APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Michael Cioni + frame io

COW Forums : NAB Show

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
Eric Santiago
Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 10, 2019 at 4:11:53 pm

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/2216-michael-cioni-joins-frame-io-...

Met him at NAB 2011.
Super nice and helpful.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 11, 2019 at 3:25:45 pm

One of the disappointing things I have found about Frame IO is that you can't take full advantage of the FCP X h.264 multitrack share function.

One of the cool feature that X has is the ability to send multi audio tracks in a h.264 file so that another editor can have control over those tracks. Many people want that h.264 file for the ease of import and it looks darn good anyway.

Currently Frame iO mixes those tracks together and takes away that cool advantage that X has.

I contacted them about it and they are aware of it.

Hopefully Cioni can make that happen.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 12, 2019 at 11:34:59 pm

[Tony West] "One of the cool feature that X has is the ability to send multi audio tracks in a h.264 file so that another editor can have control over those tracks. Many people want that h.264 file for the ease of import and it looks darn good anyway."

Why H.264 and not ProRes? Seems like this type of file is a split-track submaster of an edited project. Wouldn't you want the highest quality possible since it's going through further post. What am I missing?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 3:28:28 am

[Oliver Peters] "Why H.264 and not ProRes? Seems like this type of file is a split-track submaster of an edited project. Wouldn't you want the highest quality possible since it's going through further post. What am I missing?"

They might not necessarily do farther post on it. They might not touch it at all, but I want them to have the option down the line if they ever want to drop a music track out or turn a mic off or whatever.

Since FCP X has that feature I want to take advantage of it.

H.264 isn't really the point. Frame IO can't split tracks in ProRes either. They should be able to do either.

I was surprised that it couldn't do it since the platform is used by so many "high end" projects producers.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 12:15:06 pm

[Tony West] "H.264 isn't really the point. Frame IO can't split tracks in ProRes either. They should be able to do either."

When you say it 'can't split tracks,' do you mean that split-track masters (like DME stereo stems) are muxed into mono or stereo when the client downloads the file from Frame? I would think Frame leaves the original untouched, but I haven't tested it. I know 5.1 surround is OK.

[Tony West] "the platform is used by so many "high end" projects producers"

I think that's more marketing than anything else. Depends on whether you mean for workflow or simply review & approval and/or delivery.

Personally I wish they'd simply clean up all of their UI and platform inconsistencies.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 2:56:07 pm

[Oliver Peters] " I would think Frame leaves the original untouched"

I thought that also, but not true. It takes multiple audio tracks down to just one track.

[Oliver Peters] "I think that's more marketing than anything else. Depends on whether you mean for workflow or simply review & approval and/or delivery."

I don't know if it's marketing are not. I haven't seen any hard numbers on who is using it and for what.

They didn't argue with me about it to their credit, and said multiple editors have raised the same concern. They said it was "on their radar" so we will see what happens.


[Oliver Peters] "Personally I wish they'd simply clean up all of their UI and platform inconsistencies.
"


I made some suggestions to them about their UI and they made the changes I suggested, so if they agree with you it might happen. At least they did it for me.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 6:27:08 pm

[Tony West] "I thought that also, but not true. It takes multiple audio tracks down to just one track."

Hmm... Somethings odd. I just ran a test round-tripping split-track masters through Frame without any issue. I exported a split of VO + music out of FCPX as a master file. Once as ProResProxy, then again as H264. Both as Multitrack Quicktime file. I also exported a ProRes Proxy split track from Premiere Pro. Uploaded all three to FrameIO. Then downloaded them. They came back exactly as I sent them up. No change in audio configuration. I was using the web portal to Frame, not the extension app.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 7:32:04 pm

I came straight out of the timeline in FCP X to Frame.io from the Share menu.

Two mics with two different tracks went up.

One track of audio on the download.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 8:09:49 pm

[Tony West] "I came straight out of the timeline in FCP X to Frame.io from the Share menu."

Try it direct instead. The FrameIO extension is pretty mediocre at best. Sounds like a bug in that.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 8:31:03 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Try it direct instead. The FrameIO extension is pretty mediocre at best. Sounds like a bug in that.
"


The extension is the most direct way isn't it? I know I can send it as a zip file as they suggested through them but that's not what I want. They didn't say it was a bug, they said it wasn't set up to send it that way at this time.

I prefer not to work around the app. I prefer them to fix the app so that it works more efficiently.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 13, 2019 at 8:54:41 pm

[Tony West] "The extension is the most direct way isn't it? "

The extension is too simplistic for any sort of real workflows. It should only be used for review and approval on the very simplest of jobs.

Export a master file from the FCPX Share menu set as a multitrack Quicktime. Open a web browser and log into Frame. Find your project and upload. Share that from Frame as a Presentation with download enabled. Works like a charm. That's how Frame was intended to work.

