[Paul Curtis]

I understand, the Aja seemed more expensive that the DeckLink Displayport box that BMD now do, the DeckLink external box takes SDI and converts it to displayport to 4:4:4 RGB. My thinking was that i can have this external box doing the conversion. I can feed it with a simple SDI card (only 4:2:2) from the PC and perhaps use a thunderbolt SDI for the Mac, so both SDI’s can feed into the DeckLink for monitoring.

On the other hand the deck link extreme 3D PCIe card will do 4:4:4 directly but even so, the above solution is cheaper and does allow for me to find a 4:4:4 solution at a future point if i decide that the proposed set up isn’t good enough. The external box also supports a LUT so might be useful for onset monitoring at some point.

thanks
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

I think the DeckLink route is cheaper overall. Plus you’re never going to convert 4:2:2 to 4:4:4 anyway? I will investigate further though..

thanks
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

Peter, thank you.

Looks like i’m going to run the DC through a BM SDI, then HDLink to display port. As i understand it the DC needs RGB and all the SDI solutions from BM are YUV, hence the HDLink convertor.

AFAIK SDI is only 4:2:2, for 4:4:4 i would need 3G SDI and there aren’t many reasonable options there (that don’t take up precious PCI slots). Although i keep looking.

You mention the 570GTX but how about the newer cards? 670 has many more cores and lower power requirements – are these not compatible with Resolve?

Would i be better off with geforce cards and not quadro then?

thanks
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

Peter, thank you for such a quick response. A couple of clarifications please!

The 3D was for 3D vfx work, not stereoscopic work.

Why is the quadro required for the UI GPU, out of curiosity?

So i could get away with a single 4000 card to start with, and it *will* use the CUDA on the 4000 but it won’t be as good as dedicating a separate card, am i correct?

Yes the dreamcolor is grading only, i have other monitors for UI work. I presume it’s fed separately from a video source for accuracy and frame rate syncing reasons. But if it was hanging off the quadros display port as a normal windows second monitor would i see colour accurate work on it? Or could i point resolve to use it as the output monitor?

thanks
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

An awful lot of real world REC709 accommodates extended range, i find it odd that FCP X will show you the range but not let you get it out. This is from original media so there has been no transcoding. I don’t see why an OpenEXR frame (Export Frame) would not include it all! At least a check box option.

Of course if FCP X had an eye dropper i wouldn’t need to export the frame!

I know Mac OS X has the system eye dropper but i presume it’s reading off the LCD data so i don’t know how accurate it is…

cheers
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

Andy,

Thanks. I managed to work out that i could slip the video without it affecting other edits but the tip on connecting the audio in the main timeline was a good one. Saved me a little head scratching!

cheers
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

Sadly that wasn’t possible as prior to the session the track didn’t exist. Yes, i know it’s not ideal but that’s what i’m left with.

I can strip the finalised audio track separately no problem, but how do I slip the video in a multi cam set up?

i.e. so i have one multi cam track where i’m bouncing between angles, but in one of the angles i want to nudge the video within the multi cam edit back and forth a bit. I’ve not been able to work out how to do this?

thanks
paul

[Paul Curtis]

Brian

That’s really odd. I set up a bare bones project to test

1) Camera static, fast moving POV key framed

a) Add a solid – it’s motion blurred as expected
b) Change solid to an image comp – blurred as expected
c) Project from a light onto the solid – no blur except the edges

So you’re seeing blur with c)?

What version of AE are you using, i’m on CS5 still

thanks
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

Actually just to add to this.

It appears that when you project through a light onto a solid (camera projection), the outer shape of the solid will blur but the projected image inside will NOT blur.

The source projecting layer will blur if i look at it.

I assume this sounds like a bug to me. I’m on CS5 still, i wonder if anyone has CS5.5 and can confirm or deny whether it’s been fixed?

thanks
Paul

[Paul Curtis]

Brian

Yep, that’s all on.

So you think that if you animate the point of interest for a camera view then i should see motion blur for it? Even though the camera itself isn’t moving?

thanks
Paul