pookie_old
Veteran
Re: Camera Heads
Barry, as you seem to be like me....old school, a question please.
You said, "In the old days we'd go through and cue up the tape to the beginning of a take, mark the "in" point, FF to the end of the take, and mark the "out" point, and then add that clip to the "batch capture" list. And do this for the entire tape. Very time consuming, but that way we'd only capture in the circled takes".
While it IS time consuming, it also was a way to learn what you filmed, not simply rely on time code to identify shots.
By actually reviewing, and logging, you see things that are very, very easily overlooked with the time code method....shots tossed because you "think" you know everything in that shot.
I see the need for people to learn the craft, not just use whatever "tricks" the newest software/hardware can do.
There's a major problem these days, kids who can't do simple math without a calculator, or a cashier in a store who needs to look at the till in order to give change on a dollar, for a thirty nine cent purchase.
Any opinion as a fellow old timer (I started in the super 8 days)?
Barry, as you seem to be like me....old school, a question please.
You said, "In the old days we'd go through and cue up the tape to the beginning of a take, mark the "in" point, FF to the end of the take, and mark the "out" point, and then add that clip to the "batch capture" list. And do this for the entire tape. Very time consuming, but that way we'd only capture in the circled takes".
While it IS time consuming, it also was a way to learn what you filmed, not simply rely on time code to identify shots.
By actually reviewing, and logging, you see things that are very, very easily overlooked with the time code method....shots tossed because you "think" you know everything in that shot.
I see the need for people to learn the craft, not just use whatever "tricks" the newest software/hardware can do.
There's a major problem these days, kids who can't do simple math without a calculator, or a cashier in a store who needs to look at the till in order to give change on a dollar, for a thirty nine cent purchase.
Any opinion as a fellow old timer (I started in the super 8 days)?
pookie_old
Veteran
Re: Camera Heads
[quote author=TC link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=60#62 date=12/29/04 at 15:20:29]I started in the VHS days.
[/quote]
Young punk
[quote author=TC link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=60#62 date=12/29/04 at 15:20:29]I started in the VHS days.
[/quote]Young punk
Re: Camera Heads
[quote author=Barry_Green link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=45#54 date=12/29/04 at 14:53:11]Guys, let's not call people names, even if it's something as innocuous as "pookie bear"...
What I don't get is why there's this animosity. Let's try to rise above it, okay? I can see where you both are saying the same thing... keeping a shot log is absolutely vital, anybody who doesn't do that is a fool. And David does.
In the old days we'd go through and cue up the tape to the beginning of a take, mark the "in" point, FF to the end of the take, and mark the "out" point, and then add that clip to the "batch capture" list. And do this for the entire tape. Very time consuming, but that way we'd only capture in the circled takes.
Nowadays, David is saying his method is to just capture the whole tape at one time. Then, because each take is slated, he can instantly identify them, and just deletes the non-circled takes. Seems a much more efficient use of time, with the same net result -- the good takes are on the hard disk, the bad takes are ignored.
You're talking about the same thing. You're both recognizing the value of the same thing. Let's please be civil about it. If there's a personal issue, please take it to PM's and sort it out, so we can keep the board clear, okay? Thanks!
[/quote]
I know, Barry, and I should let it roll off my back; I usually do. But after post after post of insulting remarks (not to mention the recent spate of insulting posts all over the place), well, I'm human. It's been a long week, a long year, etc., whatever, things come to a head. I'm not proud of it. But the animosity started with and was sustained by him, so I'm not particularly sorry about it, either.
My point is, technology has progressed beyond the old way of doing things. Drive space being at a premium in the old days made the tedious task of going through the tapes and capturing only what you were going to use (which is what I was talking about, period) a necessity. Those limitations no longer apply. You can easily capture a whole set of tapes with no problems fitting them even on a "small" 80GB hard drive, if you wanted to.
TC, I understand what you're saying about the file management aspects of logging, but quite a few capture programs allow you to set it up automatically, especially if you shot efficiently (like in the manner I describe). If need be, you can tweak file names later.
If you're going to put in the time to manually name clips anyway, it makes (to me) a little more sense to work with AVI files instead of the tapes.
Hands down, I say a single pass through the tape with no starts, stops, and rewinds is better for the tape and for the equipment. And besides, as we're working with digital information, why not work with it in the computer as much as possible?
(This whole thing will be resolved with solid-state recording, of course.)
[quote author=Barry_Green link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=45#54 date=12/29/04 at 14:53:11]Guys, let's not call people names, even if it's something as innocuous as "pookie bear"...
What I don't get is why there's this animosity. Let's try to rise above it, okay? I can see where you both are saying the same thing... keeping a shot log is absolutely vital, anybody who doesn't do that is a fool. And David does.
