[Howard Duy vu]

[Andy Neil] “I don’t have any NTFS drives to test this, but if true, that’s a semi-legitimate complaint. But still it’s more or less the price of doing work on both PC and Mac systems. It’s a pain, I know, but at least Mac can view files on NTFS and ExFAT and FAT32 drives. PCs can’t read any OS formatted drives and never have been able to. In my mind, it’s the PC that’s the real problem here.”

Hi guys, I can report that an NTFS-formatted RAID should work, because that’s what we use. Our shared storage runs Windows Server 2012, and shares the RAID through 10GbE fiber using the SMB protocol. The only limitation is that you have to run the libraries LOCALLY, which I suspect could be your problem. So to sum up: you have to run your libraries (for a Premiere user, this is like your project file) locally, either directly off the internal drive, or a drive that’s a directly connected external drive. All media and cache can be on your shared RAID, externally managed. Don’t store any media in the library, that’s the key.

[Howard Duy vu]

[Sebastian Alvarez] “It’s not, but you have a good point in starting at 360. Keyframing 360 down to 320 works just as I would do 0 to -320 in Adobe software. Thanks for the tip.”

Well, when you say “it’s not exactly the same,” that’s just semantics. It’s functionally equivalent, which is all that matters. Also, it’s 360 to 40 which is the same as 0 to -320, not sure if you had a typo there or if you misunderstood. You have to think of a circle, where 360 degrees equals 0 degrees, so to cycle backwards through the hues, you would go from 360 to 40.

[Howard Duy vu]

Not sure if you have a good understanding of the color wheel and how it relates to hue. To accomplish what you want, you would just keyframe from 360 degrees to 40. That’s the exact same thing as going from 0 to -320.

I would suggest in general to look at what you need to do and try to accomplish that, rather than going through little by little and nitpicking every little detail of functionality. All the programs do the same thing, they just do them a bit differently at times.

[Howard Duy vu]

There are two ways to deal with this:

1) Bring it into Cinema Tools and do a reverse telecine on all the footage. You can do a batch of them, and it will strip out the pulldown and get you to 23.976.

2) FCPX will do this automatically when you cut it into a 23.976 timeline, but it seems to be finicky about how you’ve initially interpreted the footage. Click on your original clip in the browser, and in the inspector, go over to the “info” tab, and on the bottom left of the inspector, set the drop-down box to “settings”. I had to tell it to interpret the field dominance as “Upper” for it to be properly cut into a 23.976 timeline and have it remove pulldown. This seems to be contrary to the article that you linked, where it says it should be flagged as progressive (that’s actually technically correct, it’s progressive with pulldown. It is NOT normal interlaced footage.)

When dealing with such footage, it’s almost never a good idea to cut it in a 29.97 timeline, even though it might look “ok.” The problem is that you will often cut in a clip not on a correct frame and mess-up the pulldown cadence. Then it will be a real pain when it comes time to make a proper master.

[Howard Duy vu]

Have you tried importing your RAW dng clips into the Resolve media pool BEFORE importing the XML (keep ‘automatically import media clips into source pool’ unchecked)? Once Resolve is aware of the clips, it should match them up with your XML.

[Howard Duy vu]

You need to say what type of media you’re using, etc. We still run FCP7 on occasion on Yosemite, and it actually works fine for the most part (but Motion 4 no longer works).

I had an old project I had to bring up a couple of months ago, and it kept crashing constantly. This was on a machine upgraded to Yosemite. We did an uninstall and then reinstall of the entire FCP Studio, and then it just worked perfectly. Long story short: REINSTALL FCP Studio after an upgrade to Yosemite.

[Howard Duy vu]

Well that’s not a bad feature to add, but I would only want it as a toggle because I wouldn’t necessarily always want an audio crossfade with every time and audio clip butted up against another one. And still, it doesn’t change the fact that even if it added them automatically, you would still have to listen to the cuts and perhaps adjust them anyway.

[Howard Duy vu]

I don’t see the lack of being able to add the audio dissolve to connected audio as being that major. It’s a “nice to have” but it’s hardly a deal-breaker. That’s because you can get way more precise with manually adjusting the fade handles, and it really only takes a few more clicks.

I know there’s certainly a speed advantage to selecting all the audio cuts and pressing a hotkey to instantly add audio dissolves, BUT in reality you will have to listen to every audio cut anyway to hear if they work. So… you’ll have listen and adjust anyway, and you have FAR more control with the manual fade handles, with the way you can easily fade to the subframe level. If you’re not listening and adjusting each audio cut, well what can I say other than: don’t be lazy! This is especially true if you’re finishing and mixing the audio in the NLE.

To sum up: it would be nice to have, but the fade handles are superior even though they take a bit more time.

[Howard Duy vu]

You could bump it down to 1080p, but there’s no reason to do so. FCPX will keep your framing when you round-trip back into the program. Make sure you tell it to render out to 2K. If I understand you correctly, you don’t have Alexa raw which is what would be preferable, but the ProRes should be pretty good especially at 4444. If you had the raw, you could just bring them into the media pool first, and then import the XML, which would relink if you tell it not to automatically create clips. In either case, you could export out at ProRes 4444 with great quality.

Also, in general, Resolve 11 is pretty good about keeping most FCPX speed changes, ramps, and things like that, so you don’t have to bake them in. You should check them after the round trip, though, because there may be slight translation errors occasionally which you can easily correct in the NLE. This is actually a huge advantage for FCPX-Resolve workflows.

[Howard Duy vu]

Yes, the compound clip method should work fine. Just wanted to chime in and say if you wanted to go the Compressor route as above, I misspoke about making the framerate 59.94. It should actually be 29.97 (so ignore their specs that say 59.94). 29.97i is actually 59.94 because it’s 59.94 fields per second already. If you go make a new timeline in FCPX and set it to 1080i, it will only have two options: 25i and 29.97i, so 29.97i is what you want in either case.