Shane Ross
Forum Replies Created
-
WELL, we know ONE thing that DR 16.1 has that NO OTHER NLE has.
A “boring detector.” Any shot over a certain length of time gets flagged as boring (in the CUT page, specifically).
Ball’s in your court, FCX!
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Alas, no. Because imported images in premiere simply point to the actual image where it is located on the finder level. Whereas Avid will import and convert the image to media…and not be linked to the one you change.
BUT…this does make me wonder how to update it if you use (like one should) the plugins that link to that still, like Pan and zoom, or Moving picture. I believe you need to retarget them, one at a time.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Guy Mellitz] “Unfortunately, the contact I have is, I believe, an AE who is probably doesn’t really know, or is unauthorized to stray from what he’s been told to do.”
Then try to get higher on the tech chain there. Contact someone in charge, and present the issue. Present the idea of delivering 23.98 masters, that they can then interlace, or you can also provide the 60i masters. But yeah, you need to reach out to their head tech guys…having a minion insist on what you deliver is not a good call.
[Guy Mellitz] “Beyond that, he says “We sometimes deliver other versions that are progressive, it’s just the broadcast master than needs interlace. Starting with interlace makes it tougher to make the progressive masters.””
Good, then deliver a progressive master, and an interlaced master. But yeah, let someone know that your footage is 23.98, and your master is 23.98, so delivering 30p for web delivery makes no sense. but 60i for broadcast does, and is totally doable.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
https://www.thewindowsclub.com/exception-unknown-software-exception-occurred-application
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
The main reason some clients…and networks now….want 30p is so they can post the video online, as the web and interlacing don’t mix. The fact that they say they will interlace on their end…TO ME…reads as they will broadcast this on air at some point…but also want a progressive version for the web. Which makes me wonder…why are they insisting on a 30p master? They can put the 23.98 one on the web and not have it skip and it’ll play fine. Why do they want 30p? Why not accept the 23.98p, add pulldown to create a 1080i60 master for air, but put the 23.98 online?
That’s what I’d be asking the client. Explain the issues of 24p to 30p conversion…and that interlacing that will make it look worse than 24p to 60i conversion would.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
In googling this, I see that it’s a WINDOWS error, not an Avid error. All results point to windows issues and solutions.
None of these issues mention the GPU. So what makes you think it’s the GPU?
And if Avid doesn’t work properly due to working with an unsupported GPU, the only solution is to get a supported GPU. BUT…nothing I find about this error mentions the GPU.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Guy Mellitz] “My current workflow is to mixdown the 23.98 sequence, open that bin in a 1080i/59.94 project and lay it into a new sequence, then export it at 1080p/29.97.”
What? NO nononononononono. That’s not what you do at all. That’s what you do when you want to PROPERLY add pulldown to get 23.98 to 29.97 interlaced. But 29.97p? That’s almost the worst way to do it.
There is really NO good way to get 24p to 30p. No matter what, you’ll get repeat frames. You can try Fluid Motion, or even After Effects, but if there’s fast movement, then you get the jelly effect either on the moving object, or in an “aura” surrounding the object.
Even higher end converters might jelly on motion, but some do a decent conversion (Talking about the Alchemist here).
So, if you shot and edited 23.98, and are asked to deliver a 30p master (if they wanted 30p, then it really needs to be shot 30p)…they either need to live with the slight stutter look of 6 additional frames, or you need to take the master to a post facility with Alchemist, have them run a test conversion and see if the client is cool with that.
24p to 30p isn’t a smooth conversion.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
OK…here goes. I did NOT see DNxHD/DNxHR listed in my options for Quicktime. Even though I have the Avid codecs installed. Stupid. BUT…if I choose Cineform, then go to the VIDEO TAB below, and under VIDEO CODEC, change it to DNXHD/HR….and then choose the RESOLUTION DNxHD HQX 10-bit…I got it.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Well, I think Adobe calls it simply “DNxHD 145/175/220” And then there should be a place to get specific. Let me look on my system when I get home.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Try DNxHD Quicktime. OP1A is a very specific format that I haven’t had the luck getting out of Premiere yet. Only able to do it in Resolve and Avid. But a DNxHD QT file will be pretty high quality. If you export 175x or 220x, it’ll even be 10-bit. Whereas most of the DNxHD formats are 8-bit, and OP1A is 8 bit…it’s an XDCAM 50 format.
DNxHD 220x is much akin to ProRes HQ.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def