|
I work for CBS Interactive doing a bunch of their online news editing, and we do it all in FCP but the other editors can get to be real pissheads about things. I had one guy scoff at me because I was using 3 video tracks (one for A-roll and two for B-roll), looks at me and goes, "Checkerboarding? Sha. Haven't seen that since editing 101!" and walks out. Whatever. Not as bad as some of the TV studios I'd heard of, I worked at a film school for a while in the UK and one of the coworkers saw me teaching a class on FCP for teens and was like, "You're teaching them the blade tool? It's 3 point editing all the way, if the mates at iTVS saw you using a blade tool you'd be fired on the spot!" Of course, if you're teaching people NLEs for the first time, I prefer to keep things as non-abstract as possible, and things like the blade tool make for very quick learning & understanding of how to splice and re-arrange video clips on a timeline. Never really used Avid. The only time it would have ever been useful was when I was interviewing for Pixar but they didn't like some of the movies I'd worked on so I was never really in the running anyways. My freelancing is sort of balancing between cinematography & editing. Most of the work throughout the year will be editing, but the big jobs will be camerawork. Now that I'm getting into after effects, there's a lot of little things cropping up for that, too. Finally got a retail version of FCS 2 (was using an academic of FCS 1 for the longest) so I'm really looking forward to upgrading to 3 when the financials clear up. Not been a pretty year for freelancers. bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 19:44 on Nov 26, 2010 |
#
¿
Nov 26, 2010 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
Peacebone, depending on where you're at and what you're working on, that will decide. I myself have never worked on an avid NLE. Never needed to and aside from one interview it's never come up. I live and work in san Francisco but a buddy of mine works in LA and all he works on is FCP so I think your money's better there. At least for me it's a better investment, the odds of getting a project in avid aren't ad great as getting a project in FCP. To the DSLR dude, transcode your clips to apple pro-res 4:2:2 and save yourself a gigantic headache.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2010 01:23
|
|
|
You might be a lot happier with a few intel mac minis, sounds like less hassle, less heat, electricity, etc
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2010 09:38
|
|
|
Seriously. A buddy of mine from college just bought a 5D and won't shut the gently caress up about how much better it is than my HVX. Okay yeah your camera that came out in the last year is better than my HVX I've had for 5 years. Duh. But I've also paid for the camera a dozen times over and shot movies across the world. So I don't need some waiter with his new DSLR talkin poo poo about my camera And of course you get piles of insufferable morons who post job ads who ONLY want a DP with their own 5D so they can do every single shot with a ridiculous DoF. But that's the industry for ya
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2010 07:48
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:Not really. It's mostly just vocal amateurs. I suppose if you want to go to work for a studio then that might be a bit easier, but that's not the way I roll, so
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2010 18:35
|
|
|
Vimeo's a much better choice for reels and stuff, IMO. Hopefully I'll get around to sharing some pics of my setup later. I've got two doc trailers to edit together (one just landed in my lap today), so I definitely think I'll be spending the rest of the week (hell the year) with FCP open more often than not. Node-based video editing looks like a complete nightmare. BTW, does anybody teach Final Cut? I'm going in for an interview to teach FCP & general video production to youngsters - I used to do it at a film school in London, but that was more that I'd been hired for other stuff and sort of moved into teaching a few classes here and there.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 02:00
|
|
|
MMD3 posted:Any help would be much appreciated. Maybe try opening them in Mpeg Streamclip and export to another format. Are you working on PC or Mac? Also maybe try downloading the files from another site like youtube, a high-quality trailer on their site might still be worth using once it's transcoded.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2010 02:28
|
|
|
Editing hasn't changed because the language of storytelling hasn't changed. We're still using the same senses to tell story in the same way, so if you want to get that large as a concept, language as a vehicle for conveying ideas hasn't really changed, either. We've still got the same 5 senses and they're used in the same way. You can't telepathically put a story in someone's head (yet), although you can sort of broadcast audio into people's heads, but they're still going to interpret them in the same manner. We can't travel through time and our perception of the universe is still based on a single linear perspective, so there's not really a whole lot new in the ways we can communicate with each other. Movies like Memento probably come the closest to challenging traditional storytelling narrative, but then it's still based on the audience putting the film together in a linear, time-forward fashion in order to make sense of the story. Smell-o-vision never took off and having something in the theatre to physically interact with (like from Captain Neo or the other Disney 3D films) can't be recreated at home, so you're still stuck with basically one vehicle for conveying a story. EDIT: DVD did bring about a change in some parts of editing language, along with video games, where there's more of an interactive story. I made a DVD in film school in which you saw an intro, then there was a screen with 6 choices and you could pick which scene to watch next. Building in those sorts of story choices and trying to direct the audience to choose a particular path while allowing them to do others MIGHT fall under a change of editing language but I'm not sure if that still falls under editing. bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Dec 30, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2010 22:51
