23.97 sequence to 29.97

I was editing a project with lorez files (H264) to later online with HD files.
For some reasons - main one is crazy deadline - I must have dragged in the TL a file that was 23.97 without noticing it and I ended up editing with the wrong frame rate.
So when came time to online the nightmare started. Reconnecting the 23.97 TL to the 29.97 produced crazy results of course.
So I ended up rebuilding the whole spot from scratch, shot by shot.
What is the solution if there is one, to go from 23.97 to 29.97?
Just to spice things up, nobody in the post facility had an answer that worked!

ANy ideas?

Thanks

If this was FCP7, you shouldn't have edited with H.264 files in the first place.
You should have been able to create a new timeline with the correct frame rate and paste everything into it. Why didn't you try?


www.derekmok.com

Yea. You won't have the most pleasant of editing experience working in h.264. ProRes proxy is a better offline format.

I'd copy and paste it into a new timeline if I were you.



www.strypesinpost.com

derekmok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If this was FCP7, you shouldn't have edited with
> H.264 files in the first place.
>

I didn't have a choice. I had to cut a spot with 40 shows. No time to convert them to the desired codec.

strypes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I'd copy and paste it into a new timeline if I
> were you.

I tried and everything was all over the place!!!

> I tried and everything was all over the place!!!

Because H.264 doesn't have timecode.
This is why you want to follow proper workflow.
Has anybody in here used H.264 in an online/offline workflow? I would normally never trust it for that purpose -- straight online edits only.

> I had to cut a spot with 40 shows. No time to convert them to the desired codec.

Did you ask them for online-quality deliverables? Why are they using H.264 files anyway? They're just taking a massive hit in quality, especially in issues like frame rates and motion.


www.derekmok.com

>Did you ask them for online-quality deliverables

They're offline/onlining. So they'll re-link.

However, "no time" is not an excuse for bad ingest. Not in the post world. You're the pro, and if they give you h.264s, you'll have to convert them. Most of the DSLR shooters know that, even if they have "no time". You shoot yourself in the foot. Your cuts could drift after rendering, etc..

However, you should be able to relink. I'm guessing there are bad timecode tracks in there.



www.strypesinpost.com

> However, you should be able to relink. I'm guessing there are bad timecode tracks in there.

From what I know, H.264 doesn't have proper timecode tracks, period. When ingesting, timecode is *generated* using the camera's time stamps. Only then do you have recognizable timecode. That's why H.264 clips drift after rendering.


www.derekmok.com

If you're using an mov wrapper, you can insert a timecode track just like in any QT movies. Mp4 wrappers do not support timecode at all. We use QTs without timecode tracks all the time anyway (eg. Graphics files). Drifting (rendering wrong parts of the clip), and other render oddities, are due to FCP not being able to handle h.264 well. Premiere and FCP X works with h.264 without much issues.

>When ingesting, timecode is *generated* using the camera's time stamps.

This is only on the Canon DSLRs because those cameras are still cameras and don't use timecode. Softwares use the time of day metadata in the thm files to add a timecode track to the QTs because it's better than nothing.



www.strypesinpost.com

strypes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> They're offline/onlining. So they'll re-link.
correct

> However, "no time" is not an excuse for bad
> ingest. Not in the post world. You're the pro, and
> if they give you h.264s, you'll have to convert
> them.

Not sure where you work but let me explain how TV works in Los Angeles: a producer says "we need a :60 sizzle with these 50 1h00 shows. The creative director needs a rough cut tomorrow".
At this level you don't say "tell the CD that I first have to convert all the media. It should take 1/2 day. Then I'll start the cut. So he won't have it by tomorrow".
NOBODY says that here...

actually we offline with H264 and then online to pro res 422 LT w/o a pb... when there's no frame rate issue.
And as stated in my original post, the issue came from probably a gfx of I don't know what element that set the TL to the wrong frame rate.

>Not sure where you work but let me explain how TV works in Los Angeles: a
>producer says "we need a :60 sizzle with these 50 1h00 shows. The creative
>director needs a rough cut tomorrow".