In the old days we'd go through and cue up the tape to the beginning of a take, mark the "in" point, FF to the end of the take, and mark the "out" point, and then add that clip to the "batch capture" list. And do this for the entire tape. Very time consuming, but that way we'd only capture in the circled takes.
Nowadays, David is saying his method is to just capture the whole tape at one time. Then, because each take is slated, he can instantly identify them, and just deletes the non-circled takes. Seems a much more efficient use of time, with the same net result -- the good takes are on the hard disk, the bad takes are ignored.
You're talking about the same thing. You're both recognizing the value of the same thing. Let's please be civil about it. If there's a personal issue, please take it to PM's and sort it out, so we can keep the board clear, okay? Thanks!
[/quote]I know, Barry, and I should let it roll off my back; I usually do. But after post after post of insulting remarks (not to mention the recent spate of insulting posts all over the place), well, I'm human. It's been a long week, a long year, etc., whatever, things come to a head. I'm not proud of it. But the animosity started with and was sustained by him, so I'm not particularly sorry about it, either.
My point is, technology has progressed beyond the old way of doing things. Drive space being at a premium in the old days made the tedious task of going through the tapes and capturing only what you were going to use (which is what I was talking about, period) a necessity. Those limitations no longer apply. You can easily capture a whole set of tapes with no problems fitting them even on a "small" 80GB hard drive, if you wanted to.
TC, I understand what you're saying about the file management aspects of logging, but quite a few capture programs allow you to set it up automatically, especially if you shot efficiently (like in the manner I describe). If need be, you can tweak file names later.
If you're going to put in the time to manually name clips anyway, it makes (to me) a little more sense to work with AVI files instead of the tapes.
Hands down, I say a single pass through the tape with no starts, stops, and rewinds is better for the tape and for the equipment. And besides, as we're working with digital information, why not work with it in the computer as much as possible?
(This whole thing will be resolved with solid-state recording, of course.)
pookie_old
Veteran
Re: Camera Heads
Ah the old days, I think I'm gonna cry......what a pain they were....
Grease pencil, movieola, razor blade, tape, splicer, sore back, sore eyes, cut fingers, huge mess....
I loved every minute ;D
Ah the old days, I think I'm gonna cry......what a pain they were....
Grease pencil, movieola, razor blade, tape, splicer, sore back, sore eyes, cut fingers, huge mess....
I loved every minute ;D
Re: Camera Heads
When you say " (This whole thing will be resolved with solid-state recording, of course.) " I envision a camera recording to chips with bluetooth type fire wire wireless connection to the computer which captures to chips and I go wow....I need this now. No more heads to worry about, no more tiny little fragile firewire ports to protect. Life in the solid state lane is going to be rad.
When you say " (This whole thing will be resolved with solid-state recording, of course.) " I envision a camera recording to chips with bluetooth type fire wire wireless connection to the computer which captures to chips and I go wow....I need this now. No more heads to worry about, no more tiny little fragile firewire ports to protect. Life in the solid state lane is going to be rad.
Re: Camera Heads
[quote author=mino link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=60#67 date=12/29/04 at 15:48:00]When you say " (This whole thing will be resolved with solid-state recording, of course.) " I envision a camera recording to chips with bluetooth type fire wire wireless connection to the computer which captures to chips and I go wow....I need this now. No more heads to worry about, no more tiny little fragile firewire ports to protect. Life in the solid state lane is going to be rad.
[/quote]
No doubt that's only the tip.
[quote author=mino link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=60#67 date=12/29/04 at 15:48:00]When you say " (This whole thing will be resolved with solid-state recording, of course.) " I envision a camera recording to chips with bluetooth type fire wire wireless connection to the computer which captures to chips and I go wow....I need this now. No more heads to worry about, no more tiny little fragile firewire ports to protect. Life in the solid state lane is going to be rad.
[/quote]
No doubt that's only the tip.
pookie_old
Veteran
Re: Camera Heads
http://www.cybercollege.com/tvp048.htm
scroll down to "DVD and Solid-State Recording"
http://www.cybercollege.com/tvp048.htm
scroll down to "DVD and Solid-State Recording"
Re: Camera Heads
Too cool. Off topic a little but was reminded...Us military made a suit covered with millions of tiny devices that could both project and display at the same time. Anyone wearing tis suit would be invisible because what was captured by the devices on the back of the suit would be projected on the front of the suit, ergo, the invisible man....I love technology.
Too cool. Off topic a little but was reminded...Us military made a suit covered with millions of tiny devices that could both project and display at the same time. Anyone wearing tis suit would be invisible because what was captured by the devices on the back of the suit would be projected on the front of the suit, ergo, the invisible man....I love technology.
