[Christopher Pavsek]

Of course I was a fool and upgraded to Mavericks on a new iMac.

Now P Pro keeps losing its preview files. When starting up any rendered sequence has lost its green bars.

And rendering takes forever. A sequence that rendered in 35 seconds now takes 8 minutes?

I’ve searched here and googled and found no one else with this issue, so perhaps there is a particular problem with my setup. Anyone else with this issue? Any ideas other than reinstall Mountain Lion which ran almost perfectly with P Pro?

iMac 2013. 3.5gz i7
NVIDIA 780M video card
16gb RAM

Mavericks OS
P Pro 7.1 up to date

[Christopher Pavsek]

Yes you can put it on, but. You take the lens shade off, put the filter on, adjust the filter to your needs, then if you must, put the shade back on. You can’t reach the filter with the shade on unless you want to sping the filter with your finger on the glass, of course and you don’t mind a big fat fingerprint.

[Christopher Pavsek]

To piggy back on this discussion, if you dont’ mind: What if one wants to work in FCP–and what if you have 60p footage like Tom does and a 30 p timeline–anyway to get the 60p footage to play every frame and play in slo-mo at 50 percent speed? (that is, in effect, use 60p footage as 60 fps slow-mo footage)?

[Christopher Pavsek]

You can also use a program like “Handbrake” to rip the dvd and make an avi or mp4 file. This can be converted to your needed format in compressor.

[Christopher Pavsek]

thanks. was having major brain clamp–the effect of having 2 children….

[Christopher Pavsek]

why not just make a sequence for your video–a sequence set up for DV–and edit in your stills. Even if they are square pixels, you will be fine. In recent versions FCP automatically senses that the images are square pixeled and adjusts their aspect ratio for you. Try to import an image and then insert it in a timeline. Then double click on the image/clip in the timeline to open it in the viewer. CLick on the motion tab and under “distort” the aspect ratio will have changed.

[Christopher Pavsek]

Thanks. Yes, I checked those specs but the Dell site made it seem that perhaps it wouldn’t work. But thanks. Guess I’ll spend some money now.

[Christopher Pavsek]

i guess i was wondering more if this meant something was wrong with the camera.

i seldom use autofocus unless i’m chasing my kids around the house with the camera (mine does double duty as “pro” camera and home movie machine) or if things are just to busy to go manual. but if this is indicating that something is dying in the camera, i’d send it off for repair.

[Christopher Pavsek]

Let me ask this further now (Graeme–i had asked you a similar question in a personal email).

I also need a pal copy of my project. I was considering two options:

1: Laying off to digibeta NTSC and then dubbing to PALdigibeta at a facility with an Alchemist. I’ve been told htat will look good.

2: reconstituting the project as a PAL FCP project and converting the few video clips i have to PAL using Nattress G-converter and then laying off to PAL digibeta on an uncompressed FCP system.

The advantage to 1 is ease. Just dub it. Cost is good too. 150 dollars with stock.

The advantage to 2 is the following, perhaps: my film has a LOT of titles (my work is “experimental” and i use lots of text, some of it quite large and with quite bold colors, including NTSC-hating reds and blues. PAL would handle these colors much better. The final viewing of this project will be at festivals with video projection so color saturation and trueness seem important.

Any thoughts? Am I nuts to think that hte color I’d get in option 2 would be better?

Will a transfer NTSC to PAL with an alchemist get aroudn that problem?

[Christopher Pavsek]

Let me ask this further now (Graeme–i had asked you a similar question in a personal email).

I also need a pal copy of my project. I was considering two options:

1: Laying off to digibeta NTSC and then dubbing to PALdigibeta at a facility with an Alchemist. I’ve been told htat will look good.

2: reconstituting the project as a PAL FCP project and converting the few video clips i have to PAL using Nattress G-converter and then laying off to PAL digibeta on an uncompressed FCP system.

The advantage to 1 is ease. Just dub it. Cost is good too. 150 dollars with stock.

The advantage to 2 is the following, perhaps: my film has a LOT of titles (my work is “experimental” and i use lots of text, some of it quite large and with quite bold colors, including NTSC-hating reds and blues. PAL would handle these colors much better. The final viewing of this project will be at festivals with video projection so color saturation and trueness seem important.

Any thoughts? Am I nuts to think that hte color I’d get in option 2 would be better?

Will a transfer NTSC to PAL with an alchemist get aroudn that problem?