Mike Most
Forum Replies Created
-
>>But figure out a way to meet those needs for less and you can have it all!
Not unless you also happen to have the experience and talent of Stefan Sonnenfeld, Siggy Fersti, or any of the other guys over at Company 3.
Seriously, anyone who thinks it’s all about creature comforts hasn’t spent any time in a room with a colorist of that calibre. Because if you have, it’s pretty obvious that it’s NOT about those things. Creature comforts, and, as you say, things like security, location, all of those things play a part. But they’re not the sole reasons.
-
You need to load the source clip into the Media Pool, set the starting time code to match the EDL, then go to the Conform page and select Preconform. Point to your EDL and it should do what you want.
This is all explained in the user’s manual.
-
Anything new to report in terms of support? DaVinci Resolve, for instance?
-
If that sounded personal, I apologize. It’s just that if you read many if not most of the threads here, it’s often about that. The main point of my post was that people want the program to be something it was never designed to be. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but there should be some understanding that a user’s goals aren’t always the same as the developer’s, and that comments like “it should have been in there from the beginning” can sometimes reveal not only a lack of knowledge about the program’s history, but also a personal redefinition of what the program is, one which may or may not be in line with the developer’s intent and/or their intended audience. I’m sure Blackmagic would ultimately like to extend the usefulness of the program, but Resolve was originally designed to be essentially a digital 2K, and at a time when “file based cameras” didn’t even exist. The entire focus of the program is and always has been color grading. “The beginning” was way back around 2004, before Reds, Alexas, F3’s, and even Genesis – which recorded to tape. Today, there seem to be growing groups of users who want Resolve to be an Avid, others who want it to be a Colorfront, still others who want it to be Final Cut or Scratch, and others who want it to be 3CP. Except that it is none of those things.
Telling a developer your vision of what their product can be is one thing, and often a very useful one. Chiding them for not having made it something it was never intended to be is a bit unfair. That may still sound a bit harsh, but I think it’s generally true.
-
I would point out that using Resolve for creating editorial dailies is something users are doing, but neither Blackmagic nor DaVinci before them has ever stated or even implied that Resolve is a dailies system. It is a grading system for finishing, and although it has been greatly enhanced to do other things, saying that something “should have” been included that has little to nothing to do with the actual product design or intent is a rather self serving statement. Things are what they are, not what you might want them to be. Saying Resolve is a dailies system because some people are using it for that doesn’t make it so. A true dailies creation system is much more concerned with metadata creation and retention, accurate sound sync, multiple deliverables creation, and overall workflow efficiency than it is about color correction. If you look at programs and devices specifically targeted at that – I would suggest that both Colorfront and Scratch Lab are in that category – they are quite different in terms of their focus and their feature set than a dedicated color grader like Resolve.
Now, having said all that, Blackmagic is of course free to add those things, and quite possibly will. But to imply that they should already be there is probably more an indication of what you want for free than it is what the program was actually developed to be.
-
When using a Decklink card with MC6, the audio is sent out embedded with the video on the SDI feed. It should also be available from the audio outputs of the Decklink card. It will not be available on the computer’s line outputs.
-
No, it’s not buggy and it works quite well for many of us. Start with the basics. Go back to the Avid bin that has the master clips in your sequence and look at the tape names. Now come up with a way, using the conform options, to get those names for the clips in your media pool. Bring all of the clips into the media pool before loading the AAF, and deselect the option to automatically add the clips. Once you’re sure that the tape names are correct (you can see them in the Reel ID column in the Media Pool), and you’ve tried what I’ve suggested, come back if you’re still having problems.
-
Both. But I would also say that neither one is particularly involved or time consuming…..
-
Interesting. I actually had a very similar problem about two weeks ago, where I was handed a project without the original MXF media and an AAF that they had generated. Unfortunately, they had generated it without having the “use AAF edit protocol” selected (as I had told them to do, but they conveniently ignored what I told them) and when trying to do a roundtrip back to Avid, most of the shots had to be slipped for proper sync. So as an experiment I tried making a new AAF and, like you, it wasn’t able to relink to any new source clips.
My guess is that this is an Avid issue – either a problem or a condition, depends on how you look at it. When the AAF is created, it’s probably using metadata that is not available unless the media is on line. AAF’s use information like frame offsets that may not be available if the media isn’t. So although the AAF doesn’t require any of the source media when relinking to alternative source media (like the original camera files), creating it does require information that is not available when source media is not present and linked. Remember that AAF is a file format that includes the option of embedded media, so it’s a rich container that might require information that comes directly from the media at creation time. That’s my guess, anyway. So my conclusion is that this is not really a DaVinci problem, it’s simply a condition of how AAF’s are generated.
-
Hmmm. Did you try decomposing prior to making the AAF without the source clips? That might re-establish needed metadata on a per-clip basis so that the AAF can properly identify its sources.