This is why I say Frame needs to fix their inconsistencies across their versions. Only by using the browser interface do you get the full experience. Don't expect these things to get fixed.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 1:15:22 am

[Oliver Peters] "The extension is too simplistic for any sort of real workflows. It should only be used for review and approval on the very simplest of jobs."

Sorry Oliver that's your opinion and I don't agree.


[Oliver Peters] "Export a master file from the FCPX Share menu set as a multitrack Quicktime. Open a web browser and log into Frame. Find your project and upload. Share that from Frame as a Presentation with download enabled. Works like a charm. That's how Frame was intended to work. "

Actually it's not intended to work that way at all. It CAN work that way and I have used it that way but that's an extra step that shouldn't be needed. If you go to their website they are not showing someone doing what you just described. They show them going right from the timeline to the project in Frame IO using the app (that you don't like). Which you can do, you just can't do multiple audio tracks that way, which is the whole point of my post : )


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 12:22:46 pm

[Tony West] "Sorry Oliver that's your opinion and I don't agree."

No, based on my experience with it. For example, if you have several dozen active projects in a Frame account, it's quite difficult to navigate to the right place using only the extension. Second, you cannot simply access your account through the extension without logging in through a portal. You also can't effectively use the extension app as a standalone app, except for simple uploads, even though it sort of allows more. So at best, it's a work in progress.

[Tony West] "Actually it's not intended to work that way at all. It CAN work that way and I have used it that way but that's an extra step that shouldn't be needed"

It's an extra step that's essential. Using your method, you never end up with a master file that lives on your drive outside of the FCPX sequence inside of FCPX. Seems pretty dangerous.

But whatever. You have a method that doesn't seem to work for you. I'm suggesting a method that I know will work. Take your pick.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 2:43:55 pm

[Oliver Peters] "No, based on my experience with it. "

I understand, but what's more relevant than "your" experience is that of Frame's tech support who I spoke with and disagree with you. From you comments it doesn't sound like you have a lot of experience with it.

You thought it left the original untouched before you learned from me that it didn't.

[Oliver Peters] "I would think Frame leaves the original untouched"

Hey, there's no shame in learning but it's OK to acknowledge it.

They are very clear in how they want you to use their platform and here is "Their" video to prove it.






No where in that video are they saying only use our app for review or go around it for "serious" stuff.


[Oliver Peters] "Using your method, you never end up with a master file that lives on your drive outside of the FCPX sequence inside of FCPX. Seems pretty dangerous. "

I hear your concern but you are assuming I want that master in all cases. Many things will hit air once, never to be seen again because the event is on a certain day that has passed. Remember that I still have the Library on one drive and X set to backup on a separate drive. That's two places I could get it from plus it would be on frame and then the client would also have it after download. That's "4" places for this one time thing. My way is fine for this.


[Oliver Peters] "You have a method that doesn't seem to work for you. I'm suggesting a method that I know will work. Take your pick."

Well,

A. You offered a workaround that I already knew about (as I mentioned I spoke with their tech support) and you did it in a way that suggested that it wasn't a workaround, but rather "their" intended way to use it to begin with. Which is not true at all. I do appreciate your help but wanted to clear up that bit of "misinformation".

B. Your way doesn't work anyway, because even if you skip the app and take a video with mics on separate tracks directly into Frame, you will not be able to monitor both those mics. So if you can't HEAR the mics how are they supposed to review it? Like I said, if you had more experience with the platform you would have known that and not spent all this time guessing at a faulty workaround that doesn't work (when it comes to review). No shame in it.

I'm trying to help them make their platform better as a person that actually uses it a lot.


[Oliver Peters] "it's a work in progress"

Finally, something that we can agree on : )


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 2:50:32 pm

[Tony West] "From you comments it doesn't sound like you have a lot of experience with it."

I don't know. I'm in and out of Frame solidly most of the day (and have been since they launched), along with about a dozen other people on staff. No one here uses the extension app in FCPX or Premiere, because it simply doesn't serve any of our needs. We use Frame for extensive review-and-approval, moving selects to clients and delivery files to clients.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 3:15:04 pm

I use Frame.io every day and I can concur with Oliver that the frame.io extension just isn't ready for prime time.

I also agree that frame.io should clean up the inconsistencies with their UI.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 3:53:57 pm

[greg janza] "I use Frame.io every day and I can concur with Oliver that the frame.io extension just isn't ready for prime time.
"



What problems do you have with the extension other than what I pointed out? Just curious.

Btw, you also agree with me. I'm trying to improve the extension. That's the point of my post.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 4:25:09 pm

For starters, I would want full customization of the encoder settings in the extension and not presets.

