I think the shooter is unaware of the issues that seem to plague ama workflows in general and in specific to nanoflash recordings. I think it's more likely he just has been unaware that issues exist that probably have nothing to do with his work but the nature of the beast. I haven't had to deal with nanoflash directly but I've certainly read of enough glitches that it must not be as robust or straight forward as it seems. I'd be curious to know if the cross pollination of media like I've read about in this thread is unique to nanoflash ama. AMA seems to have a certain iffyness to it no matter what. Look forward to seeing if the indexed AMA of MC 7 will solve these issues. So far no one has been able to tell me where the new media database for AMA MC7 is located. At NAB and the editors lounge the question was asked but no one had the answer where this new index file exists. It's got to be somewhere right?
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, John Heiser <jpheiser@...> wrote:
>
> I've had issues with Nanoflash MOVs getting mixed up. AMA files into an MC
> project, transcode, then send to Avid DS. Edit project and send for
> approval - project remains on the system.
>
> Now I get a batch of footage for a new project, also Nanoflash. AMA into
> MC, transcode, send to DS. Work on new project. Hey we have changes on the
> first project. Open it up, and some of the clips in project 1 now carry
> video from project 2. Problem is solved by moving project 2's footage out
> of the indexed path.
>
> Nanoflash clip names in the two projects are unrelated. Timecode may be
> similar, though. It's just weird.
>
> This shooter never gets negative comments on his Nano footage for other
> clients, so I assumed it was something on my end. Now it looks like it's a
> Nanoflash/AMA issue.
>
> ----
> *john heiser | senior video editor*
> *o2**ideas*
> birmingham, alabama, USA
> http://vimeo.com/johnheiser
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 7:56 AM, editbruboy <bruno@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I've had something similar with Nanoflash files on version 5 Symphony
> > (PC). All my Nanoflash rushes were copied onto hard disk with folder names
> > such as card 1, card 2 etc. Link to volume didn't work with the card file
> > structure that came to me. If I remember correctly, the cards had some
> > strange folder names (with curly brackets) so I was forced to link to AMA
> > files. On doing this I got some very strange results, with some files
> > linking to clips that were from different folders/different days. The clip
> > names matched the files on disk, but the media was clearly from a
> > completely different file number.
> >
> > Never got to the bottom of the problem, but it's clearly remained in
> > current versions of software and seems to also be cross-platform.
> >
> > Luckily, it happened fairly infrequently, so I just did a traditional
> > import on the offending clips. Wouldn't fancy my chances of re-linking to
> > these clips in the future though!
> >
> > Bruno
> >
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Dan McCabe <danlist@> wrote:
> > >
> > > On a Mac Symph 6.5.2
> > >
> > > Some of the footage on this project is shot as Nanoflash mxf which I
> > > want to bring in as AMA from a drive that has all the original shooting
> > > and then consolidate to an editing drive.
> > >
> > > I select all the files in a new folder of new footage on the original
> > > shooting drive and "Link to AMA file(s)."
> > >
> > > All the files populate a bin but I also get new master clips on the
> > > editing drive from an unrelated shoot. The only connection is that they
> > > were originally Nanoflash files as well that I consolidated.
> > >
> > > What's up with that? Is AMA digging them out from card info (maybe the
> > > same card was used on both shoots)?
> > >
> > > Anyway to turn that off?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > D.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [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 (9) |
No comments:
Post a Comment