Michael Gissing
195
COW Coins
190
DaVinci Coins
3
Solve Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
[Jonathan Clauson] “If I am totally wrong about duck, let me know. :-)”
https://www.automaticduck.com/products/pifcp/
No mention of Vegas specifically but AAF import from AVID is mentioned
-
I would seek clarification. Those specs mention 4:3 aspect ration, but all SD is 4:3. You can achieve 16:9 either with letterbox or anamorphic.
Before you throw away 40% of your frame area by letterboxing, find out if that is what they want, or if it is anamorphic. They may also want center punched 4:3 from the 16:9 so ask what the broadcaster actually wants and expects.
-
Richard, I agree that mastering levels up to 0dbfs will improve dynamic range. It will also lower distortion as digital is inversely proportional between THD and levels to analog recording. The fact that broadcasters insist on digital levels only peaking to -10dbfs has its history in the fact that Sony digital machines from day one made -20dbfs = 0 VU so in the analog domain, levels peaking to 0dbfs were the equivalent in analog of +24db which would distort the front end of practically all broadcast analog routing systems and the front end of a lot of analog mixers.
However, in 24 bit files you have (theoretically) 120 db dynamic range so reducing that by 10db still gives you a huge dynamic to work with. In 16 bit it reduces the dynamic range to 80db. Typically feature films use no more than 40-50 db dynamic range and broadcast programs would rarely use 30db dynamic range. So in practical terms it makes no real difference.
You can use whatever levels you like but as you know, there is nothing but pain once you peak past 0dbfs and your final product, if broadcast, will have to peak to -10dbfs anyway. All VOs recorded here use mild compression on record an peak to around -10dbfs.
-
During playback, the Dat was just playing true speed, referencing its sample rate to crystal sync. If the camera was shooting 30fps (29.97?) then the audio when captured as an aif file will sync to the 29.97fps image without any problems as they both are ‘real time’ and simply replicating what happened on location.
So edit in 29.97 and the audio should sync. Frame rates are not real with digital audio. They reference to sample rates. Timecode can be added but the underlying sync is based around 48khz and true speed in playback.
You should also expect the location people who made the fundamental mistake to contribute to the cost of the Teranex conversion. There are so many posts here about location crews stuffing up frame rates. This is always a problem for post where fixing it gets expensive. It is so simple to get right on location so make them pay and learn.
-
What codec/camera did you shoot with and how is it getting into FCP.It may be as simple as setting the flag on each clip as upper. Try changing the field settings to upper on one clip and dragging it into a new sequence to see if the render bar goes away and the footage plays nicely.
HD 1080 is often in an interlaced form, even if the content was shot progressive. This is commonly referred to as psf. If you are delivering to a broadcaster they will be expecting an interlaced master.
Interlaced HD is upper with all frame rates.
-
Apart from finding a codec that both systems are happy with, the process of transfering sequence info was discussed here recently. You could search the forum for that but my recollection was that Vegas>AAF>Automatic Duck>FCP was considered the only way.
I have sucessfully imported from AVID to FCP using Automatic Duck, but I have no idea if that works with a Vegas AAF. AAF is supposed to be a standard interchange, but it has been developed by the same people who originally did OMF, so I have my doubts that it is totally solid.
-
The sensor is 16:9 but the image is then squeezed anamorphic to record as a 4:3 digital signal in SD. Have a look in FCP at a SD sequence and you will see that selecting anamorphic changes only the display in FCP. The frame size remains 720 x 576 as you are PAL.
HD is true 16:9 square pixel.
-
As I said, standard def frame sizes are 4:3. In PAL that means 720 x 576 pixels and in NTSC 720 x 480. There are two ways to get 16:9 framing inside that 4:3 frame. Either crop top and bottom (usually called letterboxing) or squeeze the image (usually called anamorphic or rectangular pixel).
When SD is broadcast or put on a DVD, the TV can stretch the image horizontally to create a corrected 16:9 image from the anamorphic 4:3 original. On a computer media player you either have to tell the player to display 16:9 or hope that it might correctly resize by reading the anamorphic flag in the file. As this is not reliable and subject to peoples individual settings in the computer, it is safer to create the computer file in true 16:9 by rendering the horizontal stretch.
Does that make more sense?
-
A common misunderstanding of SD video is that 16:9 is a cheat achieved by anamorphic squeeze of the pixels. If you are using SD anamorphic frame sizes then that is why you should expect a quicktime movie export to maintain the 4:3 ratio unless you manually adjust the frame size. Quicktime player should correct but it may not and should not be relied on.
Rather than wonder if other media players will correctly read an anamorphic flag and stretch the image back out like a 16:9 TV does, try exporting and setting a 16:9 frame size.
In PAL that means exporting 1024 x 576 instead of the anamorphic 720 x 576.
In NTSC I think it is 840 x 480.
-
What version of FCP are you running? People have reported here recently that they have had problems with FCP 7.0.2 (I think) and closing gaps, so try a search.