Mauricio Lleras
Forum Replies Created
-
[Mauricio Lleras] “when you finish typing press enter to confirm the name”
Or alternately Shift Tab one time to confirm the name and then Shift Tab again to go back to the clip,
I’m not in front of the machine so I can’t recall precisely, maybe both work -
This.
Plus when you finish typing press enter to confirm the name and then hit Shift + Tab
to return to the clip and continue logging.
When you’re done with your last favorite Shift Tab to return to the clip then down arrow
to go to the next one.
Btw, all of this can be done without even stopping playback
if you can/want to go fast like that! -
Hey Trevor,
as you must know by now, FCPX will only take in properly op1A mxf,
as opposed to op-atom mxf which is the format used by the avid.
Your question got me interested so I did a quick search
as it seems you’ll really want some 3rd party app
to do a conversion between the two formats
and found this:
https://www.mog-technologies.com/solutions/developments-tools/mxftools/
Seems the mxf component suite has tools for rewrapping op-atom mxf into op1a,
and maybe also for advanced metadata handling.
The price is not mentioned though,
so you’ll have to write them to get more info.Hope it helps,
keep us posted on your findings! -
Hello again to all,
my apologies if I was absent,
as I said I live in Paris
and as you may guess things here these past few days
have been difficult, so I hadn’t been really available.Great input from everybody on this topic,
thanks a lot!
Especially interested by the perceived gains
Mitch, Michael, Jim and others have noticed
in capturing low res SD through SDI to a 422 10 bit codec
such as Prores 422.
While I don’t know if I’ll be able to use this method
– we do have a sony deck that outputs SDI,
but the card the guy has has no SDI IN
and I don’t know if he would invest in a different one,
knowing that budget is an issue-
I would be interested in hearing your thoughts
on using Prores LT as opposed to Prores422,
thinking of course about saving some space,
but also the question being,
what, in this case, and having in mind what Bill and Adam said,
would be the gain in going Prores422 over LT,
if LT is already 10 bit 422, captured also through SDI,
what would the extra bits/space bring, if anything?
And keeping in mind that ProresLT’s bitrate is almost identical to DV’s
in SD formats…
I know we’re probably talking about some very minute details here,
but would be interested in your answers all the same!
Could anybody eventually do a quick test to provide feedback?
Anyway, interesting stuff, very glad to have started
this discussion here, thanks again. -
[Michael Gissing] “I am doing a 23.976 progressive feature doco at the moment with lots of archive from DV codec and the fields order issue is a nightmare.”
Michael,
if I understand you correctly you’ve had
lots of problems with DV mainly
because you’re mixing it with other codecs
that have upper field priority, right?
I could really see the trouble there…
But would you still recommend staying away from DV
if all material was the same?
I remember editing that way a long while ago
and don’t recall any issues…
I’m asking because I got the chance to talk some more
to the director and it seems that after all
almost everything is on DV PAL,
most HI8 having been transferred to DV many years ago.
So I would be tempted to stay on DV,
although I know for grading Prores would still be better.
What would you say about going Prores LT
if I should transcode?
It’s the same bitrate for SD as DV but I would gain
10 bit and 4:2:2 sampling, so I’m guessing it would be fine,
although I still wonder if it wouldn’t be better going Prores 422,
but that would entail a lot more storage space…
Thoughts?
Also, the blackmagic card he has has no SDI,
so I don’ know yet if blackmagic’s software will
change field priority when ingesting/transcoding to Prores,
will ask them… -
Hello again, sorry, been busy…
Bill, thanks for the input,
but I tend to agree with the others
as to codecs:[Bill Davis] “Adam explained that AFTER the hit to analog VHS or DV25 – digital encoding has little preservable data left that warrants using a beefier codec for storage”
Even though this is most certainly true, and you will not gain
any quality on your original image by going with a larger/better codec
such as Prores, what you WILL gain is more latitude
for grading, meaning 10bit space and 4:2:2 chroma sampling
will give you the possibility to grade in a smoother way,
even if of course you won’t be getting back info
that was lost already from the beginning…
So if you won’t be grading the footage it’s
probably just about the same, but if you do
better codecs will probably yield better results,
at least they should, as I say this without having done proper testing.
