Shane Ross
Forum Replies Created
-
[Andrew Kimery] “This is why when one does their initial ingest one shouldn’t use a heavily compressed codec like low bit rate H.264”
YES! Nail on head.
This is also why one must always RETAIN THE FULL CARD STRUCTURE of tapeless cameras. I know of many people who shot P2 , captured that into FCP Legacy…threw out the card backups, thinking their captured footage was all they needed. Issue…that codec was extremely proprietary, it ONLY was viewable on computers with FCP installed. Hand that off to someone without FCP…white screen. Found that out when giving dailies to a producer.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Bill Davis] “If you need to access EVERYTHING you’ve ever shot, you have two utterly simple options.
First, stick with your current working OS and your existing software, just like generations of editors working in AVID (and other NLEs!) have.”
I mentioned that in my original post. The need to keep an older computer that can read these files. But then, if I want to work with these older files in a NEW project with the NEW OS and NEW editing software, as us archival documentary filmmakers often do, I’ll need to convert those to a codec the NEW system likes. But…can I? Can the older computer have access and actually encode to this new codec? Hmmm…maybe not, but then the new computer can’t read the old file in order to convert.
Now…this is a relatively NEW problem. Not a “generations of editors” problem. Because before, oh, say, 12-15 years ago, TAPE was the dominate recording medium, as was FILM. Then P2 came along as did other formats and revolutionized filming. SO, we didn’t have a codec issue. What we had was a DECK issue, needing to keep older decks around to play this footage. And then make sure you had a capture card with the proper connections to connect to that deck, or have a converter.
SO, I guess that’s the situation here. Have an older computer, with an older capture card, and then play out from that to the new computer, with new capture card, and transfer that way. Making sure to get adapters along the way so that you can connect to the new capture cards.
[Bill Davis] “Or (my preferred solution) keep an old laptop or desktop computer around that has a 32-bit compliant OS installed, That way if anyone EVER asks you to pull up old 32-bit content, just open it on that machine and transcode it into a 64-bit file – which will then work with ALL the modern NLEs.”
Ah, but CAN you? What if the codec you need to encode to can’t be encoded on the computer you have…I recall that the MacPro G5 couldn’t encode ProRes…it didn’t have the powerful enough processor. So what if this nice desktop you keep can’t do that to this new fangled codec? Then see above…signal from computer to computer via capture card.
[Bill Davis] “This is simply NO different than when VHS tape, Betacam, DC-2000 backup cartridges, Syquist data disks or ANY other legacy technology fell out of favor. You move your stuff along, or you keep a machine capable of loading the old media around so you can keep moving forward.”
Yeah, but then dubbing to another media and then another media and then another media…moving forward…gets you very very muddy media. Speaking from experience as people transferred film to BetaSP, then captured that as “high quality AVI files” at 640×480, interlaced…then tossing the betacam masters, and the film is gone too… Archivists nightmare.
[Bill Davis] “This is NOT difficult. It’s simply the next in a LONG LINE of tech moves that enable progress.”
Yeah, I guess it’s nothing new. This is why the Smithsonian keeps not only the film/tapes/media stored, but multiple decks and projectors and devices that can play that media. Looks like I have to do the same. Glad I have a Umatic Deck, a MacPro 2008 with older OS, and capture card, and VHS and DVD decks.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[John Pale] “Going from 23.976 to 29.97 does not duplicate entire frames.”
23.98 (24p) to 29.97 progressive (30p)…progressive to progressive…will duplicate entire frames.
[John Pale] “That’s not how 3:2 pull down works.”
That’s only if you are going 23.98 to 29.97 interlaced (59.94i). I have many deliverables lately that want 30p…so they can stream it online, where interlacing is bad.
[John Pale] “Converting 29.97 to 23.976 can produce visual artifacts, but it’s not just tossing out frames either.”
By default, full frames are discarded. Unless you TELL it to blend the frames.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
And you just seem like a total “YES” man, just saying how great and amazing Apple is, all the time.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Bill Davis] “But flip it.
Do you EVER push back at the legions who no matter WHAT Apple does, they MUST tell everyone exactly how they’ve got things totally wrong? (Cough, cough, FCP X, The MacPro, overpriced iPhones, Desktop units that are WAY to expensive to succeed…. etc. etc. etc. etc.)”
Yes…the people who bad mouth every single thing Apple does is JUST as bad. Trollish, really. I mean, why are you here if all you are going to do is say, “Apple sucks” and offer nothing fruitful to the discussion.
[Bill Davis] “Either those “Apple is all bad” voices are fair — or they aren’t. And if they are, you MUST accept that the mirror side of the coin is voices that parrot “Apple is all good” in the EXACT same fashion.”
I feel the aren’t…so that means I DON’T have to accept the mirror of that. I swear, you sound like an Apple PR person, only saying the greatest things about Apple and how everything it does is good. The fact that you can’t seem to find ANYTHING to grumble about is mystifying to me. Even the most ardent Apple supporters will have some gripe about something.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Herb Sevush] “This is a truly wonderful rant coming from someone who has always, until now, celebrated the liberating effects of the no-cost video world of today – FCPX being part of that world, buy once at $295 and never pay for an upgrade again – the iPhone as a democratizing tool for video makers the world over – man the barricades.”
That’s because according to Bill, Apple can do no wrong. Like ever. Bill, I like you, i’ve eaten pizza with you, you are a genuinely good guy. But the constant cheerleading for absolutely EVERYTHING Apple does is…too much. I mean, I like Apple, but have issues with FCX, and the new Mac Pro. I had issues with old FCP 7, that I loved, and based my career on. I love working on Avid…but there are many things about it that annoy me, and I’ll point them out. And do so in hopes that they get fixed, so I’ll love it even more.
