Multiple Sequence Settings in One Project

[Richard Sanchez]

Symphony has a feature called “Universal Mastering” that should do what you need. You’ll work in your primary acquisition format (You can set your timecode window to display timecode in the respective rates you’re delivering to) and your final step will be to use Universal Mastering to layback. As far as I know, Universal Mastering only works with Avid’s hardware and not with any 3rd party hardware, and Universal Mastering also only works for tape delivery, there is no equivalent for digital delivery, in which case you’ll need to look into converting your final master. I’d use compressor, personally, but there are a multitude of options.

This is a great explanation of Universal Mastering from Job Ter Burg

https://www.jobterburg.nl/Publications/UniversalMastering_v1.2.pdf

Richard Sanchez
Los Angeles, CA

“We are the facilitators of our own creative evolution.” – Bill Hicks

[Michael Phillips]

Unfortunately, there is no file-based universal mastering, only playback as part of a digital cut process to tape. I blogged about this in July of last year:
https://24p.com/wordpress/?p=6

Also, while Media Composer can link to assets greater than HD via AMA, it is not a 2K+ editing and finishing system. All assets are scaled to HD or an extraction can be done from the higher resolution and then scaled or not depending on size of extraction. That is via the FrameFlex feature.

Timelines are still tied to project type and there cannot be a different frame rate timelines in the same project in the sense that it will always be frame rate matched to the project type with motion adapters. So you cannot play and edit an NTSC timeline while in a PAL project without the NTSC material being motion adapted to be 25i or 25p (again, progressive and interlace being tied to project type).

Maybe in the future – but for now it’s the same it’s always been.

Michael

[Justin Gray]

Thank you guys. I really wish Avid would consider this as it would be really nice to be cutting on it again. But until that day, my shop probably won’t make that switch.

Thanks Fellow Bovines,

Justin Gray
Senior Editor/Motion Graphics Artist
Gray Planet
https://vimeo.com/grayplanet

[Pat Horridge]

The problem with making that change is that just about every media creation choice would have to offer the frame rate choice whereas currently all media is created in the project framerate. The big issue with allowing frame rate conversion within the project is you destroy the timecode relationship and the ability to conform back.
Taking final sequences to output projects of the desired framerate has been the simple safe method of multiformat delivery.

Pat Horridge
Technical Director, Trainer, Avid Certified Instructor
VET
Production Editing Digital Media Design DVD
T +44 (0)20 7505 4701 | F +44 (0)20 7505 4800 | E pat@vet.co.uk |
http://www.vet.co.uk | Lux Building 2-4 Hoxton Square London N1 6US

[Michael Phillips]

I disagree. Avid could engineer the ability to manage all timecodes regardless of which project a file starts in as it can be defined by the essence or at time of link. When they introduced “transcode” in v6, they didn’t go the extra step of keeping timecode for whatever rate as there are TC columns for every frame rate and pulldown possible. v5.5 used to have two comments in EDL, one was for original frame rate and one for a motion effect should an additional one been applied. This falls in a feature being half implemented. I blogged on how I relink back to originals with a direct link and transcode by going through the step manually. If it can be done manually, I would bet it could be done by a computer. This fell into the same response as frame for frame mixed frame rate: “it’s coming in the next release” and it never does.

https://24p.com/wordpress/?p=22

Michael

[Justin Gray]

I agree with you Michael. Out of any editor I use Avid is the only one not offering this feature. And I believe it is at their own detriment.

Thanks Fellow Bovines,

Justin Gray
Senior Editor/Motion Graphics Artist
Gray Planet
https://vimeo.com/grayplanet

[Glenn Sakatch]

True, others do it, but they don’t necessarily do it correctly. As on online editor getting sequences from guys who have cut in FCP and just let it do what ever to the footage, i have seen more than my share of projects that won’t relink properly to the native (r3d) files because the timecodes it is looking for, don’t actually exist on the original file.
You are working in 59.94 and bring in 23.98, and spit out a list, and that list assigns 59.94 timecodes to your 23.98 footage. All of the sudden i’m manually rebuilding edits in online.

Was on another forum last week with a online editor who just received a list exactly like this. 1500 edits won’t relink because they are 23.98 originals cut into a 59.94 sequence. Luckily for the offline editor, FCP just worked, he didn’t have to do anything…unfortunately for the online editor and the Client who has to pay, FCP just worked, so he didn’t have to do anything.

Glenn

[Michael Phillips]

Glenn brings up good points as well, but there is no reason that Avid cannot do it right as it has all the timecode columns to track any rate as well as different pulldown cadences for any of the rates and has always done do in the SD world of 24, 25, 30, etc. I am just saying that for a company that markets the best in media and metadata management, there is no reason why the full tracking could not be done as it worked in 5.5 metadata wise.

Michael

[Michael Phillips]

The following screenshot shows there is no difference when working with a different frame rate clip than the project whether it came from another project or directly AMA linked in the bin. The clips have the same behavior. The project is 1080i/25 linking or opening 1080p/23.976 clips. What is scary is that a transcode is always lossy – notice now the AuxTC1 column metadata gets deleted. There could also be some refinement as to Field motion. Transcoding progressive footage does not make interlace motion yet it shows up as interlace. This can be changed to progressive as needed. But this goes to show that it can be done and having to manage every format/frame rate in its own project is a pain. And if there is a transcode,even more, not to mention sending the AAF to an online facility that now needs to conform to original masters. It can be done – just needs a better design/implementation.

Michael