[Bouke Vahl]

[Job ter Burg] “The advantage being that pulldown can more easily and correctly removed from your sequence, either in any subsequent editing, or for example by displays or projectors that are capable of doing inverse telecine and display 23.98p.”

Seconded.
And, do not forget, some broadcastes DEMAND it, as they want to be able to reverse telecine to make 25 fps masters.

Besides, you yourself might want to go to DVD, where 24P allows for longer discs at the same quality.
Of course there always are internet clips also, they will look way better if the source is progressive, and the overal data rate decreases.

So yes, the FCP manual is right, it is better to remove pulldown before you edit.
Only exception i can think of is when you insert a few 24 clips into a mainly 30 fps show.

But then the pulldown must be normal, if it is advanced, it will look ugly so re-doing it is also in order.

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

[Shane Ross] “Why scale down BEFORE you output?”

cause Digibeta is SD.
And, as i said, downscaling is an art.
I never said use FCP to downscale. And i don’t trust all capture cards to offer the quality of downscaling i have using other tools.

Having a downscaled input file for DVD compression is a good thing, as it is faster on multiple passes / different settings.

Besides, not everyone does like Compressor. I never use it.

But you missed my most imporant point…

btw, did you get the Relink to work?

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

You edit in 24 P, and in your case that is 23.976
So the whole pipeline stays 23.976 untill the very last stage!

After picture lock, scale down to a SD clip. (that is an art itself…)

you make your DVD 24P from there.

You then add normal pulldown (not advanced!) to the SD clip, and output to Digibeta.

But why on earth do you start something without knowing how to finish it?

I know it is only TV, but do you like having problems, or are you so confident that over here anything can be fixed?
Next time, find out your workflow BEFORE shooting, cause you WILL shoot yourself in the foot someday.

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

Raul,
Not yet, but i’m busy building this into Subbits.
(my subtitle tool)
The idea came from extended markers in the sources, so you can edit while retaining the subs in correct place. (ideal if you have to edit a foreign language.)

However, perhaps Andreas already has something like this.
Have a look at spherico.com
(i know he has done ‘something’ with subs and markers, perhaps it is done…)

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

Sounds a fun job!

Did you take a look at Reaper?
(if not, do so….)

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

Scott,
I don’t know Performer, but probably the records are BWF files.
Most editors (at least video editors) can let you set the starttime of your sequence.
Perhaps that’s possible with Performer as well.
If so, and you output a BWF, you should be able to retain the starttime.

And, get the latest version of FCPauxTC reader.
It comes with an XML merge application for BWF, and a helper app. that can read LTC from Wave files, and convert them to BWF.
So if you have a channel to spare in your Performer input / output, just retain the LTC, output a Poly wave, let the helper app. set the BWF timestamp.

hth,

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

look at this very old, (two days), thread:

https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/8/1117798#1117798

And remember the zoom is writing BWF files.

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

Sure,
bouke at videotoolshed dot com

(that was not hard to guess 🙂

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

Could be rounding errors.
If it’s just a bit, i would pitch shift. You also get a speed change, but the quality remains exactly the same, at the cost of a pitch shift.
Up to a few percent no-one will know. (Speeding up 24 film to 25 pal normally is pitch shifted, this is 4% and no-one complains)

Bouke

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

[Bouke Vahl]

Sean,
BWF’s in FCP is a bag of hurt.
FCP assumes the starttime not based on the current project, but on the last setup settings used.
It also tries to be smart on how to cope with 23.976 / 24 time difference.
Being smart is no problem, but not telling what logic it is following can be killing.
(look at the amount of threads on ‘ out of sync wave’ there are here…)

To top it off, FCP has a memory for BWF files and their metadata, and you can’t club it out its brains!
You need to rename the clip in order for FCP to re-read the metadata.
(you’ve found that one out, after importing them in 25 the metadata was stuck in the 24 project.)
Note, if the BWF starts on a round second, there should be no difference between 24 and 25, but there MUST be a difference with 23.976

My option would be to start over again.
Rename the BWF’s, open your project, create a new project with the same settings as your working project. (To club FCP into submission), go to your user prefs and set BWF import on NTSC to Non-drop if it wasn’t already. If you have to switch it, you need to restart FCP or the settings are not in effect)

Then, try again…
(and yes, this sucks….)

Also, see if the sample rate is indeed 48000 exact. If not, your problem might be there.
Another option is to remove the BWF timestamp.
(A QT export to Wave will do that for you)

hth,

Bouke

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