"We don't need to slate, it takes to long"

Left my first clapperboard (made when I was 13 years for a short film I did with my cousin), using materials I found lying around...

The right one, I bought it for 30 bucks for a short film last year...


DSC_0009.JPG
 
I have shot without slating before, and probably will again, but not when I am handing footage off to someone else. It's just a lack of respect for the editing process.

One of the things I love about the Red is the way it logs shots. I Keep track of every shot on a paper log, so that I know Reel A004, Clip 36 is the third take of the wide shot of whatever. I still use the slate when I am scanning clips, but I'll take that process over the way the HVX names clips any day.
 
Jim Brennan said:
One of the things I love about the Red is the way it logs shots. I Keep track of every shot on a paper log, so that I know Reel A004, Clip 36 is the third take of the wide shot of whatever. I still use the slate when I am scanning clips, but I'll take that process over the way the HVX names clips any day.
Click to expand...


Hate to say it, Jim, but that's an FCP failing, not an HVX failing. The HVX will let you name clips just fine. It's up to the NLE to take advantage of it.

Using metadata with Premiere Pro CS5 is dreamy. It not only shows the UserClip Name as the clip identifier, it indicates Shot Marks, too.

So, if you set up the metadata so that it's something like "Scn 1A Tk " and then set the number to advance sequentially, all the clip names end up being Scn 1A Tk 0001" and advance. You upload metadata for each shot you're going to shoot, reset the sequence, and you get Scn 4C Tk 0001," and so on.

Then, if you use the Shot Mark, it shows up as "Yes" in the Media Browser or a checkmark in the Project panel. You can sort on it, too.


1274888982.png


Any NLE could do this.
 
David Jimerson said:
Hate to say it, Jim, but that's an FCP failing, not an HVX failing. The HVX will let you name clips just fine. It's up to the NLE to take advantage of it.

Using metadata with Premiere Pro CS5 is dreamy. It not only shows the UserClip Name as the clip identifier, it indicates Shot Marks, too.Any NLE could do this.
Click to expand...

I didn't know you were working with CS5. Cool.

Yes, the EX1 gives a ton of metadata as well. I've noticed that Avid gives me all this metadata in the NLE as well. Nice to see more NLEs really doing this. I am VERY surprised FCP doesn't.
 
If you're the director and the editor, and it's a short, and you're recording sound into the camera, I can see how slating could be optional.

If you're recording dual-system and you're not at least audio slating, you're begging for an unbelievable amount of hassle.

If you're shooting film and not slating -- that's insane.
 
I'm pretty sure I can enter metadata for FCP to read as well, but with the Red I don't have to. Just having that automatically generated reel and clip number are enough for me.

THe thing about the HVX clips that makes me batty is the randomly generated number/letters that put them out of the sequence they were shot in....unless you enter metadata.
 
Just saying that you can do all the shot-logging with the metadata, so you'll know at a glance which is the third take of the wide shot, which are your circle takes, etc., and even sort on them when you're importing so that you can easily get the exact clips you want with no need to refer to external notes. If you have an NLE which takes advantage of it, you never had to see the XXXXXX.mxf clip name. It's really very cool. :)
 
Raylight didn't do that as of about a month ago. The metadata slates it does provide are nearly useless, and purely visual -- no sorting.

PP CS4 didn't provide for reading the Shot Mark; it's a subtle but fantastic addition to PP CS5.

But really, the info is all there in easy-to-read, easy-to-edit format. Any NLE should be able to do this stuff, especially as more and more cameras include it.
 
Jim Brennan said:
THe thing about the HVX clips that makes me batty is the randomly generated number/letters that put them out of the sequence they were shot in....unless you enter metadata.
Click to expand...
But they're not random. The first four characters in the filename are always a numerically ascending value. Format a new card, shoot a clip, and I guarantee you the filename will start with 0001xx.mxf. Now, the "xx" part is random, that's true, but the number is always numerically ascending, starting with 0001 on a freshly formatted card.

If you wanted an entire project with ascending numbers, I bet if you just didn't format your cards but instead used P2CMS or P2 Viewer to erase all the clips on the cards, or used the in-camera delete clips function instead of formatting, you could get a project with up to 9,999 numerically ascending clips, all sorted and appearing in the exact order that you shot them in.

So it's not a failing of the camera or the P2 system, it's just a case of not understanding it and using it to get the results you want.
 
Oh, and to be clear -- my post wasn't to bash FCP, but to defend the HVX. :) The HVX (and all the P2 cams) has the tools.
 
David Jimerson said:
Raylight didn't do that as of about a month ago. The metadata slates it does provide are nearly useless, and purely visual -- no sorting.
Click to expand...
Raylight Ultra says "New! P2 Metadata in the Vegas timeline and Media Manager "

In the support documentation, it says "Ultra 1.2 displays the P2 UserClipName in the Vegas Explorer window."

So it sounds like it's partly there.
 
Yeah, it's a visual slate. The first or second frame displays the info visually, as if it's part of the video, but you can't sort on it, and in the media pool, it's too small to read.
 
It really takes no more time to create metadata uploads than it does to create external shot logs, and the metadata stays with the footage for good (or until you change it). :)

It's the best stuff in P2 no one ever takes advantage of.
 
This two cam shoot with no slate and no shot logs nor script notes has become a major hassle.

Pluralyes has so far failed. I'm not editing (since I require an actual pay cheque) but I imported the clips into CS5 premiere and tried Pluraleyes on them. It's not working for some reason (could be me and premiere, I never use it) and they don't have a version for edius or avid yet.

The editor was going to try pluraleyes with FCP but his 2 month old Mac just died and has to wait for a replacement.

So relying on technology to save your ass can be a gamble.
 
That's not exactly right.

Relying on technological fixes to save you from half-assed procedures is a gamble, and usually a bad one. Use the tech correctly in the first place, and you're stylin'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top