Chad Brewer
Forum Replies Created
-
Hey Paul,
Have you ever checked out https://www.lowendmac.com?
They compile some pretty good deals from a handful of reputable places selling used Macs across many vintages. I like their tech spec details/reviews on all the individual models for comparison amongst all the serial numbers. I have purchased a few computers from some of the companies they list and have been very satisfied getting healthy machines inside as well as cosmetically cared for on the outside.Maybe see if anything from the companies in their Mac Pro “deals” listing is of worthwhile before eBay if you haven’t already.
-chad
(still have your aspect ratio calculator on a number of computers – always a handy tool) -
Not familiar with Clipwrap times, but this is quite useful for calculating file sizes with various codecs:
https://www.videospaceonline.com/
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
[Craig Seeman] “[Trevor Asquerthian] “FCP yes (underlying QT inherently incapable as the quantising to frame edge was 50:50)”
Amazing how some people complain about no direct tape in/out in FCPX when this was something Apple never could get right. I think it’s smart they left it to third parties.”
Hey Craig, is what you guys are talking about here with frame edges basically referring to the same thing as “frame accuracy” in terms of editing with machine control?
I ask because if so, it’s perhaps the issue I’ve been dealing with for years regarding device control with FCP being sketchy – as in edits to tape can be dead on frame accurate over and over and then without changing anything to the same VTR they can be randomly 1 frame early or late. I was over this many times with AJA and Blackmagic over the years and finally thought it was probably an FCP issue that was never developed properly. I have never used AVID, but heard it had more reliable device control than FCP.
Is frame accuracy (or lack thereof) essentially what you guys are talking about here and how Apple could never get it right or is this a completely different discussion than the issues I’ve had that I was describing?
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
Hey Dan,
I’m glad you finally were able to get the tape laid off properly.
I’m only familiar with the Teranex models that were sold under Teranex before they were acquired by Blackmagic, so if your model is a Blackmagic model you might have some different options in your menus than the ones I see, but not sure:
I only have “film/video/auto” selections in the SOURCE option.
The scene detection option I have is simply an on or off setting – the default being set to on.Changes to either of these settings may change the frame processing delay through the Teranex, thus you getting a different amount of delay that ended up being correct for the edit. These settings aren’t meant to adjust timing though, they are to adjust certain aspects of the conversion processes – but which of course can affect timing. For instance scene detection brings the aperture buffer down from 4 fields to 2 fields for the first new converted frame after a cut, if I recall correctly.
I for one, believe the issue you were experiencing is related to sometimes transient polling issues with FCP’s device control and various VTR’s as I’ve seen layoffs being 1 frame early or late – RANDOMLY. I can lay off the same exact sequence through the same exact signal path sometimes 10 times in a row and it’s dead on. Then I can do it another ten 10 times without changing ANYTHING and 4 out of 10 times it’s a frame off. And I’m talking about without doing any signal processing! – no Teranex, no converter or conversion of any kind.
It used to drive me insane as I do tape lay-offs every single day. I’d been over the issue with Blackmagic and AJA at length, and finally gave up and learned that sometimes you have to retry or change device control playback offsets or what have you to compensate for the transient weirdness. At least this has been my experience.
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
[Craig Seeman] “Of course you have a Quad machine around as well.”
I got past your sarcasm, but how’d you know the one VTR we don’t have? Honestly, we get calls twice a year, every year now from some poor souls desperately trying to find a Quad in service for some tape they hold to be precious still.
[Craig Seeman] “If you’re expecting a variety of work you get the gear to support it. You don’t expect modern gear to handle older formats and workflows beyond a point.”
Yep. For a place like the one I work at, it’s a must. We have to be ready every day for a very large client based with broadly disparate needs.
Everything here is in service and used everyday believe it or not:
https://www.televersions.com/formatsArchiving has become and will continue to be a really big deal in terms of videotape libraries and content. I’ve seen since the creation of the Apple Pro Res codec that due to it’s efficiency and manageable file size it has been making many tape archiving jobs a reality, instead of an overwhelmingly complex and expensive wish.
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I think a G5 is ok to work with”
I like that you picked up on what I was saying, Aindreas, and noted the “hardware snobbery” that was expressed in another post.
My post and thread title were stating I have a G5/FCP6 for home use. And yes, they aren’t cutting edge any more, but still respectable machines nonetheless as you say.I work with a whole big gang o’ Mac Pros and the like at work, just can’t afford one for myself.
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
[Craig Seeman] “In any project one should have forethought about the entire workflow.”
