You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#134706) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]
Welcome to the Avid-L2
FAQ!
AVID-L II Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Subscribing (or unsubscribing) to the Avid-L2
Send an e-mail message to:
Avid-L2+subscribe@groups.io
Or, to unsubscribe, send e-mail to:
Avid-L2+unsubscribe@groups.io
Note that by subscribing, you are acknowledging that you have read
and understand this FAQ See below for additional detail.
Your options for member types can be reviewed on the group's home page. At any time, you can view messages on the web site for this group itself
Membership types are Indvidual messages, Digests of 12 messages each, Daily Summary, special announcements only, or no mail at all to use the web portal only.
To change your member type, visit the group s.io web site and modify your membership type in the check boxes provided
Policies
Despite what email address or handle you use, you should register as a Yahoo user to participate in the Avid-L2, for access to the web features of this group.
Subscribers should set up an account with their legal first and last names, then send the request to join.
This is a Moderated list, and all subscription requests must be approved by the moderator(s). I, please include your first and last name in the subscription request to the moderator when you request to join.
As always, Groups.io and the moderators of this list are not responsible for the use third parties may make of information you have made publicly available in this or any other public
forum. Please take a look at the applicable Yahoo Terms of Use and Privacy
Policy for more information about public information and forums.
Off Topic Filtering. Part of the interest of the Avid-L2 is it's range
of topics. If you are posting an Off-topic thread, please preface the
subject with OT: Use the colon after the letters.
Email filters and rules can be used by subscribers to move Off Topic posts to where ever they would like in their email organization by using a rule/filter with Sender of: Avid-l2@yahoogroups.com and subject contains OT: .
The Avid-L is a helpful yet rough around the edges crowd. Topics that are not welcome are religion, politics, and other disruptive topics that interfere with the operation of the list. Moderation of these topics will be quick, so simply put- Let's all just play nice
Commercial Posts must be prefaced with [commercial] in the subject or they will be rejected.
Jobs should have #job in their header, and press releases should have [pr] in their header
Background
Avid-L was established in 1994 at Calvin College by Steven Koster.
It was created to be a forum for Avid users to meet, discuss, and share
information.
Avid-L quickly grew into the premiere on-line users group for
professional film and video editors. It was one of the earliest examples
of an Internet community, allowing hundreds of editors worldwide to
share their experiences and expertise with their peers. There was no
better place for a professional Avid editor to get such wealth of
informed professional advice.
At various times, individual subscribers volunteered services to the
group. Searchable archives were maintained by Germany's Berlin Users
Group as well as the UIUC. A tips & tricks list was posted by Andy
Birkhead of Innovative Edit. Wes Plate, a longtime contributor, not only
shared key techniques on his Web site, he also created a photo gallery
for members' portraits.
In 1997, several subscribers began a tradition of meeting in person at
the NAB trade show in Las Vegas. The first gatherings were organized by Jaime Fowler. In 1999,
Avid Technology itself began sponsoring these gatherings as an exclusive reception and seminar for Avid-L members only. In 2002, this changed to the "Avid Users Group" meeting.
By 1999, Avid-L boasted over 1600 subscribers, exhibiting a true
international scope with over 300 international members. The community
included participants from a wide variety of well-known corporate
organizations in broadcasting, technical, and content creation fields,
as well as and multiple local TV stations, colleges, and universities.
In 2000, Avid-L joined AvidProNet.com, and then, in 2002, was integrated
Into Avid.com.
In 2005 Due to problems with signal to noise ratio and abusive posters, the Avid-L2 was formed. A year later the Avid-L was discontinued by Avid.
At the middle of 2006, the L2 has around 1100 members, with plenty of "lurker only" members who simply use the web version of the list. The L2 is spam-free, by moderation and with Groups.io’s tools and will remain that way.
In 2019, the Group has migrated to Groups,io from the previous Yahoo engine- the Groups.io page maintains the complete Avid-L2 archive. The original Avid-L archive has been lost to the history of the interwebz.
Welcome, and Enjoy!
Extras!
With a Groups.io account tied to your subscription to the Avid-L2, you can use the web features of the Group.
Calendar Various Avid events are in the Calender. If you have an event you'd like posted, pull down and fill out the Calendar event request and send it to any Moderator
Database - The database area contains Avid Feature requests, Help Wanted, Freelance Listings and For Sale sections. Feel free to add your listings to any of these areas. Job Postings will remain up for 1 month. Please date all postings to the database areas, being pertinent is a good way to be.
Files- The files section contains various sundry files, including the latest Avid release notes. Check back often for changes.
Photos - Pictures of your Avid setup are welcome, or pictures relating to a post you need a photo to explain. Photos will be posted after moderator approval. Who knows, your picture might grace the front page for a while.
Links- Various helpful links, including direct links to Avid CPR releases can be found here, also the link to the archives.
JDS
You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#134705) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Mute #guidelines-notice
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]
On Jul 28, 2020, at 12:47 PM, Mark B via groups.io <eatapc=me.com@groups.io> wrote:Can I ask: Why does shooting 24 piss you off? I'm honestly interested. Yes, I'm a Boomer, but always open to learning something.
