-
Framing issue after relinking to higher res footage
Hello,
I have been working in a 1080p 23.98 AVID project and I relinked some clips in one of my sequences to their higher res equivalent. I have been working with a proxy workflow with DNxHD 36 8bit 1080 clips. The higher res footage is DNxHR 444 12bit 4096×2160. I didn’t have a problem relinking to the higher res clips, but I’m having trouble with what seems to be some framing issues now. The mastering aspect ratio of the film is 2.39
I have attached a comparison of the shot in the timeline. Why would there be extra black on the sides of the shot with the 4096×2160 clips and what would be the way to fix this?
Thanks so much.
-
4 Replies
-
1920 x 1080 is 16:9
4096 x 2160 is taller than 16:9. (3840 x 2160 UHD is 16:9, as an aside)
To keep from cropping off the top and bottom of the full frame, the full image has been shrunken down to fit within the 16:9 raster, much the way 4:3 footage gets pillarboxed in 16:9..just less severely., since the difference is less.
The 1920 x 1080 image appears to have been cropped.
The 4096 x 2160 hi res version contains the entire uncropped image.
You’ll need to use Frame Flex to crop the image as was done in the lower res version, if you want To preserve the same framing. -
There are times when I’m changing things before and after in Frame Flex and also in Resolve.
Still, need to confirm when it comes back to Avid when using Frame Flex for final output.
I got tired of that and just did it in Resolve. -
Thanks so much!
So my follow up issue is that I am only relinking to the cam originals in order to export a few clips in the locked timeline with lots of AVID keyframed pan and zoom effects on them that didn’t translate well in resolve when I did a conform for the colorist. I was then going to replace these exports in the colorist’s resolve timeline so I don’t have to recreate the effects again.
I’ve confirmed that we are going to be projecting at 2048×858 DCI Scope 2.39.
Do you think this got all out of hand because my proxies were incorrectly transcoded to 16.9 when they should have been 2.39? Are my avid effects useless pretty much?
-
I wrote something incorrectly in my initial response. 4096 x 2160 is of course wider (not taller) than 16:9, but the basic premise is the same. The offline cut was made with a cropped image.
[Fay Gartenberg] “Do you think this got all out of hand because my proxies were incorrectly transcoded to 16.9 when they should have been 2.39?”
Yes.
[Fay Gartenberg] “Are my avid effects useless pretty much?”
Unfortunately, that may be true. In addition to the section in question, the editor may wish to go shot by shot on the entire film and make sure the final framing is what is desired. There is a portion of the image that is available now that was not visible to the editor during the offline edit.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up