filmmaker77
Member
If you record audio externally in 29.98. Shoot picture in 24pA. Import choosing 24pA with pulldown removal into FCPHD. Edit at 23.97. How do you link up the 29.98 audio with the "24 frame" edit? Won't it be off?
29.98 audio for 23.97 edit
- Thread starter filmmaker77
- Start date
wabbit
Evil has Ears
Why would you edit in 24p? Even if you are doing a film out you can edit it 29.97 and do a reverse pulldown for the "cutlist". Otherwise you can't use a monitor in 24fps and your will just have to downcovert if when you want something viewable on any NTSC monitor.
If you are using a HVX or DVX then you can't jam sync or genlock your audio recorder or slate to the camera so the TC with camera won't match anyways. Sooo, theorically you can set your slate and recorder to 24fps and have the frame count match the cadence of the video but I don't think it would matter since only the frame you sync on needs to match up to the audio.
I am just talking this out since I have never heard of anyone editing video in this way. But our post studio is all Avid so I am not up to date on what is happening in FCP world. What is the advantage of editing video at 24fps?
Cheers
If you are using a HVX or DVX then you can't jam sync or genlock your audio recorder or slate to the camera so the TC with camera won't match anyways. Sooo, theorically you can set your slate and recorder to 24fps and have the frame count match the cadence of the video but I don't think it would matter since only the frame you sync on needs to match up to the audio.
I am just talking this out since I have never heard of anyone editing video in this way. But our post studio is all Avid so I am not up to date on what is happening in FCP world. What is the advantage of editing video at 24fps?
Cheers
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
Your talking about apples and Oranges. Thee is Time Code and "speed". Your TC will not match but if your sound was recorded at a straight speed (48 or 44.1) as opposed to pulled up then you should have no sync issues. Everything you have talked about is at video speed so none of your footage has undergone a speed change. Now if you recorded on some kind of analogue deck resolved to TC (2" 24 track field recorders anyone?)then you could possably have an issue but not a big one.
So the good news is everything should play in sync once you get it there. The bad news, sort of, is that if you were counting on TC to find the takes you will have to do that by hand from the sound reports. If you don't have slates and sound reports shoot someone.
Wabbit, I know people who edit in 23.9x because you get motion artifacts, especially with slowmo that they like because they look more the way film does. Plus if you have done the 24PA thing it was either because you want to go film out or your really looking for that film look, or your just plain stupid - oops that just slipped out. I have seel a lot of expensive strange choices made in low budget, like the director who shot n S16 because she wanted her VHS to be window boxed.
So the good news is everything should play in sync once you get it there. The bad news, sort of, is that if you were counting on TC to find the takes you will have to do that by hand from the sound reports. If you don't have slates and sound reports shoot someone.
Wabbit, I know people who edit in 23.9x because you get motion artifacts, especially with slowmo that they like because they look more the way film does. Plus if you have done the 24PA thing it was either because you want to go film out or your really looking for that film look, or your just plain stupid - oops that just slipped out. I have seel a lot of expensive strange choices made in low budget, like the director who shot n S16 because she wanted her VHS to be window boxed.
wabbit
Evil has Ears
Ok, but unless you are definately going film out I am not understanding why you would use 24fps editing. The motion artifacts are achieved while shooting with a 24p camera at 24fps and will show up in 29.97 timeline. Or are you talking about applying slow-mo or other motion effects within the NLE itself? I don't know any better but that seems a odd workflow for FCP. Couldn't FCP just use the marked frames for 24p (or 24pA) to apply the motion effects to? That way you could still view your edits in a proper monitor.
I am completely naive to how using a 24fps timeline holds any advantages unless there is a guarenteed filmout and even then the advantages are small.
Still mostly confused :undecided Any further elaboration would be appreciated
I am completely naive to how using a 24fps timeline holds any advantages unless there is a guarenteed filmout and even then the advantages are small.
Still mostly confused :undecided Any further elaboration would be appreciated
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
The time I know they were using 23.x was for slomow , well actually it was Avid but would apply also to FCP, during the edit. There were some other reasons that I'm not too clear on. If your on a multi monitor set up it's not a big deal to have the canvas at a good size.
Basicaly I agree with you. If your not going film out there is very little reason, that I know of, to edit in 23.x and a whole host of reasons not to.
I think it's become the 5.1 of the picture department. There are very few films that are really mixed for 5.1 and it's not easy or cheap to do it properly. But a HUGE number of filmmakers with no budget feel they NEED to have a 5.1 mix. It's a huge wank. It's interesting from that link you posted the other day, stereo wasn't even a common release format till the late 70's and surround didn't get common till the 80's and 5.1 till the 90's. I had never realized till then that thee weren't any films worth listening to before 1992...;~)
Basicaly I agree with you. If your not going film out there is very little reason, that I know of, to edit in 23.x and a whole host of reasons not to.
I think it's become the 5.1 of the picture department. There are very few films that are really mixed for 5.1 and it's not easy or cheap to do it properly. But a HUGE number of filmmakers with no budget feel they NEED to have a 5.1 mix. It's a huge wank. It's interesting from that link you posted the other day, stereo wasn't even a common release format till the late 70's and surround didn't get common till the 80's and 5.1 till the 90's. I had never realized till then that thee weren't any films worth listening to before 1992...;~)
wabbit
Evil has Ears
You mean to say it is not a good idea to mix my 5.1 audio with Vegas in my 8x10' office with my $200 surround sound computer speakers? But 5.1 is what the big boys use and I want to be taken seriously like them. If I can't say I have all those flashy things like them, people will see me as just an amatuer with a video camera.
:happy:
Thank god that attitude is not becoming epidemic. :huh:
(sorry to hijack your thread filmmaker77)
:happy:
Thank god that attitude is not becoming epidemic. :huh:
(sorry to hijack your thread filmmaker77)
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
WOW you spent $200 on SPEAKERS. You must be rich.
