|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 20th, 2006, 06:04 PM | #31 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Elk Grove CA
Posts: 6,838
|
According to Joshua, if car manufacturers come out with a car that runs on water, they should be responsible for retrofitting all vehicles without charge. Unless the original program that you bought advertized that it did what you now want it to do, why do they owe an obligation to upgrade it for you.
__________________
Chris J. Barcellos |
April 20th, 2006, 06:20 PM | #32 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Monterey, CA
Posts: 406
|
I was in the same boat as Ash 4 weeks ago, although with a different problem "Premiere Pro failed to return the video frame" errors with PrPro 1.51 after 4-5 hour rendering time. I tried every imaginable fix offered by Adobe and Microsoft, I even reinstalled XP with SP1a, not SP2. 4 days later and I was nowhere with deadlines quickly creeping. I downloaded PrPro 2, and on the 1st shot, perfect. I am all about principle and that I shouldn't have to pay more money for something that should already work, but I believe I read a post in the Adobe forum where somebody had the same problem with the same dilemma and somebody replied "At some point you have to ask yourself what is your time worth". I purchased PrPro 2.0 that same night and haven't looked back. 4 crucial days were already down the drain which was worth well over the $199, so I believe I did the right thing. I met my deadline and am now wrapping up another project as I type.
The interface alone is worth it in my opinion. Now, be aware though, After Effects 6.5 will NOT import PrPro 2.0 projects, they got me there as well, but hey AE 7 Pro is awefully nice and once again is worth the $199 for the interface alone (workflow is much more efficient), and it is so much more responsive than 6.5 ever was. Kevin |
April 20th, 2006, 06:27 PM | #33 | |
Jubal 28
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 872
|
Quote:
Adobe doesn't have me anywhere; I'm a Vegas guy (and I don't understand why Ash won't just use IT if he has it instead of all these headache workarounds, but that's neither here nor there), but I've used PP 2.0 extensively over the past month or two.
__________________
www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com |
|
April 20th, 2006, 07:24 PM | #34 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 493
|
Quote:
I'm not looking for a free upgrade. I'm saying there should be a fix or patch, which, as mentioned, is not (and likely will not be) forthcoming, despite the problem being around since the program was released. Adobe doesn't do this as well as other vendors (this from an Adobe die-hard).
__________________
Owner/Operator, 727 Records Co-Founder, Matter of Chance Productions Blogger, Try Avoidance |
|
April 20th, 2006, 07:34 PM | #35 | |
Jubal 28
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 872
|
Quote:
FCP doesn't remove standard pulldown, either, and Apple doesn't claim it does. Did Adobe?
__________________
www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com |
|
April 20th, 2006, 09:45 PM | #36 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
|
FCP 5 will handle anything you throw at it... As far as Premiere 1.5 I didnt want it to do ANYTHING special... not even 24P! I just wanted to capture and edit in 29.97 but it improperly detected my footage as 24P causing lots of issues or re-rendering of native files. THIS IS A BUG! Like I said, Windows Movie Maker can handle 2:3 pulldown file natively!
ash =o) |
April 20th, 2006, 10:50 PM | #37 | |
Wrangler
|
Quote:
We are probably in agreement here for the most part and it may be just semantics or wording, but in a nutshell, you can never recover 24 complete progressive frames from a 3:2 cadence whereas you can recombine 60i from the tape to a complete and whole 24 frames using 2:3:3:2. Although advanced pulldown was traditionally better for filmout, I like to use it for material going to DVD because a 24P file gives you more program room on the DVD. Let the player do the 24->60i instead of wasting DVD real estate by doing it yourself to the source material. But hey, Ash has got his problem worked out now so we can all go back to our other issues of the day. ;-) regards, -gb- |
|
April 21st, 2006, 07:01 AM | #38 |
Jubal 28
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 872
|
Maybe it's semantics, Greg, and yes, I agree about 24p DVDs, no question.
And I know Cinema Tools will remove 2:3 pulldown; I was just referring to FCP itself.
__________________
www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com |
April 21st, 2006, 10:48 PM | #39 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
|
FCP 5 will remove any pulldown, even from Varicam footage... I just came off a 6 month project doing so... Audio in Vegas is much superior but FCP handles everything footage wise.
ash =o) |
April 22nd, 2006, 11:56 AM | #40 |
Jubal 28
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 872
|
I don't think so, Ash:
http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/FCP...st_Formats.pdf http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage..._nattress.html Like I said, you can do it in Cinema Tools, and Cinema Tools comes free with FCP, but FCP doesn't do it itself.
__________________
www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com |
April 22nd, 2006, 05:41 PM | #41 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
Quote:
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
|
April 23rd, 2006, 04:46 PM | #42 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 1,689
|
Maybe you guys are missing the point, I DIDNT WANT TO EDIT IN 24P! I just wanted PP to work like EVERY OTHER EDITOR ON EARTH. It is indisputable fact, that PP 1.5 is the ONLY editor on the planet that cannot do 29.97 footage that has in-camera 3:2 pulldown in a 29.97 timeline. Instead of fixing the bug, which existed from day 1 apparently, they fixed it in a new version. Upgrades to software happen, I understand but this was an admitted BUG, not a missing feature. There is a difference...
David, you are incorrect and those links are old, Final Cut Pro while will remove the pulldown in 2:3:3:2 footage on capture if your settings are correct. You can also capture 2:3 footage and edit it natively in a 29.97 timeline. The only time you need Cinema tools is if you are removing pulldown from 2:3 footage or dropping in non-native footage that is at a different frame rate. I just came off a 24P project that mixed Varicam, HVX, and XL2 footage, all shot in 24P 2:3:3:2 and nothing had to be processed in Cinema Tools. ash =o) PS Adobe sent me a free 2.0 upgrade, and it has a better interface and seems to have addressed the 24P issue. Still not as robust as FCP5 as far as formats but easier to maneuver in. |
April 23rd, 2006, 05:46 PM | #43 | |
Jubal 28
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 872
|
Quote:
That’s exactly what I said. FCP removes advanced pulldown but you need Cinema Tools to remove standard pulldown. Those links both refer to FCP 5. I’m starting to think you just want to argue here. So, have fun with that.
__________________
www.wrightsvillebeachstudios.com |
|
April 24th, 2006, 02:31 PM | #44 |
Trustee
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,669
|
> It is indisputable fact, that PP 1.5 is the ONLY editor on the planet that cannot do 29.97 footage that has in-camera 3:2 pulldown in a 29.97 timeline.
Bollocks! |
April 24th, 2006, 02:48 PM | #45 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Elk Grove CA
Posts: 6,838
|
Neither does Premiere 6.5. In fact, I don't think it did HD or HDV. And Vegas 5, didn't either, did it ? And if I recall, Premiere Pro 1.0 didn't do HD, and HDV wasn't available until PPro 1.51. These software developers are pure devils....
__________________
Chris J. Barcellos |
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|