[Che Broadnax]

There’s no redundancy in this snapping setting.

Snapping, without the preferences checkbox, only refers to the snapping of clips to other clips in the timeline. If you’re a drag-the-clip-around kind of editor, that’s pretty convenient.

The checkbox brings the playhead into the snapping action, so that dragging the playhead around will snap to clips heads/tails.

Different functionalities, same name.

Meanwhile, I’m peeved that every time I export I have to select “In to Out” as it defaults to work area. Frankly, the whole “work area” thing has always felt redundant to me. Why wouldn’t I just use in and out points? Why would I render the work area, when I could render in to out? It feels pretty vestigial, although, I use it from time to time in After Effects. But only because there’s no real way to mark in and out.

[Che Broadnax]

I was really hoping this wasn’t such an obscure concept! I haven’t seen a single answer to this question. I’d be satisfied with somebody telling me, “no, this can’t be done. Should be, but can’t. So, either make a billion tracks for stems, or combine them in some 3rd-party solution.” But I can’t even find somebody saying this.

Did you ever find a solution?

[Che Broadnax]

Do you know of some way to set this as the DEFAULT way audio files are treated? I’ve created a preset, but I don’t know how to make PPro default to my preset.

As a side note, I don’t understand why I would ever want 2 tracks of audio living together on a single track. It’s baffling. I get that PPro is unlocking “channels” from “tracks” for some reason, but it just seems like it doesn’t do anybody any good, really, except for screen real estate and making patching potentially bananas. I guess I’m old fashioned. 2 channels? 2 tracks. 5 channels? 5 tracks. If I want to route them all to something specific I can do that via a mixer, but…

Anyway, I’d like Premiere Pro to default to importing Stereo Files as importing 2-channel/2-track files

[Che Broadnax]

How did I not know that the mixer mode in fcp worked this way? That’s downright avid-esque. Okay, well, let’s just hope Premiere gets with the program there.

[Che Broadnax]

Track-based levels and automation gain have long been the default audio workflow in Avid Media Composer. It’s perfect for doing rough mixes or even a final mix if you’re not sending out to ProTools. The convenience of not having to drag tiny key frames in your timeline, or having to load every clip into a viewer is a nobrainer. Park your timeline over a clip, adjust in mixer, move to next clip, repeat. FCP never quite figured this out with all of their tweaking occurring in the viewer, and as premiere takes this particular metaphor from FCP they haven’t quite got this right yet either. However, with the attention they’re paying to avid’s actual editing tools, here’s to hoping they get audio right before too long. And that it’s a nice patch that automatically downloads to cloud customers like me!

[Che Broadnax]

Huh. What a pickle. I’ve known nesting to be evil since FCP 2.0, when I first experienced the shock of trying to cut from a sequence into another sequence as per Avid standard procedure, and finding a nested sequence there instead of just some regular clips. Steered clear of nesting until a couple of years ago when I found myself outputting tons of versions of the same spot for broadcast.

I’ve certainly run into some weird render file glitches, too.

Was hoping there’d be a non-destructive way to get nested sequences to actually perform in the only way they’d be particularly useful.

The weirdest thing of all… I’m sure that one point this actually worked. Maybe I was just trippin’.

[Che Broadnax]

Okay, I’ve sort of tracked where the problem occurs.

If I nest Sequence A into Sequence B, then any time I make changes to A, the nested version in B reflects the change. But then if I duplicate Sequence B to create Sequence C, then changes to A do not reflect in C. If I may editorialize for a moment, that is bad.

Now, if I create a new sequence called D, and then copy and paste the content from Sequence B into D, then changes to A are still not reflected in D.

The only time changes in a nested sequence seem to be reflected is when I directly cut A into that sequence.

Is there a setting somewhere that cripples/enables nesting to work properly?

[Che Broadnax]

Yeah, it’s freakin’ LUT Buddy. I just used a totally zany LUT I had created for another project, exported the clip with the LUT applied in PP to the queue and then rendered it. The render did not have the LUT applied.

Okay, so that’s the solution there — it’s not a matter of RGB versus YUV at all, it’s a matter of certain effects just not carrying over into the render. When the LUT is applied in AE, it DOES carry over.

I luckily found this awesome RGB curves preset that is damn close to the cineStyle LUT here, so I may just apply THAT in PP and bypass the use of LUT Buddy entirely. Then at least I won’t have to bring EVERYTHING into AE. Although, to be fair, I found that Colorista Free’s interface was far more responsive in AE than in PP. Go figure, maybe everything should go into AE anyway…

Thanks

[Che Broadnax]

In AE my project settings>color settings are:
16 bpc (I had tried earlier 32, with no difference)
Working space: none
Match Legacy After Effects QuickTime Gamma Adjustments.

The source files loaded into premiere are Canon 7D h264 movs.

I tried exporting my premiere sequence as h264 for vimeo, as animation codec quicktime movs, and as some sort of avi, and all exports were the same — stuff which had gone into AE via dynamic link was more contrasty and stuff that not gone into AE was not.

It MAY be the case that maybe PP is not using the LUT in LUT Buddy at the time of export, which would explain, also the lack of contrast. Because in my project window, the clips that have or haven’t gone to AE actually look the same, it’s just on export where something is bizarro. I’m going to test this theory…

[Che Broadnax]

So I am currently working a job where the client wants us to deliver to various affiliates in any possible imaginable format. Most of our sequences are natively HD and progressive, and luckily, many of our deliverables are digital. But some need to go to Betacam SP or digiBeta.

What would be the ideal methodology for outputting our HD timelines to SD tape? Nesting sequences in FCP?