On Jul 28, 2020, at 3:43 AM, Roger via groups.io <rogershuff=yahoo.co.uk@groups.io> wrote:We're using the C300 at my university. The files link fine with the plugin. I've got v3.2 installed here.With Best Wishes, Roger Shufflebottom +44 7973 543 660On Monday, 27 July 2020, 16:58:07 BST, Benjamin Hershleder <ben@contactben.com> wrote:Hello Brain Trust,I have been given some preliminary information about a camera that *may* be used:I see that the Codec is: "XF-AVC codec, an H.264 format wrapped in the widely supported MXF wrapper."It looks like Avid has an AMA plug-in already:Does anyone have any experience with these files they'd like to share?Thanks for any thoughts on avoiding trouble with these files!Cheers,Benjamin
———
Benjamin Hershleder
ContactBen.com
You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#134702) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]
On Jul 28, 2020, at 3:43 AM, Roger via groups.io <rogershuff=yahoo.co.uk@groups.io> wrote:We're using the C300 at my university. The files link fine with the plugin. I've got v3.2 installed here.With Best Wishes, Roger Shufflebottom +44 7973 543 660On Monday, 27 July 2020, 16:58:07 BST, Benjamin Hershleder <ben@contactben.com> wrote:Hello Brain Trust,I have been given some preliminary information about a camera that *may* be used:I see that the Codec is: "XF-AVC codec, an H.264 format wrapped in the widely supported MXF wrapper."It looks like Avid has an AMA plug-in already:Does anyone have any experience with these files they'd like to share?Thanks for any thoughts on avoiding trouble with these files!Cheers,Benjamin
———
Benjamin Hershleder
ContactBen.com
On Jul 27, 2020, at 4:07 PM, schühlieh via groups.io <schuehlieh=yahoo.de@groups.io> wrote:Hi Ben,
have already worked often with material from this camera,
only good experiences with LUT and AMA, performance and CC.
What I really always do, is to remind the crew of the copy process :
They have to copy the whole card over to keep file structure intact - then AMAlinking works wonderful well.
So many filmmakers think this is "something they can do themselves" and then only grab the clips.. Then all metadata is lost.. Also saw too many people poking deep into the folders trying to dig down to the clips, linking one at a time, really horryfing
You'll find the AMA plug in here - point the source browser to the topmost folder, then Avid looks inside and it works
Canon XF Plugin 3.6 for Avid Media Access [macOS]
https://www.canon.co.uk/support/consumer_products/products/digital_cinema/digital_cinema_camera/eos_c300_mark_ii.html?type=download&softwaredetailid=tcm:14-1978680
(and much more, Canon has a really good software download page!)
When they use fast CFcards (instead of SDcards) they can record several flavours of AVC-intra, some of them you can consolidate, fast as copy process..
Here are the specs
https://www.canon.co.uk/support/consumer_products/products/digital_cinema/digital_cinema_camera/eos_c300_mark_ii.html?type=specifications
HTH
best
Julia
On Jul 27, 2020, at 3:00 PM, Keld von Eyben <keld@voneyben.dk> wrote:It's Canon who has the plugin.
I have used it some years ago and it worked.
I don\t know about support for 2020 MCP versions, though.
On Jul 27, 2020, at 10:25 PM, John Moore <bigfish@pacbell.net> wrote:The bubbled up battery was in a different ups of the same make and model. That's great to know the batteries are such a good price at interstate. Funny Interstate car batteries are way more costly than other brands. Is it the same company?
On Jul 28, 2020, at 1:25 PM, David Baud <david.baud@gmail.com> wrote:Nope. 24fps playback for film even in Europe. 25fps is for television (PAL/SECAM) based on the common power supply which is 50Hz.david at kosmos-productions.comDavid BaudColorist & Finishing EditorAnybody remember film? You had two choices -- 24 fps, and, well, 24 fps.25 for my friends across the pond, and I still don't understand why...-- Sol-------------------------------------------------Sol FischlerEditor: Image & Sound914-525-2579On Tuesday, July 28, 2020, 12:23:46 PM EDT, hoplist <hoplist@hillmanncarr.com> wrote:Are we still doing this? This is so depressing. There are perfectly good reasons to shoot 30 and perfectly good reasons to shoot 24. And what's with the pissing match about frame rate precision? We all know what you mean!Guess what, I'm shooting 60 when I can. Nyah, nyah. That's 30+ frame better than all-you-all. If you shoot 24 for me, I will be pissed. If you think 30 is the wrong "look," okay Boomer.In recognition of my European friends, if I was shooting for the international market, then of course I would shoot 24 or maybe 48 or maybe 60. By the way, how does a 60 to 24 reverse pull-down look? I haven't tried that.Sure, we should have one standard, but we don't.Yours in diversity,todTod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.Spot on, Mark: "If you're shooting at 29.97, it is for a 'live' look, otherwise, it would behoove you to shoot 23.976p because it holds up better for broadcast and streaming and web and everywhere else."Whenever a director contacts me about a project, I bring up shooting specs. The way I put it (to make it as scary as possible): Please shoot at 23.98 unless you want your footage to look like a soap opera. They never do. (The next issue that comes up is about shooting in log, but that's another rant.)
Wilson's advice to record "in the field as DNxHD 145," thereby avoiding all transcoding, is an interesting idea and useful for his workflow, but having to transcode footage is not in my list of "Top Ten Things Shooters Do That Create Headaches in Post."
On Jul 28, 2020, at 11:13 AM, Sol Fischler via groups.io <sol.fischler=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:Anybody remember film? You had two choices -- 24 fps, and, well, 24 fps.25 for my friends across the pond, and I still don't understand why...-- Sol-------------------------------------------------Sol FischlerEditor: Image & Sound914-525-2579On Tuesday, July 28, 2020, 12:23:46 PM EDT, hoplist <hoplist@hillmanncarr.com> wrote:Are we still doing this? This is so depressing. There are perfectly good reasons to shoot 30 and perfectly good reasons to shoot 24. And what's with the pissing match about frame rate precision? We all know what you mean!Guess what, I'm shooting 60 when I can. Nyah, nyah. That's 30+ frame better than all-you-all. If you shoot 24 for me, I will be pissed. If you think 30 is the wrong "look," okay Boomer.In recognition of my European friends, if I was shooting for the international market, then of course I would shoot 24 or maybe 48 or maybe 60. By the way, how does a 60 to 24 reverse pull-down look? I haven't tried that.Sure, we should have one standard, but we don't.Yours in diversity,todTod Hopkins
Hillmann & Carr Inc.
On Jul 28, 2020, at 10:07 AM, Mark B via groups.io <eatapc=me.com@groups.io> wrote:Spot on, Mark: "If you're shooting at 29.97, it is for a 'live' look, otherwise, it would behoove you to shoot 23.976p because it holds up better for broadcast and streaming and web and everywhere else."
Whenever a director contacts me about a project, I bring up shooting specs. The way I put it (to make it as scary as possible): Please shoot at 23.98 unless you want your footage to look like a soap opera. They never do. (The next issue that comes up is about shooting in log, but that's another rant.)
Wilson's advice to record "in the field as DNxHD 145," thereby avoiding all transcoding, is an interesting idea and useful for his workflow, but having to transcode footage is not in my list of "Top Ten Things Shooters Do That Create Headaches in Post."
On Jul 28, 2020, at 10:07 AM, Mark B via groups.io <eatapc=me.com@groups.io> wrote:Spot on, Mark: "If you're shooting at 29.97, it is for a 'live' look, otherwise, it would behoove you to shoot 23.976p because it holds up better for broadcast and streaming and web and everywhere else."
Whenever a director contacts me about a project, I bring up shooting specs. The way I put it (to make it as scary as possible): Please shoot at 23.98 unless you want your footage to look like a soap opera. They never do. (The next issue that comes up is about shooting in log, but that's another rant.)
Wilson's advice to record "in the field as DNxHD 145," thereby avoiding all transcoding, is an interesting idea and useful for his workflow, but having to transcode footage is not in my list of "Top Ten Things Shooters Do That Create Headaches in Post."
On 28 Jul 2020, at 06:19, Shane Ross via groups.io <shanerosseditor=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:I'm not allowed to shorten 23.976 to 23.98? What?:)Laugh all you want, but people think that number is a 'speed / framerate'. (I did, long time ago, and it drove me crazy.)Doing math with 23.98 instead of 23.976 gives you an offset of 0.6 seconds after an hour.That is too much in our world.And yes, 23.976 is also not the 'exact' number, but good enough for rock 'n roll.Shane
On 27 Jul 2020, at 22:28, Shane Ross via groups.io <shanerosseditor=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:23.98,Eeh Shane,For the records, most of the times I disagree with you, and most of the times I'm right, you're wrong.Now, are you trying to piss me off here?
You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#134693) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]
On Jul 28, 2020, at 10:07 AM, Mark B via groups.io <eatapc=me.com@groups.io> wrote:Spot on, Mark: "If you're shooting at 29.97, it is for a 'live' look, otherwise, it would behoove you to shoot 23.976p because it holds up better for broadcast and streaming and web and everywhere else."
Whenever a director contacts me about a project, I bring up shooting specs. The way I put it (to make it as scary as possible): Please shoot at 23.98 unless you want your footage to look like a soap opera. They never do. (The next issue that comes up is about shooting in log, but that's another rant.)
Wilson's advice to record "in the field as DNxHD 145," thereby avoiding all transcoding, is an interesting idea and useful for his workflow, but having to transcode footage is not in my list of "Top Ten Things Shooters Do That Create Headaches in Post."
You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#134691) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]
On 28 Jul 2020, at 06:19, Shane Ross via groups.io <shanerosseditor=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:I'm not allowed to shorten 23.976 to 23.98? What?:)
Shane
On 27 Jul 2020, at 22:28, Shane Ross via groups.io <shanerosseditor=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:23.98,Eeh Shane,For the records, most of the times I disagree with you, and most of the times I'm right, you're wrong.Now, are you trying to piss me off here?
