![]() (I don't currently know what a solutions for Window's user's would be, however.) When I used 5DtoRGB, I didn't have a problem at all. " I loaded up terminal and it worked perfectly, combining the two files into one. MTS files before using any software just by using cat in the terminal because they are literally just a stream of data. Researching the problem, I found that you could use ClipWrap to combine the files and put them in a MOV container, but I didn't want to pay for a program that I was going to use just for that purpose and I didn't want there to be another step that could reduce on this topic said that "you can combine spanned. The first file converted fine, but the second hung with two frames to go. The recording was on stock firmware (1.0) and spanned into two files. I also cannot tell a difference between no gamma and 2.2.Īt this stage in my understanding, I can't see myself using 5dtorgb if its going to shift the image darker like just tried using 5DtoRGB version 1.5.9 Lite on my Macbook Pro to convert a 30min MTS recording into ProRes 422 (HQ). I can't confirm the softening because I don't know how to pixel peep yet. I seem to feel like all three 5dtorgb versions perhaps soften the edges a bit. Very little difference between 1.8 and 2.2, but 1.8 seems to flatten image more. Looks like the red channel flattens very slightly and the overall image seems to shift a fair bit darker. Here are the results of the Gamma comparison anyway.īetween original and both gamma 1.8 and 2.2 and no gamma settings, there is a substantial difference. To check the files, I imported the 4 versions of the same clip into adobe premier pro on a 1080p template and just looked at themĪnything wrong with this? Should i be using the avchd 100 intra template? I noticed no difference when i did that. I'm checking a couple versions of proves 444 Gamma 1.8 vs no gamma vs stock mts vs 2.2 gamma. And if I'm recording on the internal codecs at 24mbps, do I ever need to transcode to anything above ProRes 422 LT? (will I see any picture benefits at the higher rate codecs?) Secondly, what colour programs are other people using in conjunction with FCP X? (I find the built in colour correction a little clunky) What settings should I use to get the closest match to the original GH2 files? I've noticed the colour of the clips is different (flatter) after 5DtoRGB does it's thing. However, I have 3 questions for those more experienced than me: Even though FCP X seems to manage my AF101 footage straight from camera okay I'm going to transcode all clips through 5DtoRGB from now on before I bring them into FCP X. I came across this thread yesterday, tried the trial version of 5DtoRGB and can say I'm very happy with the results. The developers were very responsive over e-mail, but haven't fixed the problem and I have therefore been searching for a reasonably priced alternative. It re-wraps the MTS files fast, flags them as progressive and removes the artifacts, but I found I lose 2 frames of footage and all clips suffer a -4db hit on the sound. These are visible in the interface and on export in 1080p. FCP X ingests the GH2 progressive clips okay, but flags them as interlaced and leaves bad jaggies (aliasing) artifacts on any diagonal lines. However, that seems like it is not much more efficient than syncing by hand.Firstly a warning to those who are letting FCP X import files directly from camera. I suppose I could import the video and audio separately, remove the original audio and then link the audio file Dual Eyes created to the original video. My problem is that when I try to sync the original raw files it either does not work at all or doesn't replace the audio, but gives me a new audio file that has simply been clipped to match my video. It is supposed to work in a way that it replaces the original audio with the audio from your external recorder. Dual Eyes is somewhat different then Plural Eyes in that it is a standalone program that syncs your audio before you import into your NLE. Maybe you have some kind of stand-alone version?Thanks for your response. I was very impressed and it saved hours of work. The program worked very well, it helped if you had your clips arranged chronologically on the time line. It must be similiar for Dual Eyes, and there really was no trick, at least on the system I worked on. I worked on a project last year using Plural Eyes and Premiere.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |