[Mark Raudonis]

[Chris Blair] “And I’m not arguing that people don’t or shouldn’t use google searches for employment background checks, only that taking the information and letting it by itself sway their decision, is irresponsible. “

By itself? No. In combination with other factors? Absolutely valid.

Most people in a position to hire can easily read between the lines and come to this conclusion: whiner, complainer, loser!

Now, how much effort does a candidate have to make to move a potential employer away from that negative point of view?

Without that “internet” info in hand, it would be on the employer’s shoulders to “discover” this about the candidate. With that internet info in hand, it’s now on the candidate’s shoulders to convince them otherwise. Why would you want to “”publish” those kind of details about yourself? It’s NOT a good career move.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

[Mark Job] ” I have been reading all the threads on the Avid website (Their user forums)about how bad FCP is and how terribly long the rendering times are, etc, etc. Many Avid users also have FCP now. “

I have to give you credit for coming here to get a second opinion… but if you’re relying on an Avid website for an opinion about FCP, what did you expect to hear?

If you have a valid reason to switch, then go ahead and do it, but only YOU can decide if FCP’s gonna work for your workflow/clientbase/format etc. You can collect multiple opinions and research all you want, but there is no substitute for trying FCP out in your own, unique environment.

And… if you do try it out, please don’t fall into that trap of comparing twenty years of Avid experience to twenty minutes of FCP. It takes awhile to learn the differences and how to apply the strengths of the FCP interface to your advantage rather than your frustration.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Charilie,

I learned a new word today: Diegetic

For those too lazy to google, “Diegetic” refers to sounds that are expected to come from within the story:
dialogue, natural sound effects, etc. An ADR track that’s too “clean” will not sound diegetic, and hence call attention to itself.

The “right” way to address this is to use the exact same kind of microphone as the field recorder used.
Then, mix in “presence” tracks under the ADR track to replace the natural sounds missing. Another key is to record in the same “style” as the field production, for example a boom mic from 2 feet away, or radio lavs hidden under clothes. The key is to match your ADR with the same style as produciton. Then, it’s just a question of filling in with background sounds to match anything recorded on location. A good field production recordist would have supplied those “clean” background tracks to you.

If you’re asking how to correctly balance your mix…. can’t do that via this forum, there are too many variables to address.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

We have several of these monitors. They’re great. Yes, we have the HDSDI boards for them, but they are NOT cheap! Having these boards makes for the easiest interface between source and monitor. At a professional level, your only other option would be to get a HDSDI >>> to HDMI converter box from AJA or Blackmagic. Those boxes are around $500 bucks. The Board for the Panasonic is around $1500.

If audio sync to source is important (protools, or editing) then you may want to stay with the built in board. If latency is not as crucial, you can probably get away with the converter.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Another helpful keystroke is “reveal in finder”. This will “match back” your clip all the way back to the finder level. If you practice good media management, and use the finder level folder structure as a way to organize your project, this key stroke is the key to finding anything, anytime, anywhere.

We pass “thin” projects back and forth that just contain a timeline. These projects do not have large folders of media within, so “reveal in finder” enables us to use the entire SAN as one big project. This is NOT something that AVID can do, and in my opinion is a plus for FCP.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

dude,

You sound like an old fart! “These new fangled FX are just too fancy for me!”

Come on! The three D text effect is actually quite cool. Me thinks you’re just envious you didn’t think of it! Sure, it will become dated quickly, but so what? For now, it’s fresh, and unexpected and works.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

I’d just like to add that anyone contemplating this product (Auto voice transcription) should do their own test.

I did. And it just ain’t good enough.

mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Kent,

The answer to your question is : Download the Adobe trial version of “Audition” and try it out for yourself. I did, and in my opinion, it’s useless for what you’re hoping.

Did you not see the comment in the avid formun you cite about “punctuation”? There is NONE!

If you want a “Nicely formatted transcript in pdf” you’re going to have to do it yourself.

This has nothing to do with FCP or Avid. People have been pursuing this holy grail of “auto transcriptions” for quite some time and so far, that goal has yet to be reached.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

Sterling,

You are absolutely correct… a complete “textless” version is, in my opinion, a much more logical, efficient process.

Most of the delivery requirements that I see ask for a completely separate tape… however some distributors still want “textless elements” at end. I think this method is very “old school”, carried over from the days where shows were mostly “cuts” and you could just insert in and out the few chyrons needed. Today, we’ve done shows where it’s nearly impossible to find a “clean cut” anywhere.

Therefore, the “entire tape textless” makes much more sense.

If your project is highly complex graphically, then I’d suggest you speak with your international distributor and suggest the “entire tape” method.

While you’re at it, get a clear definition on how they want to handle the “aspect ratio” conversions. This can really impact your graphics.

Good luck.

Mark

[Mark Raudonis]

[walter biscardi] “the Kona boards can also be set up as a stand alone converter to work independently of the computer. this is an awesome feature when you want to make dubs or do some sort of deck to deck or deck to DVD recorder transfer.”

This feature recently saved us twenty THOUSAND dollars!

The comparable “conversion” board set for a SONY HDCAMsr deck is around $10k. Two decks? $20K.

We had to convert from 23.97 (on tape) to 29.97(on DVD) and just used the Kona 3 as a stand alone converter. In my mind, this feature alone justifies the cost of the Kona 3.

I agree with everyone else on feature set, company service, and reliability.

mark