Oliver Peters
2
Apple Final Cut Pro X Coins
6
Avid Coins
17
COW Coins
1
DaVinci Coin
1
Premiere Pro Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
Here’s some reading that might help get you up to speed.
https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2009/04/16/what’s-wrong-with-this-picture/
Let me try to quickly answer your questions. However, it won’t be short. ☺
Video can be interlaced scan (“i”) or progressive scan (“p”), which goes back to how the image is displayed on a TV or monitor. Older CRT-based TV sets were interlaced, but modern flat panels are progressive. Broadcast SD TV transmission was interlaced, but broadcast HD transmission is both interlaced and/or progressive, depending on the standard used.
In broadcast displays and TVs, the image is display in scanlines. Interlaced divides the whole frame into 2 fields, where each field has half of the scan lines that are typically offset in time. The scanlines alternate vertically between field 1 and field 2. So in NTSC, you have 60 fields/30 interlaced frames within a second, with motion accuracy of 1/60th of a second.
A progressive frame contains the complete information for that frame. In NTSC there are 30 progressive frames with motion accuracy of 1/30th of a second. “FPS” can stand for “fields per second” or “frames per second” depending on the context. The one exception to all of this is the 720p HD standard where frame size is 1280 x 720 and frame rate is 60 progressive frames per second. No broadcast transmission goes higher, so there is no 120fps in broadcast or streaming services (yet).
It is not 23.94, but rather 23.976 – also abbreviated to 23.98. Both are rounded values for a much longer decimal number. True 24fps is generally denoted as 24.0 these days and usually that only applies to true film acquisition and theatrical projection. Because the NTSC TV frequency syncs to 59.94Hz and not to 60Hz, video production uses an offset rate. 29.97 instead of a true 30 and 23.976 instead of a true 24.0.
Film capture is inherently progressive. When all TV transmission was interlaced, 24.0 “progressive” film was transferred at a slightly slower rate (23.976) and converted to 29.97i (60 field per second) using a method called 3:2 pulldown. Once HD and more modern flat panels became the norm, it was possible to work in and display true 23.976p content and to deliver masters and distribution copies in this standard. So we were able to dump the whole interlaced and pulldown methodology.
The PAL color standard was developed later than NTSC and could learn from some of the issues. PAL standards are 25fps (50 fields/25 interlaced frames or 25 progressive frames), synced to a frequency of 50Hz. So 24.0 film was transferred faster at 25fps or PAL used its own particular version of pulldown.
So 23.976, 24.0, 25.0, 29.97, 30.0, 59.94, and 60.0 are all completely different and distinct frame rates. When you mix these standards something is invariably done to the footage to conform it to your base or timeline format. Frames may be repeated or the footage slowed or sped up depending what the source and target rates are and what process you are applying.
Most professional production cameras do not shoot at 120fps with the intent of that being the playback rate. Generally it’s used for slow motion effects. You shoot at 120, but play/edit/deliver at 23.976. Same as shooting high frame rates on film. That sort of thing.
If you are delivering to YouTube, generally upload an H.264 or H.265 codec wrapped in a .mov or .mp4 container.
I hope that all of this helps clear things up.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Michael Gissing] “The limiting thing with layers in Color was getting the order right”
And, of course, its 2K resolution limit.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
I work with Resolve on a regular basis and IMHO, it’s still pretty rough around the edges as an NLE. Plus there are tons of gotchas buried in its complexity. For example, I hit a really weird one today, which was that some Alexa clips would get blown up by about 300% or more when I played or scrubbed the source clip or the timeline. Turned out to be an optimization setting in preferences. Automatic (the default) wasn’t working right, so switching to manual and turning off one option fixed it. That cost me a couple of hours. Naturally every NLE may cause a bad day like that, but things like that can really can you.
But more on-topic and related to your question, from what I can tell, implementing nodes in FCPX might pose some issues with the UI. I believe the developer’s background involves experience with Filmlight (Baselight) systems, which also don’t use nodes. So it might simply be a preference issue. I haven’t stacked layers too terribly deep, but I don’t think there’s a limit, except in what the GPU will handle. It’s probably also an issue of where they are placed.
In this video, I used several layers on each clip and then an adjustment layer on top of that. The adjustment layer also had CF2Pro applied and it also had several layers. So then as an experiment I compounded the clip and added yet another instance on top (last section of the video), which included a Koji film stock LUT. I tried the same thing with one of their presets, which consist of several layers within each preset. At that point the 2013 Mac Pro’s GPUs started flaking out. I don’t think it did that because of the number of layers, but rather because of the convoluted video pipeline I had created.
The comment about Color was partially layers and partially quality of the look. I always found Color’s layer methods to be very fast – faster, in fact, than copy/pasting specific nodes in Resolve. I also liked the grade I got there. In fact, I’ve had to work on a sequel where the original was graded in Color and the sequel in Resolve. There were certain stylized looks I had done in Color that I simply could not match in Resolve.
I do find that Resolve is good for really digging in and grading a shot within an inch of its life, but it’s also a bit harsh for my taste at times. Subjective, I know, but that’s why I feel like the look I got out of Color – and to some extent in Color Finale – gives me a more pleasing result.
Nevertheless, I’m happy to grade in either depending on the job.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Some wacky testing of the XDR display with a wide range of machines.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
Max Yuryev’s review of Apple’s Afterburner
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
OWC SSD
– Oliver
Oliver Peters | oliverpeters.com
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Herb Sevush] “Here is a link to a PC workstation designed for video:”
I reviewed one of their units:
https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2019/04/03/are-you-ready-for-a-custom-pc/
Very impressive and very quiet. If you are mainly working in Premiere or After Effects (or Avid for that matter), I would dare say this gives you a lot more bang for the bucks.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Apple upgrade info
https://www.youtube.com/embed/RAC9NPSYzCk?feature=oembed
https://www.youtube.com/embed/YUIt-YrFOKw?feature=oembed
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT210570
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210228
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210408
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Seems like a very realistic point of view. Must have good business to be able to drop $6K just to see how it works ☺
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
There’s always this Mac Mini Kickstarter project ☺
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com