Forum Replies Created

Page 68 of 186
  • Steven L. gotz

    February 8, 2007 at 2:07 pm in reply to: FCP & PPro forum observation

    OK. Cool. Then I will have to stick to my theory that because there are more Pros using FCP than Premiere Pro, and Pros like the Cow because of it’s great support and format, more FCP posts than Premiere Pro posts makes sense.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 8, 2007 at 1:52 am in reply to: FCP & PPro forum observation

    It might be because there are more Pros using FCP than Premiere Pro, but it might be that Adobe provides a decent forum for the beginners and basic users. On the whole, it seems like I see a lot of the folks in both places, but there are also a lot of folks I only see here.

    Is there a decent FCP forum run by Apple, or on an Apple supported site?

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 7, 2007 at 5:16 pm in reply to: Poor Quality QuickTime DV-NTSC output

    For Quicktime, you are better off getting Sorenson Squeeze so that you have access to the Pro codec.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 7, 2007 at 4:07 pm in reply to: youtube problem

    According to one guy who has some nice videos posted, the secret is to use WMV at 1024K. Another fellow said that sharpening the edges helps, as well as oversaturating the video. Since YouTube seems to desaturate it a bit, that makes sense.

    I still have not found the magic formula, but there is one. I have seen some really great videos on YouTube. Search on “Mr. Deity” and look at the clean white text on a black background. Look at the clean video. If I could do that, I would be very happy.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 6, 2007 at 2:24 pm in reply to: premiere pro 1,5 plug ins

    What plugins do you need? There are no good plugins for free that I know of other than some old transitions. Why do you need plugins? What do you want them to do?

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 6, 2007 at 2:23 pm in reply to: To HDV or not to HDV? that is the question!

    On the other hand, I have found that editing HDV in a SD project allows me to find the best part of the frame. I can pan around the larger frame, scaling from 40% or so to see the entire frame, all the way back up to 100% to see just a small part of the frame. But yes, without Cineform Aspect HD, it would be a lot harder.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 5, 2007 at 11:38 pm in reply to: Interpret footage automate?

    I don’t shoot D1. Do you? D1 is 720X486 I believe, whereas DV is 720X480. Where does 534 come from? Well, divide 480 by 0.9 and you get 533.333333333 which rounds up to 534.

    Now, if you do the same thing to 486, you get 540.

    Make three PSD or TGA files. One at 720X540 square, one at 720X534 square, and one at 720X480 0.9PAR. Put each on the same sequence, select each one at a time in the program panel to activate the motion effect outlines, and you will see that the one that fits exactly is the one that is 720X480 with 0.9PAR right out of Photoshop.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 5, 2007 at 10:24 pm in reply to: Interpret footage automate?

    If you have a 720X534 it sees it as square pixels and it will look right. If you make it 720X480, it should see it as 0.9PAR.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 5, 2007 at 10:21 pm in reply to: Invisible Footage

    There is a well known problem with too many JPG files on the sequence. A bug is a bug even if you try to ignore it.

    If you had created a white matte in Premiere Pro, your problem would likely have not manifested itself. But a jpg is just another still it has to keep track of and there is some sort of memory leakage associated with jpg files.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

  • Steven L. gotz

    February 4, 2007 at 10:43 pm in reply to: how long do they go?, adobe pp. 2.0

    The lower the quality you are willing to put up with, the longer it can run. I personally would never go more than an 1:15 or at most 1:30. Trying to get two hours on a single layer just compromises the quality way too much. Unless you shoot a lot of talking heads with stationary backgrounds, from a sturdy tripod. Then your material compresses a lot smaller without a problem.

    Steven
    https://www.stevengotz.com

Page 68 of 186

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