|
Chitin posted:Honestly you're not going to get this done as cheap as you want with packaging and all (the media alone comes to nearly $100) but frankly I'm not sure why you need all that for cast, family and friends; a well designed disc in a white paper sleeve will look plenty professional and more is overkill for something that won't be sold as a retail product in my mind. Honestly? I totally understand and agree that any rational person would probably just go with a paper sleeve deal or a basic jewel case and not go to that extent of it. But this is a project I've spent [i}thousands{/i] on already, and has taken upwards of five years to come to fruition. And I'm perfectly willing to admit that for the satisfaction of my own pride I want to see this project end in a DVD case in my hand that looks like something I coulda bought at Best Buy. Is it unnecessary? Absolutely. Expensive? Probably. But I just want to make sure there's no way I can do it before I write it off completely. powderific posted:I just did a big order from these guys and was pretty happy with the result. If you did full color dvd with a clear plastic sleeve or jewel case, it'd be about $170 for 100. $140 if you just do those plain paper window sleeves. I think either option would be more than enough and well appreciated by cast and crew. So for $140 you get the disk duplicated with an image of your choice printed as the disk label, and they ship them to you in paper sleeves, correct? Do you happen to know if they use an inkjet method or thermal transfer/retransfer to label the disks? Also, I assume if you were happy with it you found all the disks to work fine, labels to be well printed, etc? EDIT: I was originally thinking I'd just do paper sleeves and DIY my own DVD cases but these prices actually seem to be within my price range for everything start to finish, it seems like it'd only be about 250 for everything included which is about what I'm prepared to pay. CaptainFuzychin fucked around with this message at 03:36 on Dec 6, 2011 |
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:37 |
|
|
I recommend you don't burn your own DVD-R or DVD-RW. My experience is that the rate of them going bad after only 6 months to a year is unacceptable for anything you might want to keep. Actual DVDs are worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 03:55
|
|
|
Unfortunately, I never saw the discs myself. They were for a remote client who seemed happy enough with it. I bet they'd send you a sample if you gave them a call.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 17:28
|
|
|
You can buy sticker sheets you can print on that will peel off and go on DVD faces. You could even take them to Kinko's for a quality print job on the stickers if you want the extra quality. If you have a friend that works at a company that has a DVD duplicator/printer then you might be able to get a hookup that way. I've worked at small film houses with DVD duplicators and printers and doing a run of 100 isn't a big deal that could be set up in off-hours to run on the cheap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
Does anyone have some advice on getting rid of the moire that's screwing up this shot (right around 0:50)? It's a line-drawing given to me by an artist, so I'm not sure how best to deal with it. I brought it into After Effects, did a lossless render, and I don't see the moire in FCP or the quicktime file when I export it, but I get it when I compress it. I've tried putting some blur on image to try to fix it, but that didn't work either. I know it's the thinness of the lines but I'm not sure on the best way to proceed to knock it out. http://vimeo.com/33408938
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2011 02:00
|
|
|
I've had some weird issues with putting progressive media into an interlaced timeline in FCP that produced similar aliasing. The best solution I could come up with was to change the timeline to a progressive codec and deinterlace the interlaced clips in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
BlackMagic's DaVinci Resolve Lite, the free version of their color correction and grading software is now out for Windows 7 machines in beta form. Like with all BlackMagic products the minimum system requirements are huge. 12 gb memory minimum, only certified cards are Quadro 400 minimum (2d only), GeForce GTX 580, Quadro 5000 and Quadro 6000. Need CUDA so no ATI aupport. Anyway go to BlackMagic Designs webpage go to Support then choose DaVinci Lite as the product and it will allow you to download the beta for Windows 7 64 bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2011 05:28
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:Does anyone have some advice on getting rid of the moire that's screwing up this shot (right around 0:50)? It's a line-drawing given to me by an artist, so I'm not sure how best to deal with it. Did you shrink the resolution during compression? It might be resizing without interpolation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2011 14:57
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:Does anyone have some advice on getting rid of the moire that's screwing up this shot (right around 0:50)? It's a line-drawing given to me by an artist, so I'm not sure how best to deal with it. Could you maybe post two full-res screenshots, one form the footage you imported into FCP and one from the compressed video? You also have weird moiré in the guy's glasses at 0:36. Like Teenage Fansub posted, it looks like resizing without proper interpolation, probably mixed with 4:2:2 sampling. EDIT: Also, post the codecs you used please. Are you by any chance editing/exporting this interlaced?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2011 15:10
|
|
|
Interesting... I just re-rendered the compositions, added a slight bit of blur and then dragged the animation-codec lossless file that after effects created right into FCP, and that worked. I must have been dealing with something carrying over from an older version, although I'm not sure what.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 06:18
|
|
|
Hey guys, so I've gone and shot my first short on a friends Canon HV20. It all looks great so far on the camera, but I was told that when I start editing today, there are a few special things about HDV film that I'm going to have to take care of for it to look how it's supposed to. He said there is a bit of noticeable frame skipping or something like that, and that the screen needs to stretch down a little, and to deinterlace it. I really am not sure what all of that means or where to start as far as fixing it, but anybody have some advice? He made it sound like having to do that was a pretty normal workflow, but I couldn't find anything on it after a little while of Googling. I have access to Premier, and After Effects through my school, if that makes the process any different.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 19:49
|
|
|
I use an HV20 so I can answer your questions about workflow. I use the HDMI output with a Blackmagic Hyperdeck to get uncompressed 8 bit 4:2:2 video but previously used the normal tape workflow. The normal tape gives you HDV video which is 1440x1080 stretched to the full 1920 through a 1.33 pixel ratio encoded with MPEG2 in 8 bit 4:2:0 color. The HV20 can do progressive video but the data is encoded within a 60 frame interlaced stream. You will need to attach the firewire cable to a computer and use software to capture the video and deinterlace it or remove pulldown to go from an interlaced stream (each frame only shows every other line) to progressive video (each frame shows the whole image). You can also either change it to 1920 by 1080 with square pixels or keep the 1.33 rectangular pixels. The HV20 has no proper pulldown flags (data markers which tell programs how the stream is interlaced) so many software packages have trouble deinterlacing/removing pulldown but After Effects works like a champ. I believe you can capture through Premiere Pro. After that you can edi. It sounds hard but is actually pretty easy. Shoot footage to tape Connect camcorder via firewire to pc ot mac Capture using FCP/PP/Vegas Remove pulldown via AE Edit Yuns fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Dec 13, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2011 22:32
|
|
|
Yuns posted:I use an HV20 so I can answer your questions about workflow. I use the HDMI output with a Blackmagic Hyperdeck to get uncompressed 8 bit 4:2:2 video but previously used the normal tape workflow. The normal tape gives you HDV video which is 1440x1080 stretched to the full 1920 through a 1.33 pixel ratio encoded with MPEG2 in 8 bit 4:2:0 color. The HV20 can do progressive video but the data is encoded within a 60 frame interlaced stream. You will need to attach the firewire cable to a computer and use software to capture the video and deinterlace it or remove pulldown to go from an interlaced stream (each frame only shows every other line) to progressive video (each frame shows the whole image). You can also either change it to 1920 by 1080 with square pixels or keep the 1.33 rectangular pixels. The HV20 has no proper pulldown flags (data markers which tell programs how the stream is interlaced) so many software packages have trouble deinterlacing/removing pulldown but After Effects works like a champ. I believe you can capture through Premiere Pro. After that you can edi. It sounds hard but is actually pretty easy. Perfect! Thank you so much. All of it was captured already in FCP at my friends house, so I have all of the MOV files. So all I have to do is take those into After Effects and deinterlace it and bam it should be fine? Is there any stretching needed to be done as far as video size goes? edit: also, it seems like nothing is picking up the video when I import it in AE or try to play it with Quicktime. They're just playing the audio, any ideas? SVU Fan fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
First, what modes did you use on the camera when recording? Did you use the 1080 24P mode (you can tell because the screen shows HDV surrounded by film sprocket holes) or 1080 60i mode just says HDV, Also what can you tell me about the MOV files. Did they play properly on the machine that captured the video? If so, your machine might not have the proper video codec. MOV is just a container that can use a number of different codecs. FCP users will typically use an intermediate codec like ProRes and your friend might have transcoded to ProRes or something else. Update your version of quicktime to the newest version.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 04:03
|
|
|
Yuns posted:First, what modes did you use on the camera when recording? Did you use the 1080 24P mode (you can tell because the screen shows HDV surrounded by film sprocket holes) or 1080 60i mode just says HDV, I'm pretty sure we shot it in 60i. He captured it in FCP and the clips were all playing fine on his machine while FCP was open. So he gave me the MOV files after he captured it, and for some reason the video is not playing in either Quicktime, or even After Effects. I just updated Quicktime and the video is still not playing. Would the problem possibly be fixed if I just took the MOV files and used FCP again?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 04:47
|
|
|
Sounds some sort of codec issue. It should work in FCP if it worked on his machine. Since it is in 60i with no 24P you can just deinterlace to 30P with FCP or Compressor. You only need AE to remove pulldown from 24P in a 60i stream. Feel free to keep it at 1440x1080 or increase the project to 1920x1080. I generally render to 1920. EDIT: Or if you'd like, you can send me the shortest mov file through a file hosting site like mediafire and I can see what the issue is. Yuns fucked around with this message at 05:23 on Dec 14, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 05:20