|
|
|
Unexpected EOF posted:Basically, I'd really like it if people made sure they were properly lighting their shots and maybe used a monitor instead of the really inaccurate LCD the HVX has. It took me a really long time to get used to that LCD. I had to go through a lot of bad shoots before I really learned how it works and how it translates to real screens. I'd be better off buying an actual monitor but until I can get one, I've figured that if you push it until the image just starts to wash out, you're almost at peak. I think it over-reports color to try to make up for the bad resolution, I'm not sure. But either way, that's been my eyeball technique and it's been holding thus far.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2010 04:57
|
|
|
Protip posted:Unfortunately the HD Writer software that came with the SD60 only has the option to convert to mpeg2 format, and it converts it into a standard format instead of widescreen, so it doesn't really work for me. I did just try Avidemux 2.5, which at the settings I used seemed to output the video at a high quality but the audio lost sync. Still looking for something that will do the job a little better, and it would be nice if I could automate a batch to convert a bunch of videos at once since they are all broken up into individual clips off of the camera. Have you tried MPEG Streamclip? That can convert between tons of formats.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2011 11:17
|
|
|
Unless I'm mistaken, Vegas IS an NLE just like all the other major ones. Unless you're talking about node-based editors, but NLEs use timelines, it's just non-linear because you can move to any point on the timeline and manipulate it in a non-linear fashion. Unlike something like videotape where you have to rewind & fast forward to move your cue. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but that's been my understanding of why they're called NLEs. I haven't used Vegas in over 5 years but I'm pretty sure it was considered an NLE even back then.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2011 02:45
|
|
|
I just started freelancing for an ad agency, and it is so different than anything else I've worked for. I had the interview on Tuesday, the dude is basically walking me to the door as I'm talking to him so I think there's no way I'm gonna hear back from them, get an email by the time I get home asking me to come in the next day. I show up, they talk to me for a half hour about the two spots they need edited, hand me a hard drive full of footage and off I go. Send them a 60 sec spot that night, they love it and give me a few tweaks. Send them revisions the next day, couple more tweaks this morning, and now I'm sending it to the rep to send off to the client. I've never worked with so little direction, but so far it's working. When I've cut for news or documentaries or music videos I get people who want to sit behind me the whole time and go through things step-by-step. Maybe it's just because these guys are so busy, but they're really to-the-point and hands off. My last email from them was 5 bullet-pointed changes and telling me the different formats they want it in to send to the client.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
Haha yeah I JUST got that. They asked me to end the video right at the high-five, no problem. Then asked me to make a version w/ out any music or the intro. I shoot those off to them. Then get a frantic call, like "This version without music looks like crap when you do the cutaways without any audio! and the outro without music looks really bad you need to send us a new version with those fixes ASAP!" and then want a title card added to the end without telling me in advance. And THAT'S when my internet went down. Which all could have been avoided if they'd said that instead of expected me to read minds over email. I don't mind making the changes but "take out the music and the intro" is pretty clear, if it doesn't contain "also take out the cut-aways and the outro" then why would they expect me to do that? Oh well. Thankfully the internet came up after half an hour of me banging my head against the desk.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 22:56
|
|
|
Question about an editing reel: Do you edit the scenes in addition, or is it just clips from completed projects? I've done a bunch of short news segments and commercials, I don't have the original footage but I can get the completed videos from their websites, so would it be best just to stick some chunks from these together and title them? I figure it's about drat time I actually made a reel, I just never thought about how an editing reel would work.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2011 23:05
|
|
|
Yeah I was looking at yours earlier for reference, which was sort of what prompted my question. Like, if I'm re-editing these scenes, then the reel itself becomes about the editing, not about the work I've done. Whereas if I put in chunks of things I've edited, then it would keep the feel of what I've actually delivered as an editor. For a cinematographer's reel I'd definitely rearrange the shots (I'm actually thinking of making 3 reels, one for editing, one for DP, one for FX), but that was sort of my issue about re-editing scenes for an editing reel, since they'd no longer be what I delivered to client. I hope that makes sense.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 01:38
