[Benjamin Reichman]

Files were all transcoded through L&T, no external converter.

But the backup files (the DCIM folders, etc.) were moved in completely different places to where they used to be. I was using ShotPut Pro on-set, going to various small drives, and then everything was put on a single drive later. So maybe that’s what’s going on? But how can I fix that?

Or is there an alternate approach I should be looking at now for doing this??

[Benjamin Reichman]

Thanks, Shane. It’s working well, and the HPX500e footage looks amazing, by the way. Beautiful colors. I don’t know what lens was used, but it frankly makes the very, very good EX3 footage look bad in comparison.

[Benjamin Reichman]

Thanks! I can’t seem to get to the Singular Software website (keep getting “Plesk” error message), but I’ll check again later.

[Benjamin Reichman]

Thanks for the responses. I tried playing the tape in a deck (no capturing, just playback) and got exactly what Bret said: a 4:3 video image which happens to have black letterboxing at the top and bottom.

What’s the purpose of in-camera letterboxing? Was it so you could shoot in what was visually 16:9 and yet still output a 4:3 720×480 video for broadcast??

Just trying to figure out why the camera would even be capable of doing this in the first place.

[Benjamin Reichman]

So it’s possible for the camera to be set to letterbox in 4:3? I don’t have much experience with SD and tape cameras…

So we should bring it in as 4:3 and then resize to fit into our 16:9 SD widescreen sequence? Is that right?

And just to confirm: the letterbox is a camera setting that I can’t (obviously) undo now, because it’s in the tape and not in the way Quicktime Player or FCP is displaying it?

Thanks a lot,
Ben

[Benjamin Reichman]

Also, I should add another oddity. When I export a self-contained Quicktime file, it comes out slightly cropped on all sides, so what I saw at the very top or side of the frame in the Canvas is now chopped off. But that seems bizarre, because it’s a self-contained Quicktime!

Is this a clue, or another separate puzzle?

Thanks for the help!

[Benjamin Reichman]

Mark, I know what ‘progressive’ means, but I don’t understand your comment. Is there a setting I should change, or do you mean that I should view it on another monitor?

[Benjamin Reichman]

Shane,

Thanks–I’ve fully rendered. It’s the small text in the interface that’s soft. When I was fiddling with the Field Dominance settings (just because I’d tried all the things that made sense to me), when I chose something other than None the effect just got much worse, which made me wonder if somehow it was connected to that…? But that doesn’t really make much sense.

Maybe if I apply a Sharpen filter? That might just make things worse, but I’ll experiment.

[Benjamin Reichman]

Matt,

Thanks. However, I’ve already exported at Current Settings and found that I have the softening. In fact, just placing a clip in the sequence causes it. I’ve already made the Sequence Settings changes you suggest.

I appreciate your comments, but I’m still at a loss. Any other ideas?

Thanks,
Ben

[Benjamin Reichman]

Thanks for the tips, but I’m afraid they don’t seem to have solved the keyframing problem.

Because the new high-res footage is a different resolution from the sample watermarked clips, pasting attributes results in keyframes that put the high-res clips in the wrong place in the frame. For example, a clip that is supposed to move from outside the frame on the left to the middle and then up and to the right is still doing that general motion, but it’s no longer hitting the center of the frame, going all the off up and to the right, etc. because the clip’s resolution is different. At least I think that’s why it’s happening. Hmmm…am I missing something?