Forum Replies Created

Page 33 of 413
  • Larry’s suggestion is better. Marks the clip you click on and does not require track targeting.

  • “The thing I miss is the lack of Avid’s “t” keyboard shortcut — highlight the clip, hit the t key and you’ve got the in & out point on the timeline. Very handy for replacing clips. I haven’t yet found its equivalent”

    Dave,

    Wouldn’t the X key (mark clip)do that for you (provided you have the track targeted?
    It would be nice if you could map ‘Replace With Clip/in Source Monitor, Match Frame” to the keyboard. This requires no marks at all.

  • Premiere doesn’t have the ability to do dissolves past the end of a clip into an empty track. Thats an Avid thing, because the timeline in Avid is not empty, but rather is filler.

    Not exactly sure whats going on with your editing from the source monitor.

  • John Pale

    February 27, 2017 at 2:50 am in reply to: Prem vs FCPX – Panels

    Latin is a dead language. Move on, dude.

  • You do have to open the HSL Secondary pane to see the Key parameter…which is what I should have wrote….

    🙂

  • Its the HSL Secondary pane. Its not actually called Keyer in the interface.

  • John Pale

    February 26, 2017 at 11:52 pm in reply to: Character limits for reels or file names

    For EDL’s it is a concern, yes.

    EDLs were created for old linear edit controllers. Avid’s List Tool (formerly EDL Manager) has options that allow longer clip/file names, but these are not standard CMX 3600 EDLs.

  • John Pale

    February 21, 2017 at 12:15 am in reply to: Pulling my hair out!

    Avid can be very fussy about the Nvidia driver you have installed on a PC.

    Make sure you have the one stated in the installation guide.

    I’m mostly a Mac user, so I don’t know which one Avid likes these days.

  • It’s not the only program that has issues with it. Many do. It basically turns the file name into a file path. Bad practice to use a slash or backslash into a file name.

  • John Pale

    February 20, 2017 at 4:07 pm in reply to: Exporting 2.39 film to 16:9 anamorphic

    You are effectively altering the pixel size when you squeeze everything in the timeline. Everything looks squeezed when using square pixels.

    1920 x 1080 HD is square pixels always. There are no anamorphic presets, which is why I think they intend to stretch it back out in the projector.

    There are HD formats that use anamorphic pixels (DVC PRO HD, HDV), but they are not 1920 x 1080.

    I have received squeezed stuff for editing many times, and when I unsqueeze it in the edit, it appears in the proper aspect ratio (letterboxed) in a 16:9 frame. I have not been asked to deliver that way before, which is why I suggested you send them a test. Best to be sure before giving them the whole film.

Page 33 of 413

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy