John, did you read my previous email where I mentioned this problem? Adding a tape name to the reference clips will allow you to decompose without it trying to do the entire clip.
Andi
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 00:55:59 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
From: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 00:55:59 -0700
Subject: RE: [Avid-L2] Anybody using or familiar with XD Direct for mass ingest of XDCam material?
Another thing came up with our testing of XD direct. After ingesting some test XD Cams the AEs cut a small sequence and no matter what we've done Avid 6.5.4 wants to batch import the entire XD Cam clips not just the sections that were used with handles.
We tried decomposing the sequences, which scared me but was recommended by the rental house as the proper workflow, and when we tried to decompose Avid just created decompose clips that are the length of the entire original XD Cam clips.
We tried decomposing both captured and imported clips and got the above result. We tried decomposing only imported clips and got the same result and when we tried decomposing only captured clips no clips were created. So clearly Avid knows these clips are imports.
Traditionally decomposing imports is a no no but Avid would allow you to do it. Now I don't know if our inability to decompose these clips with handles is an Avid thing where is trying to protect us from screwing up or if there is something about the XD Direct that is prohibiting a traditional decompose of the XD Direct clips. I'm figuring it's something we are missing either in XD Direct settings or an Avid setting we haven't found yet.
I was thinking that the XD Direct SD 23.976 clips for offline would allow for an uprez that would just be ama linking to the XDCam master disk and the online sequence would just come online or perhaps require a relink to selected clips in open bins. Then we could do this for each disk needed and transcode with handles to make the online rez clips. I'm not sure if that will work as the suggestion is a batch import after decomposing the online sequence and that does not appear to be cooperating at this point. I'm sure with the proper guidance from the rental house we will sort it out.
We tried decomposing the sequences, which scared me but was recommended by the rental house as the proper workflow, and when we tried to decompose Avid just created decompose clips that are the length of the entire original XD Cam clips.
We tried decomposing both captured and imported clips and got the above result. We tried decomposing only imported clips and got the same result and when we tried decomposing only captured clips no clips were created. So clearly Avid knows these clips are imports.
Traditionally decomposing imports is a no no but Avid would allow you to do it. Now I don't know if our inability to decompose these clips with handles is an Avid thing where is trying to protect us from screwing up or if there is something about the XD Direct that is prohibiting a traditional decompose of the XD Direct clips. I'm figuring it's something we are missing either in XD Direct settings or an Avid setting we haven't found yet.
I was thinking that the XD Direct SD 23.976 clips for offline would allow for an uprez that would just be ama linking to the XDCam master disk and the online sequence would just come online or perhaps require a relink to selected clips in open bins. Then we could do this for each disk needed and transcode with handles to make the online rez clips. I'm not sure if that will work as the suggestion is a batch import after decomposing the online sequence and that does not appear to be cooperating at this point. I'm sure with the proper guidance from the rental house we will sort it out.
__._,_.___
Posted by: Andi Meek <kwikpasta@hotmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (6) |
this is the Avid-L2
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment