Sean Oneil
Forum Replies Created
-
There is a Color forum, that may be a better place to ask.
On your PC, Blackmagic Framelink should be able to convert the files to DPX. It comes with the drivers which is a free download. Not sure if you need a card installed to use it or whether or not they allow it.
Rest of your plan sounds solid except one issue. Color only works with certain codecs, and I doubt GlueTools DPX is one of them. And unfortunately if you export to another Quicktime codec, it will render it as 8-bit even if you’re going to a 10-bit codec. Quicktime can only render RGB codecs at 8-bit. Dirty little secret I recently learned on another thread here.
Sean
-
[Dominik Bochenski] “FCP should recognize all the missing clips in that folders (filenames and timecodes match)… Instead, it relinks one and stops the process. I have to go through the relink process once per cut.”
See if they have different reel names. If so, try making them all the same. That might solve the problem. I can’t help you too much as I have never done an EDL conversion. When I’ve found myself in that situation, I usually go a different route. I was busy earlier and didn’t think to explain this.
First off, one thing you might not realize is that you can assign 29.97 timecode to 23.98 video. Use the “Modify->Timecode” feature in FCP to your advantage. What this will allow you to do is bypass the need to convert a 29.97 EDL to a 23.98 EDL. You can simply just recapture your source footage and run it through Cinema Tools. Then you import those “.rev” clips into a temp FCP project and modify the timecode so that it’s 29.97 again. Close the temp project and open your real one. Reconnect the sequence to the new .rev media, fix any flash frames, and you’re done. You’ll get a warning that the reel name, rate, and length are different. Just ignore it.
Sean
-
[Dave LaRonde] “You may not even have to futz with pulldown. Here’s a list of reasons why you’d need to remove pulldown and edit at 23.976:
• You’re doing a film-out
• Your goal is to make a 24p DVD
• You’re doing motion graphics or effects work whose motion has to absolutely, positively match the motion of the film frame rateIf you’re doing NONE of the above, I don’t know of any compelling reasons to remove the pulldown. If there are, I’d like to know.”
That’s all good and true if this were 1998. Nowadays televisions are almost all progressive scan/HD now, and footage is often viewed online as well. You need to have clean 3:2 pulldown cadence in your SD deliveries so that digital TV decoders can know how to deinterlace it properly.
Sean
-
I don’t believe there are any workaround other than what you are doing. The EDL has been “media managed” (can’t think of a better term) so it’s only using footage that was in the edit (plus handles). So every clip requires it’s own piece of media.
Also, when you do get it all done, some of your edit points will be shited a frame sooner or later. This is due to non-film-safe edit points being during the 29.97 editing. And when you get it all sorted out, God help you if there are were speed changes, freeze-frames, etc.
This is why it’s so much better to run the footage through Cinema Tools before you edit anything. I wish more Avid editors were up to speed on this.
Sean
-
[Tom Wolsky] “The equivalent of saying I can sign or agree to any contract I want and if it doesn’t agree with what I want to do it’s not valid.”
That’s correct. We all have the right to do that whenever we wish. As far as consequences, there are none whatsoever unless there was a copyright violation.
[Tom Wolsky] ” EULA is a violation of the contractual agreement, and oh yes, BTW, it’s a copyright violation too. “
As I said above, only the latter is relevant. The former is not.
[Tom Wolsky] “The second paragraph is not relevant as I don’t think the any one’s using FCP on an iPhone yet.”
Obviously that was a hypothetical situation. It is relevant as it could happen one day. But I’ll use something not hypothetical. How about purchasing OSX Leopard from a store and installing it on your PC instead of a Mac. That would be violating the EULA, however, it is not a copyright violation. Thus there are no consequences. Violating an EULA agreement in and of itself is not against the law. Violating copyright law is. And not because it’s in the EULA – but because it’s against the law. The EULA may help prevent you from pleading ignorance, but that’s about it. Copyright law does not protect software makers from things like “you can’t use it on Sunday” or “You can’t install the one and only copy onto your PC, cellphone, or toaster oven” whether you agree to it in a EULA or not.