And again Oliver is correct, split track pro-res files uploaded directly from the web browser work perfectly. We just uploaded a project recently with several split track masters and all uploaded and downloaded from frame.io without issue.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 5:10:08 pm

[greg janza] "And again Oliver is correct, split track pro-res files uploaded directly from the web browser work perfectly. We just uploaded a project recently with several split track masters and all uploaded and downloaded from frame.io without issue.
"


Not according to Frame io themselves.

Here is what they wrote about their own system............

"Hey Tony,
Sorry about the frustration with this, but unfortunately this is a known limitation with multi-track audio from FCPX.

For sharing videos for Review, the best option would be to mix down the audio to a single stereo track upon export, so all of the tracks are audible by reviewers."


He referred to it as a "known limitation" meaning they already know about the problem.

Also he didn't use Oliver's suggestion at all. He said mix it down.

I don't want it mixed down for review. I want all tracks separate but I still want them to hear each track.

Keep in mid I gave them access to my project and they could download it and see exactly what I was talking about.

They didn't say.........."hey it works fine" they said "Sorry"


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 5:13:29 pm

[Tony West] "Sorry about the frustration with this, but unfortunately this is a known limitation with multi-track audio from FCPX."

I'm not using FCPX but I'm not using the Premiere extension either. If you upload a split track file directly to the frame.io site there are no issues.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 3:56:38 pm

[Oliver Peters] " I'm in and out of Frame solidly most of the day (and have been since they launched)"

Then I'm surprised you thought the files were untouched. You should have discovered that long ago.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 4:05:04 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 14, 2019 at 4:05:47 pm

[Tony West] "Then I'm surprised you thought the files were untouched. You should have discovered that long ago."

Because I've tested it and they are. If I upload a file to Frame from the Finder and then download that file somewhere else, there is no difference between it and the original. So I'm not sure what you are referring to.

This is using the web portal, not an extension.

Note: We do not send up raw camera originals that have not been handled by an editor in some way. I'm talking about uploading files that have been curated or edited in some fashion - selects, masters, review copies, etc. There are plenty of other, better ways to transfer camera originals from point A to point B.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 5:20:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Because I've tested it and they are. If I upload a file to Frame from the Finder and then download that file somewhere else, there is no difference between it and the original. So I'm not sure what you are referring to."

Once again you are missing the point. You can not "hear" all separate tracks to review unless you mix down.

Yes, you can bring it down the same, that's not what I'm talking about.

Seems like they would know more about their system than you. Here is what THEY say.........

"Hey Tony,
Sorry about the frustration with this, but unfortunately this is a known limitation with multi-track audio from FCPX.

For sharing videos for Review, the best option would be to mix down the audio to a single stereo track upon export, so all of the tracks are audible by reviewers."


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 6:41:15 pm

[Tony West] "You can not "hear" all separate tracks to review unless you mix down."

That's because split tracks are not intended for clients to monitor accurately over the internet. They are a post thing to be brought into an NLE or a DAW. To me it sounds like an FCPX issue more so than a Frame extension issue - or a combination/integration of the two.

It seems to me that you were asking for help in why a function didn't work. Not what was the best way to complete the task. And his second sentence is exactly the same thing I just said.

[Tony West] "Seems like they would know more about their system than you. "

How many times have you dealt with tech support with any company and only ever received the absolute, correct info? I can certainly point to a ton of times the folks at the Genius Bar at any Apple Store have been completely wrong. ☺

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 7:08:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "That's because split tracks are not intended for clients to monitor accurately over the internet."

That's an opinion stated as fact.

You tried to make the argument that you could monitor separate tracks through Frame, and after being proven wrong on that you're pushing the goal post a bit.

Just admit I was right about that : )

[Oliver Peters] "To me it sounds like an FCPX issue "
They made a program aimed at X users so they should fix it imho.


[Oliver Peters] "It seems to me that you were asking for help in why a function didn't work."

I'm sorry you were confused about that. I wasn't asking for help, as I mentioned I went to them for help and they apologized and explained a workaround for me.

My post was about hoping Cioni would fix it. "Hopefully Cioni can make that happen"

Then it turned into this challenge of rather I was right about what I was saying.

[Oliver Peters] "How many times have you dealt with tech support with any company and only ever received the absolute, correct info? "

I hear you, but no one has proven them wrong on this point in this back in forth.

Look, I would be fine with someone figuring out that they didn't know their own program and that there was a secret way that it worked.

It's not new to them. It's obviously new to you : ) but not to them.

I like the program and the app. I don't have any real problem with it except for the multitrack thing which is kind of a big deal for me, and I aint the only one.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 7:24:43 pm

[Tony West] "You tried to make the argument that you could monitor separate tracks through Frame, and after being proven wrong on that you're pushing the goal post a bit."

Huh? What I said was you could download split track files uploaded to Frame and the track configuration was unaffected when you used the web portal. I wasn't talking about monitoring or R&A of split track files, but rather using Frame to transfer files. That seems to be what you are trying to do.

[Tony West] "They made a program aimed at X users so they should fix it imho."

No, they made a platform for media workflows of various types. FCPX integration is a subset of that. And probably a tiny subset at that. There are also integration apps for other NLEs.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 4:55:58 pm

[Tony West] "B. Your way doesn't work anyway, because even if you skip the app and take a video with mics on separate tracks directly into Frame, you will not be able to monitor both those mics. So if you can't HEAR the mics how are they supposed to review it?"

Split tracks are only going to be used in an NLE anyway so the ability to monitor those tracks in the frame.io interface seems unnecessary.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 5:37:30 pm

[greg janza] "Split tracks are only going to be used in an NLE anyway so the ability to monitor those tracks in the frame.io interface seems unnecessary."

I'll help ya........

There is a interview segment with 2 mics.

I do an edit on the interview and I send the Frame link to two different people. 1) The producer (who will not cut but review it) and 2) the editor who will cut it into a larger segment and will want as much control and flexibility as possible over it.

I don't want to have to send them two different links. That's twice the work and that WOULD be unnecessary.

I want ONE file that meets the needs of everyone on the other end. Seems simple enough to understand and I'm not the only one that wants that.

Again from Frame.......................it is something a number of editors have reached out to us about. It's an issue we have on our radar here,


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 5:58:27 pm

[Tony West] "I do an edit on the interview and I send the Frame link to two different people. 1) The producer (who will not cut but review it) and 2) the editor who will cut it into a larger segment and will want as much control and flexibility as possible over it."

If you use the web interface directly you can have exactly what you're looking for- one video for two uses.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 7:12:35 pm

[greg janza] "If you use the web interface directly you can have exactly what you're looking for- one video for two uses."

I tried that Greg, it didn't work. That's why I went to them to ask for help.

"For sharing videos for Review, the best option would be to mix down the audio to a single stereo track upon export, so all of the tracks are audible by reviewers. "


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 7:26:34 pm

I think maybe there's a disconnect here. If I understand you, you want to create one split track file that can be used for two different purposes - to review on Frame.io by your producer and then to also be downloaded and used by your editor to edit with.

Oliver and I have stated that if you upload a split track file directly to the frame.io website you will then be able to do what you've requested.

If you're saying that you can't have a file that's split track after exporting that split track file out of FCPX and uploading it directly to Frame.io then the problem lies solely with FCPX.

But I'm also wondering why you're spending so much energy on something so simple. Even if you didn't use the extension, uploading split track files to the frame.io site directly is still easy peasy.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 9:38:32 pm

[greg janza] "I think maybe there's a disconnect here. If I understand you, you want to create one split track file that can be used for two different purposes - to review on Frame.io by your producer and then to also be downloaded and used by your editor to edit with."

yes.


[greg janza] "Oliver and I have stated that if you upload a split track file directly to the frame.io website you will then be able to do what you've requested."

And I stated to both of you that is incorrect. Even if you drag the spilt file into Frame io directly Frame io cannot read that file correctly. Meaning you will not hear all of the tracks for review.

[greg janza] "But I'm also wondering why you're spending so much energy on something so simple. Even if you didn't use the extension, uploading split track files to the frame.io site directly is still easy peasy."

First of all, the extension is meant to be used and is no problem at all unless you are sending spilt tracks.

You and Oliver keep saying that you can upload a split track file directly to Frame (without the extension)and it will work.

Did you read Frame's reply to that? It doesn't work.

The reason I'm spending time on it is because when they fix it that will save me time. The same reason other editors have asked them about it.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 9:45:23 pm

Tony, it must be something with how you're exporting out of FCPX.

I just tested a 6 channel split track mono pro res file that had been uploaded directly to Frame.io. I downloaded it from Frame.io and then imported it into Premiere and it remains a 6 channel split track mono pro res file.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 9:55:06 pm

I believe Tony is saying that if you watch it on Frame.io you won't hear all 6 channels, or at least not discretely. It will be a stereo mix, or it just completely dumps some of the channels.

Is that correct Tony?

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 6:37:36 pm

[Michael Hancock] "I believe Tony is saying that if you watch it on Frame.io you won't hear all 6 channels, or at least not discretely. It will be a stereo mix, or it just completely dumps some of the channels.

Is that correct Tony?"


Yes!!! That is correct Michael.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 6:47:02 pm

"I believe Tony is saying that if you watch it on Frame.io you won't hear all 6 channels, or at least not discretely. It will be a stereo mix, or it just completely dumps some of the channels.

Is that correct Tony?"