|
|
|
Kolchak posted:It depends on what you're looking to do, I think. I work mostly in television, so when I'm looking at editors' reels I'm looking for the ability to tell a story, to convey the geography of the scene, etc. My eyes usually glaze over when I'm sent another 3-minute collection of random footage and Video Copilot tutorials cut to "Paper Planes," because all it tells me is that you can sync your cuts to an audio waveform. I'd much prefer to see a few scenes from stuff you've cut. Right now I'm looking at a few clips from some pieces: 1) a piece from a promotional video/commercial I did for a video game system, going up on their facebook acct (waiting on approval for the edit itself, they like the music, just trying to figure out how to pay for it). I was gonna take about the first 20 seconds of this and then cut to the outro 10 sec. 2) a piece from a news video i cut for a CBSi affiliate, again intro up to the beginning of the interview, then cut to outro and out 3) a piece from a music video i cut that was made from a live performance i put together for the SF Girls' Chorus. We set up 3 video screens behind the girls while they sang, and then projected this video piece. We filmed the event, then I used after effects to lay in the video in post over the original (faint) video screens, then cut between angles of the event and a one-screen version of the video. 4) a bit from a doc trailer i just finished cutting. so altogether, about 30 seconds from each video, essentially a couple of 10-20 second sections so I could preserve the feel of the edit I turned in to client. I don't have any music videos or narrative pieces at this point, so I'm not going for anything super-flashy as I am just competency at a range of styles from quick news & commercial to slower-paced performance and documentary. Mostly just waiting on this bloody promo piece to get the OK.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2011 19:05
|
|
|
Man_of_Teflon posted:Quick question as I'm a complete scrub with aftereffects, but this looks like the thread to ask in: I believe that the issue is the tracking, since AE has to run the tracking over the comp in the program, and then would base the actual stabilisation off a null object that it's following in the comp, so premiere may not be doing that. i'm not sure on that one, i went to a CS5 roadshow and I *thought* that that was working in an after effects->premiere roundabout, but without using Premiere I could see why it wouldn't work.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2011 19:11
|
|
|
If your current setup is working fine, then there's not really a need to change, since they all are different ways of creating the same product. But if you're trying to work with a bunch of other people, who may be using FCP, then that might be worth looking into as an investment. For example, my buddy and I shot a music video last weekend, created matching hard drives, and since we're both editing on FCP6 then we only have to send the project file back & forth instead of the actual footage. Everybody I work with works in FCP, so there's an advantage to having it for that reason. That said, if you're not looking for that extended collaboration/networking and your current setup is giving you what you want, then there's no need to change.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
Anybody have some tips on getting better-looking DVDs for play on computers? I got a bunch of spots filmed in 1080 on a 5D, they look good in QuickTime, then I use compressor and throw on DVD best quality, looks fine on tv but interlaces a good deal on computer monitors. I've always had this problem but it seems especially pronounced with the 5D 1080 footage. Tried deinterlacing it when I ran it thru compressor, but saw no difference. I assume they'll screen it on a tv but if there's something to try so I don't get that, I'd like to hear about it. I can't remember the last time I watched a DVD on a computer so I've no idea if that's just a DVD/computer screen issue
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2011 21:38
|
|
|
Interlacing. The cameras are mostly still but one of the spots for example is a dude jumping up and down with champagne bottle spewing champagne everywhere out of the glass so you can see the lines on the computer. Fine on a tv
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2011 22:14
|
|
|
I can see lines in final cut pro, but I don't see them in QuickTime. I was given the spots already edited and exported to pro-res 422 but I can re-export if necessary. I've never run into problems like this before Edit: I put it into a new timeline and changed field dominance to upper, the lines went away. Guess I should re-do all of them, ugh, this guy bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Mar 15, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2011 22:38
|
|
|
I only had the finished spots, the completed, exported files, so I've no idea what the original timelines were like. Essentially I just was called in to build a DVD of the spots while this guy was at SXSW. I was wrong about checking it on a TV, too, I thought one of the people I handed it off to did, but I'm not sure. Either way, it looked fine in quicktime, was interlaced in final cut until i switched field dominance to upper, then exported back into dvd studio pro which still had some interlacing but, again, that's always the case, so, fingers crossed. Not much more I could have done overall, I walked into that job completely blind.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2011 03:53
|
|
|
What I did in one of these situations was I took the 16x9 footage in the 4x3 timeline so it was already letterboxes, then I made a big black image, jpg, in photoshop to be the same specs as the 4x3 frame, and dragged that into my project file. Then I put the black jpeg in the timeline and moved it down so it lined up with the black box underneath the 16x9 footage. Then repeated the process for the black bar above the 16x9 footage. Left those blocks on top and bottom throughout the timeline, so that way all of my 4x3 footage got covered up by the black boxes and looked like the same as my 16x9 footage. Not the most ideal of solutions but it worked.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
Depending on the plugins, they'll either be laid out on top of the clips directly, just like cross dissolves, or they'll be added to a bit of slug sitting on top of the clips (some BorisFX plugins do this). If you find the spot where the plugin is working you shouldn't have a problem finding it. Sometimes when I'm editing, especially in reels, I wind up nesting sequences to keep things a little more clean, so if you don't find the plugin directly, maybe the sequence is nested, in which case you could double click on the sequence and see if that opens up another one. Or, if you know where the effect is happening, you should be able to right click/ctrl+click on the clip and open in viewer, then go to your filters and tab and look for it in there.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2011 18:52
|
|
|
Got a bunch of footage from a client today - everything in Apple Pro Res 444. The client had asked me earlier if 444 was necessary, and I had told them no, since they were shooting everything on a Canon 5D and they weren't going to gain anything additional from going 444 over 422. They gave me 444 anyways, but it's only for editing in FCP, no motion graphics, so is there any point to them doing 444? I think the guy figures it's all the same to him so he might as well go for the best-looking set of numbers, but I have Final Cut 6 and I can't seem to get a timeline in which I don't need to render this footage, so I'm going to convert it to 422. Would anyone have a different workflow for this? I don't mind working in 444 if I can find a way to do it without having to render all the time. Is there a different setting I can use for my timeline to get it to play APR 444 1080 sq pixel frames @ 23.98? I can't find a quicktime component for 444, so I'm wondering if it's a FCP7 thing. If I don't figure it out by the time I go to bed then I'll just have compressor convert it all to 422 overnight and then online it later, but I just don't want to spend a ton of time rendering right from the beginning.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 06:04
|
|
|
OK good to know. I'm on 6 at the moment and was thinking about upgrading to 7 but was also kinda waiting on 8 to come out. I'll go ahead and set it to convert the footage overnight and import it as 422 tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2011 07:16
|
|
|
So I just uploaded a new reel: http://vimeo.com/22446361 There's a lot of stuff on my vimeo acct that's been in different stages - this video, for instance, there's a lot of stuff from other shoots I've been doing that I wanted to include, but I'm waiting on the director/editor to finish stuff on his end before I can share any of it. The ad agency I've been working with has me on an NDA so I'm not sure what, if any, of the stuff they've done I can post. So right now I'm just sitting on that until I'm more established w/ them and can start asking (or just include enough stuff I've done for other clients that I don't need to worry about it). So it's really a snapshot of a work-in-progress, but I figured I need to at least get *something* out there since I have no reel on my website at all right now. Not even really sure where to put this, I shot it and edited it and did the graphics, but it's probably more a cinematographer's reel than anything else. I dunno. There you have it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2011 00:01
|
|
|
I just do it manually, but then I never have all that many subtitles to make. I've done them in English & Japanese for videos up to 10 minutes long by just using the text option in Viewer and, for me, it's such a small chunk of time out of the total editing process that I haven't really bothered to look up alternative methods.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2011 16:49
|
|
|
Yeah that's the one. I normally create one text, format it, and then copy+paste in appropriate spots, then go back and open each one and type in the words. Compared to the rest of the time to edit the video, it's pretty quick but if all you're doing is subbing and you're talkin longer stuff then automated solutions would be way better. I've rarely had to spend more than half an hour dealing with subtitle placement, the real work was in getting the text approved, especially translating to Japanese.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
Adobe premiere CS5.5 is a free download with a 30-day trial, no watermarks, you may want to give that a shot and see if it cleans up.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2011 19:09
|
|
|
I've only got one Intel machine so I'm waiting for some results before I upgrade. I'm only on FCS2 so I'm still a little behind anyways, but I'm in the middle of a bunch of projects anyways and can't afford to mess up all my settings. Can't wait, though. If I wind up getting another machine I'll buy it early, otherwise I'll probably wait til things slow down at the end of the summer.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2011 16:17
