[Matt Campbell]

So all you have to do is change the actual time of the conformed clip to the same time as the original. Not %100 sure if this removes frames or just changes the speed of the clip. But what you are left with is a edit that has the exact same timing, but with the new frame rate.

Adam, what you’re describing is a speed change in compressor. Changing the length of the clip will change the speed. This is not the proper way to do that. Compressor is then speeding up your clips to fit in the shortened time.

The method I had success with was as I described above. We’ve sent the file out and haven’t heard anything back from them, so we assume that the true 24p file sent has worked for the film out. I’ve played down my original 23.976 and converted 24p files and both sound identical. No speed changes have occurred.

All we had to work with was that finished uncompressed 23.98 master. so my only option was to conform to 24p on export.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

Yes Shane. Sorry for not clarifying. I need to output a digital file at True 24fps for some film device submission.

I tried outputting a digital file at the current settings of 23.976 using aja uncompressed. I then took it in compressor to do the frame rate conversion and setting frame controls to best under rate conversion. Result gave me artifacts, ghosting in hand movements and on my stills, some morphing crap from compressor redrawing those frames.

So I then just exported from my 23.98 timeline, this time selecting aja uncompressed 24p, rather than 23.98. This file looked good with no ghosting and frame blending stuff but can’t really tell if it is a proper conversion. Audio and video looks to be in sync but not 100% sure about it.

How would you do with fop 7, compressor, AE or something else. Or am I over thinking it.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

Thanks Dave. Yeah, I’m working in ProRes LT. I’ll have them send me that or even 422.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

First off, an external monitor is extremely helpful as FCPs Viewer and Canvas do not show full resolution. They will degrade the image for playback purposes as opposed to an external monitor or even TV playing through an I/O card. That will be 100% full res.

Secondly, try exporting your sequence or even just a small chunk of it at your current settings. How does that look through Quicktime 7?

Also, under your Sequence Settings, you could set the Motion Filtering Quality to Best under Video Processing Tab and under Render Control, Always Use Best Quality When Rendering Movies.

For 720p, ProRes HQ is overkill. ProRes 422 is completely fine. Other than that, not sure what else to try.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

So best to put the 29.97 stuff thru Compressor to match the frame rate and codec of the 23.98 footage to avoid it looking ‘skippy’?

Shane, will compressor remove the proper frames for this conversion from 29.97 to 23.976? Or is Cinema Tools a better option?

I have a similar situation and would really like to keep my 23.98 sequence vs. working in 29.97.

Also, in another situation, almost exactly reversed from the other, I do have a 29.97 sequence and 1 clip needs to be added. That clip is 23.98 and I’ve added pulldown in AE and rendered out to https://WWWSS cadence. My question is my 29.97 sequence is Progressive (because the DP shot 30p on one of the Sony XD Cam cameras), but isn’t the newly converted clip with pulldown added now Interlaced? Can you add pulldown to 23.98 clip and get a 29.97 Progressive clip? And how would you do that?

What is the proper conversion there?

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

Thx. And sorry for the confusion.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

That’s my confusion is that I’m not really sure. In NTSC land, when I have a D1 file 720×486 and use my external monitor with FCP, all looks good and normal. That actual file on the computer monitor looks strange because the monitor can’t display NTSC pixels. So quicktime displays it using the Production setting under Show Movie Properties, rather than displaying Encoded Pixels. So I would create a 640×480 square pixel file to represent what the TV would display. So looking at the 640×480 square pixel movie file on the computer side by side with the NTSC file on the TV monitor looks identical.

My question is, with PAL, what are the dimensions for this. What would a web deliverable in PAL be. If we deliver 720×486, as 640×480 for web in NTSC land, what is that equivalent in PAL land?

Sorry, this stuff is really confusing. And I’m not even sure I’m saying this correctly or even representing the files correctly. I don’t use 720×486 for web because the computer can’t display those NTSC pixels and allowing Quicktime to display it using the Production setting, still looks off. Hence using the 640×480 setting.

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

Sorry, I’m just not following. So I opened a PAL D1/DV Square Pixel, 788×576 preset in Photoshop. Opened up the Image Size window and changed the 788 dimension to 640 and got 640×468. Sound right?

I dont’ how to do all these conversions. Can anyone just give the dimensions without all the runaround?

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

That’s 16:9, I’m referring to 4:3.

Like in NTSC, your edit would 720×486, but that’s for broadcast and for web you would use 640×480, square pixels. Any ideas?

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD

[Matt Campbell]

true. unfortunately i didn’t shoot this and our in-house people live by the “we’ll fix it in post” mantra. makes my job really interesting. thx

OS 10.6.7, Mac Pro 2 x 3 ghz quad-core intel xenon, 4 gb ram and AJA IoHD