Yes!!! That is correct Michael.

Yes, that's easy to understand. The question that never seems to be answered here is why would your producer want/need to have access to 6 channels of discrete interview sound for content review inside of Frame.io?

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 7:02:34 pm

[greg janza] "Yes, that's easy to understand. "

You don't really understand it because you don't know how to make the file.


[greg janza] "The question that never seems to be answered here is why would your producer want/need to have access to 6 channels of discrete interview sound for content review inside of Frame.io?"

For the second time, I want one file that the producer can just watch and the editor can have access to all the tracks.

ONE file for both.

Frame IO did not ask me why I needed that because they are knowledgeable enough to know why. They are in the process of likely making it happen for editors in the know.

The questions really is..............Since Frame gets it, did it ever occur to you that YOU may be the one that needs to catch up?


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 7:10:09 pm

[Tony West] "ONE file for both."

For anyone following this very convoluted thread, if you use Premiere to export a split track pro res file and then upload that file to Frame.io for both a producer to watch and an editor to download, there is no issue at all.

The only issue is potentially with the FCP X h.264 multitrack share function and how it gets treated when uploaded to Frame.io.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 7:33:46 pm

[greg janza] "For anyone following this very convoluted thread, if you use Premiere to export a split track pro res file and then upload that file to Frame.io..."

This also works in FCPX if you export a Multitrack Quicktime and upload through the web portal, or if you upload a camera clip as is through the extension (drag and drop, not Share). Anytime encoding is involved, you must manually control how the encoding application deals with the audio track configuration. No real surprise there.

In my testing, I think part of the issue is the FrameIO Share Destination presets - H264 and Source. Both presets seem to only upload stereo or mono clips. Multiple stereo channels are muxed to one stereo track on the encoded file. Multiple discrete mono channels are muxed to a single mono track. The Source preset is completely wrong as it is NOT set to a "same as source" export. It would seem to me that fixing these two presets could be done very quickly if Frame addressed it.

The second issue is Frame's media player. Since the player is a standard media player like any basic web player, I don't see any way that it will allow discrete monitoring or selective monitoring of multichannel content. It's either going to be mono or stereo. I don't see that changing anytime soon, as it would likely require an entirely new media player across all platforms that can access Frame (web, extensions, iOS, etc).

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 8:21:54 pm

[greg janza] "For anyone following this very convoluted thread"

It's "convoluted" because you don't understand how to create the file I'm talking about and rather than admit it, you are trying to prove that a workflow that you have no understanding of is not useful.
I knew you were lost when you suggested the IINA player which is incapable of playing that type of file and you would have known that if you had experience with this workflow.


[greg janza] "if you use Premiere"

Irreverent in a thread about X, I don't use Premiere, and I'm not sure you are right because you have yet to prove you know the file type.


[greg janza] "The only issue is potentially with the FCP X h.264 multitrack share function and how it gets treated when uploaded to Frame.io."

Only partly right, it doesn't have to be h.264 can also be a ProRes multitrack share but it at least you are starting to learn a bit.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 11:01:54 pm

[Tony West] "You and Oliver keep saying that you can upload a split track file directly to Frame (without the extension)and it will work. "

The fundamental disconnect is that you seem to be talking about uploading via the extension and then properly monitoring discreet tracks on Frame. Greg and I are talking about uploading through the standard web portal and then downloading the same originals from a link you would send to your client. The latter works without question.

I see no way that the Frame player interface itself will ever properly provide discrete audio playback of multiple channel, 2, 4, 8, whatever, without either mixing or not playing some of the tracks. But the download via a portal upload is fine.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 8:31:32 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The fundamental disconnect is "

That you and Greg had no experience doing what I was writing about and tried to offer incorrect information based on your lack of knowledge and experience with it.


[Oliver Peters] "I see no way that the Frame player interface itself will ever properly provide discrete audio playback of multiple channel, 2, 4, 8, whatever, without either mixing or not playing some of the tracks."

But I don't really need you to see it, because..................I already spoke with them and they are on it.

You and Greg have been doing more flacking for the company that neither of you work for then they are.

To their credit they could have said "Nobody wants that Tony and we are not going to waste time and money on it."

They said the opposite of that.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 8:45:17 pm

[Tony West] "You and Greg have been doing more flacking for the company that neither of you work for then they are."

There's no reason to get rude. We fully understand your workflow, but don't necessarily use it ourselves. We've be offering suggestions that might be helpful. I've done testing in the past two days to verify what does and does not work. There are some issues that are likely easy to be resolved and others that will likely take more engineering effort. You seem to be copying and pasting the customer service chat feedback. While their customer support folks are friendly and helpful, I'm not sure that's an indication of what they will or will not be able to do in the future. No slam against them. Just how the business works.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 7:20:03 pm

Just to make sure you have the same type of file Greg that I'm talking about try this.......

