Actually, the motion adapter 'guesses' (i'm sure its more sophisticated than that) the source- usually it gets it right. Most often the motion adapter will correctly guess that 2398p in a 5994i project needs pull down added.
(The one it never gets right is removing 2:3 from a 720 / 5994 source in a 2398 project- the motion adapter
Always assume the 720 is 'p,' but it's easy enough to open the motion adapter and adjust.)
It's a good idea to eyeball every shot carefully.
(actually harder to see the errors on a newer monitor because they tend to suppress interlace issues automatically! If you do this a lot, keep a glass monitor around - its easier to see motion adapter errors.)
________________________
Greg Huson
Secret Headquarters, Inc
Greg (at) SecretHQ.com
www.SecretHQ.com
DigitalServicsStation.com
On Nov 16, 2012, at 7:26 AM, "ksirul" <kenavid2@glueedit.com> wrote:
> When MC adds a motion adapter, it isn't actually adding 3:2 pulldown right? It's just a 125% Motion Effect?
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Mark Spano <cutandcover@...> wrote:
> >
> > You have it, although the way I read it, you may be adding (or being forced
> > to add) multiple redundant steps. If this were my show, I would have just
> > cut everything into a master 59.94i sequence. Not sure why there's bouncing
> > back and forth between 23.98p and 59.94i sequences, when MC can handle the
> > 23.98 material perfectly fine in the 59.94i sequence using motion adapters.
> > But anyway, once you have everything in your master 59.94i sequence, yes,
> > the 23.98 sections will have motion adapters added to them automatically.
> > You can definitely mixdown those sections, but to avoid clutter and
> > confusion, I usually just render. Rendering the sequence bakes in the
> > motion adapters - you then in effect have an entirely 59.94i sequence, and
> > any file outputs can be done using QT ref or same-as-source (as every
> > referenced file is now either a natively 59.94i video file or a rendered
> > (baked in) 59.94i file). Avoiding mixing down is just a preference for me
> > at this stage, since it makes things much easier when the inevitable last
> > minute note comes down and we've got to change something. Then I don't have
> > to remove a mixdown and revert to a previous sequence to make that happen.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 8:27 PM, John Moore <bigfish@...> wrote:
> >
> > > **
> > >
> > >
> > > So I'm doing an hour special that has a few sketches shot on Red, oh joy,
> > > at 23.98. For the studio shoot of the main show it is all 59.94. We took
> > > the sketches and cut them into a 59.94 sequence to build the studio
> > > playback reel. The offline is being done with the line cut and isos and
> > > the playback reel. I haven't had to deal much with mix and match but I
> > > figure I will color correct the sketches in their native format timelines
> > > and then when I get the final online sequence I will eye match and cut in
> > > the 23.98 sequences into the 59.94 final timeline. Avid will add the
> > > appropriate motion adapter and voila away we go. Am I missing something
> > > here? Will I need to do video mixdowns of the 23.98 sequences to output to
> > > tape or file. I'm delivering a file as primary and tape as backup. I seem
> > > to have read that the mixdown will be required for a QT ref movie do to the
> > > differing frame rates. Usually I like to export a QT ref for multiple audio
> > > channels and use QT Pro to make the final file. This has worked well even
> > > when I had to go to ProRes files. There is the option to export an XDCam
> > > file which would require that fake disk folder thingy and an export to
> > > device IIRC. Can someone shed some more light on the need for a video
> > > mixdown of the 23.98 sections or do I have to mixdown the entire show? TIA
> > >
> > > John Moore
> > >
> > > Barking Trout Productions
> > >
> > > Studio City, CA
> > >
> > > bigfish@...
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (5) |
No comments:
Post a Comment