Chris Poisson
Forum Replies Created
-
With that camera you could use the HDMI out with the Convergent Design MI box, which is 200 bucks cheaper than the FireWire box, which is the SI. Then you would use any card or box with SDI in, and assuming you have a fast enough machine and drives, capture to Prores.
You still could transcode all your footage from native HDV to 24p whatever with Compressor, I’m not sure how long that would take or what would happen to your timecode, but who cares as long as you name all your captures.
I have a Kona LH, which has component plus SDI in, so I have a choice to go from Firewire with an SI box, or component to Prores, or, go native HDV and render later to an uncompressed format. My camera does not have HDMI out.
On going to 24 fps later, I’d ask around about the gotchyas on that, but I would think they may be minimized with the new Studio, at least one would think so.
-
Hooban,
I don’t have a V1 and my Canon A1 is with FedEx right now, and I have no experience with reverse telecine. Can’t help you with that one. But, since you say going to film is an “off chance'” why even worry about that right now? That’s like saying I might win the lottery.
I don’t think you can capture with puldown removal from that camera as you can with Firewire from a DVX 100, which is what my 24p experience is limited to, but with the new Studio, you can mix frame rates, so why not just go the native HDV route? This from a CD guy, not sure if it was in the thread I sent you or not, but it’s worth a look.
There are a number of viable workflows here that give similar results, but a couple considerations need to be taken.
The advantage of capturing directly into uncompressed or prores is time and integration of other HD-SDI sources (among other reasons): assume 1 hour tape
uncompressed/prores capture (via analog or HD-SDI through a converter): 1 hour for capture (encodes to prores on the fly), editing in prores is realtime and no output render time needed (for most effects) if going back to HD-SDI output
Native HDV capture with drop into prores timeline when editing is finished:
1 hour capture + time for render to prores (not done during capture, at least 1 hour) + time for rendering effects (variable).Workflow 1: Analog component out to HD-SDI using a converter or capture card conversion.
Advantage: This is a great, inexpensive way to get to uncompressed video or prores on the fly, especially if your capture card already has component input.
Issues: Analog conversion losses (take a look at this video that shows the difference between all digital capture (via HDMI in this case, but via firewire is the same result) and analog capture: https://convergent-design.fileburst.com/AvD.wmv
Another issue is handling the audio and timecode/deck control.Workflow 2: HDV to HD-SDI converter (HD-Connect SI or HD-Connect MI)
Advantage: no analog conversion losses, easy connections enable audio conversion along with deck control (through RS-422) and timecode. Realtime scaling to 720p/1080i, standard def.
Issues: Additional Cost (we’re working on that, the HD-Connect MI is down to $595)Workflow 3: native HDV with drop into prores timeline once editing is finished.
Advantage: Most inexpensive solution.
Disadvantage: additional time is required for render to pro resEach workflow would only have 1 transcode to prores. Analog capture would give the worst results with native HDV and HDV to HD-SDI conversion giving the same results (quality wise).
Hopefully this is helpful. Let me know if I goofed up anything.
Regards,
John Schell
Convergent Design Inc. -
Hooban,
I would seriously read every word of this thread before you do or buy anything else.
BTW your camera has HDMI out, and with a Convergent Design HDMI box and a Kona you’d be set, but read about editing native HDV here. Makes more sense than you might expect.
-
Vimeo is very nice and it’s free. Also, check out Our Stage, they have monthly competitions for cash, and at the very least, free t-shirts.
-
The manual for Color is a pdf located on the install disks. Not sure exactly where, but it is mentioned in the booklet and on the excellent DVD instruction disc included with the install disks. It also seems to be available by hitting “help” while in Color.
I agree with Walter about saving paper and shipping costs, but it is good to sit down with a good old-fashioned manual. Or is that sit down with a good maual and an Old Fashioned?
-
This could be done many ways, but probably best in Motion or After Effects. There are a few filters which turn stuff into noisy pixels an/or little blobs or specs, not just standard noise. There’s a great one in After Effects called CC Scatterize, truly amazing, and in motion you can do this with particles.
In any case, you could easily do a reveal up his arm or whatever by applying your effects to a copy laid over top of your footage, and reveal that with a mask. And their are other ways, lots of effects have a threshold slider which basically means “amount.”
The only ways around masking are to control the effect with track mattes, or shoot it green screen.
-
Adam,
I have always just walked away from it all for inspiration. Yes, I do get ideas from other TV and motion stuff like demo reels etc., but if I’m really stuck for an idea I just walk away. So if I’m on a (potentially) boring job and want to bring it up a notch or two, I go to a different room, or go outside, anywhere but my usual workplace. The simple act of moving and working in a different place is amazing.
When I was in the ad biz, we used to do this all the time on special projects and new business pitches, never in the office or at home. One of our favorite places were hotel/resort lobbies like the Phoenician, the more different the better. Try it, you’ll be amazed. If you’re stuck at the office, just go to a different room or go outside. Works for me…
-
VERY cool, thanks Craig.
-
Of course I will read the manual. I just got this 2 days ago FCOL. I did know this “whole clip” thing from reading about Smoothcam, didn’t put the 2 together, but this helps a lot, thanks.
BTW, I let that darn thing render over dinner, and the result is really weird, It is a shot of kids playing soccer, and in the foreground the goalie passes across frame rapidly, in regular motion it is quite blurry. Optical flow did an amazing job on it, but there are artifacts in front of the boy that used to be motion blur which now looks like there’s water being pushed in front of him. It’s similar to a ripple dissolve, but not regular, it follwos his form. If it wasn’t a mistake, I’d call it a cool effect, but I’m just wondering…