- April 14, 2017 at 2:34 am
Hello! I am working with 4K raw in an avid UHD 23.976 project. Since my editors are working in MC 6.5, they applied 3D Warp resizes as temp, that I am now rebuilding with frame flex on the the 4k raster footage at DnXHR HQX. Does anyone know of a ratio correlation between 3D warp resizing parameters to frame flex so I can rebuild the resizing as accurately as possible.
My 4K is 16:9, and we’re delivering in 1920×1080. Thank you!
- April 14, 2017 at 9:38 pm
Unfortunately, there does not seem to be any easy correlation between the two as 3D allows for smaller and larger whereas FrameFlex uses “smaller” in the sense that it is extracting from a bigger image. Also, the full left and right slider numbers don’t use the same scale. It would have been nice for Avid to allow a 3D Warp to be converted to FrameFlex under these conditions as I am sure it can be calculated by some relationship somewhere.
- April 14, 2017 at 9:40 pm
I’m not sure I understand. If your 4k is 16:9 and the offline was done at HD in an older version, can’t you just apply a basic frame flex 16:9 to fill the frame?
- April 14, 2017 at 10:11 pm
It’s not a matter of filling the frame, it’s a matter of using frame flex to replicate their resizes on the 4K. Our editors knew that we shot in 4k and had the ability to punch in, but because they are on an older version of avid, they could not use frame flex. Instead they did all their resizing in 3D warp, and now I am trying to rebuild the resizing in frame flex. Just sticking to 3D warp on the 4K when we can frame flex will ensue in a loss of quality. I’m trying to see if there’s a ratio between 3D Warp scaling and Frame flex scaling.
- April 14, 2017 at 11:46 pm
It’s probably one of those given Parameter X: (A1=A2) and (B1=B2), then X = ?? , Same for Parameter Y, type thing. But that kind of math is not my forte.
- April 15, 2017 at 1:05 am
Are the punch ins all different? If they are, i’m not sure how quickly that could be figured out anyway. You would be calling up every shot, and doing the math, and doing the tweak.
Might be just as easy to use the offline reference as a 50 percent layer and manually go through the show.
If they use two or 3 different punch ins over and over again, you can use that method to figure out the equivalent amounts. Maybe a math pattern will materialize while you do it.
Log in to reply.