Shawn Miller
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
[Bill Davis] “Well, in X – every thing in the Project library is dynamically connected to the Storyline that it’s a reflection of. The Share menu lets you express it out to the net via Vimeo, YouTube or to your own in-house server.
As you make changes in the Storyline, those are expressed instantly to the repository in the Project Library. If you want to maintain a version, you just duplicate the project. This allows for pretty agile versioning. To switch from Verson A to Version B, you just share out the new one.
It’s not so much connection to “publishing systems” as much as it’s that the entire program being designed to export directly to a export stream, rather than exclusively to the desktop as a standalone file – and having built- in tools to enable that (keyword attachment, etc) right inside the program.”
So, it sounds like you’re describing an automatic encoding system that lets you programmatically render files out to specific locations in whatever format may be needed. Please correct me if I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying.
Adobe’s approach to that functionality is via watch folders. Just set up a file location in Adobe Media Encoder and whatever you place at that location gets encoded to whatever format(s) and destination you specify.
Shawn
-
[Bill Davis] “But while I agree that Adobe has excellent integration within the users workflow – I’d be interested on how you see their integration outside of the “in-suite” content creation setting.”
I guess it depends on what content you’re creating. Different CS applications can exchange files and formats with different outside applications. This is why AE (for instance) can be used as the hub of a very VFX/Mograph centric workflow (because it can open Cinema 4D or Maya projects), or as the backend to a PPro edit destined for finishing somewhere else (Avid, FCP, DaVinci, et.). The Adobe Suite isn’t exactly an island.
[Bill Davis] “What tools does it have for built in publishing and connectivity?”
For publishing, Adobe Media Encoder, for connectivity, XML.
[Bill Davis] “Honestly asking – I’m not familiar with the Adobe line nearly as much as I am with the X approach – which leaves it’s “masters” dynamically connected to not only the editing suite – but to the Publish area as well.
Is Premier still following the – make it over here – then export it as a disconnected file over there – then if you need another one, repeat process – or are they migrating towards dynamic files that remain persistently connected to the editorial suite and just publish the current state as needed – the process that I see X as being built around?”
I’m not sure I understand the statement. Which encoders leave media dynamically connected to pushlishing systems? Can you give an example?
Shawn
-
[Gary Huff] “Actually, I’m not sure how well that mount is going to work for anything other than the Voigtlander lenses. It’s a dumb mount, meaning you won’t be able to change aperture on those Panasonic lenses.”
Ah, good point. In my excitement, I forgot that the Panasonic lenses have electronic apeture. I still have a number of Zeiss, Sigma and Nikkor glass that I can use via a Novoflex adapter though… so it’s still good news. I was considering picking up another AF100 this winter, but if the BMCC shakes out like I hope it will – it may become my new go to camera for VFX, b-roll and beauty shots.
Shawn
-
[Gary Huff] “Yes, unless you want to run some Apple-centric hardware, there’s no reason to be tied into one platform vs another.”
I completely agree.
Shawn
-
[Gary Huff] “Many of whom prefer to edit off a laptop, and the article still points out that Apple laptops are second to none, so I fail to see how this will be much of an influence in the long run.”
For editing, sure. But I think a pretty big part of his fan base are also VFX/Mograph artists… I’m guessing they’re more likely to be desktop/workstation users. It might also be worth mentioning that, his post is partly about moving away from FCPX.
Shawn
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Blackmagic Cinema Camera MFT”
Holy crap, and hold the phone! I always thought that MFT was the perfect choice for this camera… a no brainer actually. Now, you can use two of the fastest prime lenses on the market, plus Panasonic’s awesome new f/2.8 12-35 zoom. Thanks for sharing that, Jeremy.
Shawn
-
[Steve Connor] “Not that interesting, just the same arguments made for switching, that have been around for the last year.”
I think the ‘who’ in the blog, is what makes the story interesting. Freddie Wong is a major influencer amongst young, independent filmmakers.
Shawn
-
[Walter Soyka] “I think that Adobe Camera Raw might be 8-bit only — the color picker in it is on a 0-255 scale, not 0-32767. Does anyone know for sure?”
John Brawley’s blog and Blackmagic’s website both report that it’s 12 bit.
Shawn
-
[Matt Bell] “That is NOT what I got at ISO3200 using the kit lens.”
Ah right, you did say that didn’t you? The kit lens you’re talking about, is it the Lumix 14-140? It’s a fantastic lens for daylight and controlled lighting situations… but not so much for lowlight. For the times when I don’t have or need much light, I will only use lenses f/2.8 or faster. The few times I’ve had to bump the iso level higher than 800, I have not had issues with noise.
Shawn
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Mmm, I guess it depends on your definition of clean.”
I think these are pretty clean images @3200 iso. FWIW, I’ve also done these types of low light tests on my own AF100s (home and work)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhROyQZaAMs&list=UUcM_6ay33BNpChknCrMCgig&index=56&feature=plcp
Thanks,
Shawn
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.