Andrew Rendell
Forum Replies Created
-
ProRes is good for the pictures, but you need to convert the audio to aiff files at 48kHz (sample rate) and 16bit (depth).
-
[Alberto Brancolini] “In your experience, is this whole elaborated talk worth the walk?”
No, do as Dave says.
OTOH, since you ask:
1) well, sort of – spend time & money and the sync issues/artefacts can be minimised subjectively, but it’s not something you want to do if it’s not absolutely necessary.
2) not better, not worse, just slightly different.
3) IMO the difference is too small to be worth worrying about, display scanning rate is more significant (it’ll look slightly different on different computers anyway)
4) no that’s not the case, filming at a rate that’s different to the flicker is worse than filming at the same rate. -
RCA to XLR cables? I’d be looking at keeping everything balanced.
I personally wouldn’t choose a subwoofer system for when I’m sitting at a desk, I’d go for a nearfield 2 way pair. I do like Genelecs though, but maybe the 8030a or 8040a.
[This is very much a personal opinion and YMMV over subwoofers. I’m track laying this week in a room which has 8020a’s and I’m loving them!]
-
If it’s the timecode stamp, there’s a tutorial about that here:
https://library.creativecow.net/lyon_matt/fixing-fcp-assets/1 -
As I understand it the reason for using 96kHz sampling rate isn’t about increasing the frequencies being reproduced, it’s about reducing aliasing.
Weird things happen as the sound frequencies approach half the sampling frequency, which cause frequencies to be produced in the output that weren’t there in the source (which is called aliasing). Look up modulation theory if you realy want to know why (think of the sampling frequency as a “carrier”), but the outcome is the unpleasant “metallic” harshness to the sound that you sometimes heard on early CDs, particularly on classical instruments like violins, pianos, etc, which produce harmonics going up to high frequencies. The solution to that is a very hard low-pass filter at 20kHz to get rid of any frequencies close to (or above) half the sampling rate (for 44.1 or 48kHz sampling), but that kind of filter causes phase distortion at high frequencies, so some degradation in absolute quality. Going up to 96kHz sampling simplifies the filtering requirements a lot as any degradation in quality will happen at frequencies well above human hearing, reproduction is better at the frequencies we want. (If you could invent the perfect low pass filter to block out everything above 20kHz without effecting frequencies below it you’d make the higher sampling rates pointless.)
-
On the terminology front, lots of us in the UK are influenced by the BBC (mainly by being trained there). The BBC is in many ways a “law unto itself” and in general it doesn’t feel the need to conform to anyone else’s practices (except for things like the EBU and ITU broadcasting standards, which the BBC has frequently contributed to) so the BBC has often made up it’s own descriptions for things which have different words everywhere else. One of the most distinctive things is that for the BBC everything is an abbreviation, e.g., GV for general view, blue- or green-screen is CSO (for colour separation overlay, although I’ve never heard anyone outside the BBC using that one), etc, so the UK tv business does tend to use a few terms that are different to the rest of the world for that reason. In fact, making up your own TLAs is still quite popular in London!
BTW, I thought a “joiner” was the technician who cut and spliced the neg (making cement joins) to match the edit for making the release prints of a film. I’ve never heard joining used to refer to editing (an editor has also been referred to as a “cutter” in the UK for at least the last thirty years). As a general rule I’d expect any UK specific term to be an acronym rather than a different descriptive word.
[TLA = three letter abbreviation.]
-
“Best” is a rather subjective term when you have a limited budget, but here’s my thoughts.
At that budget I’d probably be looking at the Canon XF105 but check the other brands, as features are something of a compromise at that price point and one manufacturer might be slightly better than another for some particular thing that might be attractive to you.
Don’t neglect sound.
Timecode is great for syncing multiple cameras and separately recorded sound, so it’s a plus, but if you’re going to be mainly shooting single camera it’s not vital (I’d want it, but I might give it up if I had to sacrifice some other feature for it to stay in budget).
I wouldn’t worry about ProRes as it limits your choice too much IMO (there aren’t many camcorders which record ProRes, and you can always convert if you need to). I’d be much more interested in 4:2:2 TBH.
A choice of video outputs, such as HDMI and HD-SDI, is useful, and you’ll probably want gen lock if you’re going to use it in a studio.
-
+1
Make sure your audio is aiff and the sampling rate is 48kHz. -
Well it MIGHT be something simple, so it’s probably worth getting a repair guy to have a look at it and give you a quote. But my gut feeling is that it’s quite likely that it’s not to be cost effective to fix it.
-
What you’re doing is quite normal. Each mic “hears” one person, so each track has the sound of that person, two people = 2 microphones, one on each of your two tracks (your two waveforms). That gives you flexibility to use different amounts of gain and eq and different panning positions in the mix and to dip out the sound from one microphone when the other person is speaking (and there are a couple of different reasons why you might want to do that).
Having both microphones mixed on a track requires having a mixer on set/location. That makes it less flexible in post so it has to be done well at the time of recording, and that is a skillful job which requires a good location sound recordist.