Dan Riley
Forum Replies Created
-
I said use the in point for both multiclips, but maybe it would be better
to use the outpoint for your second multiclip. This way you’d have
all of cam1 and then cam3 would start up where cam2 left off on the
previous multiclip.Dan
-
Maybe I’m not reading your post right, but I’d make two multiclips.
One would have cam 1 and 2, then the other would have 1 and 3.
Use the in point for both. Then just load the multiclip you need.
Remember, multiclips are just references to your footage.
You can make as many multiclips as you want with the same or
different cameras.Dan
-
John,
My bad. I thought AVID did autosaves in the background.
The last time I edited on the Media Composer about three years ago
I don’t remember it being an issue like with FCP where you can sit there for 15 to 30
seconds with larger projects.Dan
-
Dan Riley
March 2, 2007 at 6:36 pm in reply to: This ever happen to you: Edit to tape wants to render even though you already did.well, you certainly wouldn’t stop there if we were talking about
all my problems . . 🙂I’m trying your idea now which I’m betting will solve this.
The thing with this sequence is,
it’s a half hour show with lots of interviews with Boris chroma key filters
which take FOREVER to render. It will be 6 hours or more. (g5 dual 2.5 gig).
Today’s output was for my music mix, so I just dropped the
sequence that wouldn’t ETT into another sequence and added a timecode burn
and played in real time out to digibeta. So that will work
for today. He can set his offset in protools to match the timecode of the
window burn which matches the OMF. Meanwhile back at my office
FCP is rendering the duplicated sequence without the track that was
turned off. Hopefully this new sequence will then ETT with no trouble.
We shall see.Thanks Michael,
Dan -
Dan Riley
March 2, 2007 at 3:56 pm in reply to: This ever happen to you: Edit to tape wants to render even though you already did.Oh, wait a minute. I re-read Michael’s post and he said “visibility”.
I thought I read “selected”. OK, yes there is a track with visibility off
(an 800# I don’t need). I’ll try pulling the track out and creating a new
sequence. Hope this works.Dan
-
Dan Riley
March 2, 2007 at 3:52 pm in reply to: This ever happen to you: Edit to tape wants to render even though you already did.Overnite render did not change anything. Edit to tape still wants to write to video (re render)
for hours. What is going on? This is a real pain in the butt.
If anyone has any other ideas, please speak up.Dan
-
Dan Riley
March 2, 2007 at 7:05 am in reply to: This ever happen to you: Edit to tape wants to render even though you already did.I look into that tomorrow. I’m pretty sure I had all the tracks with visibility on.
I know how to see visibility on sequence tracks, but how do you see if
clips have it turned on or off? You mentioned clips as well as tracks.dr
-
I guess I’m a pretty simple guy.
All I want from a new FCP version is AutoSave in the background.
It’s one royal pain to have to wait for it when you are trying -
Dan Riley
March 2, 2007 at 2:39 am in reply to: multiclip rendering = collapsing multiclip sequence?That’s the way FCP’s multicam works.
After you render, you will not see all your angles in the viewer.
My workflow is to not put anything, like titles or effects,
on another video track until I’m pretty much done with my
multicam (V1) track. Then I start adding shi…..stuff.
Then I render.
You could always un-select then select again, the track and make FCP not see the render
then you will see all the angles again.Dan
-
Digitize at whatever codec your sequence is going to be.
Bringing it in SDI 8 or 10 bit makes good looking video.
I do it all the time with my DV footage.
As long as your drives are fast enough for uncompressed
you will be fine.Dan