Bouke Vahl
Forum Replies Created
-
[Shane Ross] “What if you are going to broadcast, that is 29.97 (here in the US)? Then you don’t NEED to cut 23.98. All you do is complicate matters by having to remove pulldown and then add it back.”
Many broadcasters demand a master without cadence breaks.
Also, if the OP shot AP, it’s ugly and never intended for final output, a 23.976 @ 29.97 piece should be NP.
Next, if you need anything else done with the piece, you need the 24 master.
That includes going to internet, Pal, very long DVD’s and last but not least, film (although i suspect that’s not going to happen in this case 🙂
And of course, if the original broadcaster allows cadence breaks, what happens if you sell it again to a broadcaster that does?[Shane Ross] “cutting at 23.98, which is only NON-DROP FRAME, means that you have to calculate things.”
You only have to do the math once, write down the numbers and be done with it.
It’s a 5 minute job, vs a day or so if you have to manually re-do the piece to remove cadence breaks.
(I’ve done it a couple of times…)[Shane Ross] “What if you don’t want the 23.98 look? “
Then why on earth shoot it? It’s a compromise format that only looks good if you go to a non-interlaced output like film or internet. In all other cases, it sucks IMHO.
(but of course sucks way less than standards conversion, and is very handy if you need multiple formats, that’s why it was invented…)[Shane Ross] “What if you are going to DVD? That is 29.97..”
No, it’s not. 23.976 is a perfectly good DVD framerate. Player will add pulldown if needed.
And since you have less frames to process, encoding will be faster, and you can put more on one DVD at the same quality.[Shane Ross] “There are MANY reasons not to work 23.98”
Huh? the format IS 23.976! Only in a 29.97 container.
Yes, it’s fast to just handle it as if it were NTSC, but as i have hoped to make clear,
there are more disadvantages.
How hard is it to remove pulldown on ingest, or do a simple removal afterwards?
If it’s AP, no render is needed and it can be done way faster than RT.
(If you can live with QT ref, it’s instant removal…)[Shane Ross] “So we need to find out what the final deliverable is to determine if the OP needs to work 23.98. “
On this we totally agree.
Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
ouch…
Shame on Shane!
One should always cut in 23.976.
If it’s for the web, no de-interlace needing, less frames to compress.
If it’s for broadcast, you have to apply pulldown after the edit so the cadence stays and it can be removed from the master without trouble.for the OP, did you shoot AP or NP?
(you can tell, find a high motion part and see how the relation interlaced / progressive is. If it’s one interlaced frame every 6 frames, it’s Advanced and it’s simple)Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
-
Here we go again:
BWF does NOT carry timecode. It carries a Time Stamp, that is a number between 0 and 4147200000 (24 hours * 60 minutes * 60 seconds * 48000 Khz).
The number says how many samples have passed since midnight (read, tc 00:00:00:00) when the recording started.So it’s up to the software to interpret the number.
Now as we all know, there is a time difference between DF and NDF.
(that’s the whole idea behind it.)If you import a BWF in a DF project, it thus should show you a different number than in NDF.
This does not work in FCP, as you have noticed. This is not even a bug, this is just bad programming by someone who did not know what he was doing.Open a BWF in Quicktime, enable the TC track (wrongly named of course) and you’ll see the number.
(and if you’re a geek like me, you can also find it with a HEX editor)You could try my merge application and see if that gets it right:
https://www.videotoolshed.com/product/26/fcp-auxtc-reader
It comes with a BWF/QT merge application that puts the BWF inside a QT, based on BWF time info and QT tc info.
(also saves you a lot of manual syncing in FCP)Now for LTC, it’s a bit old fashioned to use LTC for transcribing if you work file based. If there are no TC breaks, plain metadata (like QT TC, BWF timestamp or Sound Devices style Album/Artist information) works way easier and fool proof.)
Having said that, my Transcriber application supports all.