|
|
|
Apple took a chance and rewrote the entire code based on where they think editing is headed. It's a 1.0, not as much a successor to fcp7. Im interested in seeing where it goes but it would be a fool's errand to update to this if you're in a pro shop. Give it some time and we'll see, they're essentially trying to jump ahead a couple of generations instead of trying to continue dragging legacy code and old workstyles forward
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
You mean unlike all the third party plugins that were announced in the last couple days?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 02:41
|
|
|
It's still a plugin. You just said the software doesn't allow plugins and yet there they are. BorisFX and FX Factory have both announced new plugin sets for FCPX, so obviously plugins are happening. I mean, sure you can complain that the old plugins don't work anymore, but that happens anytime there's a major change in the codebase. I lost a bunch of plugins when I went from AE CS4 to CS5.5, since it's now 64 bit. Them's the breaks. Note that I have not used FCPX (I'm still on FCP6 at home, some clients have 7), I don't expect to purchase it for some time but I'm not gonna rage about it. FCP6 handles all my needs currently so I don't see what's really worth getting so upset about.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 21:24
|
|
|
The big problem with that is that none of it's true - Apple pushes out tons of free patches over the App Store and withholding key features as paid updates would kill adoption rates for a piece of software that's *already* getting tons of extremely negative reviews. On top of that you can already buy new plugins and install them outside of the App Store, as Automatic Duck, BorisFX and FXFactory already have plugin packages for FCPX that they're selling through their websites. They're not gonna sell a two-tiered version of the software, they already have that - iMovie. Apple will patch in remaining functionality that production houses require, while new users will adopt it and learn it and work as it's essentially a public beta. My guess is that when FCP7 got pushed out the door they devoted all the resources to the complete rewrite, but weren't willing to skip an entire development cycle, so they pushed what they had out the door so people can start using it while they continue working on it. Not the best of moves, as it would have been nice to see them come out with the whole shebang at once, but if the choice was between release this this summer, or release nothing at all, they decided to go that route. It seems like they're catering to the fastest-growing segment of the industry, which is home/home-office users who go out and shoot on T2is and 5Ds and want to come home and edit something really quickly and push it out the door. The current functionality is perfect for that, while adding the legacy items like tape support and such, will come over time. The big production houses aren't going to switch over on day 1 anyways, so the wailing and gnashing of teeth will happen either way you look at it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2011 18:18
|
|
|
I'm not too experienced with the Canon HV30 but my guess is that since it's mini DV and fairly cheap, it's probably recording at 29.97 or 60fps since doing a true 24p would mean puting in the gearing to run the miniDV tape at different speeds. It's most likely using pull-down to give you 24p while still recording at 30fps. This sounds like it might be helpful http://eugenia.queru.com/2007/07/13/canon-hv20-24p-pulldown/
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2011 16:04
|
|
|
Anyone have Compressor 4 and figure out how to put on JUST an H264 conversion? Compressor 3.5 had a great H264 for intranets/LAN preset but I have Compressor 3 & 4 at home, neither of which has that. I'd be happy sticking with 4 and just dropping on an H264 preset then changing it, but they removed the regular H264 preset as well. Right now I'm going to 4 to convert to PreRes 4444 for stuff out of after effects, then switching back to 3 to export to H264 to send to client. Ridonculous.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2011 19:25
|
|
|
1st AD posted:I just copied the settings from Compressor 3.5 as best I could: http://www.2shared.com/file/7P9y3cIT/H264_LANsetting.html Thanks, I appreciate it! It was annoying that they dropped so many settings, I've got to send things out in a number of different formats for different clients. This is a great starting point, altho I'm hard-pressed to tell on how exactly Compressor 4 is supposed to be better than 3 or 3.5.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2011 01:19
|
|
|
I've been working on a project using public domain footage from archive.org. Most of the stuff is already edited as opposed to entire takes and shots, but especially with older movies there's plenty of stuff to choose from.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2011 17:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
Does anyone know why my footage is coming out 2 stops lighter when I export from after effects? I'm editing in Final Cut, I export a 10 second chunk to do some stuff to in AE, then export lossless and put back into Final Cut and the footage is 2 stops lighter. I'm working on a project now with a black jacket on a black background so it's REALLY noticable. I'm colour correcting it to deal for the time being but I haven't noticed that issue with stuff being exported re-imported from Final Cut before so I assume it's AE, but I just don't know.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2011 16:55
|
|