|
|
|
Turned out my friend forgot to export them as Quicktime MOV's but rather ones that were only compatible with FCP, and also forgot to mention that! Thanks a ton for your help Yuns. I just had to go to a computer that had FCP and everything worked out perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2011 09:42
|
|
|
I hope this is the right place to ask. Is it just me or does the Warp Stabilizer refuse to work in After Effects CS5.5? Whether I shoot with my cellphone or D5100, I always get this pulsing blur effect over everything when it is stabilized. Making the footage unusable. I have no idea how to fix it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2011 15:23
|
|
|
I tested AE Warp Stabilizer on some shaky handheld footage. So let me guess. You are trying to stabilize handheld footage shot while walking? If so, I think I understand the issue. If the footage is walking footage with jarring footsteps, Warp Stabilizer will have problems. It can center and smooth the footage but every time your foot hits the ground you introduce additional motion blur and rolling shutter distortion (image skewing caused by the fact that most cmos sensor don't scan the entire densor at once but rather scan lines). If the steps are jarring enough, Warp Stabilizer cannot compensate and while the overall image will be centered and cropped, with each step the scene will blur for an instant. This causes the image pulsing. If so, you may try another stabilizer plugin but you may have to reshoot as this will be very tough to fix after the fact. Use a steadicam or other stabilizer for a reshoot. Warp Stabilizer is good but it is not a miracle worker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 11:54
|
|
|
Yuns posted:I tested AE Warp Stabilizer on some shaky handheld footage. So let me guess. You are trying to stabilize handheld footage shot while walking? If so, I think I understand the issue. If the footage is walking footage with jarring footsteps, Warp Stabilizer will have problems. It can center and smooth the footage but every time your foot hits the ground you introduce additional motion blur and rolling shutter distortion (image skewing caused by the fact that most cmos sensor don't scan the entire densor at once but rather scan lines). If the steps are jarring enough, Warp Stabilizer cannot compensate and while the overall image will be centered and cropped, with each step the scene will blur for an instant. This causes the image pulsing. If so, you may try another stabilizer plugin but you may have to reshoot as this will be very tough to fix after the fact. Use a steadicam or other stabilizer for a reshoot. Warp Stabilizer is good but it is not a miracle worker. Strange. I've seen people walking around and riding bikes and it works. But I guess I can try again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 13:26
|
|
|
If you think it should work, you could try alternative settings, but I was able to replicate your pulsing blur problem using video of a heavily jarring walk.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 16:28
|
|
|
This may be of interest to this thread. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfFj5luBM0E&sns=fb Incredibly nerdy, done by somebody at ITV here in the UK.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 17:14
|
|
|
Yuns posted:If you think it should work, you could try alternative settings, but I was able to replicate your pulsing blur problem using video of a heavily jarring walk. Thing is, now that I think of it. I did make a stationary shot once where I was just panning the camera around slowly. Same blurry effect. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2011 20:19
|
|
|
New fx app on App Store. Looks incredible! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLyN0e7S4_Y&feature=youtube_gdata_player
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2011 21:31
|
|
|
Great, now I can spice up my home videos with something other than star wipes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 02:05
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Great, now I can spice up my home videos with something other than star wipes. Why have hamburger when you could have steak?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2011 22:02
|
|
|
Hey, just found this thread! Last time I saw a film-related thread, there was still a filmmaking forum! I'm a commercial editor in LA, been doing it for a while, I'll try and answer questions when i can but I actually have one of my own; hopefully someone can help. I'm working with some footage shot 1080p 23.98psf (came from AVCHD on p2 cards from some sort of panasonic). Basically, the deliverables format specifies 1080i 59.94. I asked if they could accept a 1080p 24pn QT file that they can perform a pull down on, and they said they would rather I do the pulldown and QC it on my end so that they don't have to worry about it. The problem is, I'm finishing this project remotely, on a laptop with no monitor capable of viewing at 1080i 59.94, so I don't know how to check my work on this. My question is, knowing that I can't really QC it, is it better to convert my FCP timeline to 1080i/59.94, or to leave it at 1080/23.98psf and make the conversion at the compressor level? Or even better, is there a third option that magically doesn't make a pull down look like poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2011 23:24
|
|
|
I say make the client pay to have it run through a Teranex, if not do it in Compressor, the quality will be better than doing it in FCP.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2011 01:59
|
|
|
I trust Ae with a 3:2 pulldown more than Compressor. You'd probably better just deliver 23PsF on this project though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
