Shane Ross
Forum Replies Created
-
The last OS to fully support ALL of the FCS3 (including FCP 7) apps was 10.6.8. I have my MacPro cheese grater on that OS and sticking to it. 10.7 will work, as will 10.8…10.9 breaks some apps. But the most FCP 7 friendly OS is 10.6.8
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Someone has found out that because of the cooling issue in the MacBook Pro…the i9 processor is throttled by the OS…so it really doesn’t do any better than the i7. Unless you put it in the freezer…
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Joe Marler] “Scott may have been thinking exclusively about multiple editors working on the same timeline vs the FCPX approach where much of the work is of an organizational nature in the Event Browser before reaching the timeline. From that perspective, having collaborative features only used by multiple lead editors in the timeline phase of post production could seem a niche application.”
Not sure about that, because I think only Resolve allows multiple editors to work on the same TIMELINE at the same time..allowing you to update it as you go…so someone can make an edit change WHILE it’s being graded. Avid can’t do that…Avid allows multiple editors to access the same project file…but the bins that contain the cuts, once opened by someone, another person cannot then make changes to that cut in that bin. They can see it, but not make any changes (they can, but it’s complicated…they can’t save those changes unless they save it as a different bin).
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
You’ll need to use Resolve as a go-between. AAF to REsolve, XML out to Premiere. There is no direct route, sorry
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Scott Witthaus] “[Oliver Peters] “where two editors can SIMULTANEOUSLY work within the SAME timeline.”
I’m sorry, but this is a horrifying workflow, IMHO. Who the hell would EVER want that? Maybe I should just consider myself lucky never having had to work in a multi-editor workflow.”
ANYONE working on a reality TV show needs this. Most people working on TV docs that have a short delivery time so we need more than one editor needs this. Not sure why you are lucky not to…It’s a godsend to many of us who have a LOT of footage to deal with, and short deadlines (talking tens of thousands of hours of dailies). There are many many legit reasons for needing this from reality to doc to news broadcast to sports to….
[Scott Witthaus] “I mean, outside of broadcast, where does this exist (not counting asst. editor tasks)?”
Oh…NOT broadcast? OK…when I started out in corporate, we had Media 100…we didn’t use Avid because, well, too expensive, quality wasn’t as good (Media 100 had GREAT online quality). But there were many times when two editors on the same project would have been helpful. Cutting corporate getaways where there were meetings coupled with activities where we filmed and cut a “THIS WAS YOUR WEEK” to present on the final day. Two editors on those and had to join the exports and have duplicates of all the media on two sets of drives (back in 1996). I did many corporate jobs where two of us being able to access the same project and media would have been great.
And other types of events like red carpet shows (sorry, broadcast, I know)…multiple editors are needed on the same project.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
OMG! That’s hilarious. A LOT of people must have bought the wrong versions…
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Resolve Free works on everything up to 4K. To work in 4K, you need to pay.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
Is the footage truly interlaced? Meaning, is it, in fact, 29.97 with two fields of video? If you played this in an interlaced project out to a monitor, would you see smooth playback, and no lines…
OR…is this interlacing “baked in?” Meaning, it was shot interlaced, but captured improperly so parts of both fields are there, and you see the jaggy lines. OR…exported improperly with the jaggy lines?
I deal with all sorts of archival footage, and TOO MANY PLACES will capture improperly, export improperly, so this footage they are trying to sell will have that horrid look baked in…and they shrug when it’s pointed out. So I either don’t buy it, or if it’s rare and needed, buy it but explain to the network that it’s rare, and can’t be fixed. If it’s baked in, you can’t fix it.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Ricky Barnes] “Am I losing quality? The Aunsoft website says it’s lossless. But I’m not convinced.”
Any time you convert from one format to another, you’ll lose quality. But, WHAT CODEC are you converting to? Some, like the one FCP prefers, ProRes 422, (HQ is there, but not sure it’s FCP 6 compatible)…you’ll get an image that, while compressed, and recompressing the image, virtually lossless. You won’t be able to tell the difference.
[Ricky Barnes] ” But I’m not convinced. I have done some of this, and it generally looks pretty daggone good, but of course I haven’t done a cross-comparison”
Here’s how you compare…. Drop a ProRes clip onto the timeline. Drop a native XAVC onto the timeline…put a DIFFERENCE MATTE on the top layer…if you see only black, that means it’s lossless…if you see some speckles, that means there’s slight difference. But, you can’t…as FCP doesn’t bring in the XAVC native. But, trust me, it’s virtually lossless…and actually put in a better color space. proRes is 10-bit, XAVC is 8-bit.
[Ricky Barnes] “But I’m looking for a “tech-spec” guru who can alleviate my suspicions and say “It’s all good, bro” – or “Dude – you need to upgrade to FCP 10ish”.”
Dude, you really need to update your editing software to something more current, so you don’t need to convert AT ALL. FCX…fine, if you can deal with that interface, it’s great. Premiere Pro…sure, but you can only rent it forever, not own. But, it’s not expensive, and deals with this native. Resolve…FREE…and can convert to pretty much any editing codec if needed, and great for final color (Almost an industry standard). Avid…you are a camera guy, you don’t need to use Avid. But, with new software comes new hardware…so this won’t be cheap. I like shooting with my HVX-170 too, it’s great! But DVCPRO HD…8 bit, anamorphic…10 year old camera.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
You say you want to interpret the 60fps footage to 23.98…that means that you want to use it for smooth slow motion. If that’s the case, yeah, you’ll want to retain the frame rate. If you convert to 23.98, relinking won’t really work…and your slow motion will look poopy.
Test things. Test convert 60fps footage to an offline codec with Resolve, cut it with 23.98 footage, interpret it to 23.98 for slow motion, then send the XML to resolve and see what happens.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def