[Joel Fisher]

Right, it’s actually an 8-core with 12GB RAM.

In the end (17 minutes later), it looks fairly poor… very apparent interlace fields.

Will try a couple other settings, but certainly chime in if you or anyone else have thoughts!

[Joel Fisher]

Thanks, giving it a whirl… will let you know how it goes. The 00:00:03:19 test clip is taking 15 minutes+, so I may end up tweaking a couple settings, but hopefully this is the ticket. I also set the Duration to 100%, under the frame controls.

[Joel Fisher]

Wonderful! We’ll give it a whirl.

[Joel Fisher]

Ah, so we could process this through Compressor.

Would it be as simple as creating a ProRes droplet that was specifically 1080psf 23.98, as opposed to “Settings based off of source resolution and frame-rate.” We want to help make it as clear, easy and dummy-proof as possible for them and for us. If we create a droplet, they won’t have to do more than set their system up to render, choose target directories and enjoy a nice long coffee break.

So, just create a 23.98 ProRes droplet, and Compressor will handle the conform properly?

Once again, thanks a million, everyone.

[Joel Fisher]

Gary, you’re absolutely right. It did come up in Cinema Tools as “24.0”.

Upon conforming to 23.98 in Cinema Tools the “Aud Rate” column in FCP goes from 48.0KHz to 47952Hz… is the video being slowed down ever so slightly to 23.98, affecting the pitch of the audio and everything? If so, is this the only and best workaround for footage that was shot improperly?

Thanks a ton, everyone!

[Joel Fisher]

I don’t think so. Everything else in the bin within Final Cut is listed as “23.98”, while the test clip we have is coming up as “24p”. Now, is it not true that some Panasonic cameras (this was shot with AVCHD codec) have the option to shoot at a solid true-progressive 24p? (i.e. the HVX200, which was capable of 24pN… 24 true-progressive frames, yes?)

So, is it a problem to mix some “24p” on a 23.98 timeline with 23.98 assets? If so, how can we fix this videographer’s footage? All other camera operators on other days shot XDCAM 23.98 with the Sony EX1 and EX3.

If there is no conversion option, and the 24p is left as-is, will this be a problem for 3rd party broadcast QC, in the end?

Please do let me know if there is a solution for 24p to 23.98. I know 23.98 is often referred to by some as 24p. But can’t we agree “23.98” is technically “23.98psf” (which, according to my understanding is an interlaced format, more closely akin to 29.97/59.94?) and that if Final Cut is differentiating on the framerate within the bin, perhaps it’s recognizing a difference?

Thanks a ton!

[Joel Fisher]

Yes, I’m sorry. We’re trying to get ahold of one of the clips before the videographer converts and delivers everything to us to save everyone potential headaches.

However, for the sake of argument, let’s say they shot it as 24P… it’s AVCHD, 24P (don’t know what all the framerates of those cameras are, these days, but perhaps a 24pN?)

So do we need to run a conversion on it to make it have a proper cadence when playing back at 23.98, or can we simply cut the 24P footage on the 23.98 timeline without any framerate conversion, pulldowns, pushups, jumping jacks or anything?

Also of interest, in Final Cut the footage comes up as 24P, as opposed to everything else, which is 23.98. Don’t know if that sheds some light.

Thanks a lot, Shane.

-Joel

[Joel Fisher]

It’s 24p footage that we need to cut at 23.98, along with everything else. Final delivery will be 23.98psf HDCAM SR.

[Joel Fisher]

Great, thanks. I basically trusted that with everything set up correctly on the LH, the HDCAM deck, and the Digi, everything would be technically good, as it always had been in the past… and it was. I also knew a bit about the upper and lower fields, and again, trusted that the correct settings would provide the proper output, even if I wasn’t fully knowledgeable of the science. Thanks so much for writing it all out in such a helpful way.

I knew that about anamorphic, but am always nervous when it comes to delivering that way. Once saw a pretty high profile featurette for a feature film end up on even Apple’s site squeezed… appalling. You just never know who’s on the other end. Maybe I should deliver anamorphic anyway, and trust there’s someone competent/caring on the receiving end. Thanks for pointing out the short end of the stick that 16:9 set owners receive!

[Joel Fisher]

Aha, turns out I did deliver it precisely as requested. Error on the part of QC. Wonderful. It’s satisfying to see that my initial efforts toward precision weren’t in vain.

But, I am still curious if anyone out there knows what the English translation of line 22, field 1 is.

Thanks again, and happy editing!