Open your master file in QT 7 select show movie properties.

You should see

Video track
Sound Track 1
Sound Track 2
Timecode Track


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 7:30:05 pm
Last Edited By greg janza on Oct 14, 2019 at 7:37:54 pm

I would recommend that you abandon QT7 completely. To check the accuracy of a split track file import it into an NLE.

And for file playback use this instead: https://iina.io/

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 3:42:36 pm

[greg janza] "I would recommend that you abandon QT7 completely. To check the accuracy of a split track file import it into an NLE.

And for file playback use this instead: https://iina.io/"



It has some nice features but it can't read files shared out of X as multitrack QT movies.

This is how I know you are not using the same file if you recommended this product. It will only play one track out of the 6 unless it's a mixed down QT file.

Also I can't see where you can turn off selected tracks inside like QT 7 can so that's a no go, but thanks anyway.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 4:20:21 pm

[Tony West] "This is how I know you are not using the same file if you recommended this product. It will only play one track out of the 6 unless it's a mixed down QT file."

I recommended the iina player because it's a versatile color accurate player. It's not a replacement for a NLE.

Maybe it's just me but I still don't get why you would need split track playback in a basic player since all editing will occur in your NLE and only your editor would be the one determining which tracks to use.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 4:35:56 pm

[greg janza] "I recommended the iina player because it's a versatile color accurate player. It's not a replacement for a NLE."

Yeah, it's good for color but it can't play the sound of the files I'm talking about so it's useless.

[greg janza] "Maybe it's just me " Yes! it is : )


[greg janza] " I still don't get why you would need split track playback in a basic player since all editing will occur in your NLE and only your editor would be the one determining which tracks to use."

Because I could turn off certain tracks without even opening an NLE if I wanted to. The technology was already there for editors. I didn't invent it. You're OK with losing it because you can't figure out a way to use it in your own personal workflow so you think it's not necessary for anyone else's workflow.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 4:47:19 pm

[Tony West] "You're OK with losing it because you can't figure out a way to use it in your own personal workflow so you think it's not necessary for anyone else's workflow."

My confusion stems not from a lack of being able to make use of split track audio in a player. I don't use any player for audio editing - only a NLE.

And the standard workflow for a producer or writer to review interviews is for an editor to either create a transcript or post up the interviews to a site like Frame.io. Neither of these options would necessitate split track audio. That's why I'm asking about your workflow.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 6:06:20 pm

There are two good media player options, since QT7 Pro is a dead product. For good QC there's Telestream Switch, which is a paid app. You have to get the Plus or Pro options to turned on advanced features like captioning, multichannel audio, and removing watermarks on some codecs. Another is Blackmagic Media Express. It's free, but it runs through BMD i/o hardware when present.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 6:36:11 pm

[greg janza] "My confusion stems not from a lack of being able to make use of split track audio in a player. I don't use any player for audio editing - only a NLE.
"


I think your main confusion is not understanding how to create the file I'm taking about in X.


[greg janza] "And the standard workflow for a producer or writer to review interviews is for an editor to either create a transcript or post up the interviews to a site like Frame.io. Neither of these options would necessitate split track audio. That's why I'm asking about your workflow."

I explained the workflow and you still didn't understand it. It just seems beyond your scope.


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 9:11:59 pm

Hi Tony,

We've found a few inconsistencies in frame.io with uploads too. Non standard frame sizes can crash the upload process from inside FCPX, and delivering 5.1 sound has been glitchy.

The best way around this was for us to use a watch folder with the desktop app instead of using the app inside FCPX. This way we can export a ProRes master (if needed), a H264 and a HEVC file with different audio routing.

We've had pretty good success with this, but the app inside FCPX bit us so badly with a couple of pressurised uploads that we've largely stopped using it.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 6:11:02 am

[Tom Sefton] "We've found a few inconsistencies in frame.io with uploads too. Non standard frame sizes can crash the upload process from inside FCPX, and delivering 5.1 sound has been glitchy. "



Thanks for the input Tom. I haven't had any crashes with the app but also haven't used any non standard frame sizes.
I will be on the lookout for that though.

I hope you shared these findings with the team at Frame?


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 8:39:56 pm

We did. Nothing really happened after that, as we were under a tight deadline and as it had failed I had to switch to using Google Drive to deliver the files.

It was a 3840 x 1080 file with surround sound where the L, R, C and Lfe were in one language, and then 2 other languages were hard mixed to the rear L and rear R that was 1h20 long. It encoded from R3D 6K and went out to h264 frame.io as an overnight export. Next morning, it had failed during the upload process. Team couldn't figure out why and even though we showed it happening again I've not had any feedback. Was faster to run out a ProRes master, then use compressor to spin out a h264 and HEVC file with same audio routing and upload to another service.

