FORUMS: list search recent posts

Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Kevin Brower
Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 3:21:05 am

Which provides a better slow motion in FCPX:

The clip was shot at 60fps.

1. Edit in a 24p timeline and use "conform speed"

2. Edit in a 60p timeline and simply slow down the clip.

Thanks


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 3:41:00 am

Option 1


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 6:40:24 am

Isn't it the same thing? I thought conform just does the math for you and applies a 40% speed effect.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 12:53:21 pm

[Bret Williams] "Isn't it the same thing?"

Putting 59.94 footage in a 59.94 timeline will yield no speed change when hitting conform. If you slow it down further, you'll be making up new information.

Putting 59.94 material in a 23.976 timeline and conforming will play the material back more slowly using the actual frames that were shot instead of making them up. It's true slow motion instead vs a processed speed change.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 1:29:56 pm

If you still have Cinema Tools available, it's better to conform to 23.98 in CT. Doing it in FCP X requires rendering and the visual quality is not quite as good as using CT. Using CT simply changes the native playback speed. Of course, if CT is not installed, then retimed/conformed in FCP X is your best option.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 2:51:37 pm

[Oliver Peters] "If you still have Cinema Tools available, it's better to conform to 23.98 in CT. Doing it in FCP X requires rendering and the visual quality is not quite as good as using CT. Using CT simply changes the native playback speed. Of course, if CT is not installed, then retimed/conformed in FCP X is your best option."

Putting 59.94 footage in a 23.976 timeline and hitting conform is essentially the same as running the footage through CT.

You are playing 59.94 back at 23.976.

Jeremy


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 5:48:55 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Putting 59.94 footage in a 23.976 timeline and hitting conform is essentially the same as running the footage through CT"

No it isn't. Using CT doesn't require a render. Doing it inside FCP X does, unless that changes recently.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 5:49:40 pm

PS: Also, you can batch the clips in CT and you can't with FCP X.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 6:34:23 pm

I guess I always found CT to be an exploit due to an fcp shortcoming.

I have always liked how you could simply interpret footage in Ae and now Pr.

With fcpx, I don't have to duplicate or destroy the original media and if recorded the audio is in tact to be used if needed.

I find it more flexible and less messy.

Almost every clip needs a render by the time I'm done with filters, reposition, differing codecs, et al.

An unprocessed speed conform of this sort is no different for me in fcpx.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 6:47:54 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "With fcpx, I don't have to duplicate or destroy the original media and if recorded the audio is in tact to be used if needed."

But CT is a non-destructive process. You are simply changing the header info that tells a player what speed to play the file. If a production's timebase is 23.98 and the footage was shot at 30 or 60, it was only intended to be used as slomo, unless this was simply done as a mistake. Obviously communication with the DP is important.

Most pro cameras that shoot offspeed come into an NLE and play at the correct timebase. At least that's true of Sony, Panasonic, Canon C300 and Alexas. They are doing the same thing that the Varicam has done and that's the same process you are applying by using Cinema Tools.

For me it's a workflow that's mainly applicable to HDSLR and GoPro footage. I convert that media anyway to ProRes. Then I separate the offspeed files and batch conform. I can always conform a file back to the original speed or go back to the untouched camera file if I had to.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 7:29:21 pm

Last time I checked/tried conform in CT was a one way process. For whatever reason you couldn't confirm it again. That's why is always been insisted that you first duplicate the original.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 7:53:13 pm

[Bret Williams] "Last time I checked/tried conform in CT was a one way process"

Conform can go back and forth. You are not modifying the media itself. Reverse telecine is a one-way and is destructive.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:42:08 pm

You're absolutely right. Seems like I had a problem once going back, and I always see Shane recommending you duplicate cuz you can't go back. Hmm.