Well, yeah, in an ideal world or one in which one editor/one post-house/etc. is in sole control of the process and the decisions to be made from project start to finish.
A facility like ours or say Michael Gissing’s in Australia have the variety of NLE’s on the market sometimes playing somewhat different roles than simply for the creative work that is largely discussed here. We have the countless scenarios where a producer or director (not editor) comes to us with a project file from who knows when, from who knows where, and 5 boxes of videotapes that comprised the edit 10 years ago, and says, “Can you put this back together? I’m re-purposing some work…Or updating me reel…Or I have a gold-mine of valuable footage I shot in the 1980’s – it’s on 1″ tape ONLY, but the content still has the ability to possibly generate hundreds of thousands of dollars in future revenue in some way, because it’s footage for whatever reason that can never be re-created.”
That’s part of the reason I wanted to introduce a discussion about FCPX and its future from a facility’s standpoint, not just a creative editor’s standpoint because FCP7 has had and still does have, entire facilities built around it – and of course it’s EOL now, but still works like a charm….For now…But we can obviously only say “for now,” right now.
It’s quite possible John Heagy had no control of this particular project he was mentioning until it was handed to him from someone/somewhere else. These very common situations of having to “un-earth” or “repurpose” or “pick up on in the middle of” old or new projects and the necessity to be able to do so for many years is a point Jeremy Garchow talks about a lot here and is crucial for him and his clients and I’m sure is for many others. My guess is he still pulls one of his own DVCPRO HD shoot tapes now or then to get that one shot he knows they got years ago, but never needed until now. He’s “got it like that.” Jeremy has the very deserved power to have a lot of control of his entire workflows.
It would be ideal for every project’s workflow to be determined at the start and then adhered to until completion, but for some editors and MOST of us video facilities, that’s a luxury we are treated to like, only when there’s a full moon, or the stars align, or we are having one of those “it can’t be this easy” type days which aren’t that often.
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
[Keith Koby] “There are better tools available for capturing and organizing materials from tape than fcp7. There are free ones too that come with your capture devices.”
Yeah, they are used here all the time as well.
[Keith Koby] “If you haven’t detected a switch to digital delivery since the tsunami that affected Japan 2 years ago, then you certainly are working a lot in archival materials.”
It’s been a huge switch to digital delivery…For many years now and we’ve been on every wave of it…Working with lots of archival materials? But of course…What was the video storage/recording medium for the past 30 years? Brand new, created this morning type content still goes out on tape every day though. Digital delivery outweighs our tape delivery these days, no doubt, but tapes are around and will be for some time. That’s all my point was. Networks still demand it because for now, it’s the best way to limit the plethora of technical variables involved in video.
[Keith Koby] ” All of this material is delivered over the internet and soon even big facilities with lots of video assets will be backing up offsite over the internet. It happens a lot already.”
Back-up and delivery via the internet are two different situations at this point. Please upload a 4:4:4 RGB, feature length film with 12 channels of audio to Paris for a film festival this Friday. Good luck.
[Keith Koby] ” What is exciting about fcpx is that it is a tool that has useful features and tons of potential for the next 10 years or so.”
Agreed. It is exciting to see something new with years of potential and room for growth.
[Keith Koby] “I can understand your hesitation to part with old familiar workflows, but you need to look at the reality of the situation.”
No hesitation at all, nor any adherence to old workflows. I develop new digital and videotape based workflows on a daily basis in a high demand broadcast environment. And to your last comment, I don’t need to “look at the reality” of the situation.” I live in the situation.
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
[Craig Seeman] “Adobe sells software. Apple sells hardware. Apple wants you to buy a new computer. Adobe wants you to eventually upgrade your software. They’re different business models.”
True, but regardless of whether the product is software, hardware, or fresh cantaloupe, the common denominator of different business models is existence by having customers. Doesn’t matter “what” they’re buying, it’s that you need to satisfy them in whatever way to buy whatever “it” is.
For all I know these days, robots are purchasing things online directly from computers and having them uploaded to their cloud, which would of course alter our ideas about business models all together.
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago -
Dan,
I believe you’re saying that your program is now starting on field 2 of TC 01:00:00:00 instead of field 1. I’ve seen this with this same card and same VTR.
It takes some trial and error with doing multiple edits to tape just past the program start time and then going back and checking before committing to the entire layoff, but change your device control setting’s “playback offset” option between 0, +1, +2, +3, +4 each time and see if changing that moves the edit one field earlier. This has worked for me in the past when the edit was landing one field late.
Let me know if adjusting the playback offset fixes it for you.
Chad Brewer
Senior Videotape Operator
TeleVersions, LLC – Chicago