Also, I agree with Michael that although handling
of H.264 files has gotten a lot better over the years,
having long timelines full of them is a good recipe for major headaches.
As far as using them for archiving it may very well be a very sensible solution. -
Bill,
some good tips in your post
that might come handy, who knows!
Glad to see you’ve worked most of your issues,
and reassuring to see it’s working well for you,
although who doesn’t know that
(been reading this forum probably since the beginning 😉[Bill Davis] “This is the EXACTLY the same “learning curve” I’ve confronted in every single software program I’ve ever used.”
Agreed, all software has it’s quirks and it’s particular ways
of handling things that you need to iron out over the years.
It may well be as you say
that a lot of the issues mentioned on this and other sites
have to do with specific workflows were there might be
offending elements (weird clips, slow effects, bad installs, etc…)
that go unnoticed rather than actual problems with the software itself.
It’s just that I’ve also seen reports from people claiming
they had problems on specced out machines
with clean OS installs and everything,
so that makes you wonder,
but of course you can never know what
their project or workflow contains…
Overall it seems to be reassuring though,
and I’ll try to do the cleanest setup
I can with what I am given and then do some testing. -
[Steve Connor] “It does OK with big projects, it does struggle with long timelines”
So Steve,
what are you seeing on your end?
How does it struggle specifically?
On what kind of material/project?
Have you found solutions on your problems
as Bill has for many of his? -
[Robin S. Kurz] “[Steve Connor] “it does struggle with long timelines”
How do you define “long”. My current timeline is around 1:40:00 at the moment and growing, coming from an event with around 40hrs. of material and I have no (speed) issues whatsoever.
“This is precisely the kind of interchange that worries me
and has kept me watching X grow at a distance,
as it seems it will behave very well for some
and kind of badly for others,
and from what I’ve read and seen firsthand also
it seems that X’s performance issues
are independent of hardware configurations,
as it may behave great or poorly on similar
top of the line new mac pros for instance.
It seems like kind of a hit and miss thing,
although I’m also aware that some of those
performance issues are far from deal breakers
as usually people will still get the job done
and manage them with simple solutions like
quitting the app every now and then
or keeping the inspector closed and all waveforms
off when not absolutely needed.
I will of course test it on the machine
I get assigned to work with as soon as I can.
Still, I have to say performance is a big deal for me,
and I don’t mean performance on fast renders
but more like having very fluid basic operations
in the timeline, like having an immediate
response when hitting play/stop,
going from/to next/previous edits or
properly displaying frames when fast forwarding…
I name these as I have seen issues like this and more with FCPX
working with simple light footage (xdcam HD422)
or even prores HQ, on systems on which FCP7
behaved better with the exact same footage…
So Robin, for instance,
you say you don’t have any of these issues at all?
Also, I’m not talking about bugs,
as those are expected from any program
there is or probably will ever be… -
Thanks to all for your answers.
It’s a pity though that few of them addressed directly my initial questions,
so I’ll sum them up again in hope someone wants to chime in.
– How are you finding FCPX’s general performance
with longer projects these days? This worries me the most,
as I’ve seen a lot of mixed feelings about this.
– Has anybody had any issues working with SD material in FCPX?
If so, what were they?
– Has anybody used Media Express for capturing
and then going to FCPX? Any recommendations
for logging or tips for getting the most out of the app?
Or would you feel a more sensible workflow
would be to go with an NLE that can capture from tape?
Avid? Premiere? What are your preferences?
I for one have done a lot of these workflows with FCP7
so it would be an easy way for me,
but would really like to try FCPX.
I’m thinking capturing and doing a first level of organizing
inside FCP7 and then sending an xml of the whole project
through 7toX might be an interesting option,
so I’d get bins and notes logged during capture
translated into FCPX.
That would be fine if we proceed to capture all the material from the beginning,
as opposed to bits here and there…
I also ask about Premiere because I have yet to try it
but been following it also and getting a pretty good impression so far.Again, looking for thoughts from people having had similar workflows.
I’m not particularly worried,
I think it will be pretty straightforward
regardless of the NLE I choose in the end,
just wanted to get a general feel
of what people thought on using FCPX in a project like this one.Thanks again!