I see.
So, speaking only of a MC-based workflow ...
Minus the file renaming process (which is NOT done in QtChange -- but, rather, is executed using a batch application like Rname) ...
...It would seem the most compelling reason to use QtChange in the process -- is to make timeline dupe detection possible.
And if timeline dupe detection, for whatever reason, was largely not necessary -- than the original DSLR file name would probably offer equal utility in terms of EDL creation.
Would you agree?
Thanks.
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "oliverpetersvidy" <oliverpeters@...> wrote:
>
> > blafarm wrote:
> > is there any compelling reason to add the additional step
> > of embedding time code into those files using QtChange?
> > what is the actual utility of adding time code to the QT files
>
>
> A source file names shows up, which MC understands. This can be used as a camroll and does work with EDLs. The TC and source info is needed for things like proper dupe detection. The Reel ID is read as such in FCP, which is my primary NLE.
>
> - Oliver
>
No comments:
Post a Comment