FORUMS: list search recent posts

frame flex workflow

COW Forums : Avid Media Composer

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
len hugh
frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 10:46:38 am

I am about to start assisting on a feature that is framed for 2:40, being shot with a 4x3 sensor but not anamorphic. We are working on 16x 9 monitors.

The options I have been given are 1920x1080 dnx mxf that are pillar boxed,
or use frame flex.

I have never used frame flex and my research seems to show that its AMA based. I am not keen on having my editor cut with AMA, I like the stability of mxf dnx.

1.
Am I right in saying if I want mxf dnx files I need to use frame flex to cut out a 16x9 portion of the image and transcode.
If the editor wants to see the whole image, maybe to or rack/ re-position the image, I have to go back to the ama, resize, transcode and relink?

2.
has anyone else another suggested workflow?

Thanks in advance
L


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 12:02:58 pm

This is somewhat part of a longer discussion that should have been decided before creating 1920x1080 DNxHD media which will always be 16:9 aspect ratio and anything that is not that aspect ratio will have letterbox or pillarbox.

FrameFlex' primary benefit is allowing you to access resolution from sources that are larger than project resolution providing more "quality" for reframing. But seeing as you have already made 1920x1080 material there is no real value in FrameFlex.

Now, you can certainly still use FrameFlex by going to source settings and lying about its XY resolution and aspect ratio to create what you are looking for, but all my tests with conform so far have shown that source side manipulation in this manner DOES NOT CONFORM correctly. Unfortunately Avid did not properly design virtual resolution for just these types of operations.

What you need to do, is work in a 2.40 project type (2K+) and transcode your media to native source size in DNxHR LB (equivalent to DNxHD 36) and now you have correct and expected behavior although I have seen some wonkiness with anamorphic, but that is not your scenario. This will result in a 2.40 extract of the 4:3 higher resolution frame that you can reframe up and down as needed and this will conform correctly when using FrameFlex.

UHD DNxHR LB is 4x the storage of 16:9 DNxHD but you can render 1/4 frame proxies which makes it exactly the same as DNxHD as far as storage requirements go. BUT... Avid has not yet put the ability to transcode proxies by third parties in their licensed Avid Media Toolkit. But working at 2K 2.40 may be very close to DNxHD so it may not be that much if an issue storage wise. I need to do a quick test to see how it compares.


Michael


Return to posts index

len hugh
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 12:12:12 pm

Thanks, a bit more research for me to do. I am not across the new HR resolutions.
I should have been a bit clearer in my post, we have not created any media, they dont even start shooting for 2 weeks. I am just trying to plan out the best form of attack.


Return to posts index


Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 12:15:51 pm

Then do some tests with the 2.40 aspect ratio that is available in 2K+ resolution project sizes. If you are in v8.x you should have access to them.


Michael


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 1:00:06 pm

Also, what is your dailies workflow going to be? In Avid or with a third party product like Resolve, Colorfront, Cortex, etc.? That will affect how you approach creating the proper dailies to do what you want it to do.


Michael


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 1:44:53 pm

With 8.4, you can create custom project sizes, so I created a 1980x854 which is a 2.4:1 aspect ratio (at least what is allowed by Media Composer.

I then AMA linked to 4:3 non anamorphic sources that I transcoded from ARRI RAW to DNxHR LB. Here is how I set up my project using source settings on those files:



Then while editing, you can use FrameFlex in the timeline to reframe as needed:



This image will show you the relative storage requirements for each of the workflows:




This was for an 00:00:11:14 duration clip at 23.976.


The advantage with this workflow is that your viewers in the source/record monitors are 2.4:1 aspect ratio, so there is no letterboxing or pillarboxing and you have a much better shot at a conform working in a third party application that supports FrameFlex (Resolve).



Michael


Return to posts index


Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 3:55:47 pm

Forget the 1920 virtual version. Just go ahead and make a 2K DCI Scope project and do the above steps. I was able to get a proper conform in Resolve in doing so but had to turn off input sizing and the timeline FrameFlex was correct. I rendered out a 2.39:1 DNxHR file that I color corrected and did the roundtrip AAF - there I had some problems that I am still working out. I suspect if you want to roundtrip, you need to transcode at source resolution, and not timeline.


Michael


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 13, 2015 at 5:30:08 pm

I had a little more success with the 2K DCI scope project, AMA link or transcode in Resolve that can create DNxHR as source resolution. All you need to change is "center crop" for the display and the rest falls into place.

That worked well with conform in Resolve in a similar 2K DCI scope timeline. But coming back to Media Composer should that be a need was not good at all...

I wish Avid would document what we should expect with different workflows. I'll keep "testing".


Michael


Return to posts index

len hugh
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 14, 2015 at 10:08:20 am

Sorry, I had written this post this morning an not posted it.

Ill ask what program the DIT is using to wrangle my avid media. Lets assume resolve. I dont have a version 8 to test on at the moment, or media. I will contact the post house and see if I can get in on the weekend to test what you have here.

To go back on an earlier post, you say the HR codec isnt available to 3rd party apps. For offline work I do a lot of same as source out to programs like ffmpeg, mpeg stream clip etc to make my H264 etc. Are you saying there isnt the ability to do a same as source and hand it over to another application?
That I would need to have avid do a custom export to a more common codec?

thanks again for all your help


Return to posts index


Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 14, 2015 at 1:28:28 pm

I should be a little clearer - DNxHR is available to some apps like Resolve, MTI Cortex and most likely Colorfront, etc. What I was referring to is that the ability to make 1/4 frame proxy versions of those DNxHR codecs is not possible. So depending on project resolution will be up to 4x the storage requirements unless you choose to transcode again in Media Composer to 1/4 proxy but now you need more storage to do that as well. Just things to keep in mind.

Coming out of Avid, you can certainly do a SaS as DNxHR and there are DNxHR QuickTime components available for download and install. Again, I am referring to the ability to make 1/4 size proxies. I would make some 1 minute clip tests at different resolutions and proxies and do a test of what it will require storage wise.

Meanwhile I continue testing the conform side of things with FrameFlex... not that straightforward and no documentation from Avid on these types of workflows.


Michael


Return to posts index

Job ter Burg
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 14, 2015 at 4:54:36 pm

Are you going to be doing any conforming in Avid MC, or is this just creative editorial? If the latter, just ask for letterboxed MXF's and be done with it, I'd say.


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 14, 2015 at 7:12:11 pm

There is something to be said for simplicity.


Michael


Return to posts index


len hugh
Re: frame flex workflow
on Oct 15, 2015 at 10:19:54 am

No, we wont be conforming in Avid. Not sure what, but not avid.

2.40 Letter boxing I am fine with but pillar boxing 4x3 to get to 2:40 will take a fair bit of the monitor away from us.

I also think simplicity is often the best. I feel I may just go with DNX HD pillar boxed and resize in as much as I can to get to the 2.40 the DOP has framed for.
That said Ill hopefully run some tests on the weekend, its always good to be up to speed on the latest options.

thanks for all you help, Ill post back here if I have any great break thru's!


Return to posts index

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