[David Bogie]

And this, too, from macminute.com:

> Safari gets major performance boost, other improvements
April 18 – 13:55 EDT While undocumented in the release notes, last week’s Mac OS X 10.3.9 update includes a new version of Safari that brings substantially improved page load times. Safari 1.3 loads pages 35 percent faster than version 1.2, according to Safari developer Dave Hyatt. In addition to the performance increase, the new version of Safari has a very similar layout engine to that of the version that will ship with Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger. “This update includes Safari 1.3 and new versions of WebKit, WebCore, and JavaScriptCore that contain thousands of improvements we’ve made to the engine since Safari 1.2,” Hyatt writes on his blog. “What you are getting is all of the new standards support, new WebKit capabilities, site compatibility fixes and performance optimizations that are also present in Safari 2.0 for Tiger.”

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

this from macminute.com

> Apple acknowledges Mac OS X 10.3.9 Java issues
April 19 – 10:26 EDT Apple has posted a support document that details a Java issue that some users are having after upgrading to Mac OS X 10.3.9. “After updating to Mac OS X 10.3.9, some systems may have issues with Java applications and Java-enabled websites when using Safari,” Apple says. “Safari may unexpectedly quit, and standalone Java applications may unexpectedly quit or not launch. You can perform a simple test to verify whether your computer is experiencing this issue. If it is, you will need to reinstall one or two software updates to resolve the issue.” The two pieces of software are Java 1.4.2 Update 2 or Security Update 2005-002.

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

Works fine on my old G3 flat iMac.

I’m beginning to really loathe the ads here, though. They cause the Safari page to bounce all over creation and, since they come in at different times, I can be typing away only to discover I’ve entered nothing. Hate it but that’s capitalism and i certainly do not begrudge our pals and the cow their ability to generate income while providing such a cool place.

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

I’ve seen this happen when you suddenly reach the end of your hardware’s capacity to process and display all of the images in realtime. It’s often caused by adding just one more clip or one more filter.

Sorry, best I can do. Only seen this once or twice on my DV projects when I’ve got like 50 jpg or psd
files all scaling and moving, aka the Kevin’s Burned Effect.

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

> Media doesn’t just disappear off your drives, it’s probable that some names are not exactly the same on your media drives and you’ll need to manually re-link them.
< Media has been reported to simply disappear off drives. The topic hasn't come up recently but it rages every now and then. We have no idea what causes it or where the media goes but the directory shows no record of the media files and recovery applications do not find any directory bits to indicate the file ever existed, which is clearly impossible. But that's what has been reported by folks who know how to recover stuff. It's rare, so rare as to be a non-problem. Unless, of course, it happens to you. I will vouch for everything Walter has asked and suggested and add that there were questions you could have asked here first. We truly hope you figure it out quickly and painlessly but, if it was me, I'd try to figure out how I was going to talk this over with the client and explain why there wasn't a fail safe plan in place. bogiesan This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: "For crying out loud, read the freakin' manual."

[David Bogie]

You may have your deck set improperly to play the signal you recorded on your camera. For instance, if you were shooting with a Canon and trying to capture stereo with their funky on-camera mic at 32k, you have a problem that you can only solve by getting out the manuals for the camera, the deck, and FCP. The DSR will not play that tape properly without some tweaking of menus, I’m pretty sure. Or maybe you were using a camera that can encode audio into the video and grab four channels. That will be a proble since FW will only pass two at a time to Quicktime 6+.

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

No settings control the input. FW input is just a file transfer. You recorded the signal too low on your tape. You can route the signal out through a mixer, boost the audio, and pipe it back in through another DV-to-FW deck.
But anyway you cut this, there is no getting around it: your tapes were recorded improperly.

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

If you’re coming in on FW, what you see is what you recorded on the tape. You can boost it once it’s been captured but that’s a whole new set of issues like signal to noise ratios and background noise removal.

Where are you getting the “tone?”

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

You can use Match Frame to shortcut the process but, AFAIK, you’re stuck with a long and tedious job.

Strongly urge you to make one or two duplicates of your sequence before you start messing with it.

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”

[David Bogie]

I don’t mean to be too flippant but the topic of captioning and subtitles comes up about weekly. You can search the forum for many threads. Google for captioning and you will be taken to the US standards pages and all kinds of service providers. The open standards were written for 40 year old technologies, we can only hope the whole scene evolves.

The discussion will get interesting in a few more months as third party filter writers ramp up for QT7’s new capabilities, too.

I think closed captioning is still being encoded into line 21 on NTSC composite, interlaced. You can pull this into FCP and it will pass through the application until you render. Then that line is apparently stripped away and replaced. We’ve brought in captioned video, applied a filer to a few seconds of the clip, and output. The captions disappear at the place where the filter was rendered.

bogiesan

This is my standard sigfile so do not take it personally: “For crying out loud, read the freakin’ manual.”