-
FCP to color
-
I decided to try sending to Color from another user account and it worked. So after deleting both the FCP and Color prefs, I finally have the sequence in Color.
Thanks to those who replied.
-
Alex…
Your procedure looks like you’re exporting a ProRes file, then cutting it up again to match the original sequence?
Is this to create a ProRes version of the sequence?
If so, it’s much easier to just use Media Manager and have it output a ProRes version. It’ll save tons of additional labor.
Personally, I keep my sequence in the original camera codec (XDCam EX). I use Media Manager to get rid of the excess footage, then export that version to Color. That way I keep any risk of transcoding errors to a minimum.
After the grading process, it’s rendered to Apple ProRes HQ.
Dean Sensui — Hawaii Goes Fishing
-
All I can tell you that is the method the BBC uses to colour correct the majority of their TV shows – some of which appear on PBS in the US.
I guess it makes for a very ‘pure’ XML file for Color to work with. They used to use Final Touch and think the UI of Color is perfectly fine – it is based on Pablo. They are glad that Apple didn’t change the way it works, they just made it a lot more reliable.
With that workflow they have no crashes or errors. The only problems end up being due to operator error.
alex4d
-
Why would you go through the trouble of exporting a self contained ProRes movie, then cutting it up to move it to Color? Seems like a lot of extra, unnecessary steps.
Just remove the graphics, bake the speed changes and such, remove the extra video tracks and send to Color.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media
HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.STOP STARING AND START GRADING WITH APPLE COLOR Apple Color Training DVD available now!
-
[walter biscardi] “Seems like a lot of extra, unnecessary steps.”
But Walter, the BBC spend lots of time and money designing workflows to do exactly that. They always prefer a cumbersome labour intensive approach that, to be fair, is usually bullet proof.
It justifies the employment of tech support personnel who rarely understand the requirements of the operator, dealines and budgets.
Sadly, many other broadcasters adopt these BBC ‘standards. Our ABC is often a culprit here in Australia.
-
[Michael Gissing] “But Walter, the BBC spend lots of time and money designing workflows to do exactly that. They always prefer a cumbersome labour intensive approach that, to be fair, is usually bullet proof.
It justifies the employment of tech support personnel who rarely understand the requirements of the operator, dealines and budgets. “
Absolutely. I have tech specs for an international network that still has references to standards from the 1970’s. I was completely confused, as was my audio designer, as to why we were still meeting specs from 1970’s analogue distribution when the network is an HD only broadcaster. Took a few months of going back and forth before the engineers agreed they should have reviewed their specs more closely than just taking a blanket BBC technical spec from that long ago.
Of course PBS here in the U.S. has an incredibly convoluted spec book too. You wonder how the engineers and management have that much time to be so specific about every little thing for about 250 pages. On the other hand, there’s almost nothing left to interpretation. It’s all in black and white.
I was thrilled a few weeks ago when I got the specs for Discovery Networks. 19 pages, of which 8 were dedicated to HD. Direct and to the point, I love that!
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media
HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.STOP STARING AND START GRADING WITH APPLE COLOR Apple Color Training DVD available now!
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up