[Adam Weinberg]

hi malcolm – re: 1/24 for “low light”, yup, i’ve always understood everything you wrote to be the case.. my question was more why Canon would chose 1/24 to be the “default” shutter when turning the shutter off, as opposed to 1/48. if 1/48 was the setting for shutter off, i wouldn’t accidentally change it and it would be one less option to cycle through with the joystick when quickly switching settings, but it’s instead 1/24 for some reason, which i feel like i will barely use.. makes no sense to me!

[Adam Weinberg]

i’m not trying to insinuate that i think one codec inherently has a longer lifespan than another, rather i’m wondering if certain codecs are *less susceptible* to hard drive related errors than others. and yes, this was definitely a hard drive related error.

though i’m not a technician, i could theoretically definitely see there being a correlation between file format and longevity – e.g. if a codec is long GOP, couldn’t having an error in 1 keyframe potentially throw off other reference frames? i wondered this because this is actually what appeared to be happening in my corrupted files – the image would scramble in a way where it looked at though the codec couldn’t completely interpolate between frames correctly.

basically, i’m trying to determine if archiving in ProRes is a safer codec for long-term archival than h.264 / avchd because it’s intraframe, which given my understanding of it is likely.. i was just hoping someone could either corroborate this or debunk it so i save tons of hard drive space.

[Adam Weinberg]

the vignetting sounds like an anomaly, but the loss of light at the telephoto end is definitely a known issue with the 24-105

[Adam Weinberg]

yup, i’ve seen philp’s review video.. which unfortunately didn’t address my question. and i’m not concerned about the file size per se (who wouldn’t want smaller file sizes?), but the data rate. the MKIII in IPB appears to have a significantly lower data rate than the MKII, and this has me concerned compression artifacts will be more visible on a MKIII than a mark MKII at lower ISOs (the MKIII obviously has better high ISO noise handling).

if i’m going to spend 40% more for a MKIII over a MKII, i want to know that i’m going to be getting *at least* equivalently clean video at ISO 100, and judging by the data rate numbers i’m looking at, that most likely isn’t the case.

[Adam Weinberg]

thanks so much for your help. have not yet had a chance to troubleshoot (under tight deadline!) but very much appreciate!

[Adam Weinberg]

WAV files are problematic? i’ve never had any problems cutting with the WAV files output by my Zoom H4N. but yes, the problems are with the WAV files, not the other audio tracks.

i’m cutting with ProRes LT video and those WAV files.

now my problem is .. i’ve already cut plenty using these WAV files .. i assume i can’t convert them to AIFF and reconnect?

have not yet tried trashing FCP prefs which i hate doing and always do as a last resort ..

[Adam Weinberg]

that is frightening. i had renewed hope as it was just put back on sale..

[Adam Weinberg]

yeah, i think the NEX-5N uses some new variant of AVCHD..? Log and Transfer in FCP sees the clips but it thinks they all have a duration of zero and i can’t capture them. update hopefully in the works? though i of course need some kind of solution in the immediate future to be able to use this as a B-Cam on jobs or else it will not serve it’s purpose ..

[Adam Weinberg]

from my experience DVCPRO HD is one of the easiest formats to work with .. when you’re dealing exclusively with DVCPRO HD. and it usually works OK when cut with ProRes as well. but the thing is, i need to be multipclipping DVCPRO HD media with ProRes media, and i have found that to be problematic / glitchy.

this is precisely why i want to be dealing exclusively with ProRes. or exclusively with DVCPRO HD. it’s not about quality – the quality of either format will suffice.

i guess this is a scenario where i’ll need to pick the lesser of two evils though, on this budget i can’t have everything..

[Adam Weinberg]

[Bouke Vahl] “A transfer from MXF to MOV is essentially re-wrapping the data in a QT container, and should be as fast as just a simple copy command.”

hmm .. interesting .. i never thought about that possibly being the case. unfortunately, when you’re capturing 40 hours of P2 data, a simple copy command isn’t so fast.

i guess here’s the reason i’m so confused: using the EOS-E1 plugin from canon, you can transcode the 5D’s H.264 to ProRes directly during log & transfer. with that in mind, i didn’t understand why you wouldn’t be able to theoretically transcode P2 directly during log & transfer as well.

another reason i am trying to avoid transcoding the DVCPRO HD P2 media to ProRes after it is already captured is that the link to the raw media on the card will be broken, and with this much media it is kind of necessary to maintain that link. i mean, it’s necessary to maintain that link for BOTH the 5D and the HPX .. which makes this all very difficult.