final cut pro, to flame2008
by ben oliver (ben)
on
Feb 5, 2008 at 2:30:03 pm
okay, so. I edited this project that was shot on a panasonic dvx. it was shot regular 24p, so i brought it in as regular 29.97 16x9 footage.
I cut the piece, which had a lot of slowmos and speedups. Yeah, i know, that isn't optimal, but, well, yeah. What can you do.
So the director used to work at this really fancy post house, as an intern. and one of the colorists agreed to color correct her film, which needed a lot of help. They used the ps technik mini35mm adapter, and they didn't always spin the glass, so, they had a lot of cleaning to do.
but, anyhow. here is what i don't get. in this day and age, flame2008 wouldnt take an uncompressed, 16x9 quicktime? what the heck use is that? I got all this grief from the post guys there, and its like, yeah, you can broadcast dvx footage these days, most things on mtv now are hvx2000 or dvx footage, its the way it is.
so, for any of you pro guys, here is the question. These guys didn't have a clue as to what I should give them. I ended up giving them a tiff image sequnce, which worked, but, there has to be a better way. anyone been through anything like this?
Re: final cut pro, to flame2008 by Aaron Neitz on Feb 5, 2008 at 5:21:05 pm
Discreet is unable to deal with the flags on your DV tape that give you that 24p. EDL's and XMLS would be pretty much an enormous headache.
An image sequence is the only fool-proof way to get every frame correctly into the system. Or if you're in the same studio you can run an SDI feed from your FCP to them...
Flame does have some limted support for Quicktime, but it's pretty limited.
Re: final cut pro, to flame2008 by Del Holford on Feb 5, 2008 at 7:29:36 pm
The animation codec works best for smoke and flame. Uncompressed for some reason doesn't work. Since the animation codec is also uncompressed it will give you the best quality. None of the recent codecs will work. :-(
Del
fire*, smoke*, photoshopCS3
Charlotte Public Television
del_edits@wtvi.org
Re: final cut pro, to flame2008 by ben oliver on Feb 5, 2008 at 8:33:05 pm
weird,
yeah, we dont have the budget to play it out to digibeta, animation codec is what we shoulda done, i guess.
will i have any issues, it looked squeezed when they were colorcorrecting, will i have to worry about it being stuck like that when I get the files back??
Re: final cut pro, to flame2008 by Chris Borjis on Feb 6, 2008 at 5:09:07 pm
They will probably give you back an anamorphic .tif sequence (ask them, don't assume they will) which you can then load into motion or quicktime pro and export as a .mov for fcp.
Re: final cut pro, to flame2008 by Kris Anderson on Feb 15, 2008 at 6:30:11 am
I know a lot of Flame operators that work with the pictures anamorphic. They set their client monitors to 16:9 but don't care for themselves.
If you knew what Flame could do, you wouldn't care about it not accepting QT's. I have worked with Flames in the building for years. Never been a problem cutting in AVID and then exporting a CMX3600 EDL for conform later. From a grading POV it is much better to conform the project and have access to each clip/shot individualy than to have to grade across dissolves/wipes etc. DaVinci does dynamic tarcking of windows/grades etc but it's not the same.
Flame is a finishing tool of the highest order. There's a good reason why they cost so much to buy and use.