(and is a handy tool to check BWF timestamps in various forms, the free demo will do just fine)https://www.videotoolshed.com/product/27/transcriber-2-dvd
To create files for Transcribing, i’ve made a small util that can do so for you. (and is FREE).
https://www.videotoolshed.com/product/59/maketranscriberfiles/2
It works the same as SoundDevices, but due to copyright it cannot make Mp3 (unless you have an option to encode Mp3 from Quicktime)
But AAC works great as well.
No guarantees that your transcription company can use the files, but that’s easy to check.hth,
Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
No idea how your XML looks and how you made it, but Andreas Kiel has put out a warning that line breaks in XML subtitles is broken in 7.02.
If you mail me the XML i can see if i can open it here in an older FCP version and send you a sequence.
Another thing you can try, download the demo of Subbits from my site, see if the XML that Subbits creates does work.
(you can import the timed text, but the demo limits you to just 8 titles, should be enough to do a test if it’s your XML, or FCP.)https://www.videotoolshed.com/?page=products&pID=12
(don’t forget to install the Edit’B text plugin)Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
No simple way unless you can afford a roundtrip trough an (modified) EDL.
Otherwise, use my Macro app (download from my site) to do the job.
(go to next clip, matchframe, patch, insert)Dangerous on complex edits, i would do it by hand…
Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
Jon is partly right.
23.976 can be speeded up to 24, but you need to do something with the audio as well, or you get out of sync.
even if the speed difference is just 0.1%, over a 10 minute clip that means 60 * 10 * 0.001 = 0.6 seconds, and that is VERY noticable
Go to my site, download QTchange (it’s free), it will do that for you.It highly depends on your desired output what to do.
For the DVD market, you can put 23.976 on DVD, and it will play fine in Europe.
For going out to film, you need to speed up to 24
For going out to PAL, you need to speed up to 25. (not uncommon, all major movies are broadcasted this way. Check out the running time for the film in a theatre vs the running time on TV)As for the AP pulldown, this is nonsense. The only way AP applies if you record 24 to tape that does not accept other framerates.
In digital recording, the way it is is just fine. If you need to add pulldown to go to broadcast, you don’t use AP but NP, and you do it after your editing so the cadence stays. (Almost all broadcasters require this).hth,
Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
whatever you decide, do remove the pullown before editing.
Doing it afterwards is possible, but only if you have enough handles and it will take a bit of time.If you add pulldown in the latest state, the cadence will be in a way it can be removed afterwards.
For Pal upconvert, i would not use a Teranex.
I’ve done quite nice upconversions using AviSynth.
(about 3 times slower than RT, and high quality Lanczos scaling)
Slow down 25 to 24, and upconvert. If it’s really showing, (especially if you have 4:3) sources upconverting to a smaller image to show in a box / frame will help.Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
AP is advanced pulldown.
It’s uglyer to the eye, but easy to remove.
It adds an extra interlaced frame every 4 frames to get from 24 to 30.
Thus, just removing these frames will get you a 24 image.Normal pulldown repeats just a FIELD.
Looks pretty on interlaced monitors, but requires a render to remove.So for shooting, use AP, for final output in 30, use NP.
Making 24 from true interlaced or progressive 30 fps stuff is hard.
I can’t tell you what is wise, it highly depends on the amount you have from one or the other, and how important the shots are.
It also depends on the most important output you have…Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros -
you’re right.
Stay in 24 (actually, 23.976, more accurate 24 / 1001 * 1000)You then can:
-Add pulldown to go out to NTSC tape.
-Speed up to 25 and go out to PAL tape.
(note, you’re content will get about 5% shorter, and you might want to change pitch if the music is very important, and that’s black art by itself)
-Or indeed output to a 23.976 DVD that is Pal and NTSC compatible.All with no quality loss.
This is why 24P in video was invented….
Bouke
https://www.videotoolshed.com/
smart tools for video pros