Forum Replies Created

Page 53 of 87
  • Steven Gonzales

    March 2, 2007 at 8:20 pm in reply to: HD Workflow

    You need an additional device to convert the HDV for monitoring.

    Here’s Shane Ross From this post https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/8/917706? :

    “The HDV signal is too complex to be sent out via firewire for monitoring. HDV requires a capture card of some sort. AJA, Decklink, MAtrox MXO, and now the Intensity that will allow you to connect to an HDMI monitor.”

    Decklink and Intensity are from blackmagic-design.com

  • Steven Gonzales

    March 2, 2007 at 8:09 pm in reply to: FCP Rates

    I don’t think it should cost any more than piano lessons, because it’s a lot harder to understand the piano. Check what piano lessons cost in your town.

  • Steven Gonzales

    February 28, 2007 at 3:29 pm in reply to: Is My Brand New SATA-Raid Array Dying?

    Have you checked under system preference > energy saver to make sure “Put the hard disks to sleep when possible” is not checked? Sometimes this can cause problems.

  • Steven Gonzales

    February 26, 2007 at 7:36 pm in reply to: drop and non drop frames

    If you log a clip as non-drop frame, for example, and it goes from 01:00:30:00 to 01:01:00:00, and then you place a tape which is drop frame for capturing, the computer will not be able to locate to 01:01:00:00 for the end point, because that frame address doesn’t exist on the drop frame tape.

    The warning message is to let you know this might happen, and frame addresses will be recalculated when going from non drop to drop frame.

  • Steven Gonzales

    February 26, 2007 at 2:42 pm in reply to: drop and non drop frames

    Drop frame and non-drop frame both have the same number of frames. No frames are “dropped”. What is “dropped” are some frame numbers.

    Think of timecode as frame addresses.

    If video ran at 30 frames per second, in an hour 60 * 60 * 30 frames would go by (108,000 frames) and the timecode at the end of that time would be 1 hour, or 01:00:00 or 3,600 complete seconds of 30 frame counting timecode.

    However, frames go by at a slightly slower rate (slower by 1 part in 1000, or 1/10th of 1 percent) of 29.97 frames per second. So in an hour of time on the wall clock, only 60 * 60 * 29.97 frames go by, or 107,892 frames. The timecode at that time would be 59:56:12 or 3596.4 complete seconds of 30 frame counting timecode.

    This is all well and good, except the clock on the wall says 1 hour, and the clock counting timecode addresses says 59min56secs12frames. If you’re running a TV station, this is confusing.

    So in order to make the timecode on the tape deck match the clock on the wall, the difference needs to be fixed, so that at 1 hour the timecode reads 1:00:00 even though the frame rate is 29.97.

    The difference between the theoretical 30 and the real 29.97 is 108 frames in an hour. To make up that difference in Drop Frame timecode, two frames of the counting (addresses) are skipped each minute on the minute. So at 00:59:29 the next frame is called 01:00:02, skipping two frames of numbering.

    This is done on every minute, except the even 10 minutes. So for 54 minutes out of the hour, two frames of counting are skipped. For 6 minutes out of the hour, no frames are skipped. 2 frames times 54 minutes is 108 frames, or the difference we needed.

    No frames were “dropped”, only some frame numbering addresses were skipped to help the clock on the wall match the clock on the video tape deck or computer.

    Drop frame and non-drop frame timecode both play the same number of frames in an hour of real time.

    The difference is that non-drop frame timecode has consecutive frame numbering addresses, and drop-frame timecode does not have consecutive frame numbering addresses, as it has dropped 108 frames of the count over the course of an hour, when it skipped 2 frames of count 54 times.

  • Steven Gonzales

    February 26, 2007 at 2:38 pm in reply to: Rating Your Skills

    I suggest reading the book “Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience” by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi.

    “You have heard about how a musician loses herself in her music, how a painter becomes one with the process of painting. In work, sport, conversation or hobby, you have experienced, yourself, the suspension of time, the freedom of complete absorption in activity. This is “flow,” an experience that is at once demanding and rewarding–an experience that Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi demonstrates is one of the most enjoyable and valuable experiences a person can have. The exhaustive case studies, controlled experiments and innumerable references to historical figures, philosophers and scientists through the ages prove Csikszentmihalyi’s point that flow is a singularly productive and desirable state.”

    https://www.amazon.com/Flow-Psychology-Experience-Mihaly-Csikszentmihalyi/dp/0060920432/sr=8-2/qid=1172500504/ref=pd_bbs_2/105-3761856-8962003?ie=UTF8&s=books

  • Steven Gonzales

    February 24, 2007 at 6:16 pm in reply to: Classes in Final Cut Pro

    After you finish the manual, then go through “Motion Graphics and Effects in Final Cut Pro” by Kevin Monahan to get a clear perspective on the limits of Final Cut for compositing and graphics.

    This is not rocket science. It’s a computer program that is exploiting the full range of the quicktime programming interface. It’s just not that complicated, if you understand how computers accomplish things.

    It’s more stressful to learn from a book, mostly because the books are poorly written. However, learning under stress is not necessarily a bad thing.

  • Steven Gonzales

    February 24, 2007 at 4:16 am in reply to: Classes in Final Cut Pro

    I think you should pay yourself 900 dollars to go through the manual. It will take more than five days, but then you’re getting paid for it.

    Then take your 900 bucks and buy After Effects professional or a Mackie Control Universal or Boris Red.

  • I believe that for decades many projectors actually have used a double shuttering at 48hz and show each frame twice, so though we’re not seeing 48 discrete images, we are seeing 48 projected images per second.

  • Steven Gonzales

    February 23, 2007 at 3:58 pm in reply to: Short Film Project

    Sorry, I should have said 120 to 180 minutes. Hopefully you get the idea despite my simple math error.

Page 53 of 87

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy