[Tory Stewart]

Thanks so much Shane, I had missed this. I’m happy I’m not crazy and that there are some workarounds
as I move forward.

[Tory Stewart]

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for running a test. The volumes only refuse to mount when I open the FCP Project on a different computer. In the office I used Log & Transfer to transcode from the H.264 files and took a copy of the project file and the H.264 files home with me. When I opened the project at home, mounted the volumes in the Log & Transfer window, highlighted all the offline clips in the Browser and selected Batch Capture from the drop-down menu, I got the error window I posted above.

I ran a test in the office and Batch Capture works without any issue, so I guess it isn’t something having to do with the T2i hack unless it is somehow triggered by opening the project on a different computer. Really at a loss at this point, it doesn’t really affect my workflow at this point but I worry about delivering a larger project with the H.264 files.

Tory

[Tory Stewart]

Here is a screen grab of the altered .plist file. The only change is the addition of the “Canon EOS REBEL T2i” string:

[Tory Stewart]

Hi Jeremy,

I do hope in the future to spend more time in the Log & Transfer window rather than transcoding all the footage in one go. Not least because if I log several clips from the same MVI file they name themselves in ascending order, meaning that all clips logged after them will not have names that correspond with their corresponding files anyway (for example, if I log three sections of MVI_1000 using in and out points, they come in as MVI_1000, MVI_1001, and MVI_1002. Then the file that is actually named MVI_1001 is transcoded as a clip named MVI_1003.).

The scenario you describe is the very one that is giving me trouble. I mount the volumes containing the original H.264 files and when I direct the offline clips to batch capture a window opens, lists the necessary volumes with exclamation points next to them, and says that they are not mounted. When I click “add volume” and select the proper folders (again, I have not meddled with the names or folder structure of the volumes since the first successful log & transfer) a progress bar pops up with a message indicating that media is being scanned. When the scanning is finished nothing happens, the error window remains open. Similarly, clicking “search for volumes” yields nothing. I have attached a screen grab below of the error window with a section of the log and transfer window behind it in which you can see that the volume that is being listed as unmounted is in fact mounted. The names of the four clips I am trying to batch capture have not been altered in the Browser, they match the names of the H.264 files.

To reiterate: I understand that from here on out I should either commit to spending time naming the clips in the log & transfer window and/or making sure to modify the file names if I make any subsequent changes and as long as something doesn’t happen to the ProRes files I should be fine. However, I was under the impression from discussion threads on this subject that the reigning philosophy re backing up was that the most important files were the original H.264 files (which I have been dutifully backing up in three locations) and that no matter what might go awry, as long as those files are preserved any FCP project can be rescued (within reason) with a batch capture. If this is not the case then I will have to a) switch my attention to making multiple copies of the ProRes files and b) purchase more drives so that I have enough space to transcode and edit everything at full res as well as store multiple back-ups. Of course if I rename any clips subsequent to transcoding and then lose the ProRes files, apparently I won’t be able to reconnect the media to my back-up ProRes files anyway. Is the only solution to never change clip names? After purchasing “Getting Organized in FCP” I thought I was finally operating from a place of organizational competence but now I feel a little despairing. I hope that I’ve made some error in logic so that there is some hope in correcting it, I’d prefer that than to be working within a flawed system. Thank goodness for Creative Cow and thanks so much for all the help so far!

Oh and a final question: could this possibly have anything to do with having had to alter the Canon EOS plug-in to make it compatible with the T2i?

[Tory Stewart]

This is becoming clearer. A follow-up question: what if I transcode the footage at a low resolution, change the clip names, rename the files to match the clips and edit without incident but then want to deliver the final project with the H.264 files so that the online can be done at full resolution? Will a new batch capture be impossible? If you’re working with DSLR footage do you have to transcode at the highest resolution and deliver the ProRes files rather than the CF card volumes?

[Tory Stewart]

Thanks Jerry, I didn’t realize this was the case and just assumed the file name was stored somewhere in the metadata of the clip. I was following Shane Ross’s tutorial for tapeless media capture so thought that renaming the clips after capture was not going to be problematic. Did I misunderstand something in the video and is this problem unique to tapeless media? I thought that subclipping, renaming etc was standard when organizing a project so am glad to have caught this early.

Thanks,

Tory

[Tory Stewart]

One more question: what if I conform the 29.97 clips to 23.98 using Cinema Tools and then run them through Compressor to convert them to ProRes? Is that an adequate method?

[Tory Stewart]

Thanks Dave! This has made my headache subside considerably.

[Tory Stewart]

Whoops, yes, browser confirms that they were captured DV/DVCPRO – NTSC. Thanks for the explanation of the interlacing patterns, I am going to employ your final suggestion and hopefully get to the bottom of how to footage was originally shot. If indeed the clips that are appearing interlaced were shot in 60i then having captured them using the DV-NTSC preset would have been proper procedure, is that correct?

[Tory Stewart]

Hi Dave, thanks for the response.

I’m talking about individual clips shot at 24p. I need to convert them before I edit because I need to work with them in a 23.98 timeline intercut with ProRes 23.98 footage. I did not shoot or capture the footage but I was told it was shot at 24p and the quicktimes that were given to me are at 29.97 so I assume they were captured using the DV NTSC preset.

Since posting I have noticed that some of the clips I run through Compressor actually come out looking smooth and others do not. When scrolling frame by frame through the original clips that generate a smooth result I can identify the two out of every five frames that are interlaced. When doing the same with the original clips that generate the completely interlaced result, every frame looks interlaced. Does this suggest that the original clips might have been shot in both 24p and 24pA by accident and captured all using the DV NTSC preset? Would capturing 24pA in this way have resulted in a completely interlaced clip? Sorry for the backwards logic, I’m trying to figure out if I’m going to need to rustle up the original tapes and do a complete recapture or not.

Thanks,

Tory