[Simon Kotowicz]

John,

I had exactly the same problem as you and came here looking for an answer. In the end I worked it out myself:

I’d nested an edit into a new sequence and added Timecode Reader.
I wanted to either remove it or alter its’ size, but when I double clicked the nested sequence to open the filters panel it just took me straight back to the un-nested sequence.

Here’s what I did:

Reading the above posts prompted me to hold down various keys and double click. Hold down the ALT key (I’m a PC head and don’t know what it’s called on Mac) and double click the clip that has Timecode Reader added to. This brings up a source window and on that window is the filters tab. To remove, right click the timecode filter and select “Cut” or just adjust it’s settings.

Enjoy

Simon Kotowicz
http://www.onlineeditor.co.uk

[Simon Kotowicz]

The TIFFs you received were 16bpc (16 Bits per Channel) at 11MB/frame

The TIFFs you exported were 8bpc at around 6MB/frame

8bit tiff are Millions of Colours (or Millions + if you include Alpha)

16bit TIFF are Trillions of Colours.

Video is 10bit. If you export at Millions of Colours (8 bit) you will loose some information. You were right to try to export at 16 bit.

Here’s how I managed it:

1) Create a Quicktime Reference of the sequence. This should retain the 10bit video colour levels.

2) Import QT Reference into After Effects. Make sure you intrept the footage and tell After Effects it’s HD R709 colour space (basically 10bit video)

3) Make a composition the same size and length as sequence and drop it in.

4) Make composition a 16bpc composition with HD R709 colour space.

5) Add to render queue and export as TIFF, 16 Bit, Trillions of Colours. From my vague memory you can embed the HD R 709 colour management into this using a tick box somewhere.

Hope this helps.

Simon Kotowicz
http://www.onlineeditor.co.uk

[Simon Kotowicz]

The best thing to do is grade each shot one at a time and watch the scope as you do it. Legalisers will just cut the signal off at the upper and lower limits. If you’ve got detail above and below those limits it will be lost. You should bring the video signal into those limits, thus saving all the detail. Set up your scope to display an alarm message on shots that are illegal. Correct those shots until the alarm disappears.

I read a really interesting article in IBE (International Broadcast Engineer) magazine. If a legaliser works in RGB it will first convert your YUV video signal into RGB, clamp it and then convert it back to YUV so it can be saved to tape. All colours within RGB gamut are legal. When it gets converted back to YUV 4:2:2 the colour signal is compressed (i.e 4:2:2 compression.) An artifact of this compression means colour values can diviate and end up being back within the realms of illegal, but only just. This might account for a few occassions of programme rejection.

Best thing to do is be on the safe side and correct the colours to a safe amount withing the legal limits. The difference to the naked human eye should be neglegable.

Simon Kotowicz
http://www.onlineeditor.co.uk

[Simon Kotowicz]

You’re not going to get a definitive answer. If all you’ve got is H.264 then that’s what’s gotta go into the programme, otherwise you’ll have a hole!

The H.264 file can be re-encoded into uncompressed for you to play it out but, as I’m sure you already realise, it won’t improve the picture quality.

Is it good enough? Well, this is debatable. It really depends on the type of picture and how much of the H.264 compression they’ve added. As an on-line editor I guess it’s really your call.

Should you push to get uncompressed quicktimes? Of course, as a professional you should be aiming to achieve the best possible product for your client. If they’re supplying sub-standard files when top-notch is available then you should be asking for the file again. Don’t let the in-experienced dictate your job.

The more times you compress along the post production chain the more noticable it’s effect will be. In certain cases the unwanted artifacts that compression adds are amplified everytime the picture is re-compressed, until you have something that looks terrible.

In my opinion you should be creating uncompressed master tapes. i.e. The best quality you can possibly achieve. How much it is compressed by the broadcaster or webmaster is up to them, but atleast you’re giving them a choice. Who knows, in the future technology may be good enough so we don’t have to compress for the internet or broadcast. When this happens all your masters will need re-making…

Simon Kotowicz
http://www.onlineeditor.co.uk