Frame.io is still a big part of our production pipeline, but really only for standard corporate work with HD or 4K frame size.

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 14, 2019 at 11:39:50 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 15, 2019 at 12:02:00 am

I ran a quick test, since I was curious as to what was happening. ProRes Proxy file copied from an Alexa clip with lav + boom on separate tracks, left + right. I brought the clip into FCPX and then uploaded it to Frame directly from the FCPX browser using the extension.

I did two uploads - one with the clip set to stereo and the other set to dual mono. When I played back both files, using the extension panel, as well as the web portal, I still heard the channels separated on my speakers. I downloaded both files and they were the same as uploaded - ProRes Proxy with audio on 2 different channels.

So my question is, are you going through a project timeline first? Could it be that your camera clips are ID'ed as dual mono? This would sum them to mono on a stereo timeline. If so, that's completely normal and the extension is doing everything correctly.

When I uploaded a clip using the Frame H264 share setting, dual mono audio was summed. IOW it reacted as if it had been placed on a timeline and shared. When I set the clip to stereo, the separate left+right configuration came through correctly.

From what I can tell, the extension seems to be performing as one would expect.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 1:41:53 am
Last Edited By Michael Gissing on Oct 15, 2019 at 2:27:00 am

Redshark reported this as- "Frame.io hires Michael Cioni, thereby changing everything we know about workflows". I don't see how this will be. The cloud is taking it's sweet time to be an integral part of post workflows but I don't see the problem as tools like Frame.io, Vimeo, WeTransfer etc letting us down. The real let down for many is just access to cheap enough, fast enough internet to make the option of uploading camera rushes to the cloud instead of using cheap hard drives.

Honestly in my country it is not even a race to see if 4TB of data can be uploaded faster than flying a hard drive from one side of the country to the other. Given we are sold on the idea that we can swan around editing anywhere on a laptop, internet access, speed and affordability needs to be compared to a cheap portable drive. Sure long distance collaborative workflows would be nice and cloud based storage of rushes makes this possible but I'm not being held back by services like Vimeo or Frame.io as much as cost/ speed benefits of fast enough internet access.

I think "Cloud" has been hyped for long enough for us to realise there are bottlenecks that have nothing to do with software like Frame.io. I'm sure Michael Cioni is a whizz at organising sensible and efficient workflows for many applications but changing everything we know?


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 6:05:31 am

[Oliver Peters] "Could it be that your camera clips are ID'ed as dual mono? This would sum them to mono on a stereo timeline. If so, that's completely normal and the extension is doing everything correctly."

I don't think that's the problem because in other tests that I have done where the talent mic is set to duel mono and the music and effects are stereo, the stereo tracks don't come through in Frame either if the project clip is exported as multi separate clips.

It seems pretty simple. if I can hear all the tracks on my computer before I send it to them, then I should hear them inside Frame also.

One thing that might be helpful is if you post the Frame link to the test file you are talking about. Make it downloadable and then I will download it and inspect it. If it's what you say it is then I can go back to Frame and show it to them.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 12:01:56 pm

[Tony West] "I don't think that's the problem because in other tests that I have done where the talent mic is set to duel mono and the music and effects are stereo, the stereo tracks don't come through in Frame either if the project clip is exported as multi separate clips."

My gut feeling is that the problem boils down to the settings in Frame Share Destination. Seems like it needs an audio pass-through option in the H264 destination. Have you tried the Frame Source preset? If so, do you get the same results?

[Tony West] "One thing that might be helpful is if you post the Frame link to the test file you are talking about."

I'll try to get to that later today. I'd rather do that offlist. Where can I send it?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 6:43:30 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[Tony West] "One thing that might be helpful is if you post the Frame link to the test file you are talking about."

I'll try to get to that later today. I'd rather do that offlist. Where can I send it?"


Tony, I have those files if you want to take a look. Send an e-mail or ping me through the website.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 9:17:29 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Tony, I have those files if you want to take a look. Send an e-mail or ping me through the website."

OK I just did thanks


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 3:19:54 pm

An added thought on your workflow Tony...

If your producer is using the file to review interviews I would suggest you actually upload that file to an AI transcription site like Temi (https://www.temi.com/). The benefit is that your producer can watch/listen to the interview and highlight selects in the text.

Once your producer makes his or her selects your editor can go through those selects on the Temi website and quickly string out an a-roll in whichever NLE.

Ideally, an AI transcription site would have the ability to export an xml of the selects that could be imported into an NLE. Phillip Hodgett's Lumberjack builder program has this capability for FCPX but the program is still in it's infancy in Premiere.