Re: Camera Heads
[quote author=pookie link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=60#61 date=12/29/04 at 15:18:56]Barry, as you seem to be like me....old school, a question please.
You said, "In the old days we'd go through and cue up the tape to the beginning of a take, mark the "in" point, FF to the end of the take, and mark the "out" point, and then add that clip to the "batch capture" list. And do this for the entire tape. Very time consuming, but that way we'd only capture in the circled takes".
While it IS time consuming, it also was a way to learn what you filmed, not simply rely on time code to identify shots.
By actually reviewing, and logging, you see things that are very, very easily overlooked with the time code method....shots tossed because you "think" you know everything in that shot.
I see the need for people to learn the craft, not just use whatever "tricks" the newest software/hardware can do.
There's a major problem these days, kids who can't do simple math without a calculator, or a cashier in a store who needs to look at the till in order to give change on a dollar, for a thirty nine cent purchase.
Any opinion as a fellow old timer (I started in the super 8 days)?[/quote]
Pookie, I'm going to take a stab at this, and I don't mean in it any kind of negative way. Just offering a different perspective.
I agree with what you say above, to a point. But there's also a flipside to it, being so wedded to an old way of doing things that you refuse -- or can't -- see the advantages new technologies and new methods bring. (I'm thinking of blinking 12:00s on VCRs all over Florida. One of them is at my dad's place.)
I'm not saying that you do this. But to offer an observation -- while logging your tapes the old way, you do indeed get a good feel for them, so I can understand why you want to continue it. But because it made sense to "dance with" your footage (as Walter Murch would say) at the time of logging, because the technology of the day forced you to do the logging that way anyway, it's pretty easy to get caught up in the idea that it's the best or even only way of doing it.
Someone who doesn't have the long history with it, and who is looking for the best and not necessarily the traditional way of doing something, based on the technology that's available right now, might not come to that conclusion.
I, for one, incessantly review my clips (WMP is a fabulous tool for many things) until I've memorized every tiny detail. But I don't do it at capture. I do it once the clips are in. It's so much easier to find what I"m looking for by reviewing a folder full of thumbnails than it is to ff and rewind a tape.
Again, it doesn't make me right, and technology will overtake my methods, too. I just think that you should take advantage of the tools you have available today and try to come up with the best way of working based on that.
[quote author=pookie link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=60#61 date=12/29/04 at 15:18:56]Barry, as you seem to be like me....old school, a question please.
You said, "In the old days we'd go through and cue up the tape to the beginning of a take, mark the "in" point, FF to the end of the take, and mark the "out" point, and then add that clip to the "batch capture" list. And do this for the entire tape. Very time consuming, but that way we'd only capture in the circled takes".
While it IS time consuming, it also was a way to learn what you filmed, not simply rely on time code to identify shots.
By actually reviewing, and logging, you see things that are very, very easily overlooked with the time code method....shots tossed because you "think" you know everything in that shot.
I see the need for people to learn the craft, not just use whatever "tricks" the newest software/hardware can do.
There's a major problem these days, kids who can't do simple math without a calculator, or a cashier in a store who needs to look at the till in order to give change on a dollar, for a thirty nine cent purchase.
Any opinion as a fellow old timer (I started in the super 8 days)?[/quote]
Pookie, I'm going to take a stab at this, and I don't mean in it any kind of negative way. Just offering a different perspective.
I agree with what you say above, to a point. But there's also a flipside to it, being so wedded to an old way of doing things that you refuse -- or can't -- see the advantages new technologies and new methods bring. (I'm thinking of blinking 12:00s on VCRs all over Florida. One of them is at my dad's place.)
I'm not saying that you do this. But to offer an observation -- while logging your tapes the old way, you do indeed get a good feel for them, so I can understand why you want to continue it. But because it made sense to "dance with" your footage (as Walter Murch would say) at the time of logging, because the technology of the day forced you to do the logging that way anyway, it's pretty easy to get caught up in the idea that it's the best or even only way of doing it.
Someone who doesn't have the long history with it, and who is looking for the best and not necessarily the traditional way of doing something, based on the technology that's available right now, might not come to that conclusion.
I, for one, incessantly review my clips (WMP is a fabulous tool for many things) until I've memorized every tiny detail. But I don't do it at capture. I do it once the clips are in. It's so much easier to find what I"m looking for by reviewing a folder full of thumbnails than it is to ff and rewind a tape.
Again, it doesn't make me right, and technology will overtake my methods, too. I just think that you should take advantage of the tools you have available today and try to come up with the best way of working based on that.
pookie_old
Veteran
Re: Camera Heads
Unfortunatly, you still miss the general point, learning the craft.
I can do all you can do, and I can operate all the latest software quite well thanks.
