[Bouke Vahl]

[Richard Crowley] “Alternatively, you could simply throw out one of the channels, and just use one of them. But that would require re-trainig all your editors :-(.”

well, i might be getting old, but i’ve been taught NEVER EVER to use two channels if they have the same content.
There is no need obviously, but always introduces the risk of phase shifting as one can never be sure if the timing of both channels is exactly the same. (This definitly was a problem in the analogue days.)
And, of course back then we had a screaming shortage of channels, so it was a very easy choice…

For the rest of the whole discussion, i would worry about having the entire chain unbalanced, let alone the physical abuse of the minijack input. (With this setup and without some form of physical protection it won’t last a week i’m afraid…)

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

I’ll keep this brief.
I disagree with you on several points and i have no intention to make this a pissing contest, so let’s just agree to disagree.

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

nope, 12 bit 32 Khz 4 channel sound, thus probably on DV.
But i don’t see why that should have impact on sync though…

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

While i think of it, the HQ John is talking about may come from smart blending the fields.
This makes an artificial motion blur on the footage, and that indeed is ‘filmish’.
(I can’t test now, my avid is powered down now, but toy yourself, at least you know where to look for.)

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

Don’t worry.
If he’s a freelancer, he wants to deliver good work and keep clients satisfied.
And for the time, if it is really highly complicated, it will take a night to render. So he’ll set it up and go to bed, it will be done in the morning. Not much to loose for him there…

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

Oi Rafael, bad form, drink more coffee…

Of course blowing it up is the only solution, but you only blow it up vertically to fill out the frame. So there will be no loss of framing!
(This is the nature of anamorphic, use the entire frame to fit in a 16:9 image)
But there will be loss of quality since 1/3 of the original image was black, and has to be filled in with added pixels…

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

Just ask the animator to re-render at 29.97.
For him it is just switching the timebase and putting it to work.

Otherwise, use any package that can add pulldown (AE can do this)
Make sure you use normal pulldown, NOT advanced.

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

De-interlacing is NOT a film effect in my book.
And i don’t like it either if it is for interlaced broadcast, the ‘feel’ of film comes from something else, not from progressive images. Eg limited depth of field makes for a film look, and you can emulate that a bit by masking and defocusing.

I have used a zillion different de-interlacing apps.
The worst you can get is discard a field, as you effectively throw away half your resolution.
I don’t have tried Sapphire, but i trust others if they say it is good.

But since you’ve got resolution to spare (1920 X 1080 is way enough for a normal TV set), you might get away with something simpler.

For the sake of workflow, you could try Avids slomo (fluidmotion) at 100%. Interlaced in, progressive out.

Just try whatever you have (forget the field blend in AE, it is a defocus filter rather than de-interlace).

At least you got Squeeze as another option, and if you dare use Avisynth. Lots of options, but a bit of a learning curve…

But i would focus on making a good interlaced show, with all the CC and other eye candy you can afford, and after that, try de-interlacing.

But again, there is no blockbuster moviemaker that would not kill to have his movie on the big screen in 60 FPS, so it really is a stupid effect to pretend you had the money to shoot film…

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

There used to be an import tax in Europe for cams that have FW input enabled, as they were concidered a deck rather than a camera.
So in order for the manufacturers to be cheaper, the input was disabled (in software) for the european market.
There are hacks available to enabe it if this is the case.

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros

[Bouke Vahl]

Not sure what is happening, but did you try QTchange also?

https://www.videotoolshed.com/product/42/qtchange

Besides being able to read the file creation time, it is also smart enough to deduct the file duration.
(when you shoot 10 minutes of video, the creation time is 10 minutes later than the actual start of the shoot…)

For Canon material it can use the .THM file for more accurate time, not sure how that works on Nikon material.

But if you send me some testclips i’m happy to have a look at them!

hth,

Bouke

https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros