[Franco Bogino]

I’m looking to do the same thing. What is the difference between using Cinema Tools and Compressor? Is it not the case that there is no loss of quality due to the fact that 25 is an exact multiple of 50?

I am working with footage from a Canon SLR (600D), so it needs to be transcoded from h.264 to Prores using Compressor anyway.

Should I conform the clips to 25fps using Cinema Tools first or should I just convert the frame rate as part of the transcode?

Thanks

Franco

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

I’m aware of all the trouble files, but I often also get it on timelines which are exclusively HD ProRes. I’m talking about longform online here, sometimes with some plugin effects to render, rendering interlaced for rolling credits etc.
The memory will be fine until it eventually ‘runs out’. Kind of like a memory leak. I am a freelancer, so have seen this on more than one system. As I say, most systems are pretty powerful these days, at the moment I’m on the latest mac pro towers, 2.8ghz INTEL Xeon with 16gig RAM (not that that matters to FCP).

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

I have used the misalignment plugin and it goes a long way towards fixing the damaged footage. The only snag is that the green channel is not only shifted along the y axis, it appears to be slightly rotated on the z axis.
This means that using the misalignment plugin I can get one side of the picture to look better, but the other side retains the fault.

Does anyone know of a way to ROTATE the colour channels individually? If Avid has the capability of seeing and acting on individual channels, as it does with the misalignment tool, there must be a way to apply any process to individual channels.

How is misalignment processing the footage, and can this be recreated using base avid tools?

Thanks

Franco

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

Cheers, that’s really useful.

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

Hi Ricky

I thought there might be something in BCC. Unfortunately I don’t have it installed on my current Avid. Can you remember what the effects are called? I’d like to get our online facility to have a look at it.

Thanks a lot

Franco

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

I should also mention I’m working on MC 5.0.3, in case it has any specific tools available for this.

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

Hi Peter

Thanks for the info, but I’m afraid I don’t quite follow the procedure. If I match frame it will only give me an inpoint in the source monitor for each clip, this will not give me a subclip that has correct outpoint.

Also, I don’t follow how this will combine into one clip the take angle that was split into two continuous files.
The takes are all synched by timecode, so normally I just select the 3 clips angles in my bin and click “shift +CTRL +U”. This created my multicam clip.

The problem is that on many takes ANGLE1 would be 1 clip, ANGLE2 1 clip, but ANGLE3 is two continuous clips. At the moment this means I have to do 2 separate multicam clips, one with a third angle available up to the end of the first clip, and one with the third angle available from the second clip. I would then combine these on the timeline.

What I want to have is ONE multicam clip which spans both of the ANGLE3 clips.

Kind of difficult to explain in writing, but I am hoping someone understands what I am saying and can offer a solution.

Thanks

Franco

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

It’s ok, I’ve found the problem. I had the limit capture/export option checked in System Settings!

Well there it is for anyone else who has inadvertently done this and is experiencing the same prob. Quicktime obviously splits the file into segment according to the data limit you have set.

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

I tried with 3 instances in the cluster and there was no real difference, the render time was 3:55, so slightly slower. I also ran the render with activity monitor open, and for some reason it shows 8 cores running (I don’t know if this has anything to do with multithreading?), It showed all eight running at around 80% when using a 4 cluster, and at around 60% for a 3 cluster.
I have had one response on another forum stating that the stitch time for merging the multiple segments of the render does offset the faster render time. This means that there is a sweet point where the time gained is more than the stitching time. The poster suggested that with hour long sequences you really see the difference. I’m waiting to see if anyone else confirms this.

Thanks

Franco

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.

[Franco Bogino]

Hi Walter

I am currently working with 6gb DDR3 ram. Also, the machine is one of the new Nehalems, which as I understand have multithreading capabilities. I’d read about the concept of not using all the cores for a cluster, but that this did not apply to multithreading machines, which effectively create extra virtual cores. I’ll try and do a test using 3 cores later today

Cheers

Franco

London based Avid/ FCP offline editor.
FCP Online.