[David Johnson]

Is it possible you clicked off the checkbox for that layer under the “fx” column of the timeline buttons?

[David Johnson]

B&H is a great place to start for that kind of thing … tough to beat the prices of one of the biggest box houses for items that don’t require any pre-sale guidance, after-sale support, etc. You might also consider that matte boxes are often available used and are low-risk to buy used, unlike critical components like cams.

By the way, I totally understand your frustration with the silliness of having to concern yourself with “professional appearance” for gear. At the same time, I consider the importance of that subject to be one of the most valuable lessons I was lucky enough to learn (repeatedly) from a business owner I worked for early in my career … and, I think part of it’s value comes from the fact that it’s so rarely considered or addressed. I’ve seen many times that, if a client doesn’t have confidence out of the gate, their doubts can often become a self-fulfilling prophecy as they insert themselves in the process in ways and places that they otherwise wouldn’t.

All these years later, I work for a large corporation and, when equipping our facilities, I made a point to factor in that most of our clients are very wealthy individuals with coinciding expectations. In addition to the functional uses for our studio and edit suites, they also serve as important show pieces for VIPs and similar uses. So, even though a handycam and a toss-up backdrop would do for 50% of our production needs, our studio is now equipped with full-size ENG cameras in partial studio configs, as well as a custom designed and dressed set (all of which is necessary for the other 50% of needs, but that’s off-topic). And, yes, the cams have matte boxes … primarily because they’re needed in our environment for flares, quick filter swaps and lens protection, but I’d be lying if I said appearance isn’t a factor I consider just as important as those other needs.

Just my two pence … hope its helpful.

[David Johnson]

I’m glad my suggestion was a helpful reminder, Martin. It seems there are very many large corporations that don’t consider the dissemination of their message as important as their message, yet many of them are still particularly successful long-term.

I’ll try to clarify why I mentioned MPG1 for specific scenarios … I interpreted the charge not as deciding which users are relevant for the client, but as meeting the client demands to deliver something an already-decided group of users can view without “having to download additional software”. Considering delivery is via flash drives, it didn’t seem appropriate to assume users will be viewing with web browsers or even with web access, which is where a 95% coverage figure could arguably apply.

There are obviously better choices than MPG1 when one knows the user base, their platform, web status, etc.; which is why I suggested MPG1 as a possible solution when a delivery method is needed that will “definitively play in literally any computer’s default media player that comes installed with any O/S” for scenarios with “requirements like the end-users not having to download or install anything and/or needing to access the media without a web browser”.

A well-made MPG1 can have image quality that is indistinguishable from an H264 to anyone except others who have far more interest in and knowledge of media production than the average end-user. No doubt, that requires higher bitrates, but certainly not to the point that it’s an issue for a 5 min. video on a 1Gb drive. More importantly, I don’t believe I’ve ever seen an end-user compare file sizes or file types when viewing a video.

That said, if the marketing strategy is in fact still in question, perhaps the way to go is considering whether flash drives are the best choice of delivery options for the particular video and needs.

[David Johnson]

[Mark Grossardt] “Some clients aren’t ever going to WANT to understand.”

You’re exactly right, which is why I’m grateful that one of the business owners I worked for early in my career taught me that it’s sometimes ok to fire a client … when they’ll clearly cost more than they’ll ever be worth, there’s nothing wrong with kindly walking them across the street to one of your competitors and wishing them luck.

By the way, Steve Kownacki and Mark Suszko, those are great additions to the traditional analogies so thanks much for sharing your thoughts … although I must admit I’m a little skeptical about comparing myself to a Denny’s waitress … especially considering the buyer’s remorse people often experience the morning after eating at Denny’s. ;~)

[David Johnson]

When I have to deliver to a wide base of unknown end-users on any platform, some of whom have old computers, and there are other requirements like the end-users not having to download or install anything and/or having to be able to access the media without a web browser, I still use MPG1 files.

Some codec elitists out there balk at that, but it’s the only codec I’ve ever found that, to this day, will definitively play in literally any computer’s default media player that comes installed with any O/S regardless of the computer’s platform, age, installed software, internet connectivity, etc., etc. And, if compressed with proper settings, the quality isn’t bad at all despite the age of the codec.

[David Johnson]

[Walter Miale] “I guess the problem is at the client’s end, hm?”

Actually, it doesn’t sound that way at all since you already confirmed that “He has no problem with jpegs from elsewhere.” Plus, most clients will not take kindly to you suggesting that they’re doing something wrong so it’s best to be 110% certain that is the case before you tell them that. I would take the JPGs you’re saving to someone else’s computer (a Windows machine if that’s what your client is using), see if they open and troubleshoot from there.

[David Johnson]

Either a QuickTime MOV or an AVI file with codecs that you have on your machine. To avoid having to transcode the footage a second time, look at the codecs of your other footage (both video and audio) and give the other editor the specs. For example, perhaps you work with 8-bit Uncompressed 29.97fps footage with 24-bit 48kHz stereo audio … or, perhaps not … only you can know that.

[David Johnson]

Actually it is right … uncompressed video files are in fact huge. Whether you can use settings other than what the recipient specified is up to them, but generally speaking, there are no settings to reduce the file size of uncompressed video since the various settings used when making other types of video files are compression settings, which don’t apply when you’re not compressing the video. The only thing that’ll reduce the size of uncompressed video is switching from a 10-bit codec to 8-bit, but your file is probably already 8-bit.

[David Johnson]

It looks like your system was built for XP and/or 32-bit Vista and, if that’s the case, there may be some gotchas if you try to upgrade it for 64-bit Windows 7 and CS5. For example, many such systems have mainboards that max out at 8Gb RAM, which is ok for CS4 on XP.

Since you’re both new to AE and looking for the least expensive approach, you might consider just adding some RAM to your system and trying CS4 for a while before making the more significant investments you would likely need to get to CS5 on a 64-bit Windows 7 system. That way, if it turns out that you love AE and use it a lot, you can then buy CS5 at the upgrade price since you already have CS4.

Either way, you’ll definitely need more than 2Gb of RAM for AE CS5, CS4 or CS3 and any O/S to play nicely together. Also, I don’t recall what the AE version was last time I ran it on a single processor/core system, but it was definitely pre-CS3 so I’m not sure how well CS4 would run in that environment and, personally, I wouldn’t even try CS5 that way.

[David Johnson]

Since you’re on a Mac and you’re client may not be, make sure you’re using extensions on the files. And, it usually doesn’t matter these days, but have you tried using the .jpg extension instead of .jpeg? If the person’s computer is old and/or has never encountered files with .jpeg extensions before, it may not recognize such files as JPGs without the user first telling the O/S what software to open them with.