Simon Ubsdell
6
COW Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
Absolutely second that – Brendan is a hero!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
You need to use Ramp to final value otherwise with Continuous Rate the value is incremental …
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Good thinking. I was playing around with the same idea and I added a Spin behaviour in there as well as that’s always nice to have as an option for stills.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Ernest Ratliff] “This covers pretty much all the computer display resolutions.”
A really handy link – I’ve bookmarked that. Thanks.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Ernest Ratliff] “1024 x 768 seems odd to video people, but it’s a pretty standard resolution for laptops and business projectors, if he’s working for a corporate client who wants full screen video it makes sense.”
Thanks for clarifying – I’ll add that to my ever-growing list of frame sizes to memorize 🙂
Someone asked for 960×400 this morning … it too made perfect sense when you knew what it was for.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Oliver Tosh] “I am trying to work on a video that is 1024×768.”
That is a really unusual frame size – are you sure it’s what you want? 1024×576 is common for 16:9 square pixel PAL, or 1050×576 if you are Adobe or the BBC (don’t ask!). Your frame size is a 4:3 ratio – is that what you mean?
If so, you are best off editing in a 1920×1080 project (pillar-boxing your source material), and exporting a Movie that you can then run through Compressor to get your final frame size, cropping as appropriate. Anything else and you will be losing resolution in the edit which you obviously want to avoid.
I should add that most NLE’s struggle in one way or another with non-standard frame sizes … not just FCPX.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Dave Gage] “the advantage of using the Adjustment Layers in the workflow”
Very simply, it means you can apply filters globally to a range of clips rather than individually to each one. Great, for exmple if you want to apply a crop to the whole of your sequence, but there are many other uses.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Craig Seeman] “It may well be that Apple sees 4K happening in a bigger way than 3D and it’s why you see support for 2K and 4K in FCPX but not 3D.”
I seriously hope you’re right that Apple have all the foresight necessary to anticipate the death of stereoscopic – it can’t come too soon!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Mike Fitzsimmons] “Its it me or does the pitch-corrected sound feature not really work? Seems like when I’m scrubbing/skimming, it sounds just as it did in FCP7. The skimming feature also stops working entirely if you are moving too slowly. Speed up and cross a few frames and it seems to come back to life.”
Yes, I would agree about both these behaviours – or in the case of the first the lack of behaviour. Very odd, as I’m sure I seem to remember Randy Ubillos at the Sneak Peek showed off the pitch-changing feature of skimming.
The inaccuracy of the feature at slow speeds means it’s absolutely useless for any detailed audio editing.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Really interesting. Especially in pointing out that what Apple have done with reinventing FCP is something that AVID should have done (and were apparently planning to do from this article) with Media Composer for a long time, but lacked the courage or the corporate will (or maybe the financial underpinning) to do.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com