Forum Replies Created

Page 74 of 150
  • Mark Raudonis

    September 13, 2008 at 11:16 pm in reply to: different editors sharing same material

    “x editors”?????

    That’s really the question! Until you answer that… you have NO WAY of knowing what’s the best solution for you.

    So what’s “X”? Is it two? Fifteeen? Twenty? It really does matter.

    Mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    September 9, 2008 at 2:27 pm in reply to: Re. Color Grading: Color, Looks, Color Finesse?

    “A few hours…”

    For many, this is a career! I think you underestimate the steepness of the learning curve ahead of you.

    Mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    September 6, 2008 at 3:58 am in reply to: Naming Convention for Television show

    Here’s a taste of what you’ll get from Shane’s DVD.

    As one of the “consultants” on Shane’s DVD, I can offer you this for free. (Shane… you never paid me!)

    We use the following convention: Show ID, Date, Camera, Reel #, Load.

    For example: “Reality Show season 21= RS21, Date = 9/05, Camera = “A”, Load = 05

    This would translate to: RW21905A05

    When you’re shooting five different shows at the same time, a “show designator” is crucial. Other than that, the it’s pretty straightforward. We’ve used this convention for years and it works. Anything more detailed belongs in a “description or notes column”. Anything less won’t differentiate between shows.

    Good luck.

    mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    August 31, 2008 at 9:54 pm in reply to: FCP & Avid on the same system update

    The problem is NOT how they interact with each other, but the different version of OS, QT, etc. that either are qualified to run under. Typically, Avid will lag behind Apple in qualifying their software, so it becomes very difficult to “sync” the latest versions of these NLE’s on the same drive. That’s why the easiest solution is to have separate bootable drives with proven OS and software versions.

    mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    August 31, 2008 at 3:20 pm in reply to: FCP 6 and BiCoastal Post Workflow

    Shane’s right… name the hard drive EXACTLY the same for all systems and your relinking should be limited just to the renders.

    We’ve used this workflow for years with editors in different time zones and it works.

    As to the the renders… you must re render locally.

    Mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    August 24, 2008 at 3:29 am in reply to: Multicam Weirdness

    Michael,

    Without access to the original tapes there’s no way that you can confirm where the problem is.

    Have you tried looking at the audio waveforms from all the cameras to see if they sync up? I’m sure there’s no slate (clapper) to check either… that would be too easy!

    We use multi cam’s all day long, and any sync issues are usually a result of the ORIGINAL tapes and timecode being slightly off. FCP just delivers the bad news.

    Your only chance for a definitive answer is to reference the original tapes and see if they’re all in sync.
    I’m guessing they’re NOT.

    Mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    August 20, 2008 at 6:49 am in reply to: Massive Amounts of XD Cam files

    Tom,

    We do NOT use log and capture. Rather, we use the Sony software in FAM (File Access Mode) to COPY the files from the disc to our X-SAN shared storage. This part never even touches Final cut pro. We have a “tried and true” numbering system so that each disc gets it’s own unique number. I’ve written about it before, so quite simply it’s SHOW INTITAL/Date/Camera/load: RW815A01

    The “classic off-line to on-line” works like this. These Full resolution clips are then “recompressed” in compressor to create “Off-line RT” media. This is what we edit with. Once picture is locked, we then
    take the locked sequence and media manage it to create “off-line clips” with handles. Then, using a deck like the sony FDW-F75, we batch digitize the off-line sequence. FCP will ask for a reel number, but it will then find the correct clip based on timecode. This process is a “play video” workflow, and unfortunately not file based. However, the cueing of the XD-CAM is much faster than a tape, so it does go quicker.

    I hope I answered your question.

    mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    August 19, 2008 at 4:08 am in reply to: Massive Amounts of XD Cam files

    Tom,

    Don’t despair! There are still possibilities and work flow that may be right for you.

    Example. We’re shooting the current season of MTV’s “The Real World” using Sony’s XD-CAM.
    A typical season of this show will generate approximately 6,500 HOURS of media.

    Because of this massive amount of media, we employ the classic “Off-line to on-line” workflow. Here’s how it goes: Disc is brought in house. BOTH hi and low res media is copied onto our server using the Sony PDW-D1. As Wayne has mentioned, this is basically just a blu Ray player and it’s economically priced. We use five at once.

    The low res proxies are split off into a separate folder and immediately made available to our loggers. They access the X-SAN via AFP using “PilotWare” for logging. The high res media is then recompressed using “Compressor” to “Off-line RT”. Using a the Q-master cluster approach, this step is done much faster than real time. We now have three files on our server: Full res media, Sony proxy, and Apple “Off-line RT”. The loggers can start immediately, the story department will request “selects” and we will then “recompress” selected media.

    Because we can’t keep all of the full res media on line forever, we purge it after approx two weeks. When picture is locked, we have to media manage the sequence and redigitize the ful res media.

    This may seem like a lot of steps, but trust me, this is much easier than our old taped based workflow.

    Anyone who says that XD-Cam doesn’t work for you, hasn’t really tried hard enough. We’ve been using the format for years now (Back when it was taped based IMX), and I can tell you that it works.

    I can also say that I wished FCP would play nicer with the Sony proxies, but fundamentally, there’s the problem of “off-line quality” audio. We take the steps that we do specifically to preserve the original audio quality.

    As for DRW’s comment about why anyone would still use “off-line”, all I can say is 6,500 hours x 5 shows and you’ll be thinking about low rez too!

    mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    August 15, 2008 at 3:40 pm in reply to: Soliciting thoughts on large RAID volumes

    Warren,

    First, you should have a separate, independent back up of everything anyway… even if you’re using a raid scheme on the volume. So, the idea of one volume or several is moot.

    We’re running a large shared san with four separate volumes (A, B, C, D) and they’re all over 15 TB. For us, the separate volumes are more based on workflow than anything else. One is for “on-line”, one is for archive, one is special projects, and the largest is for current shows in post.

    In your case I’d suggest just one big one.
    mark

  • Mark Raudonis

    August 14, 2008 at 2:16 pm in reply to: Placing Multiclips in multiple projects.

    Thomas,

    Time for some trouble shooting. We use multiclips in multiple projects all day long. This shouldn’t be a problem.

    Start from scratch with a new multiclip using known “good” media. Make it simple just to prove that it will work. Sounds like there’s possibly something wrong with either your media or one of your projects.
    Do the regular stuff like trashing preferences, etc.

    Mark

Page 74 of 150

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