I just tested cinema tools vs. FCP X's speed change and I can't see a pixel of difference. With 7D footage shot at 30p, I conformed to 24p in cinema tools. I also took the same original clip in FCPX and conformed it. Both came out with the same duration. And in placing one above the other at 50% opacity everything matches up perfectly sharp. There's no frame blending going on in the X version. I can turn the above clip on and off by enabling / disabling it with V, and there isn't one single pixel of change. Not even on the waveform or vector scope. So I hereby declare X's conform function just as good as cinema tools. At least on progressive footage :) True you have to render, but you actually don't. It plays back fine without rendering. It's just that it's doing something on the fly so you get the orange bar.

I'd say it's yet another example of how FCP X is a modern professional editing app that is still lacking in many extra "features" but how FCP 7 is a fully featured editing app that is lacking in actual professional media processing like conforming, multi-frame rate support & pulldown support, and of course the need to transcode.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 15, 2013 at 12:57:15 am

[Bret Williams] "Seems like I had a problem once going back, and I always see Shane recommending you duplicate cuz you can't go back. "

I always duplicate everything anyway, out of an abundance of caution and cheap disk space.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:27:44 pm

You can't go back to 59.94 in CT, hence my point.

I used CT all the time with fcp7. I don't with FCPX, Pr/Ae.

I have to render anyway, the quick and unprocessed render on fcpx isn't a bother.

I can do this on orig footage or high quality optimized media with a click.

CT is fine, just know the downsides.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:31:49 pm

[Oliver Peters] "For me it's a workflow that's mainly applicable to HDSLR and GoPro footage. "

OP is using a DSLR which is why the conform is necessary.


Return to posts index

Beachwood Productions
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 2:27:09 am

Hey Oliver any chance you could us a quick how to for conforming 59.94 to 23.98. every time I try it just puts the files in a skipped folder and nothing in the conformed folder. Thanks :)

Peter Wilcox
Beachwood Productions


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 2:31:13 am

[Beachwood Productions] "Hey Oliver any chance you could us a quick how to for conforming 59.94 to 23.98. every time I try it just puts the files in a skipped folder and nothing in the conformed folder."

What format?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Beachwood Productions
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 3:17:18 am

.mov h264


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 12:17:08 pm

Try converting to ProRes and see if that changes things. It might be a problem because of the LongGOP structure of the H264 file.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Beachwood Productions
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Feb 8, 2013 at 3:08:12 pm

I'll give it a try. Thanks for the help Oliver. :)

Peter Wilcox
Beachwood Productions


Return to posts index

Beachwood Productions
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Feb 10, 2013 at 11:45:55 pm

Better yet I found that my new GH3 records native slow motion. :)

Peter Wilcox
Beachwood Productions


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:00:51 pm

I checked and doing a conform just adds the correct retiming effect. Same thing you could accomplish by adding a slow effect and then adjusting to the correct speed. But the latter is definitely less precise, as it will display 40% for a number of different durations.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:04:54 pm

[Bret Williams] "I checked and doing a conform just adds the correct retiming effect."

But you guys are missing the point. Conforming inside FCP X forces you to render the file. This is both destructive to the image quality and a drag on system performance.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:40:12 pm

I'll agree, that technically it is getting rendered and technically it would have to be some teeny tiny amount lesser quality. But I can't find it. In switching between the two I can't see one pixel of difference on the monitor, the waveform or the vector. And I'm with Jeremy that the simplicity far outweighs the benefit. It simplifies media management much in the way not having to transcode does.

