[Mark Raudonis]

Jonathan,

Test. Test. TEST. Then TEST some more!

You will NOT get this right the first time.

YES, you should have a proper monitoring setup to do this. As you mentioned, sync is a big part of
getting this right… or wrong. Not being able to confirm that will guarantee you a fail from network
QC. Once you have all the equipment in the chain set up, dialed in, and ready, it’s not that hard. However,
expecting this to work withOUT the proper monitoring environment or exhaustive test (delivered to the network in question), you will FAIL.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

[Mark Suszko] “you have to pick ONE only.”

Excellent advice!

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Jim,

Check these folks out. https://storagedna.com/

They’re one of the first companies to bring LTFS to market.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

kat,

Yes, please come back and ask another simple question that could have
been answered with .5 seconds of googling.

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

The answer is: it depends on your workflow!

In my opinion, yes, I would put the scratch disk on all of the LOCAL machines 2nd drive. However, it really depends on how you work and what you do. I always recommend that everyone work off of a LOCAL project and then save copies to the SAN for sharing. That way, you reduce the network traffic and still maintain your “sharing” capabilities… not to mention having TWO copies of the valuable project: one local and one global.

Hope that helps.

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Do a test to see what happens.

Quick answer: Original media: 4K Off-line REZ: ProRes LT Editing sequence settings: ProRez LT.

Media transcoded from 4K to Prores will fill the frame completely, but just be degraded quality. The problem is NOT in the off-line, but when you go to Up Rez the other footage. Assuming a 4K timeline,
every other piece of media that’s NOT 4K will show up as a SMALL picture with black around the edges. You will have to BLOW UP to fill the 4K frame. The reverse is also true. If your UpREZ format timeline is
just HD (1920 X 1080) then your 4K images will be HUGE and must be shrunk down to fit within the frame. This is where your repo or reframing is easily possible. Make sense?

My guess is that your uprez process will take place on a HD timeline 1920 X 1080, and therefore you will have to shrink the 4K stuff to fit. Hope this helps.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

James,

Welcome to the cow. Since you’re a first time poster, I’ll be nice!

As you’ve discovered the “on-line/off-line” workflow ALWAYS represents a compromise… especially when it comes to multiple formats.

Bottom line, YOU’RE HOSED! I won’t berate you about the wisdom of your production choices, but now you’ve got to live with the consequences. You can’t enter post with the kind of mismatch of formats you’re presenting and NOT expect to spend time adjusting, correcting, and rendering to fix a questionable production decision.

While it’s fairly easy to transcode everything to a common off-line format (which you’ve done), there is NO WAY to avoid the fact that the different original frame sizes will complicate your on-line conform process.
If EVERYTHING you had was a common format, then yes, you could simply calculate the resize and adjust accordingly. In your case, you should pick the predominate format, and match everything to that. In your final on-line session you will have to go through shot by shot and identify the source to calculate it’s correct resize. Three different formats equals three different resize calucations.

The transcoding process to off-line (ProresLT) will not crop your frame size, it will only reduce the large format to fit in that space. So you will still have the visual material to zoom in on or reposition, but when you do so, it will look much worse than if you did it at full rez.
So, to summarize: All of the resizing work you do in the off-line format will have to be REDONE in the on-line because you are mixing three different frame sizes.

There’s no free lunch here. Either pick one acquisition format and stick to it, work at full rez throughout post, or pay the price in time and effort in the conform.

Good luck.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Or get “CATdv”. There’s a forum for it here on the cow.

I keep one screen open in CATdv, and the other with FCP. I can search the whole universe of
my media MUCH easier than I could in FCP. (Thumbnails and all).

Try it. You’ll see.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Lisa,

Here’s my .02 cents.

This person was NOT a friend. You are better off NOT ever dealing with her again. You are ENTIRELY
within your rights. In my opinion, you’re lucky she revealed her true colors early on. You’ve saved
yourself untold grief (and money) by bailing now on this relationship.

Shed these kind of toxic people from your life as soon as possible. You will be much better without them.

Now, put this behind you and go create something!

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

While I’m sympathetic to your economic challenges, be aware that this method of monitoring is inherently flawed.

So, for anyone else reading this thread, let me say it again:

Computer screens are NOT video screens. Evaluating, monitoring, or watching programming on them
does NOT give you an accurate idea of what kind of “VIDEO” signal you have. For example, “line flickering” introduced by interlacing will NOT show up on your computer screen but will be an automatic “REJECT” on an NTSC monitor. If you are creating “video” as a final deliverable, there is no substitute for connecting a
proper video monitor.

mark