[Adam Smith]

I think some codecs are more able to be split between processors (multi-threaded). When I work in FCP7 with ProRes and hit render I generally see all 8 of my processors crank up and work hard.

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

Batch Monitor comes with Compressor and will show you all active jobs.

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

If you get P2CMS from Panasonic (free download) it installs the MXF codec for quicktime and you can then drag the MXF files directly into FCP. (You don’t have to use P2CMS for anything, just install it.)

The biggest downside would be that you have to sync all the audio clips manually in FCP, but since you have no audio I don’t suppose this is a game-stopper. You’d also lose metadata (but FCP carries precious little of that).

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

I’ve seen my MacPro most if not all of my 8 cores up to around 80% when rendering in FCP… but that’s about the only time it seems to use more than one or two, and it may be content related (codec, filters).

Motion doesn’t seem to use more than one core (and seems to use my graphics card more than the system processors when rendering).

Compressor will indeed crank every core to max if you’ve got QMaster set up for it.

For me, I get more benefit from my extra cores in running multiple applications. Compressor rendering is great of course… when I need it.

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

Most camera acquisition formats are compressed out of necessity, and may not be well suited to production work. AVCHD and similar codecs are particularly processor intensive to work with, and therefore are generally transcoded before editing. While you may be able to import the footage directly, working with it will likely be a \”sub-optimal\” editing experience.

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

Looks like edge enhancement from the camera to me… it can be quite a problem. Usually shows up on high-contrast edges, with light outer line and dark inner lines.

I’m poking around with your still image, but I’m no expert keyer.

You might try pulling one key with settings high enough to get nice edges even at the cost of losing other parts of the image (white shirt, patches of skin). Then key another copy of the footage with an eye for good content but shrinking the matte in for hard tight edges – as long as you make those edges smaller than the ‘nice edge’ layer, you should be ok.

Maybe someone else can get it all in one shot, but when I’ve had problem keys I’ve done it like that… breaking it down into parts.

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

If you want the effect done in-camera, you’d set your recording format and frame rate, then in the Scene File menu change the frame rate from Default to the frame rate that gives you the desired over/under crank.

For instance – set 720pN24 for record format
Then set Frame Rate to 60

You’ll be shooting 60fps but the movie is recorded at 24 (and will play back at 24) giving a 250% slow-mo. Set the Frame Rate back to DEFAULT and you’ll be shooting 24 at 24p.

I’d set the camera to a Film shutter of 180 degrees.
NOTE – you can only over/under crank in 720p (no SD or 1080), and no audio is recorded.

I set up Scene Files with the shutter speed built-in. Slot 1 is my standard shooting profile, and the rest of the slots on the dial are the same look but with incremented frame rates. So I can spin the dial and shoot some quick off-speed speed clips and then quickly go back to my normal frame rate.

You can also do it like Chris suggested – shoot a higher frame rate than you intend to use and slow it down in post. This will give you audio and later flexibility in choosing when you want slow-mo. However the shutter speed gets a little more tricky – to get the ‘normal’ motion blur you’d need to set the shutter to the frame rate you intend to use, and not the frame rate you’re actually shooting.

Did that make sense?

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

Have you tried doing the conversion in Compressor?

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

We see a lot of people who’ve ingested and then tossed the MXF and later realize they did something wrong (remove pulldown set incorrectly / pulled wrong shots).

If you’ve cut and delivered the piece without issue and there is no chance of revisions then I’d think you’re about as safe as you can get when it comes to flushing anything.

If you’d shot this project on tape and would now be fine with throwing away or re-using the tapes, then I don’t see why you can’t do the same with the MXF files.

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor

[Adam Smith]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Motion project can take an stupid long time to render in FCP.”

Really? My experience seems quite the opposite… I often have Motion projects render several times faster in FCP. Motion only seems to use one of my eight processors, while FCP will slam them all up to 95%.

The only downside I can see so far is the horrible motion blur in FCP… so if I need motion blur I’m stuck outputting from Motion.

– – –
Video Photographer / Avid & Final Cut Editor