Gunjin posted:I say make the client pay to have it run through a Teranex, if not do it in Compressor, the quality will be better than doing it in FCP. Yeah, let's just assume that even though this is a broadcast promo for a multi-billion dollar corporation, they don't care about that. My only issue running through compressor actually is that since I have to deliver it for the online edit/sound mix, I have to deliver a QT ref with timecode burn-in, so I have to take the sequence to 59.94 in final cut itself. I've already insisted that delivering in psf is a better option but they aren't hearing it. I guess what I could do is output an uncompressed 1080psf, throw it into AE, do the pulldown, (or ditto with compressor), then pull it back into FCP at 59.94 for the QT ref.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2011 18:08
|
|
|
RaoulDuke12 posted:I guess what I could do is output an uncompressed 1080psf, throw it into AE, do the pulldown, (or ditto with compressor), then pull it back into FCP at 59.94 for the QT ref. This is what I would do. A little extra work, sure, but would help squeeze a little extra quality out of the vid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2011 18:57
|
|
|
Anyone know about Adobe's licensing? I have after effects cs5.5 on OSX. In order to do this HDR video merging, I need to use a windows-only plugin. I installed XP last night in VMWare and would like to install AE so that I can boot the VM, merge the footage then return it to OSX So I can edit but I'm not sure if my license will hold up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
In my experience the license keys from Mac to PC are totally different and don't cross platforms.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
RaoulDuke is correct I believe. Adobe allows installation of one license on two machines but they must be the same platform. Cross platform installs need a separate license. So 2 PCs ok 2 Macs ok but one PC and one Mac not ok. CS5 AE license says: 2.11 Dual Boot Platform. The Software is licensed for use on a specific operating system platform. You must purchase a separate license for use of the Software on each operating system platform. By way of example, if you desire to install the Software on both the Mac OS and Windows operating system platforms on a device that runs both of those platforms (i.e., a dual boot machine), then you must first obtain two separate licenses for the Software. This is true even if two versions of the Software, each designed for a different operating system platform, are delivered to you on the same media. 2.5 Portable or Home Computer Use. Subject to the important restrictions set forth in Section 2.6, the primary user of the Computer on which the Software is installed under Section 2.2 (“Primary User”) may install a second copy of the Software for his or her exclusive use on either a portable Computer or a Computer located at his or her home, provided that the Software on the portable or home Computer is not used at the same time as the Software on the primary Computer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2012 22:03
|
|
|
drat. Oh well, guess I'll get the Premiere trial and give it a whirl. I figure I should probably know it anyway, if Final Cut is gonna continue to be in the shape it's in. EDIT: gently caress, the premiere pro installer is bitching about my XP VM not meeting system requirements for installing. What a pain in the rear end, I hope there's some way to fool it. All I want is to use this GingerHDR plugin to merge footage. I could boot into bootcamp and install Premiere Pro and do it that way but rebooting every time I want to transfer footage is such a PITA. Is there a way to get an older version of Premiere for testing or am I just pretty much out of luck when it comes to running Premiere in a Virtual Machine? bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Jan 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2012 07:26
|
|
|
When does Premiere 6.0 come out?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 13:53
|
|
|
bassguitarhero posted:drat. Oh well, guess I'll get the Premiere trial and give it a whirl. I figure I should probably know it anyway, if Final Cut is gonna continue to be in the shape it's in. Isn't there also a trial for Mac OS? Or is the plugin Windows-only?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
It's the plug-in. I have after effects so I would just use that. I can boot into windows 7, it's just that I'm normally multi-tasking so going into windows proper means no side stuff until I'm back in OS X. Not the end of the world, just enough of a motivation-killer to make me wait til they release a Mac version.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2012 00:38
|
|
|
I'm starting to play with some motion tracking stuff in After Effects and I'm curious as to what governs its performance. It seems to take forever, but looking at activity monitor my CPU is barely spiking at all. I'm on an quad core i7 MBP with 8 gigs of RAM, working off of a FW800 drive. Could the FW800 connection be slowing it down somehow?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 19:37 |
|
|
How much RAM/processor power are you allowing AE to use? I'm using the same laptop as you and mine flies through motion tracking. I have no way to illustrate this but in AE, you know how there's two boxes and a cross hair if you're tracking one point? The cross hair is where the tracking point will be set, the first box is the area AE is using as its tracking point, and the third square is the area in which AE will search for the smaller square in each frame. The size of the third square is the biggest factor on how long it'll take your system to render each frame, so make it as small as possible without losing your track in the motion. You might know all this already though. And it sounds like there's probably some other underlying issue.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2012 09:06
|
|