Matthew Romanis
Forum Replies Created
-
Hi Jason,
Check the View options in FCP and see if there are any Psf output options (progressive segmented filed).
I have an AJA IO and in an earlier release if drivers I had to use these settings to view progressive PAL video. An update of firmware a while ago changed this. -
Hi Andrew,
You could try something like Raylight, or MXF4Qt, both a purchase, if you want to use the MXF files without transcoding.
Either way, Log and transfer is free but it’s a transcode to PRO RES 422 (make sure your MAC can process and work with these files), or pay the money and work with the files directly through a “re-wrapping” process. -
Are you seeing the artefact on both the canvas window and preview monitor? If you are using a video card to preview, which one are you using?
It’s odd that we can see the footage cleanly, yet there still seems to be an issue with field dominance in the system you are using.
Generally it’s the last resort of “I dunno what the problem is…”, but have you trashed the preferences and restarted FCP? -
I have the same 17″ LCD as you, and progressive playback is never an issue in this way whether it’s via 25p, 30p, or varicam 60p.
Just to confirm your FCP sequence settings….
Frame size – 720 x 480
Vid Rate – 29.97fps
Compressor DVCPRO50 NTSC
Pixel Aspect – NTSC CCIR 601
Field Dominance – None.What sequence compressor are you using?
-
When you drop the clip into the time line in FCP is any rendering required?
With both field dominance tabs set to none (not “not set”) the clip plays back perfectly.
Re the playback from the camera, in the 202 are you able to try setting a different playback setting for your display?
Matthew. -
Hi Jason,
I finally got a look at the file, forgot this laptop didn’t have MXF4QT installed.
I can definitely see the interlace artefacting you are talking about. Rendering it in FCP with a deinterlace filter applied gets rid of it of course, which raises the question, why does your 30p capture show interlace issues?
What camera are you using, I ask this because we have a HPX 3000 and there is a chance that some issues we have had lately in DVC PRO 50 mode may be the fault of the SD encoding board. Panasonic is chasing this for us.
Matthew. -
I can’t read the file, even when it is placed in a correct file structure. Can anyone else read the file?
Matthew. -
Hi Fabian,
We currently use a Quantum LTO3a for back up of all the P2 generated by our HPX 3000, as well as all project files, music, graphics, and in some instances the QT files generated through Log and Transfer.
We too have projects that have a long gestation period, a lot of these projects overlap so having separate tape drives makes tracking the project easy. It is not a fast process in comparison with HDD storage, but it certainly is much safer, as was mentioned in a previous post this means of back up has been used by other business sectors for many years. All of the backing up, and even retrieval, happens as a background event so it effects none of the editing operations, it can even be performed over a closed network from a separate computer.
At this stage we find his solution to be best for us, it offers flexibility, security, and ease of use.
Matthew. -
The thing to remember with larger capacity cards is that if you don’t offload during the day, you will have hours of transfer time at the end of the day, depending upon how you work, that can seriously eat into your beer time!!!!
How ever you approach the storage decision, make sure there is some redundancy. For that amount of time I would recommend Nate’s solution, and if you are feeling like another level of redundancy, hire an LTO drive and take that with you, with 2 or 3 tape drives. The bonus with this is that your archive is taken care of before you get to the suite. It’s also a good idea to be using verification software for the transfer, Shotput or HD Log, or any other recommended ones. When you use these software packages with multiple locations set, the transfer speed will only be as fast as your slowest drive destination. File size comparing is fastest, but file verification eases the mind.
Matthew. -
Hello Brian,
I have used three of the cameras you are considering (EX 1 and EX 3, HVX 202(PAL)) , and in many different environments and for different outcomes from major free to air TV through to low budget corporate. They have been used as stand alone cameras, and additional’s on programs shot with HPX 3000, Varicam, SD Digital Betacam, and HD Cam. I offer the following observations purely as my opinion, your own experience/opinion is something you should pursue before you commit to any of the cameras.From a hands on “operational” view, I prefer the Sony’s, particularly the EX 3. I find it the most convincing “Small format ” camera to use. Button location, “Real” viewfinder, ergonomics, all make it a good choice.
However, there are some issues with the EX XD CAM codec, if there are going to be layered effects, compositing, even basic green screen.
Transcoding will help to resolve some of the issues, but there are some imaging artifacts from long GOP that cannot be resolved. If your editing is basically cut to cut with uncomplicated visual effects, then there will be little to complain about.
Some of this may come down to editor/compositor and the choices they make, not my area really. But I’m exposed to a lot more complaining about the codec than praise.
The rolling shutter (CMOS imager) shows up strongly in most cases with strobe lighting, accompanying flash photography, fast panning, and vibration. I haven’t seen the issue too often in panning or moving the camera around, might be because of 25p/50i use, I might also have just been lucky.
I have seen it with vibration on a tracking vehicle (the wobble effect showed up, enough to make the shot look funky, but ultimately usable for the program it was used in), but mostly, and ultimately annoyingly, it shows up worst with strobe lighting.
I find the effect ugly, though I was the only one to notice it in the edit. When it was pointed out though, it became a point of contention. I’ll never use that camera again in that kind of environment.The 202 was for me awkward to use, but quite a nice picture, until it was used in low light, then the noise in under lit areas were a concern. The image quality was most satisfying in 720, I don’t like the look of the scaled 1080, but that’s a matter of opinion.
HD 100 is easy to use in FCP, as is EX XD CAM. Both are a transcode, unless you use a Quicktime rewrapping software package with the MXF files.
I have found no issues with either P2 or SxS, adapters make either one an easy format to work with.
I have never used the 202’s SD DV tape format, I doubt I ever would, so to that end the 170 makes more sense to me.
The image quality from the EX1/3 is very impressive, though it doesn’t have the same subtle registry of tonal colour as the 202, odd as it seems, I would have thought the more recent camera with “Cine Alta” processing (probably marketing glib) would have been more convincing. Once again though, I was the only one who thought so, other than the colour grader.
I found the idea of interchangeable lens’s with the EX 3 to be very attractive, though availability of lens’s to hire at the time made it a moot point.
My personal choice would be the EX 3, that’s got more to do with using it than anything else.
The big thing for you to consider with any of these camera choices is archiving the P2 or SxS cards. HDD storage is becoming a concern with some studies revealing problems with long term storage, DVD’s, Blueray, or whatever are an option, though I have experienced poor return use from DVD storage over a couple of years, let alone 10 or more.
We are trying out LTO 3a as an archive solution, and are mostly satisfied. Slow transfer speed is disappointing, but workable. Life time is the question at the moment, industry claims 30 years, but it always comes down to individual use and experience.
Just a few weeks ago we pulled a Betacam oxide tape form the library, shot in 1986, put it into the boat anchor (BVW VTR) and it played. A little ropey admittedly, but usable. Only time will tell if the newer archive formats will last the test of time.
Hope this is of some help.
Matthew.