Sean
-
[Tom Wolsky] “Equating them to literary works is not relevant. You don’t buy the copyright when you license the software. The copyright has nothing at all to do your contractual obligations under the EULA.”
It has everything to do with it. Copyright violation is the only thing they can go after customers for. Buying software is not agreeing to any terms of service. You are not an employee. You are not given trade secrets. It’s a licensed product, not a service. You are buying software and you agree to the terms as a licensee. In America you are free to break all of those terms if you like, so long as you do not violate their rights as a copyright holder.For example, if I figure out how to install Final Cut Pro on my cell-phone, Apple has no legal recourse against me even though the EULA says I can’t. Now maybe if I tell people how to bypass some sort of encryption or protection against that, depending on many circumstances, that could be a DMCA violation. But that still falls in the realm of copyright violation. Using the software on Sundays does not. Neither does installing the one and only copy on to my cellphone.
Sean
-
[walter biscardi] “Again, I make this assumption based on the fact that he wants to know how to get the plug-ins off a system from work, rather than just bringing the discs home and installing them or bringing home the downloaded originals.”
And to be fair to you, if I HAD to guess, I would guess he’s doing what you suspected.
Sean
-
[Tom Wolsky] “This is basic contract law. If the EULA says you can’t use the software on the Sabbath, you can’t. You can take the manufacturer to court but you’ll lose”
Are you joking? Sorry dude, this is America.
“The international copyright treaty, Article 4, equates computer programs with literary works. Thus, computer programs are automatically placed under copyright, which grants the copy owner normal rights use, and others fair use of the computer material. The signing away of one’s legal rights can normally only be done by a properly signed paper contract, or under some circumstances, orally if supported by witnesses or recordings, or, in even more restricted use, via electronic signatures issued by the local government, as a person charged with violating a license agreement otherwise can merely claim not to know who opened the box or clicked the agreement box in the install software, and it is not possible for the licenser to provide proof of who is the purported licensee, nor has a person accused of breaching a license agreement any obligation to provide such proof. In addition, legal rights can only be signed away if local law admits it; so a properly signed paper contract may not be enough to abrogate copy owners’ rights, unless there are special legal provisions admitting it”
“The enforceability of an EULA depends on several factors, one of them being the court in which the case is heard. Some courts that have addressed the validity of the shrinkwrap license agreements have found some EULAs to be invalid, characterizing them as contracts of adhesion, unconscionable, and/or unacceptable pursuant to the U.C.C. ”
Sean
-
[walter biscardi] “Or he can purchase them legally instead of taking them from work.”
How do you even know they’re not freeware plugins he’s talking about? These could be Stibs or G-Free or whatever and he doesn’t know the names or where to download them. And even if they aren’t free plugins, it can still be legal depending on the situation.
Some lawyers would argue that since he can’t be at work and at home at the same time, and if he’s owns both machines and is the only one who has access to them, then it would be legal to have it on both machines. Other lawyers will of course argue the opposite. AFAIK the legality of placeshifting computer software in this situation is a gray area that hasn’t been defined in court. It may perhaps violate the EULA. But an EULA is not necessarily a law. A software company could write an EULA that says you’re not allowed to use the software on Passover or Easter or something. Obviously violating that wouldn’t hold up in court unless you’re in Iran or something.
I’m not saying this is the case. Maybe he is just stealing software that his employer purchased – but we don’t know that and it’s none of our business nor our place to assume it.
A more helpful response would be a way to provide a non-controversial way to bring non-freeware plugins home from work. It’s not like the location of plugins is some sort of secret. Here’s an idea. He could remove the files each time he left a location. If he used “move” instead of “copy” to a USB key for example it would NOT be a violation of any EULA. Even if the computer at work wasn’t his, he’d just be borrowing from his employer (assuming the employer is fine with it). No different than taking the actual computer home.
Sean
-
By Apple keeping so many codecs “Mac only” and some even “FCS2 Only” (like ProRes), they’ve essentially crippled Final Cut Server. So either they provide at least read-only codecs for Windows, or they tell people “Tough luck, your clients should have bought a Mac.”
Sean