This IS the Avid L2: Re: [Avid-L2] Simplist 23.98 to 59.94i workflow?

Saturday, January 4, 2014

Re: [Avid-L2] Simplist 23.98 to 59.94i workflow?

If you mix down first, the motion adapter will be correct. Source: Progressive, Output: Film with 2:3 Pulldown. Promoting that adapter into a time warp effect shouldn't make any difference.

On Saturday, January 4, 2014, namyrb wrote:

"Mixdown in the 23.98 project so you have one chunk of video, then bring that into the 59.94 project. One motion adapter = perfect cadence. Mix that down and you've got the pulldown baked in, ready for tape output or file output."

This is what we've been doing so far with the only difference being that we promote it. Is this needed or can we just leave the green dot as it is? I don't know if my eyes deceive me, but leaving it as it is seems to look a little better.

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Mark Spano <cutandcover@gmail.com> wrote:

"Even though I had requesed the online be done at 59.94 the AEs just onlined in a 23.98 project."

That's exactly what I would have done. MUCH easier on your conscience, since everything's perfectly frame accurate. Pulldown add should be the very last thing you do.

"Now my plan is to take their online sequence and cut that into a 59.94 sequence. This will add the motion adapters but I realize the sequence will have a random cadence between shots."

Right, so don't do that. Mixdown in the 23.98 project so you have one chunk of video, then bring that into the 59.94 project. One motion adapter = perfect cadence. Mix that down and you've got the pulldown baked in, ready for tape output or file output.

"If I do go the universal mastering route what is the cleanest and most reliable way to make a 29.97 file for closed captioning that will be accurate to the universal mastered tape"

I never use Universal Mastering for pulldown adding. Stopped doing that precisely because of file-based delivery. Method I've described above is easier and you wind up with a very fast export (SAS).

"I also have to deliver a full res pro res file for DvD's."

That should be the 23.98 master. Make a ProRes mixdown of your 23.98 sequence and export SAS.

"The Pro Tools session is 23.98 so I assume that I'd have to bring that into the 23.98 project first before cutting the sequence into. 59.94 timeline if I go that route"

I would import into the 23.98 project AND import into the 59.94 project. MC stamps audio on the way in at the desired frame rate, and this is easier than responding to whatever weird dialogs it will give you when you open the 23.98 sequence in the 59.94 project.

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 8:16 PM, johnrobmoore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:

Originally I was told my current project would be a mixture of many different cameras and frame ratea. Because of this I suggested onlining in 1080i/59.94 our ultimate delivery format. I have now been informed all the source material is 23.98 from the vaeious cameras. The majority of the show was shot on a Sony F55 to XDCam and the offline project was a 23.98 NTSC project. I was also originally tole the network would accept a 23.98 master but now I'm told the network need 59.94.

Even though I had requesed the online be done at 59.94 the AEs just onlined in a 23.98 project. Now my plan is to take their online sequence and cut that into a 59.94 sequence. This will add the motion adapters but I realize the sequence will have a random cadence between shots. That's no different than just having a deck add pull down to 23.98 material on capture but given I have a true 23.98 sequence to start with would it be better to use universal mastering to tape to get a proper A frame on 0 and 05 frames on the final sequence. I doubt they will remove pull down later but I'd hate to throw that out if possible.

If I do go the universal mastering route what is the cleanest and most reliable way to make a 29.97 file for closed captioning that will be accurate to the universal mastered tape. I also have to deliver a full res pro res file for DvD's. The Pro Tools session is 23.98 so I assume that I'd have to bring that into the 23.98 project first before cutting the sequence into. 59.94 timeline if I go that route. I'm not at the system right now to play around but any suggestions would be appreciated.