It just seems that you can find no fault with anything Apple does…all…the…time. “FCX IS AMAZING! The only tool anyone should EVER consider, for anything! And they only charge $300, EVER. Great cost cutting savings, they are really aware of the lower budgets we have to deal with. Now, the new MacPro, it’s a powerhouse and another win for Apple. Yeah, it’s expensive, but things were a lot more expensive back in the day. When we had a 5MB hard drive that you had to put into a semi trailer to move.”
yes, I’m being snarky. But that is the annoying thing, Bill. You don’t ever ever find anything wrong with Apple, ever. They are always perfect, always do the right thing, can do no wrong. That us what rubs us wrong….at least me.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
That’s ZOOMING. Enlarging the clip to beyond the frame size. Looks like they might have blown it up 200% or more.
And that wasn’t how Aquaman was originally edited. Someone did that as some sort of odd way to try to emphasize something. Very distracting if you ask me.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Nope. The speed change is baked in. It’s recorded as slow motion, it’s not a metadata tag, it really is slow motion.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[greg janza] “the business has changed dramatically since I began freelancing in the mid-90’s. I’m happy for those that can maintain a premium charge because I agree with everything you’ve stated but at least in my market, larger economic forces dictate rates and if freelancers aren’t flexible they’ll simply have less work offered to them.”
So…they can take advantage of you and you let them? yeah, I’ll need a few whiskys in me to let that one settle in.
I do realize that the market from the 1990s has changed. Not longer can you charge $350/hour for editing, or charge $2500/week for an Avid. Then again, back then, an Avid ran $95,000 – $200,000. Yes, things are cheaper now…you can edit on a laptop and hard drive, but that will still run you $4000 or so. So bill for it. $50 a week…even $25. But bill for it.
I’m damn sure that the company’s that are hiring you charge for everything they do. Corporate clients, real estate people, grocery stores, lawyers. Ask them if they are only billing for their hours…and not including overhead in their costs. People would laugh at you.
No, businesses do EVERYTHING THEY CAN to pay less. Send production overseas…cheaper labor, cheaper location rentals. They do what they can to lower the cost of labor..and then say “I saved X dollars! where’s my bonus!” Stick to your guns, say “I cost this much,” and bill separate for the kit fee. If they ask why they need to pay for that, say “to pay for the equipment I use on your project. This much for me, this much for my equipment. If you want to only pay me…you aren’t going to get anything in return, because I can’t use my equipment.”
They might come back with “But X company over there is cheaper, they aren’t charging for their equipment.”
Let them go to them. See how long that company actually stays in business. Or see how low the quality is..and the client might come back to you. I have done this…I have been asked to do a job, told I was too expensive. So I said, “sorry, but that’s my cost….me and my equipment.” “But they are cheaper!” “Go to them.” 2 months later, they came to me to fix what the other company did. Work was sub standard due to the inexperience of the editor, and they lacked proper equipment to do the job right.
Yeah, it might hurt to not get the job. I’ve been there, been living off scraps. But you can’t give in. Once you give in, then you set client expectations and they NEVER pay you what you are worth, or for the equipment costs, so you are taking that out of your pay. Meanwhile, they are making more money because they saved money on you…and now they expect EVERYONE in that area to charge the rate they are getting you for.
I need a whisky.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[greg janza] “Camera owners have a significantly higher day rate to cover the high cost of their equipment. But most freelance editors don’t have the option to charge a premium for their computer equipment on top of their daily rate.”
Wrong. SO WRONG. Computers, hard drives, editing software. That isn’t cheap either. THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS of investment. If you aren’t adding that equipment rental to your fee…that’s on you. ANYONE who doesn’t do that, is doing a disservice to not only themselves, but to others. And setting client expectations COMPLETELY wrong. How on earth can you invest thousands of dollars into equipment…and then the upkeep of that equipment…and then updating of that equipment…without charging a fee? Why do camera ops get to do this, but not editors? I don’t get your logic at all.
Part of the price of food in a store, is the cost of not only the food in the store, but the workers, the electricity, the rent on the land or building (or mortgage and property taxes)…the equipment used to track the sales of that food. ALL of it. That’s built into the cost. YOUR equipment should also be built into the cost of your doing business.
My kid’s girl scout troop did a project…track the cost of one type of food, in this case, an apple, across several types of stores and locations. Corner market in Los Angeles, large grocery store in Los Angeles. Same types of businesses, but then in Idaho, Ohio, Tennessee, Alabama and New York…rural and urban areas. Track the cost difference. The apple costs significantly higher in larger cities, opposed to the rural areas, in the same state. And differed from state to state. Reasons? Rent, electricity, wages….lots of factors.
If you are an editor with a laptop and a hard drive…you charge a kit fee. Smaller than someone who uses a tower, two monitors, a RAID and a broadcast monitor…but you charge a fee. Where I might charge $500/week for my setup, you might charge $50/week for yours. BUT YOU CHARGE. Overhead…someone working out of their garage (me) would charge less than a colorist occupying a lush bay in a big building. Where they charge $350/hour, I charge $125/hour. Less overhead. But that is the fee for me, and my system….on a daily rate. Weekly is cheaper, due to longer term employment/rental. Just like renting a house on a monthly basis is cheaper than a hotel room…when calculated over a month.
MY GOD…are there that many people NOT charging for their equipment out there? Is this why many clients seem shocked when I add that cost to a bid for services? to my estimated costs?
It’s bad enough that projects have money for the camera people, and their equipment, but then seem to have zero left (or very little) when it comes to post…so ask for a HUGE discount on our end. But to then not charge for the equipment? You get an F on this business school test.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def