[David Bogie]

[Matt Campbell] “can FCP, Motion or even Compressor make this cleaner using Optical Flow? Or will AE and Twixtor be the best way to go? “

It’s your money, of course, but I would not invest in After Effects and Tixtor merely for the 50/50 chance of obtaining stunning slow motion. You’d be far better off obtaining a camera that can shoot at higher frame rates.

Optical Flow is more or less the same procedural algorithm in use in all of the interframe creation systems; every pixels is mapped as a vector path and the software attempts to create frames where you failed to provide them; you should have been shooting 90p or even 120p instead of 60i. The results of trying to create buttery smooth slow motion from 30fps video that includes shutter speed motion blur artifacts are spotty and they depend largely on good photography to begin with.

About all you can do is experiment. Take really good notes.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

Your frame grabs are not aliasing issues; it appears to be how the player is set to process and display interlacing.
Anti-aliasing is part of the encoding or rendering process, not playback.

You could drop the nice folks at VLC a line and ask them why their image is so superior and you could research the Apple DVD Player application at apple.com’s discussions area.

There are some viewing options for both applications that may be different. See the VIEW menu for DVD Player for interlacing display options and size options.

I do not have VLC on my office machine to check it for you.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

[Raymond Tuquero] “I would have to say that this is an After Effects job. Masking in FCP is quite hard and getting it clean is even harder in FCP.
“

Yes but I’m assuming the OP has neither time nor resources to go to After Effects. It’s readily done in Motion but even that is a stretch if one reads between the lines.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

Welcome to the family.
You need to base your entire workflow on your video output format and then work backwards from there. Video is usually rectangular pixels so all photos must be stretched. In FCP, this is automatic when you drop them into your sequence but you have chosen a square pixel format. Attempting to bring outrageously huge photos into a video editor is a problem we see often around here so you can search the forum for lots of suggestions and tips.
Be sure to use the FCP online help and simply look for PIXEL ASPECT RATIO:
CCIR 601 NTSC 4:31 video non-square:720 x 486. In photoshop:720 x 547
CCIR 601 NTSC 16:9 anamorphic video non-square: 720 x 486. In photoshop: 853 x 486
DV NTSC 4:3 video non-square:720 x 480. In photoshop:720 x 540
DV NTSC 16:9 anamorphic video non-square:720 x 480. In photoshop:853 x 480

The most often suggested step is to process all of your frames in Photoshop, scaling them down to a more useful size and correcting the pixel aspect ratio. Photoshop is a good place to level out your exposures because every DSLR will drift a bit, even when locked down on totally manual aperture and shutter speed.

You might want to visit this timelapse site to investigate several workflows for huge collections of still images: https://timescapes.org/

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

Scene by scene and frame by frame. if the camera is moving, you can use Motion Track on the artifacts in Motion to drive the locations of the attempts you make to hide them.

This is a complicated and no-win project. Without experience and superb hand-painting abilities, whatever you do will probably look worse than leaving the reflections.

If this is the only shot you need to correct, it’s still likely to be difficult and ugly. There are only a few things you can do, cover them spots or try to disguise them.

Covering them requires replacing the pixels with something on an upper video track that will appear seamless.
You can punch a hole in your layer using a mask that is the exact shape as the artifacts and that reveals your replacement image in a lower track. How you create that replacement footage is up to you and your skills.
You can attempt to disguise them with blurs and blending modes either with or without masking.

The execution of these techniques is beyond the capacity of these little posties. You can explore the cow’s search function for tutorials in the FCP, Motion, and AE sections for things like “cop blur” and related items. The techniques can be readily adapted to your problem.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

“Highest possible” is not appropriate unless you need the photos for another purpose besides video. You only need your images scanned at the largest pixel density for your project’s needs which may or may not include motion graphics. You have to know how this stuff will be used first. Video is only about 800×500 pixels or, if true HD, 2000x 1100 pixels, roughly. Those are pixels. dots per inch and lines per inch are meaningless in video. When you find someone to do this for you, be sure they research “scanning photos for video”, which you can do too, before they spend any of your money.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

Yar.

We actually see this post, and variations on it, often around here and on other FCP forums. You can search here for multiclipping and you will find many threads that can help you.

In a nutshell, what you have to do is build five separate movies, one for each camera, so that each is exactly frame-accurate. You will fill the gaps between the captured clips using video slugs. I recommend you use a different color solid for each camera.

You will then export these movies as self-contained, reimport them, and use them to build your multiclip.

If your project is more than 30 minutes long, you will want to divide the project up into manageable reels of about 20 minutes.

There are other ways to do this.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

Welcome to the family.

Your project settings establish the export default so I’m guessing you have built this project, and invested tons of time, improperly and are probably using an HD format.

[Sara Huneke] “It only needs to be a Quicktime. It’s not for broadcast. “

QT is just a wrapper for the file, there are hundreds of QT codecs.

You must tell us two things:
1. Project settings for you current Motion work (see the manual for where to check this)
2. Your desired output destination. That is, where will people be watching this movie of yours? Exactly, you cannot be vague, and you only get one choice this time around.

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

A simple Google images search will give you several freebies and lots of ideas.
But “gun scope” is a bit unspecific these days. You mean a conventional (but unrealistic) round vignette of a telephoto scope with crosshairs or a realistic full frame telephoto with windage and elevation reticles ro do you mean a HUD from some cybernetic firepower?

bogiesan

[David Bogie]

Not in 3D space, no. Motion only understands flat layers.

bogiesan