Actually kidding aside there was a local class in FCP that made all the students "mix" there projects with headphones. Then they were all shocked that the levels were all out of whack. Some too low some very loud.
You can mix in a small room (8 X 10 might be pushing it) if the room is set up well. And it doesn't need to cost a fortune. But it does have to be set up right and it needs to be calibrated and you have to know what you are doing and how it will translate to another space. I can mix for the small screen here, and I can fake it for the big screen. But only because I have done a number from here that went to a big stage and I know how it translates. But I don't mix 5.1 and all but one project either finishe on a big stage or had a test screening in a big stage.
Actually kidding aside there was a local class in FCP that made all the students "mix" there projects with headphones. Then they were all shocked that the levels were all out of whack. Some too low some very loud.
You can mix in a small room (8 X 10 might be pushing it) if the room is set up well. And it doesn't need to cost a fortune. But it does have to be set up right and it needs to be calibrated and you have to know what you are doing and how it will translate to another space. I can mix for the small screen here, and I can fake it for the big screen. But only because I have done a number from here that went to a big stage and I know how it translates. But I don't mix 5.1 and all but one project either finishe on a big stage or had a test screening in a big stage.
donkathon
Carbonite Member
I read all that, and kind of understood it, but...
Even if the rates differ, doesnt each still take place in one second, meaning they will still line up.
And if not, why not edit in 30fps, instead of 24?
Get Sony Vegas. And then you can master 6channel surround. It'll make you giddy when you hear the result.
Even if the rates differ, doesnt each still take place in one second, meaning they will still line up.
And if not, why not edit in 30fps, instead of 24?
Get Sony Vegas. And then you can master 6channel surround. It'll make you giddy when you hear the result.
Noiz2
Sound Ninja
"I read all that, and kind of understood it, but...
Even if the rates differ, doesnt each still take place in one second, meaning they will still line up."
As simple as that sounds it is exactly the point. As long as all your recorders (vid and audio) are running at a stable speed and you don't change that speed everything will line up. There are two little catches. THe first is that it's sometimes hard to tell if you have changed speed and the common use of "soft" descriptions makes this worse. For instance in your next sentence.
"And if not, why not edit in 30fps, instead of 24?"
Both of those numbers are wrong. I'm not giving you a bad time it is very common to use those numbers in just the way you did, but they are not correct and can lead to some serious problems down the line if some one thinks you really mean the numbers you say.
Since we are talking NTSC color video it's 29.97 and 23.96 and change. THe reason that it could be significant is that both 30 and 24 are legitimate frame rates. 30 is for 1950/60's black and white NTSC and is still the frame rate for film to NTSC video transfers (at the transfer time) and 24 is film frame rate. 35mm film is shot at 24 fps transfered to video running at 30 fps and that video is played back at 29.97 fps... And here you have a speed change. To get you production sound to sync to a telecine of a film you have to slow it down by 0.1%. If after the edit you are going back to film you have to speed the sound back up by a hair over 0.1% (100.100100100...%). It doesn't sound like much but it's about 3 sec over an hour, and that's a LOT.
The second catch (related to the first) is that digital signals NEED to be locked to the same clock or they will glitch. So it's VERY easy to get an off clock if your not carefull and your speed will be off.
"Get Sony Vegas. And then you can master 6channel surround. It'll make you giddy when you hear the result."
Nauseous maybe. Sorry that is just plain bad advice. I don't have enough time left to live to explain all the reasons. Unless you doing home movies and want to impress your friends it is just plain stupid to do any surround work outside of a mix stage. I guess game work could be an exception. It's not about how cool it sounds on your system it's about what it sounds like on joe blows system or in some theatre somewhere. OK I'm not going to go there. Do it if you want to, have fun.
Even if the rates differ, doesnt each still take place in one second, meaning they will still line up."
As simple as that sounds it is exactly the point. As long as all your recorders (vid and audio) are running at a stable speed and you don't change that speed everything will line up. There are two little catches. THe first is that it's sometimes hard to tell if you have changed speed and the common use of "soft" descriptions makes this worse. For instance in your next sentence.
"And if not, why not edit in 30fps, instead of 24?"
Both of those numbers are wrong. I'm not giving you a bad time it is very common to use those numbers in just the way you did, but they are not correct and can lead to some serious problems down the line if some one thinks you really mean the numbers you say.
Since we are talking NTSC color video it's 29.97 and 23.96 and change. THe reason that it could be significant is that both 30 and 24 are legitimate frame rates. 30 is for 1950/60's black and white NTSC and is still the frame rate for film to NTSC video transfers (at the transfer time) and 24 is film frame rate. 35mm film is shot at 24 fps transfered to video running at 30 fps and that video is played back at 29.97 fps... And here you have a speed change. To get you production sound to sync to a telecine of a film you have to slow it down by 0.1%. If after the edit you are going back to film you have to speed the sound back up by a hair over 0.1% (100.100100100...%). It doesn't sound like much but it's about 3 sec over an hour, and that's a LOT.
The second catch (related to the first) is that digital signals NEED to be locked to the same clock or they will glitch. So it's VERY easy to get an off clock if your not carefull and your speed will be off.
"Get Sony Vegas. And then you can master 6channel surround. It'll make you giddy when you hear the result."
Nauseous maybe. Sorry that is just plain bad advice. I don't have enough time left to live to explain all the reasons. Unless you doing home movies and want to impress your friends it is just plain stupid to do any surround work outside of a mix stage. I guess game work could be an exception. It's not about how cool it sounds on your system it's about what it sounds like on joe blows system or in some theatre somewhere. OK I'm not going to go there. Do it if you want to, have fun.