Michael Phillips
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
That should be fine – Source ID seems correct in both instances – Did you play around with the “relink to selected” options as well to see what combination works?
-
Seeing as it was a roundtrip from MC to start, it will use the same source ID’s available to it so one has to hop they match. What I do is once I have color corrected the timeline in Resolve and rendered the files, I go back to the edit page, highlight the sequence in the timeline tab and export AAD. Not NEW AFF! But AAF. This takes the existing AAF that came in and only changes the pointers to the new media leaving all tracks and VFX In place, even if it could not interpret them. YOu will see that the sequence name will now have (Resolve) added to it.
With the rendered mediafiles in a proper MXF/ folder structure, import the AAF(Resolve) sequence and it should just link up to its own rendered media.
Only on very few occasions where conform was back to camera originals and the chance of changing REEL ID might occur that you need to do a “relink to selected” and ensure that TAPE or SOURCE FILE name is properly selected to match.
Michael
-
If you don’t have the full span of media available, then relinking it will not happen. Tape names seems to be fine. Did you render with handles in Resolve?
Michael
-
Once you’ve set the levels the way you want them, export as 709, not RGB as that will add yet another scaling operation making blacks blacker and whites whiter.
See: https://www.jobterburg.nl/Publications/601_709_RGB.pdf
Michael
-
With that out of the way, look at my other comments in using “source settings”.
Michael
-
MC 8.3 now offers different color space views of the source/record monitor and one of them takes “video 16-235 (8 bit terms) and scales it to 0-255 as one of the settings. You can also look to source settings when AMA linking to the files and go to to the color tab and there you can manipulate the range or add a LUT to get proper display.
Another variable in all of this is that QuickTime X is not the best tool to judge by as it tries to make things look good rather than correct and will do its own manipulation of color. There are many many threads that speak to the QuickTime gamma issues out on the Internet.
Ultimately, MC is a Rec709 editing system at heart (slowly changing) so a properly calibrated HD monitor with I/O is going to be your real viewing canvas (not to mention scopes).
How does this same file compare when opened in Resolve?
Michael
-
The resize algorithm may have added some high frequency artifacts that could appear as”noise” or “grain”. Did toy have better down sampling checked? I also wonder if MPEG Streamclip decodes greater than 2K as well as it should, perhaps it does. I would try with something like Resolve directly to MXF/DNxHD to see if there is any difference. I don’t have any sample 4K LUMIX to try myself, but if you had a file you can spare that shows the artifacting, I’ll be willing to play with it to see what’s going on. Use yousendit.com or filemail.com and email to me at michael[at]24p[dot]com
Michael
-
[philip coccioletti] “Its a shame they are MXF files which avid creates and you just can’t drag them into any bin.”
While they share the same .mxf extension, they are not the same file type. Avid’s native MXF wrapper is OPAtom where each essence tracks is a separate file (video, audio 1, audio 2, etc.). Cameras tend to use OPAtom 1a which is one file for all tracks. Then there is a codec difference inside the wrapper. Avid supports several codecs as native, but not this one. DNxHD and DNxHR being the “most” native” as they are optimized by Avid for MC and shared storage systems.
Michael
-
I got it that to work for me on Win 7 with v8.3. Highlight take and line (cross section) on the scipt. Then find position in clipwhen loaded in source monitor. You need to add a Mark IN then click the “Add Script Mark” in order for it to work. No Mark In, no worky.
Michael
-
I would go 720p/29.97 if possible to match frame rate and still have a full progressive frame which will scale better quality wise with no motion artifacts.
If it’s 720p/59.94 or 1080i/59.94. then it’s more of a toss-up. You will have blended frames if you keep all 59.94, or you lose 1/2 motion resolution by de-interlacing or keeping every other progressive frame. So you choose between scaling on the horizontal with the 1080i, or a full progessive resize… eeehhhh…. it’s a close one.
Michael