Ron Craig
Forum Replies Created
-
Leaving the playhead where you left it seems like the most logical behavior to me.
I agree with this point of view with regards to clips that you are working on in the timeline and choose to move to the viewer. But that’s not what my initial comment was about.
We all work differently — something that is well illuminated in this discussion — but in my workflow when I move a clip from a bin (NOT from the timeline) to the Viewer I would like the playhead to be in a useful position. For me, personally, that’s the head of the clip. And no matter how you work, I have to believe that the end-of-clip positioning of the playhead is useless in the Viewer. On the other hand, if your workflow causes you to work with your clips for a while and then “store” them back in a bin with a playhead position carefully chosen, then the FCP default obviously works for you. My guess is that most editors don’t work that way, making the current default sub-optimal.
-
Well, that is informative. Thanks for that. But I still think it’s not optimal programming. When clips are selected and placed in a bin, it’s typical that the inpoint is selected first and then the outpoint is selected, right? So that means clips that are later opened from bins will have the playhead default to the outpoint. Explaining why that happens is, as I say, informative but it doesn’t fix the problem.
Or does everyone but me select their ins and outs in reverse? I assume not. So then everyone has their clips open in the viewer with the playhead at the end of the clip, a useless position.
To repeat, it’s a minor point. But still, a failure of programming in a very good program. And not worth much more bandwidth here, I’d say.
-
Yes, Shane, mine does the same when I double-click from the timeline. But my post was about double-clicking a clip in a bin. As I say, a minor issue. But definitely an annoyance. I love to save clicks and keystrokes when I can…and particularly when a little bit of intelligent programming would obviate the need.
-
Believe it or not, I actually have an unused spare. I inadvertently ordered an extra when I bought all my Kona gear last year. I thought I would keep it just in case…but I really have no use for it.
I am willing to sell it at a discount, of course. I just don’t want the Kona guys to be unhappy at me taking away business from them because they have always been so great to me! But they did already make the profit on this one…
Ron
-
Yeah, the thing that got me most about this whole thing was that the producer decided not to roll tape. Both the DP and the sound tech encouraged her to roll tape as backup but she refused.
I am a big Firestore fan, as I mentioned. But I also roll tape on every job (almost always shooting with an HDX 900) JUST TO BE SAFE. To Firestore’s credit, I’ll report that I have never had to resort to those tapes for any shot that was missed by the Firestore. In this case, as everyone has figured out, it was not a Firestore problem that caused the trouble; it was a camera setting issue. Even so, backup tapes would have saved the day.
Remember: tape is cheap.
-
First of all, this is only “my” problem because a friend had the experience and asked me to help. I admit all my own (many) mistakes but this isn’t one of them. And, yes, I thoroughly agree with the point about knowing all settings before taking them into production.
My initial thought about this was that it is a stupid way to design a camera — delivering the viewfinder/display setup video through the same port that is used for delivering “clean” video to an outboard recording device. But, then, if the camera has been “told” that the recording medium is tape, it might make sense to have that port default for use as the video source for an external monitor.
I don’t know. It sure is a big “gotcha.” None of the camera guys my friend called about this knew what you just described, Michael. I’m sure it’s in the manual somewhere. And, of course, every DP and camera op reads every word in the manual.
-
I have to disagree with you, Noah. Obviously your mileage may vary but I have had excellent results with Firestore. It has become easily my favorite workflow. There is a bit of a learning curve to do it correctly but it’s worth the trouble.
Actually, I don’t see why you perceive this as a Firestore problem. The Firestore didn’t create that video signal; the camera did. That’s what I’m asking about.
-
HI Gary,
Well, the strange thing is that the camera actually was shooting at 59.94. The shots came into FCP as 29.97 because of an error on my part in the Log & Transfer settings (which Michael Sacci figured out). I have now been able to re-transfer all those shots into FCP as 59.94.
So…and again this is just conversational at this point…I am just wondering why the bars were transferred into FCP as 59.95 (despite my setting error), while the shots came in as 29.97.
This is just curious; not worth wasting any brain cells over.
Ron
-
Hi Doug,
Yes, I do understand that. I just don’t see how that answers my question… why the bars that were recorded by the Firestore came into FCP as 59.98 and the video/shots from Firestore came in as 29.97. It’s just a technical thing and doesn’t really affect my project anymore. I was just hoping to understand what the equipment is doing.Cheers,
Ron
-
Well, Michael, you have solved the mystery. Thank you. And thanks to Bret for instructions on finding the inscrutably small and hidden preferences settings for “L&T.”
The “remove duplicate frames” box was, indeed, checked. And unchecking it did, indeed, solve the 29.97 issue. So end of that story.
Just for sake of discussion, I still don’t understand these two things:
1. Since I had never before made any adjustments to the Log & Transfer preferences — had never even opened it as far as I know unless I was sleepwalking one night — how could they have gotten changed? Is there some other function in FCP that affects those settings?
2. I still wonder why all the shots except bars transferred as 29.97, while the bars transferred as 59.94 — even with the “remove duplicate frames” box checked.No need to carry on this string any longer, seeking answers to those two, though. Just curious.
And thanks again.
— Ron