
-
[Bret Williams] ” In my world, even working with other team members putting together other segments, it’s still a better option to edit with native media. Having multiple copies of files that have been transcoded or renamed or re time coded just seems to lead to errors as well.”
I completely get that. When I do this, there’s one person handling the media. That’s usually myself or a DIT with very explicit instructions or an assistant that I trust to do it right. Certainly in short turnaround projects (conference video edits, news, etc.) staying native is fine if your system performs correctly. I just think it gets very dangerous outside of those limited applications. I would never do it on a documentary that dragged out for two years, for example, or a set of high-profile commercials shot on an HDSLR.
[Bret Williams] “I’m very glad to see the days of a project folder having folders that say “originals”, “transcoded”, or “plural eyes synced/exported”, etc and them potentially having duplicate names.”
You mean you are glad to see the end of those days. Right? For me, I still prefer that because it allows me to work backwards through the workflow if I had to. You see, I have no interest in making X the core of my entire workflow and the only tool I’ll ever use.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
A couple things about FCPX that I’m not sure if people totally understand yet here:
The library holds the original file, and will use that original file to render to ProRes422 for editing speed (in h.264, for example, the interpolation causes a major performance hit when going backwards or picking one frame; it has to read several frames before it to compute one desired frame). If you create Optimized or Proxy media, it encodes ProRes422 beforehand for use in the timeline. When you export, the best way is to go to ProRes422 and then encode that master file, being sure to check Original/Optimized media in Preferences. The loss from original to 422 is essentially zero, the loss from anything to delivery format (h.264, etc.) is what’s going to matter.
The only time you should be concerned is if you want to use the conformed clip for chroma keying or something similar, and you have 444 source footage. In that case, you always want to chroma key the original 444 footage because it has the full resolution color data.
Something that might be of interest if someone wants to test this: you can render to ProRes4444 in FCPX as well. Given 444(4) source footage, FCPX will still transcode to 422 in the timeline for editing. But will choosing a 4444 export force it to go through and re-render using the 444(4) source footage? Will that work even if Optimized 422 media is present? That could be an important thing to know, especially if there’s any chroma keying in the project. In that case, rendering to 4444 could subtly improve the quality of the key.
-
[Bret Williams] “Seems like I had a problem once going back, and I always see Shane recommending you duplicate cuz you can’t go back. “
I always duplicate everything anyway, out of an abundance of caution and cheap disk space.
-
Hey Oliver any chance you could us a quick how to for conforming 59.94 to 23.98. every time I try it just puts the files in a skipped folder and nothing in the conformed folder. Thanks 🙂
Peter Wilcox
Beachwood Productions -
[Beachwood Productions] “Hey Oliver any chance you could us a quick how to for conforming 59.94 to 23.98. every time I try it just puts the files in a skipped folder and nothing in the conformed folder.”
What format?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up