Seems like when things are the other way around that people insist that it's better to transcode footage to 422 even when completely unnecessary. That transcoding h264 to 422 won't result in any image degredation anyway. Well, that's what's going on. It's being conformed and transcoded at the same time. Besides, FCP X doesnt' work like legacy. The entire timeline has to be transcoded to 422 anyway for the master. So there would be no getting around it anyway.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:51:40 pm

[Bret Williams] "Besides, FCP X doesnt' work like legacy. The entire timeline has to be transcoded to 422 anyway for the master"

Not if you start as ProRes in the first place.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Justin Mrkva
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 14, 2013 at 6:50:06 pm

A couple things about FCPX that I'm not sure if people totally understand yet here:

The library holds the original file, and will use that original file to render to ProRes422 for editing speed (in h.264, for example, the interpolation causes a major performance hit when going backwards or picking one frame; it has to read several frames before it to compute one desired frame). If you create Optimized or Proxy media, it encodes ProRes422 beforehand for use in the timeline. When you export, the best way is to go to ProRes422 and then encode that master file, being sure to check Original/Optimized media in Preferences. The loss from original to 422 is essentially zero, the loss from anything to delivery format (h.264, etc.) is what's going to matter.

The only time you should be concerned is if you want to use the conformed clip for chroma keying or something similar, and you have 444 source footage. In that case, you always want to chroma key the original 444 footage because it has the full resolution color data.

Something that might be of interest if someone wants to test this: you can render to ProRes4444 in FCPX as well. Given 444(4) source footage, FCPX will still transcode to 422 in the timeline for editing. But will choosing a 4444 export force it to go through and re-render using the 444(4) source footage? Will that work even if Optimized 422 media is present? That could be an important thing to know, especially if there's any chroma keying in the project. In that case, rendering to 4444 could subtly improve the quality of the key.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:33:50 pm

Know what? I misread his post. I thought he was asking if conform was better than just slowing the clip down. Didn't see that in option 2 he said to put it in a 60p sequence. No wonder I didn't quite understand your reply!

Anyway it led me to run a test that shows that cinema tools and X's conform look exactly the same. For progressive at least.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:48:49 pm

Hi,

Yes, correct - conform only goes back and forth between 24 and 30, not 60. My error. Although I've never had the need to go back to 60. I'm in the camp that says transcode first. I feel that editing native from H.264 is both insane and simply lazy - the exception being fast turnaround and really bad YouTube videos of cats ;-) But then I have to do a lot with most of my footage and prefer to have it in a professional codec and wrapper. There's simply no way I'm sending an outside shop files in H264 format or use that when I have to revisit the project frame-accurately in a year. FWIW - I treat RED footage the same way.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:04:31 pm

I've been editing NLEs for 20 years and I'm just as much a curmudgeon as anyone, but I don't find it lazy to edit in h264. Completely the opposite actually. Seems to be a waste of client time and resources no edit in the actual native file format without incurring any more generation loss. You can of course transcode in the background in X, or if your'e sending a sequence out for grading, there are quite a few ways to transcode JUST the footage used before you do that. Just duplicate the sequence and make a new event of just the clips used (they'll now be links not duplicates as of 10.0.6) and then transcode that entire event.

I've always had the luxury of editing everything in online suites, and only sending out stuff for protools or maybe a shot or two for some 3D. Although I've been testing color grading in Resolve 9, and it seems to get by just fine with my h264 sequences.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:19:13 pm

[Bret Williams] "Seems to be a waste of client time and resources no edit in the actual native file format without incurring any more generation loss."

For me, the point isn't just transcoding. It's organizing the files, adding proper TC and reel IDs and logical renaming. Transcoding is a part of that process. Sure you can do that in X, but I need a system that's independent of any NLE. Simply run through a few threads on various forums here at the COW and look at the folks moaning about duplicate clip names, etc. because they failed to follow this practice. The results are projects that have become disasters.

[Bret Williams] "Although I've been testing color grading in Resolve 9, and it seems to get by just fine with my h264 sequences"

You are working in your own controlled environment. That won't fly when you send the footage out of house to another colorist and they specify QuickTimes in ProRes with proper TC or reel numbers and an accompanying EDL.

