Need Help Preparing for Doc Edit

Hi-
I am doing a doc project where I will be using Super 8, 16mm, slides, pictures, and newer HD footage.

First, what should I set FCP sequence settings to? It will be a long run time so I could cut the HD footage on separate sequences.

Second, how do I get the pictures in FCP to look like what I scanned into my computer? Let me give you a bit of background. I first tested out my photos and slides in FCP and I got blown out pictures. I then figured out the 720 *480 video principle vs. the resolution of the slides. Right now, I've changed my sequence settings to Uncompressed 8-bit NTSC 48 khz. I changed my canvas to 100% and it seems to get my best results. But, when I make a Quicktime it still is slightly blown out. My resolution on the images is typically in the 3000* 2000 range. I change it down in Photoshop to as close as I can get to 720 * 480 so I don't have to render. What I'm looking for is an easy method to get these pictures and slides in the FCP timeline where I can just edit. I also am using a trial version of Photoshop. Is there a way I can do this without having to purchase Photoshop?

I was also wondering if there was if it would be less work to edit the pictures in an outside application like Aperture 3 and then Quicktime it into FCP?

I hope this is somewhat clear. What are your thoughts?

thanks,
John

What kind of project is it? If it's not a quickie, I don't know if I'd edit it in SD anymore. Everything will look a lot better if you edit in some kind of HD format.

> I change it down in Photoshop to as close as I can get to 720 * 480 so I don't have to
> render.

Noooo...don't change your stills to 720x480. First, you can resize graphics, but never do it to your originals -- make copies first so you can preserve the larger originals in case of future reconversions. Secondly, you need to leave some leeway so that you can do rescaling within the timeline, such as when you need to zoom in or do other moves. And that's not counting the fact that if you're going HD, those 720x480 stills will be far too small to look any good.

What is the end destination of the project? You need to decide on one common editing codec, frame rate, and frame size. Picture quality is only one aspect of the equation; you also have to look at whether your editing system can handle the specs you decide on. It makes no sense to edit in Uncompressed 10-bit SD if you're running FireWire 400 drives.

These days, when all else fails, go with ProRes 422 as a codec, and 1920x1080 frame size if your footage supports it. What is the majority of your footage? Is it the "newer HD footage" or the telecined film footage? Was the film material (16mm and Super-8mm) transferred only to an SD tape format? If the latter is true, and the film footage forms the majority of your footage, then of course you may want to edit in SD so you don't have to blow up, say, 80 per cent of your footage from 720x480 to 1920x1080.


www.derekmok.com

Thanks Derek-
The film will be extremely long, 12 hours +. I would guess there will be a 50% new HD, 30% pictures/slides, and 20% old film 8mm/16mm. These things change as I go since I work in an improvisational manner. What codec in this case?

Also, on changing the stills. What exactly do I need to do to get the best image quality in FCP? I will not, as you said, change my originals. What, in your opinion, would be the best resolution to change them to. Someone told be resolution reduction is not what I should concentrate on but image reduction. Also, should I purchase Photoshop or can I get away with using iPhoto or Preview for image reduction.

So in short. What codec in FCP? and what resolution should I target for pictures and slides?

Also, the film material is not transferred yet. But, I was planning to do SD. Good or bad?


John

> The film will be extremely long, 12 hours +. I would guess there will be a 50% new HD,
> 30% pictures/slides, and 20% old film 8mm/16mm. These things change as I go since I
> work in an improvisational manner. What codec in this case?

All the more reason to think through the entire process. If you edit in HD, and prep your media for that, it is extremely easy to go to SD. If you edit in SD, and prep everything for SD, you have to online everything at the end.

Depending on how much storage and system power you have, you may opt to edit in SD but finish in HD. You have a documentary, which means you will have a huge volume of media, so you may want to do an offline first, then target only the footage you used for an HD finish. However, these days that's no longer a simple question. If your HD footage was shot on a tapeless format, for example, then converting all your footage to offline quality costs an enormous amount of time and may not save you storage space. What HD format are you using for the shoot?

> Also, the film material is not transferred yet. But, I was planning to do SD. Good or bad?

When in doubt, transfer in HD.
If you know for sure, 100 per cent, that you are only finishing for, say, an SD broadcast delivery in DigiBeta, then transferring to SD can save you a few bucks. Or, do a compromise -- transfer everything to SD for editing to save money, then at the online stage, pick out only the footage you used and go back to the film to transfer only that footage to HD. You need to have a detailed talk with your post house and figure out how best to do this. The important thing is not to jump into a process before you know what you'll be doing down the line.


www.derekmok.com

Thanks Derek-
I talked with my post consultant yesterday. I'm going with HD, Apple Pro Res. John