So they give you a bunch of media that is not supported in your NLE, and you're supposed to roll with it? It just sounds like bad planning. And I don't think that would speak of the entire industry in LA. For one, I don't see Shane Ross cutting h.264s in FCP because his producers gave that to him.



www.strypesinpost.com

> Not sure where you work but let me explain how TV works in Los Angeles: a producer says "we need a :60 sizzle with these 50 1h00 shows. The creative director
> needs a rough cut tomorrow".

They're insane. Fifty one-hour clips with less than 24 hours for a turnaround means you won't even get a chance to watch the damn things.

And by accepting the deadline, you just told them you'll move heaven and earth even if the task is impossible. So why should they give you a proper amount of time to do the job next time? You're going to do it anyway. They'd be happy to waste time that you should have received on the edit to argue among themselves and delay starting the job. And who's going to pay the price for the technical problems (such as an edit that shifts and can't be exported either to movie file or tape)? You. Since you accepted the parameters without warning them about the pitfalls.


www.derekmok.com

Generally I find that using Command+Shift insert/overwrite works a whole lot better for copying sequences. And can sometimes get rid of the drift of copying to a different frame rate.

IMHO if you have to cut in H264 then you should be using software that does it well, ie Premiere, or Apple Video Sequencer 10. "AVS10"

derekmok Wrote:
> They're insane. Fifty one-hour clips with less
> than 24 hours for a turnaround means you won't
> even get a chance to watch the damn things.
>
Turnarounds are crazy in TV. This is why speed, experience and FLEXIBILITY are the main set of skills you need to "stay" alive in this business.


> And by accepting the deadline, you just told them
> you'll move heaven and earth even if the task is
> impossible. So why should they give you a proper
> amount of time to do the job next time? You're
> going to do it anyway.

If you start to have requests like "I need time to watch all the shows", or "the codec isn't what I need for offline"... then you become a "premadona" and you won't last long!! :-) FLEXIBILITY!!!

Ethan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Generally I find that using Command+Shift
> insert/overwrite works a whole lot better for
> copying sequences. And can sometimes get rid of
> the drift of copying to a different frame rate.
I'll try for sure!

> IMHO if you have to cut in H264 then you should be
> using software that does it well, ie Premiere, or
> Apple Video Sequencer 10. "AVS10"

FCP has always been pretty good to us so far...

> If you start to have requests like "I need time to watch all the shows", or "the codec isn't what I need for offline"... then you become a "premadona" and you won't last long!!

It's better than spending a day doing what they asked, and then finding out 10 minutes before deadline that you can't export because the clips are slipping. Then you've just wasted their time because you subjugated your professional opinion to their wrong one.

There's a balance between honouring their requests and doing things right.


www.derekmok.com

derekmok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's better than spending a day doing what they
> asked, and then finding out 10 minutes before
> deadline that you can't export because the clips
> are slipping. Then you've just wasted their time
> because you subjugated your professional opinion
> to their wrong one.
>
> There's a balance between honouring their requests
> and doing things right.

I agree with you.
I never said I would accept anything, any codec, any deadline.
I think the thread went on to another direction, reply after reply. Which is ok but there's no point to keep going on this subject.
Let's focus on the pb:23.97 sequence to 29.97.

As much as you're willing to be flexible, you are working with a 14 year old source code that is not designed to handle interframe formats. Depending on the complexity of your project, you could end up with a project that chokes badly further on down the pipeline. There's nothing prima donna about that. But well, you do what you you think works for you.

I am pretty surprised that you couldn't copy and paste it into a new sequence and have it re-link properly. Usually you will have a few gaps here and there, but that's about it. If that or Ethan's suggestion do not work, you could try making the clips offline before copying and pasting them into a new timeline with the correct frame rate.

I've seen a couple of oddities happen with h.264s in a timeline, and heard many many more other stories.


>Apple Video Sequencer 10. "AVS10"

Lol!



www.strypesinpost.com