I think we've veered too far off topic ;-)

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:58:31 pm

Yeah, not saying there's no reason to ever do it. Compatibility being an issue always. If people are editing on older systems there's certainly no getting around it. But even in legacy it was all about project management and labeling folders of media, folders of cameras and camera angles, etc. Every project is different. In my world, even working with other team members putting together other segments, it's still a better option to edit with native media. Having multiple copies of files that have been transcoded or renamed or re time coded just seems to lead to errors as well. I'm very glad to see the days of a project folder having folders that say "originals", "transcoded", or "plural eyes synced/exported", etc and them potentially having duplicate names.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 10:15:37 pm

[Bret Williams] " In my world, even working with other team members putting together other segments, it's still a better option to edit with native media. Having multiple copies of files that have been transcoded or renamed or re time coded just seems to lead to errors as well."

I completely get that. When I do this, there's one person handling the media. That's usually myself or a DIT with very explicit instructions or an assistant that I trust to do it right. Certainly in short turnaround projects (conference video edits, news, etc.) staying native is fine if your system performs correctly. I just think it gets very dangerous outside of those limited applications. I would never do it on a documentary that dragged out for two years, for example, or a set of high-profile commercials shot on an HDSLR.

[Bret Williams] "I'm very glad to see the days of a project folder having folders that say "originals", "transcoded", or "plural eyes synced/exported", etc and them potentially having duplicate names."

You mean you are glad to see the end of those days. Right? For me, I still prefer that because it allows me to work backwards through the workflow if I had to. You see, I have no interest in making X the core of my entire workflow and the only tool I'll ever use.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Kevin Brower
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:59:10 pm

Brett, so are you saying that you found no difference between option #1 and option #2 in my original question with your test?


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:32:54 pm

No, my bad. I misread your option #2. I would definitely conform to 24p in a 24p sequence. That is, if your final product is supposed to be 24p. But even if you're editing it in a 60p or 30p or 30i sequence, I'd conform it in a 24p sequence which will give you that exact 40% speed you're looking for that you just can't dial in since it's not a preset. Then copy it from there into the actual 60p, 30p or 30i sequence. In the case of the 30i sequence FCP X will actually add the dead on perfect pulldown as well. Something just completely unfathomable in FCP legacy.


Return to posts index

Matias Canelson
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jul 17, 2013 at 1:58:00 am

Well, I hit a wall today... 59,94fps media imported and conformed inside a 23,98fps timeline doesn´t show up in DaVinci Resolve (9.1.5 and FCP 10.0.8).

We don´t use Resolve in our company, we use Scratch, but I was running some test today and I found this and looks like it´s a common problem. Which I wouldn´t have if I conformed the files using CinemaTools before editing. Finally I exported an Apple ProRes 422 (HQ) file to Scratch to grade (media was shot with a 5D MarkIII).

Does any of you know a good (free) alternative to just change the header of the quicktime file?



PS:After a little research I found this blog with a complete (and very technical) guide to roundtrip from FCPx to DaVinci

Part 1: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/how-to-round-trip-from-final-cut-pro-x-to-davinci-...
Part 2: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/how-to-round-trip-from-final-cut-pro-x-to-davinci-...
Part 3: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/how-to-round-trip-from-final-cut-pro-x-to-davinci-...
Part 4: http://wolfcrow.com/blog/how-to-round-trip-from-final-cut-pro-x-to-davinci-...

--
MatiasCanelson
http://www.canelson.com.ar


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jul 17, 2013 at 2:18:27 am

•I don't know of any free ones. QTEdit will do this, but its not free.

•You could bake the clips in before Resolve.

•You could put the original clips in a different time base project and grade and conform those separate, just leave a gap clip for timing in the master. When you get the returns, simply add back the clips and adjust their timing back to where they were in the offline.


Return to posts index

Joe Shapiro
Re: Better to conform 60FPS to 24fps?
on Jul 15, 2014 at 11:56:57 pm

Just found a free conform tool:

http://arvidtp.net/sw/lossless_frame_rate_converter.php

------
Joe Shapiro
Director / Producer / Editor
206-420-6411

imdb.com/name/nm1497731/
twitter.com/JoeSh


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]