Hopefully, Frame.io will eventually add full AI transcription capabilities as well as xml export of selects.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 8:43:39 pm

Transcription within FCPX - like Simon Says?

You could easily do this and provide a separate .srt file to a producer along with a proxy for review

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 9:01:50 pm
Last Edited By greg janza on Oct 15, 2019 at 9:06:44 pm

[Tom Sefton] "You could easily do this and provide a separate .srt file to a producer along with a proxy for review"

Yes, like Simon Says but more powerful. It would be a completely streamlined scripting process where a text transcription is married to the media files and so making selects of the text would take those matching parts of the media file and create a rough a-roll. When you're done making the text selects you then export an xml that would import into a NLE. Link the clips in the NLE and you have an a-roll.

You should check out Lumberjack builder. If it could be further developed for Premiere it could be a real game changer.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/tmprods
tallmanproductions.net


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 15, 2019 at 12:49:13 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I think that's more marketing than anything else. Depends on whether you mean for workflow or simply review & approval and/or delivery."

I've had great success on two features with frame.io.
Mind you I didn't sleep well during those two but heck I promised to get them dailies by next morning.
To me, it's just easier to use when you need a client to review.
Now it's not as robust in moving large data like Media Shuttle but maybe one day.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 25, 2019 at 5:52:38 pm

Circling back to the point of this thread.







More about a lot of things directly from Cioni.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 28, 2019 at 2:45:33 am

Good to hear the thoughts of Cioni. The idea of cameras without media storage, just a modem to the cloud within 4-5 years is a bit fanciful I think. The idea of a centralised storage of camera originals at full res and therefore the need to buy hard drives becoming obsolete - maybe but the short time frame is rather optimistic.

I found his argument about ProResRAW versus BRAW a bit weird. He's saying Apple don't make cameras (ignoring the idea of using iPhones) and that makes their version of RAW more appealing. The fact that Apple didn't release ProResRAW into the market place for a year and BM did it day one for free makes that seem false logic to me. Really it should be about the best codec and I'm unconvinced PRRAW is. Plus the argument that it's Apple and we can trust them because they don't make cameras is pretty much the reverse of what I see. BM have been open, fully disclosing and giving away their SDK, indeed encouraging others to use it. And who knows if PRRAW will survive the impending patent case. BRAW may also fall foul but I didn't agree with his argument at all.

So overall I got the impression from this long ramble that Cioni is pushing for where Frame.io should be if and when world wide 5G makes it feasible to transfer massive files straight from the camera to the cloud. Worthy goal but I think his time frame is unrealistic.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 28, 2019 at 12:43:49 pm

[Michael Gissing] "The idea of a centralised storage of camera originals at full res and therefore the need to buy hard drives becoming obsolete - maybe but the short time frame is rather optimistic."

I completely agree, but obviously that's the goal for Michael and Frame. Ultimately a lot of manufacturers are pushing the idea of all media in the cloud. No on-camera media (other than as a buffer), no hard drives, no on-site NAS/SAN storage. Naturally your local capital expenses would go down, however, that locks you into a permanent subscription model far more objectionable than Adobe's or Microsoft's.

What happens 5 years down the road when you want to stop paying and you want your media back in your own hands? Will you get hit with a massive download or offload charge? What about liability? Is Frame willing to warrant the replacement value of your production in the event of a catastrophic failure (never say never - think Universal Studio fire)?

Obviously a lot of things to iron out.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 28, 2019 at 1:00:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I completely agree, but obviously that's the goal for Michael and Frame. Ultimately a lot of manufacturers are pushing the idea of all media in the cloud. No on-camera media (other than as a buffer), no hard drives, no on-site NAS/SAN storage. Naturally your local capital expenses would go down, however, that locks you into a permanent subscription model far more objectionable than Adobe's or Microsoft's."

Not even the slightest chance this will happen in any meaningful way.


Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: Michael Cioni + frame io
on Oct 28, 2019 at 1:19:26 pm

Oliver Peters: Ultimately a lot of manufacturers are pushing the idea of all media in the cloud. No on-camera media (other than as a buffer), no hard drives, no on-site NAS/SAN storage. Naturally, your local capital expenses would go down. However, that locks you into a permanent subscription model far more objectionable than Adobe's or Microsoft's.

Agreed. Working "in the Cloud" sounds really slick until you have tried it. And I did (-:

The "Cloud" is nothing but a physical hard drive that you rent at a separate facility than yours. Comfortably working together over the web requires very fast internet connections on every end of the workflow, so it costs you much more than the drive rent alone. Besides this, I would never trust my valuable media to anyone outside of my company. So you do need to also have all your media stored locally before you even can think of working "in the Cloud". Forward-thinking is great, as long as you keep both feet on the ground and not in the clouds (-:

- Ronny


Return to posts index

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]