George Socka
Forum Replies Created
-
You all have got to be kidding. There is NO confusion at ALL. This website is an online publication about making movies ( and other stuff) . They make movies and other stuff. Their website is about THEM making movies.
Extend the thinking. Creative cow talks about sound stuff. The creative SoundBlaster company make sound stuff. Who registered and used the name first? Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Its a web thing? Tucows had the word cow in a web thing 10 years ago. Hmmmmmmmmmm.
That cow image? a search on Google images for “cow clipart returns 662 entries – most have brown and green and blue in them.
milkcowcreative.com has a picture of a cow, domain name registered in 2004 same as creative cow.
holycowcreative.com registered in 2001, no cow though.
Leave the lawyers at the bottom of the sea. Please
-
First reaction is: “run and hide” Second reaction is: see what one of her shows looks like and go from there. Third reaction is: since when is a 30 minute TV how 29 minutes? Maybe on the weather channel? Live traffic cam? Fourth reaction is: get her to agree to pay by the hour in one hour increments – in writing. If it only takes 1/2 hour to shoot 29 minutes of content then her costs will be minimal – whether it is worth your while is up to you of course. Not sure how you will explain to her that it takes 30 minutes to transfer from your camera to the edit system and another 30 back out even without any creative effort. And since she has been doing it for years she obviously has not been working with a tape less sub real time system.
-
Never tried one this long, but from experience rendering an mpeg file frst is preferable because any hiccup in encore will lose the intermediate render ( I believe there is an checkmark option somewhere to save it but I could never find it. You don’t want to do your 40 hours 2 or three times.
-
Not sure that anybody in the real world (our viewers) is buying CRT based HD TVs. Don’t seem to be in Best Buy’s Chrstms fllyer AKAIK
-
search markertech for Speco RQS-5C – no computer required
-
Same here – ever since I got a Sony V1U – tried every menu option in the camera, every audio setting in PPro – both 1.0 and now CS3. The crackling seems to be created in the capture – the file sounds bad in Windows media player. I am capturing all in DV mode – not HDV so that may be an issue in downconverting in the camera. What camera are you using? What project settings are you using? Are you capturing over firewire of through the sound card?
Certainly there is no crackle in hearing the camera play back through a good speaker system.
Now, it could be that this is clipping during recording, because I keep the microphones hotter than some recommend – my JVC DV100 seemed to do a better job at limiting incoming audio. Maybe the camera has an option for this that I have not yet found.
Sound Forge Vinyl restoration cleans it up.
-
Use the highest total bit rate setting that will make the file under the 100 mb maximum. Export at 320×240 – otherwise they will resize AND recompress. However, QuickTime will give you better quality even though larger file sizes, if you have QT available. See http://www.youtube.com/canadaartchannel for examples The government funding one was 512k windows media file, the rest were QT. However, with a 7 minute video, the quality of QT becomes so low that Windows media may end up looking better. If you go to http://www.youtube.com/beachdigital you will see many of these same files that were uploaded as windows media files, and the quality is less. Then I discovered QuickTime.
Use mono sound to make the file smaller
-
Mercedes and Lexus – interesting analogy. 10 years ago no one that was a Mercedes buyer would have even looked at anything made by Toyota. Times have indeed changed. CEOs are driving Lexi (??) Avid buyers are looking at software made by Apple.
-
Quote”. You don’t “pitch” it against FCP in 10 to 20 minutes on a loud show floor — if you make a decision on your tools that way, there is no guarantee that you got it right.”
OTOH, you can try FCP or PPro for less than the cost of attending NAB for a few days and then dump them if they end up being less effective than your existing ading AVID solution. The competition HAS changed.
-
I just installed CS3, and it still looks the same – with a few more options. Still can’t animate/keyframe anything over time. Still can’t make a hole in a donut to let the video through. Yes you can animate individual letters of text with AE, but AE costs as much as all of PPro if all you want are elegant titles. And you can make holes with PS, but again, another high priced tool for a title.
Some will say that titles SHOULD look boring, but then why is CNN doing so well?