[Jason Brown]

Not sure what version you’re using…but with Media Composer, it works for me to use workspaces.

Go to your settings tab in your project window and make sure *all settings* is selected, go down to workspace and there should be a icon beside one of them, this is the current one your using. Double click it and click *save workspace now*.

That works for me…I have 4 different workspaces mapped to F9-F12 for audio editing, effects editing, standard editing and capturing.

HTH,

JB

[Jason Brown]

Thanks Dave,

I thought that might be the case, I wasn’t sure if something had to be rendered to that folder to *save* the location!

Thanks again – I’m going to start calling you Super Dave!

[Jason Brown]

I’m not sure if this is the best method, but on our Media Composer…I’ll drop a clip way longer than I need it to be…then keyframe motion, then just add edit to cut off what I don’t need when I’m done.

-Jason

[Jason Brown]

Mike,

Thanks so much for devoting so much time to help me…I wanted to fill you in on what happened with the project.

Well, it is finished, and worked well…the client ended up wanting some significant animation (moving masks with varying transparencies and more). So it was a good thing I worked in AFX!

Bottom line though, after my first significant 16:9 project. I’m still not completely clear exactly what happened with the clips.

I exported from Media Composer as Same as source. It gave me the option of choosing the Pixel Aspect Ratio; Square / 4:3 non-square / 16:9 non-square. — I chose the 16:9 non-square.

When I imported into Xpress…there weren’t any settings to work in 720 x 486 (as opposed to 480). So I did the standard 601 non-square import setting at 1:1.

I then did my editing, and exported a QT Ref. The settings in that allowed the Pixel Dimensions as: Native Dimensions / 4:3 Square / 16:9 square.

I chose native and took them into AFX. The clip info in AFX said they were 720 x 486 (.9 PAR) When dropped into a widescreen comp (720 x 486 1.2 PAR) I had to scale them up 133% horizontally.

I did some tests and if I choose the 16:9 square from the output for QT ref, they are 864 x 486 at 1.0 PAR.

Also, one question on the rendering. I had to make them 720 x 486 so the Meriden codec would accept them. I had 2 options, drop them into a 720 x 486 comp and scale down. Or Scale in the rendering settings. Is there a preffered method? Is one better than the other?

All in all, I learned that:

Non-square pixels suck! — I was working with square pixel images in a non-square comp…so I had to disproportionately (sp?) scale them horizontally to match the 1.2 PAR of my comp! And if I wanted to do any rotation on them, they would go out of perspective.

My final decision on the best workflow in this situation is to use square pixels…either scale up the video clips or export them at square pixels. So the pictures that I used a ton of and animated pretty heavily were in their native PAR.

Just wanted to give you the low-down on what happened with me…if you have any advice or ideas, I’d love to hear them!

-Jason

[Jason Brown]

Thanks Mike,

I had already done that, gone through each one and adjusted…I was just wondering if anyone here had any new ideas on how to do it differently.

I just learned yesterday what “filter automation gain” does…I couldn’t figure that out for a long time!

BTW, you were helping me with a 16:9 project…I’m going to give you a synopsis (a long one!) of my findings with that project. — check that post.

-Jason

[Jason Brown]

Thanks for the GREAT info and help…I really appreciate it!

I didn’t like AVID’s pan and scan either when I worked with it…I’m going to do some tests in the morning and see what I like best and get to work!

I LOVE this forum! Thanks again!

-Jason

[Jason Brown]

Great…thanks for the advice.

As I was talking it out with you, I thought of another option which might slightly simplify things.

Instead of working with AFX to do the moves on the images (they are simple zoom and pan movements). Could I work with the effect *Pan and Scan* in AVID? 1) Can it work in 16:9 mode? 2) Is the quality of the Pan and scan feature in AVID good quality to compare with After Effects? 3) Can I composite moves with the Pan and Scan over top of the interviews?

I’ve used Pan and Scan once or twice…and I know its limited, but it might be easier than trying to work in 2 programs and increase my render/import times.

-Jason

[Jason Brown]

The Xpress system DOES have MOJO. And I don’t believe there is a storage issue for how little content I’ll be bringing over. All the exported clips total about 4.5 GB of disk space at 2:1. (audio and video)

The whole workflow is this:

Content:

Shot 16:9 SD footage on beta. (Digitized and exported from MC at 2:1)
High-res still images to do moves on while interviewers talk. (AFX…or AVID Pan and Scan)

Delivery:

7 total pieces about 1:30 each.

My initial thought is to do a rough edit with smooth audio fades, music and sound bytes in order fading up and out…in a 1:30 piece. (all done in AVID)

Take that edited QT ref movie over to AFX and do the moves on top of it to cover black holes with moves on the high res images.

Render out of AFX with 2:1 compression in the AVID Meridien Codec.

That was my initial thought on the best workflow…I just want to make sure the media will hold up the quality throughout all of this.

-JB

PS Thanks for your quick help!!!

[Jason Brown]

Thanks for the ideas…a couple of problems on workflow with that proposal.

The Xpress Pro system is not even in the same building or interconnected at all to the Media Composer.

The major reason I’m doing this is because the Edit suite is going to be busy all weekend and I need to continue to edit for a Monday deadline…so I’ve already exported same as source clips and that’s what I have to work with.

There is no GFX treatment…just stringing Sound bytes together with music. I just find AVID easier to work in than After Effects for doing *editing* work.

So my real pressing issue is quality…will I suffer going to the Xpress codec, coming from 2:1 Meridien codec? Would I be better served to work all in AFX to retain the quality? The quality is going to be a key issue…I can’t afford a bunch of compression, my boss wanted to do it at 1:1 but we don’t have the drive space.

Also, you mentioned DV50 and then also 1:1. Are those both selectable on the Xpress Pro system? I’ve never worked on the Xpress Pro, only the Xpress DV — which doesn’t allow for a selection of quality. Simply DV.

-JB

[Jason Brown]

Bouke,

Thanks for the ideas, I’m finishing it this weekend…so hopefully It will work!

One quick question, when I create GFX for a 4:3 in Photoshop (ver7.0 – so square pixels). I do 720 x 540.

So why would I do 864 x 486 and not 864 x 540?

-JB