I can also sit down comfortably anywhere, home or otherwise, read my shot logs, and compose a "better" cut without needing to be sitting in front of, or lugging around a laptop.
To be able to review shot logs "without" staring at a screen, is a very valuable tool in editing, you use your mind to compose, without the multitude of visuals to add to the process.
As far as all to disk, if I lose my capture drive (heaven forbid), I still have my log.
Recapture, and continue, I have the edit log as well or, I can edit on my partners computer, in his home, tightening the shots with the shot logs, I don't need to fumble through looking for a 2 second shot (btw, we all shot log, and not all are old timers).
You have your system, no problem, I have mine (actually an industry standard), and the world keeps spinning. But don't be so fast to bypass the "old" techniques, they're just as valid today.
Unfortunatly, you still miss the general point, learning the craft.
I can do all you can do, and I can operate all the latest software quite well thanks.
I can also sit down comfortably anywhere, home or otherwise, read my shot logs, and compose a "better" cut without needing to be sitting in front of, or lugging around a laptop.
To be able to review shot logs "without" staring at a screen, is a very valuable tool in editing, you use your mind to compose, without the multitude of visuals to add to the process.
As far as all to disk, if I lose my capture drive (heaven forbid), I still have my log.
Recapture, and continue, I have the edit log as well or, I can edit on my partners computer, in his home, tightening the shots with the shot logs, I don't need to fumble through looking for a 2 second shot (btw, we all shot log, and not all are old timers).
You have your system, no problem, I have mine (actually an industry standard), and the world keeps spinning. But don't be so fast to bypass the "old" techniques, they're just as valid today.
pookie_old
Veteran
Re: Camera Heads
Unlikely :-[
probably still shaking his head in disbelief
Unlikely :-[
probably still shaking his head in disbelief
Re: Camera Heads
OK, in case there was some misunderstanding, when I said "I just think that you should take advantage of the tools you have available today and try to come up with the best way of working based on that," I meant "you" in the general sense, not you specifically.
I'm not sure why it is that you think I can't do same things you do with my shot logs, but oh, well.
All I was trying to do was offer a different perspective.
OK, in case there was some misunderstanding, when I said "I just think that you should take advantage of the tools you have available today and try to come up with the best way of working based on that," I meant "you" in the general sense, not you specifically.
I'm not sure why it is that you think I can't do same things you do with my shot logs, but oh, well.
All I was trying to do was offer a different perspective.
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Re: Camera Heads
I have never donw it the old school way (Although I have spliced Super8
) but without knowing how to do it Pookies way, my intitial impression is, what a waste of time and energy.
Can someone break this down list by list? A Pro and Con if you will for us uneducated types?
I have never donw it the old school way (Although I have spliced Super8
) but without knowing how to do it Pookies way, my intitial impression is, what a waste of time and energy.Can someone break this down list by list? A Pro and Con if you will for us uneducated types?
pookie_old
Veteran
Re: Camera Heads
[quote author=John Hudson link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=75#77 date=12/29/04 at 17:27:48]I have never donw it the old school way (Although I have spliced Super8 ) but without knowing how to do it Pookies way, my intitial impression is, what a waste of time and energy.
Can someone break this down list by list? A Pro and Con if you will for us uneducated types?[/quote]
1: if you've never done it "my way", how can you say "waste of time and energy"?
2: logging software actually exists
At least we agree about super 8 splicing
[quote author=John Hudson link=board=Offtopic;num=1104273877;start=75#77 date=12/29/04 at 17:27:48]I have never donw it the old school way (Although I have spliced Super8
) but without knowing how to do it Pookies way, my intitial impression is, what a waste of time and energy.Can someone break this down list by list? A Pro and Con if you will for us uneducated types?[/quote]
1: if you've never done it "my way", how can you say "waste of time and energy"?
2: logging software actually exists
At least we agree about super 8 splicing
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Re: Camera Heads
Yes I am aware of this and I did preface my take with the following:
"...I have never done it the old school way... but without knowing how to do it Pookies way...my intitial impression is, what a waste of time and energy..."
I am also aware of Logging Software and the fact that many people use this method. I would love to be able to see a PRO CON list of both methods however. I personally use David's method as it works for me and is extremley efficient.
It just seems like a long way around. Seriously, I am open to both ways here, I'm just looking form more info other than links with articles but maybe a PRO CON list.
Yes I am aware of this and I did preface my take with the following:
"...I have never done it the old school way... but without knowing how to do it Pookies way...my intitial impression is, what a waste of time and energy..."
I am also aware of Logging Software and the fact that many people use this method. I would love to be able to see a PRO CON list of both methods however. I personally use David's method as it works for me and is extremley efficient.
It just seems like a long way around. Seriously, I am open to both ways here, I'm just looking form more info other than links with articles but maybe a PRO CON list.