[Herb Sevush]

Here’s a possibility for you. Copy all your multicam video and place it on a higher track. Quickly go through this new video and make all the cuts come from the A camera, which has the timecode burn already. Add a crop effect and crop out everything except the timecode burn-in. Done.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jim Wiseman] “Herb, ~$480 gets you two slots. OWC Helios 2.”

I stand corrected. Love me some OWC.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeremy Garchow] ” you can buy a PCIe extender for $480 to get you over the hump of whatever comes next”

Unless the prices have changed, that get’s you 1 PCIe slot, which won’t cut it if you have an I/O card and a raid card. It was around 1K for a multi-slot extender if I remember correctly, and that’s per workstation. Which still leaves you with a single CPU machine and no flexibility for GPU. Which will work fine for a great majority of the users but has left others out in the cold.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeff Markgraf] “Like me. ;-)”

As my mother used to say, in a very different context, for every peg there’s a hole.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Tim Wilson] “I really do think that more people saw the lack of meaningful updates to FCP, the arrival X, and delays to a new Mac Pro as a handful of straws…but the Mac Pro was the final one.”

Indeed. A wonderful product … for somebody else.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Open source and SMPTE ratified doesn’t automatically mean the world is gong to better.”

It doesn’t mean the world “is” going to be better, but it doesn’t mean it can’t. Like I said, other than historical happenstance, I don’t see why video codecs “have to be” any more proprietary than still photo codecs. They are, but they don’t have to be. At this point in time DNx would not chain me to anything, but for historical reasons I don’t have that choice.

[Jeremy Garchow] ” I still believe that there are people in this world who give a shit about other people in this world.”

Yes, but Citizen’s United notwithstanding, corporations are not people. Corporations have a legal obligation to maximize their revenue even if it means screwing every last person on earth. They are in the business of business, and absent a fiscal reason for them to change, they won’t. If enough big, important producers band together and pressure them to change they would react to that, but my bitching about ProRes deliverables isn’t gonna be the tipping point.

I love your optimism just the same.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Jeremy Garchow] “It would just chain you to something else, like Avid, Adobe, Episode, or something.”

I don’t see why a video codec needs to chain you to anything.

Apple and Avid (originally) wanted to chain you to something – software in Avid’s case, hardware in Apple’s. There’s no reason a video codec has to be more proprietary than a still’s codec – it just turned out that way historically.

DNx would work right now – cross platform, high quality, scalable, with fairly broad industry acceptance – but ProRes took the lead when Avid was being proprietary about DNx and the distributors don’t care that ProRes isn’t fully cross platform, that’s the producer’s problem so why should the distributor’s care.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

Alex –

Why not just make a multiclip the normal way and then move the clips to the correct tracks? Way easier.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

In the browser choose the 370 clips first, then the 890 clip, then right click and choose make multicam. When the multicam option box comes up choose whatever method you want to sync with, but the important thing is in the Audio area choose “1 Camera” – this will make the multiclip take the audio from the Angle 1 camera, which is why you have to choose the 370 clips first.

After you create the multiclip, right click on it in the browser and choose “open in timeline” (do not double click as that won’t do anything.) When you look at your timeline you will see the 370 clips on tracks 1 thru 4. Move all the clips up to track 1 while keeping them in sync with the timeline (use the Option + Up-Arrow key). Move your 890 clip up to track 2 the same way. Close the timeline.

You now have a 2 angle multiclip, angle 1 has the 4 370 clips and provides the audio, angle 2 has the 890 clip.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Herb Sevush]

[Walter Soyka] “Friends don’t let friends master to ProRes.”

I would be giddy with joy if DNx or Cineform became an acceptable deliverable for PBS, but at the moment it’s still ProRes all the way. Which chains me to the Mac platform and OSX, exactly the way Apple envisioned. Were it not for that, I’d be spec’ing out my next PC workstation.

While ProRes is fine, Quicktime still blows – but until a sizable number of distributors are willing to see that the emperor has no clothes – what’s a mother to do?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf