Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

FCPX is not that bad, I had someone come to me for a fine edit and color correction for a short done entirely in FCPX and I got the hang of it in an hour or do. I think it's easier to cut your teeth with a project already in working condition so I'd look at opening up something existing or using an app called 7 to FCPX to convert a Final Cut Pro 7 project to X and then start playing with it

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

FCPX definitely has tracks. They're kind of funky to learn but once you know how to manipulate them they work.

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Starting the audio before or after the cut makes it a more natural transition

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Todieat20, have you considered upgrading to a solid state drive, adding RAM or a better video card? I have a 2006 Mac Pro with an SSD, 18gb ram and an and hd4870 video card and it's still faster than new machines I use at work

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Just finished a documentary I shot in Ferguson right after the Mike Brown killing. It's rough but that's because I aimed to get it out into the news cycle rather than clean it up more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1sdBPVzQpI

FERGUSON: No Justice, No Peace

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

The stroke is just difficult. I have a 2.5 minute video that uses strokes to draw out people's movement across maps and it wants 12 hours to render. After effects be cray

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Why is dropbox banned? That's literally the single best answer.

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

He's been editing on a laptop so CPU was most likely the biggest bottleneck.

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

I have an AE comp that's got 15 layers of strokes detailing the path of people out of ancient Africa and across a world map with a camera pan along it. 45 seconds. I'm now on day 2 of rendering it and it still expects 95 more hours to go

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Literally it's 15 layers of single-line strokes, 15 layers of solids with circular masks that grow for when a stroke gets to its location, camera + null for control, and then a world map that loops horizontally. I just restarted the export when after effects bottomed out on memory and now it's at 350 hours and counting, averaging 1 frame every 2 minutes on a 60fps composition. It would probably be faster to advance it frame by frame, export each frame, then stitch together the frames in another composition.

Edit: I'm going to guess that the problem is that each stroke is a 9000x9000 pre-comp solid that I stencil the stroke on. The problem is that it's a 1080p video so the stroke will have to cover that entire screen but at this point I think I will just re-create the entire thing with smaller solids and use one master stroke with each other line coming out from it instead of all starting from the same location. Will suck but 3 hours of work to reduce time is better than 300 hours of render time

bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Feb 8, 2015

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Nah, I'm just remaking the map and strokes, it seems to be freakinf out over the world map being 9000x9000, and having a generated grid behind it along with a textured solid for the water. I flattened the whole precomp and that alone made the entire thing more manageable. Maybe half a day of rendering. I guess I do need a new computer soon, this Mac Pro 1,1 is finally getting long in the tooth

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

I would use after effects, render the images out to a video file, then use compressor to convert it to something final cut will be happy to play with, like apple pro res

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Or try using QuickTime to convert the audio to aiff

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

I made filmeditdb.com which allows you to create and track a list of assets, it's better for archival materials because you're not looking at "0155427-02.mov" for every exported camera clip but if she's good at managing her files it would be really helpful for organizing your clips. You can even export a .csv of all your assets, if/when they're used in the film, etc.

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Sorry! It looks like my server host migrated me to another server and restarted it afterwards, so I had to re-run the commands to start the webserver. It's back up now.

The tutorial video needs to be updated as well to match with the new layout, but it'll get there.

bassguitarhero fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Feb 18, 2015

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

If you have any feedback or think of things that could be in there but aren't, hit me up with them, I built it based on my experiences working as an assistant editor on a semi-large doc and working off a FileMaker Pro doc, but there are probably a lot of things I overlooked so if there's ways to improve it, I definitely will

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

quote:


In order to make video play back at a fixed rate there needs to be some kind of timing circuit. When television was first beginning, there weren’t any of the high tech silcon-based chips that we used for this task today. So the brilliant engineers back then used the oscillation of AC electricty as the basis for their timing circuit. In the US, electricity cycles at 60 times per second (60hz.) So using half of that gives us the frame rate of 30fps. (In Europe, electricity flows at 50hz. 50/2 = 25fps)

So the frame rate of television was actually exactly 30 frames per second at one point in time. However that all changed when color television was introduced. When a signal for color information was added to the television transmission there was a big problem. The color carrier signal was phasing with with the sound carrier signal because they were very close in the spectrum. This made the picture look un-watchable. The quick fix they came up with was to reduce the framerate by .03fps which moved the two signals out of phase.

We have been stuck with this frame rate ever since.

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

I'm not sure about lightworks but a lot of editing programs will allow you to highlight a clip, then hit + or -, then type in a number and hit enter and you will move the clip forwards or backwards by that many frames in the timeline.

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

I would also look into your video ram, if premiere needs to dip into your system ram so much you may be having a problem with your video card

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

In particular I would cut frames out between shots vs repeating, the head turn starts in the closeup then the longer shot starts pretty much in the same place where it would probably be better suited if you cut out a bunch of frames between that head turn and leave just a few frames of the turn finishing in the longer shot. The jump comes from the fact it looks like the same shot because the action is repeated whereas a match on action will still let you cut most of those frames out

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

bassguitarhero
Feb 29, 2008

Video copilot was great for me because it teaches you how to do complex-looking stuff really easily so the tutorial results are dope, and the videos are funny. Once you do enough of those you normally have the chops to start exploring more stuff

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply