[Marc Wielage]

Somebody should write a learned article on this problem, because it comes up all the time.

I think the best answer is, set your timeline to whatever format you need to render out to and watch everything there, assuming you can monitor it on your current display. You can correct with the masking in place, then remove the masking for the final render if it’s in a smaller vertical size than what you normally have. Be sure to watch out on the setting

I would recommend Brad Allen’s “Aspect Ratio Cheat Sheet” as being a good source of information as far as what sizes are out there and what is acceptable for home video releases and DCI theatrical releases:

unravel.com.au/files/Unravel_Resolution_CheatSheet.pdf

On the other hand: note that Vittorio Storaro and Woody Allen are shooting their new picture in 2.00 on the Sony F65. And I suspect nobody will argue with them.

[Marc Wielage]

Crop it to 1.85. Nobody cares. It’s a couple of pixels — let it go.

Lots and lots of cameras shoot formats for which there is no simple DCI aspect ratio. In particular, I dislike Red’s 2.00:1 mode. I much, much prefer that people shoot in a format with a specific release aspect ratio in mind. For example, if they want to shoot in 4K or 5K or 6K, shoot it in 16×9 so that it’s going to crop naturally and easily for a traditional HD release. If you don’t, get ready for a lot of painstaking (and time-consuming) cropping and scanning.

If there’s any issues with the 1.89 -> 1.85, it’ll be at the top of the frame. Keep an eye on that. Don’t forget that many, many distributors still request a 16×9 (1.78) version of 1.85 films. There are cable channels that expressly forbid 1.85 matted films.

[Marc Wielage]

What is 1998×1400? That’s no DCI aspect ratio I ever heard of. 1998×1080 is 1.85, and 2048×803 is 2.39, but that’s about it.

My advice would be to migrate the project over to another computer and hire a different local colorist to pick up the pieces and try to get things running again. In cases like this, hardware failure is always a potential issue. If it’s a mission-critical project, you have to have backups.

Also, OSX 10.8.5 is really, really old. Ideally, you need faster GPUs with more RAM.

[Marc Wielage]

Test the workflow by prepping 1 minute of material and take it all the way through, and see how it goes. I don’t see an issue per se, but there are always potential problems when handing off a project from one kind of editing software to another. Things change.

[Marc Wielage]

What if you avoid the keyframes and do the tracking in the tracking window?

I generally don’t run with more than 6 or 7 windows, but I hit that quite often if I run into a complicated scene. I’m using the tracking keyframer far more often than I do the regular keyframe window, and find the tracker is reliable enough that I can usually let the automatic control track the area, then go back in and do (at most) 4 or 5 manual (frame) tweaks and it’s dead on.

I generally only use the regular keyframing window for color dynamics and PTZR dynamics, and in some cases to turn windows or layers off and on.

You may want to try an alternate way to approach the scene and see if it produces less “stress” to the system, in an effort to get real-time performance back. Sometimes, a simpler approach may wind up being more effective.

[Marc Wielage]

The choice of editing software is like a lot of things: choice of lenses, choice of monitors, choice of operating systems. There’s always a lot of pros and cons, personal biases, and outside factors beyond what the software does. Cost, speed, reliability… those are all good factors. It also helps to have a wide, highly-trained user base to draw upon when you need to hire freelance people.

There’s a huge group of freelance Premiere, Avid, and FCP editors out there. Resolve… not so much. Where I see Resolve working is for conforming and finishing longform projects, documentaries, and TV series. They’re getting very close to matching what Avid DS could do years ago, but for a lot less money.

[Marc Wielage]

Note you could do the VFX and title sequences and just cut those back into Resolve, then render the final out from Resolve. It can work.

[Marc Wielage]

I have not seen grading change with normal Primaries, secondaries, keys, curves, saturation, defocus, or camera raw controls. I haven’t used YSFX since my music video days many years ago.

[Marc Wielage]

Is it possible to manually bring the tracks in to the media pool, then force-conform the track to the correct clip?

I have no problem bringing in multiple tracks provided they’re individual string-outs, the length of the project. Multiple clips for every single cut could be dicey.

[Marc Wielage]

The other possible workaround is to render out the 24.00fps project as a flattened file in a high quality format (like ProRes 444 or DNxHD or DNxHR 444), then start a new 23.976fps project, bring in the flattened file, and just render it out at the new speed. This will cause a .1% pulldown, so make sure this will sync up with your existing sound.

Generally nowadays, I think 24.00fps projects are rare… but they do exist. I personally think 23.976 is much more straightforward and easier to deal with, since most sound and picture people expect this mode (for American-based TV or feature projects, anyway).