Re: [Avid-L2] 29.97 to 23.976 for a Series?

I've found with Avid Fluid Motion if I mixdown a series of cuts into a single clip and apply fluid  motion at 100% the cut points turn into fluid morphs more or less.  It's an interesting effect but would a similar optical flow create strange transitional effects on cuts?  If so I would assume it would be better to have Resolve do the optical flow on each clip.  Clearly teranex and other converts must know not to morph the cut points but I don't know how that would work in Resolve.


On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 10:50 AM, Mark Spano wrote:

David - you are correct about graphic text - best to leave that off during this conversion. However for the motion compensation on Alchemist, you'd be surprised. With the version I have (Grass Valley xFile Client / Alchemist File v4) these conversions are almost completely artifact free. I did an entire season of Belgravia and War Of The Worlds for Epix - full episodes that were progressive, sure, but converting from 25p to 23.976p and they were spotless. Before I saw this, I could not have been convinced that motion compensated conversion like this would work, and every consult I said slow it down and pitch-correct.

On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 12:56 PM David Ross <speckydave@gmail.com> wrote:

My experience of "Motion Compensated" Alchemist conversions is that you will be guaranteed to have artifacts, certainly if the video includes any text/graphics or images that rotate (e.g. the wheels on a car). Obviously, you can switch the Motion Compensation off, but for a conversion to progressive output like this you'll just be stuck with frame blending instead.

Cheers,

 

David

 

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 09:33, Tony Quinsee-Jover <tony@hdheaven.co.uk> wrote:

If you want the best results, guaranteed to be artifact free, then this is definitely the best route. It makes for an easy workflow too - you only do the one conversion when everything is finished.

Cheers,
Tony

Sent by magic over t'interweb


> On 14 Apr 2022, at 09:27, editbruboy <bruno@bmansi.co.uk> wrote:
>
> I would try and investigate if some sort of hardware standards converter (Alchemist?) might be a better solution. So you complete your project at it's native frame rate and get it converted afterwards.

 

 

_._,_._,_

---

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#135785) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [administrator242.death@blogger.com]

_._,_._,_