Michael Griggs
Forum Replies Created
-
Command+Tab will switch between apps (e.g. Finder and Resolve) without having to move a window. You could also set up OS X’s Spaces and keep Finder in one space and Resolve in another. I find this method very helpful for keeping different “desks” spatially organized for each program.
-
According to the manual, speed change effects (as in ramps) are not supported. The entire clip has to be one speed (be it faster, slower, etc.) for it to translate.
Having used the export-the-entire-sequence-as-one-file method, I agree, Clunky to say the least…especially if/when anything beside straight cuts are used. Obviously you can still get away with keyframing for dissolves and such, but if there are any “special” (read: third party plug-in) transitions, that would make things MUCH more difficult.
The next project I get that comes from Premier, I’m gonna try using xml to bring it into FCP7 first; then round trip from there. (Had plenty of success running projects through Legacy.) At least I won’t have to keyframe all the dissolve transitions again…not to mention the fun of trying to scene detect and split a 90 minute feature…..
-
[Glen Hurd] “Showing up with an F65 and doing nothing isn’t realistic. Is it Gary? Is it Jeremy? Is it anyone else?
So why did they do it? “Glen, I hear what you’re saying, and, for the most part, I agree with your main points. But I think there’s a flip side to what you’re saying….
There are plenty of shooting situations that would greatly benefit from using a cinema camera (maybe not like the Alexa, but certainly something in the $8k-$20K range) that don’t have a lot of time to work on lighting. Specifically, in certain types of docu style interviews on location (think hospital patients, or doctors in their office), there is not a lot of leeway for time to set up a lot of “extra” lighting, if for no other reason than the interviewee does not have a lot of time to dedicate to the process in the first place.
[Glen Hurd] “The topdogs were distracted by the nature of a shoot-out and didn’t think it would demonstrate their camera’s prowress if they spent the same time lighting and improving the scene for their cameras as they would have during a real production. “
I think the fact that they WERE able to spend “less” time setting up/fiddling with lighting is one the main takeaways (for me at least) from this shootout.
[Glen Hurd] “I make that statement because I believe that bring an F65, an Alexa, an Epic would always be a better choice than bringing a GH2 to a shoot (unless space or danger were an issue), and yet you would still WANT to light your scene to improve produciton value, wouldn’t you?”
Yes, obviously the more time and effort spent in improving lighting will have an impact on production values….But I also think that there’s a bit of a threshold to that improvement, in that sometimes there are such drastic time constraints (especially when shooting on location) that SOMETIMES “good enough” actually has to BE good enough. For me, knowing that my camera selection could actually handle a “good enough” situation (and what that threshold of “good enough” qualifies as) would be a huge benefit. And I think that, if nothing else, the shootout proves that. So I certainly wouldn’t consider it a “weakness”.
-
Though it could also be noted that those of us who are limited using “cheaper” cameras have No Excuse for poor material! 🙂
….I mean….. Can still produce quality work…. yeah… that’s what I meant.
😉
-
[gary adcock] “I on the other hand think this is a business and in business using the tools that allow faster turnaround between shots and less time processing in post, allow for greater financial contrstraint ( as well as greater risk) with a historically greater chance for success ( or financial gain)”
I think Gary really sums it up.
If using a “nicer” camera allows for significantly more latitude of time and options in both production and post, it would seem that the offset of the higher cost can certainly be regained.
-
Check out Walt Biscardi’s Article on this…..very enlightening.
https://magazine.creativecow.net/article/a-cautionary-tale-for-the-fcp-switcher
The quick version: you’re gonna hafta export a master file and cut it up in Resolve.
-
Not sure about doing anything from in Resolve, but it does sound like a job for FCP Media Manager… Just recompress the timeline you were trying to grade and reconnect via xml like you said…Should solve your problem.
-
I just did that exact thing yesterday… it seemed to work quite well to dial the color to the look I wanted for the subject, then just append one more node with a desaturate highlights lum vs. sat curve.
I certainly felt like I had plenty of control with this method, and it mixed perfectly with “pure white” background composite shots.
-
My biggest take away is that it’s one more thing that Apple is “deciding” for the editor….
-
So I’m having the same issue….split a master ProRes 4444 and I’m working from the master session….
Certain clips didn’t get split when they should have. shouldn’t be a problem….
Got to Conform page, *split clips*ooops…I was 1 frame to soon! Ok, I’ll just join the clips agaiin..
I get back “Unable to join because the two clips do not share the same master file”
If it was split from the same master file in the first place, how do I make this work?