Rafael Amador
Forum Replies Created
-
[Ignacio Holiday] “I’m new to Final Cut Pro X, and I’m trying to convert some .mov footage for editing”
FCPX don’t need any kind of conversion.
Accepts everykind of h264, mp4, avchd, mts, etc native.
rafael -
I guess you are on a lap-top, so you have no “home”, no “end”.
Click the “fn” key and leftarrow or righ-arrow to go to the beginning or the end of the sequence.
rafael -
-
[Geoff McKay] “Anything over 4 gig, will usually have to be split up, or your memory stick or card won’t swallow it in one bite.”
Yes.
that is the big shortcoming of the FAT-32 format.[Geoff McKay] ” I was able to put a reasonable file together, but they didn’t receive it in time, so the low res version went up on the screen.”
Don’t worry. Next time you’ll get it right from the beginning.
rafael -
Hi Alexander,
I ran my tests long ago (FC, Compressor, Purifier, SHAKE), and I can’t remember wich position scored Purifier.
SHAKE beat by far all of them and didn’t make further test. I stick with SHAKE for every single up/downscale. In fact nowadays I only use it for that.
rafael -
Again.
The L&T Plugin worth nothing if you don’t update your FC version.
The codec is on FC, not on the SONY software.
rafael -
[Keith Betts] ” shot with the XDCam EX 720p30 codec. Using Final Cut 6.0.1″
XDCAM is supported from FC.6.2 on.
Update!!
rafael -
[Steve Eisen] “[Rafael Amador] “That should be OK for 3 threads.”
Not ProRes HQ!”
You are right Steve.
The fact is that 100MB/s (800Mbps) is the equivalent to some 5 threads of ProresHQ, but is not the same to be reading a single file than three different files (located in three different places of the HD) at the same time.
I mean that being able to read 100MB/s doesn’t mean to be able to read 3 x 33MB/s.
rafael -
[Michael Sanders] “So does the fact that no one has jumped en masse means its rubbish?
No. How long did it take FCP legacy to get a decent foot hold in broadcast? Well about 3 or four years if not more. “
That’s a very old argument.
You can’t compare the early years of FCP with the early years of FPCX.FCP was launched by an (at that time) small company in economics troubles called Apple and based on a platform with , at the time, uncertain future, and the market was in the hand of a powerful competence. Digital Video was on is early steps and Internet was not on the pockets of millions neither Apple in the mouth of billions. The expansion of FCP was basically from users to users.
FCP in the beginning was less operative than FCPX, but succeeded because convinced and because was a no-brainer to start to edit with. Even for people without any previous experience on video editing. You didn’t need to wrap your mind around nothing, Anybody that had seen a piece of celluloid in his live would catch the “paradigma” at first sight.
The main difference between FCP and FCPX, is that Apple developed FCP with the editors in mind and has developed FCPX with Apple in mind.
rafael -
[Bryan Mailer] “1. Any Output Specs I should be targeting here, with these goals?”
If you are editing in prores, export your master in Prores (1920×1080). For delivering, web videos, H264.[Bryan Mailer] “will end up presumably as 1920×1080 with black on the sides”
In the link on this post you will find the way to crop on upscaling, making a 16×9 picture (no black sides).
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/8/1168199[Bryan Mailer] “2A. If deinterlacing should happen, at what point in the process?”
Answer on your previous post.[Bryan Mailer] “3. Best Sequence Settings for working with the upscaled footage?
– The instructions I have seen tend to suggest converting to “HD” at ProRes422 (ordinary ProRes). I would naturally let FCP set the sequence settings to match the footage, but with my intended deliverable (HDTV / Festival Projection) are any settings in particular ideal?”
As the first answer. Master in Prores and then see which are the request of any festival you want to send your movie.[Bryan Mailer] “4. Is there any reason in particular that I would want to consider “720 HD” rather than 1920×1080, other than the fact that less upscaling is involved?”
Sure.
The smaller the upscale, the less quality you will lose on the process.
If you can go 1280×720 instead of 1920×1080, don’t hesitate one second.
Not sure. I would make some tests.
rafael[Bryan Mailer] “5. Smoothcam / Stabilize filters before vs. after De-Interlacing? “