Giving my first iphone edit on FCP after doing the same on the phone via imovie. Discovered that the iphone will operate in any position and flips the image appropriately, BUT FCP sees lens down stuff (front facing HD camera with the lens on the bottom of the phone) as UPSIDE DOWN even though the still frame is correctly oriented. It's lens up from now on, but trying to get the images I shot to be right side up is proving strange. Rotating 180 degrees (or -180) makes the poster frame (when image is stopped) AND the playing image upside down. Solution is to rotate 360 degrees!
Question for others: what do you think for seqeunce settings? I'm currently using the iphone's underlying compressor (h.264) which saves me from rendering except when I need to rotate the image.
I'll post when I finish to any interested.
editing on dual 2.4 MBPro, 4G mem, 10.5.8 FCP 7.0.2
And in each of those threads – as has sometimes happened, sometimes not – the Q should be asked why and when to transcode to ProRes?
I certainly do go to ProRes for broadcast spots, but what of the huge day by day little and quick stuff shot with cheap cameras in our pockets? I want to know and I want to properly advise my clients thinking of the same. I'd like to respond with something other than, as M responded, READ OTHER STUFF, DON'T ASK QUESTIONS.
M's arrogant response to my query sounds like those who said that DV is an amateur format and anyone professional must choose beta or... Okay fine, but why? Sure it's true that DV WAS good for editing and 264 is not, but let's get under the hood.
I've got a hunch that many, many people are doing as I am, editing their quick and dirty work in 264 on the timeline. There are real savings as well as losses in doing so.
Is there a GOOD reason to edit in 264 when the output is 264 for the web (IN HD) with no broadcast or higher format immediately considered? When I'm considering prudent workflow I look at likely and usual usage and not wished for usage. I've been editing 264 for about a year when the use (incidentally paid, though it is also fun) is for web HD. There's always a tradeoff in our work. Editing 264 the tradeoff is render, render, render, render, versus drive space. An advantage of staying in 264 is the backups and archives are in the same format – highly compressed, but just as the "original."
I'd love to hear more from others who can talk of the relative merits of staying in 264 on workflow versus transcoding to ProRes and the inherent advantages to a more robust editing codec. Feel free to refer to other threads assuming, as M did, amateur ignorance, or engage, as these boards seem to be intended, in a productive conversation. I've got a hunch that those of us who do make a living doing this stuff need to know about 264 on the timeline, because we're going to get more and more of it.