Forum Replies Created

Page 4 of 10
  • Lynette Gilbert

    July 17, 2012 at 5:46 pm in reply to: Tape is dead ???

    [Herb Sevush] “Romper Room, with the Do Be’s and the Don’t Be’s, was also a franchised show in the late 50’s early 60’s, with different hosts in every city.”

    I had no idea that Romper Room was franchised! I loved that show.

  • Lynette Gilbert

    July 17, 2012 at 5:38 pm in reply to: Overwhelmed: what is the best solution?

    [Herb Sevush] “You can export your old FCP projects as an XML which can then be read by PPro. There are tutorials all over the place to show you how to do it. If that’s the only thing stopping you, then you don’t have to worry about switching to PPro”

    You’re right – I did know about that, just forgot. Thanks! [One small bit of panic evaporates.]

  • Lynette Gilbert

    July 17, 2012 at 5:36 pm in reply to: Tape is dead ???

    [Chris Harlan] “The Chicago show was supposed to be terrific”

    My older sister when, but by the time I was old enough to go, the wait list was 8 years. I work for a zoo, and I found tapes from 1985-1987 where they had animals on the show every few weeks. It was definitely a find, and something that would be gone forever if I’d just thrown out the box they were in (they were poorly labeled).

  • Lynette Gilbert

    July 17, 2012 at 2:05 pm in reply to: Thoughts from the departed?

    OMG, I completely forgot about D/Vision. I think that was the first NLE I learned …

  • Lynette Gilbert

    July 17, 2012 at 1:18 pm in reply to: Tape is dead ???

    [Chris Harlan] “Bozo?! I don’t suppose any of those clips would be of Pinto or Vance Colvig, would they? Pinto originated the role, and his son, Vance later played the part Live here in LA. Vance was a close friend of the family, and I thought of him like an uncle. A very funny guy. I miss him a lot.”

    No, sorry; these are clips from the Chicago Bozo show.

  • Lynette Gilbert

    July 16, 2012 at 6:13 pm in reply to: Tape is dead ???

    I work for an non-profit organization that has archives going all the way back to the 1930’s. We still have film. I have thousands of Umatic, Beta, VHS, Hi-8, and DV tapes in storage. I’d love to dump most of it, but I have been asked to pull stuff from the 1980’s often enough (to use in presentations, historical productions, etc.) that I don’t throw anything out. And different departments often call me and say, “can you convert this Hi-8 tape that I have?” So I don’t want to know how many tapes exist that I don’t know about. Because our machines are on their last legs, I’m trying to convert the “important” stuff on Umatic, Hi-8, and VHS (like Bozo show clips – I cannot tell you what a find that was!) to DV.

    I wasn’t going to worry about any of the Beta footage, but one of our decks just broke and the replacement part is $700, which isn’t exactly in our budget, so now I’m down to one machine. According to our supplier (who deals a lot of used equipment), decks in good condition are getting difficult to find, so that makes me nervous. Our Hi-8 deck broke a few months ago, and we’re still looking for a replacement. I wish we could just buy up a ton of decks, but when your budget is extremely small, you want to be spending money on things like converting to HD, not antiquated decks!

    One thing about going totally tapeless that worries me, though, is archiving. Technology moves along so quickly, how do I know that a .mov file that I save today will be playable in 25 years? And what happens when the file gets corrupted? (I know I sound like I’m 80. I’m 100% digital in my home life, but at work, where I need to be concerned about someone needing a file in 25 years, archiving is a big deal.) But that’s a whole different thread.

    So no, tape is not dead, at least not for everyone. (Shoot, we still have to send material to some stations on Beta.) However, its eventual total demise is a huge source of stress for me.

  • Lynette Gilbert

    July 12, 2012 at 5:28 pm in reply to: Blue artifacts after rendering

    No, that’s the only effect. I do have a Motion file of a watermark overlaid. I tried to see if that was the problem, but I’d already deleted the filter so I could post the video. I added the CC filter back in … no artifacts (watermark was still there).

    I use the CC filter all the time, we post videos at least once a week, and this has only happened in the last two weeks. Same filter, same type of file, same watermark … if it’s going to happen randomly, I don’t know how to troubleshoot it.

    I thought maybe it had to do with part of the picture being too hot, but then I don’t understand why it didn’t happen on both shots.

  • Lynette Gilbert

    May 24, 2012 at 3:34 pm in reply to: Print to Video Doesn’t Work

    Hmm. I thought they only installed the hardware. However, IS never updates anything on my computer (and I can’t without an admin login) so maybe the Mac Specialist guy ran updates when he was here. If he did, he didn’t tell me.

    I leave for vacation tomorrow, so I think I’m not going to worry about it until I get back.

    Thanks!
    Lynette

  • Lynette Gilbert

    January 22, 2012 at 7:35 pm in reply to: Template is super slow

    Blah. I will just have to deal with it, I guess. It stinks that it takes almost 10 minutes to do a RAM Preview of 300 frames …

  • Lynette Gilbert

    January 22, 2012 at 6:41 pm in reply to: Template is super slow

    Specs:

    Model Name: iMac
    Model Identifier: iMac7,1
    Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo
    Processor Speed: 2.4 GHz
    Number Of Processors: 1
    Total Number Of Cores: 2
    L2 Cache: 4 MB
    Memory: 4 GB

    Graphics Card:

    ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro:

    Chipset Model: ATI,RadeonHD2600
    Type: Display
    Bus: PCIe
    PCIe Lane Width: x16
    VRAM (Total): 256 MB
    Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
    Device ID: 0x9583
    Revision ID: 0x0000
    ROM Revision: 113-B2250F-219
    EFI Driver Version: 01.00.219

Page 4 of 10

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