Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

CineForm Offers NEO 4K-Mac for Red Support (BETA)

I setup the sequence's rendering quality setup to proper one then the now I could match. I think the watermarking on the trial version seem to change the color, too, I tested later with licensed version and conjunction with the above setup and it seems to work well.

But another issue arise. I wanted to take advantage of using Matrox MXO2 or MXO with monitors while editing, playing back Express files really well EXCEPT the aspect gets changed when I play back. Since it already playback smoothly, I think there's little to do on Matrox or Cineform side. I'll convince Matrox to work on it.

So, what I tried to do is to create HD422 cineform with letterbox for offline editing. But then unfortunately, when I try to bring it in or try to place it on the timeline, FCP crashes saying cineform made it crash. Craig, can you help me with this?

Also, do you have a plan to make that handy DPX <--->Cineform converter for Mac?
 
Kaku Ito said:
I setup the sequence's rendering quality setup to proper one then the now I could match. I think the watermarking on the trial version seem to change the color, too, I tested later with licensed version and conjunction with the above setup and it seems to work well.

But another issue arise. I wanted to take advantage of using Matrox MXO2 or MXO with monitors while editing, playing back Express files really well EXCEPT the aspect gets changed when I play back. Since it already playback smoothly, I think there's little to do on Matrox or Cineform side. I'll convince Matrox to work on it.

So, what I tried to do is to create HD422 cineform with letterbox for offline editing. But then unfortunately, when I try to bring it in or try to place it on the timeline, FCP crashes saying cineform made it crash. Craig, can you help me with this?

Also, do you have a plan to make that handy DPX <--->Cineform converter for Mac?
Click to expand...

FCP does funny things playing back source material that is not 1920x1080. I noticed that Desktop Cinema mode (RAW) with an express file will show the image in the correct aspect ratio and size, but when you start playing, it jumps up to 1920x1080 and of course the aspect ratio is wrong.:wacko: If the source is being scaled down to 1920x1080, the CineForm decoder can letterbox the result so that the aspect ratio is correct.
I think I know what your crash is. Try removing the active metadata settings for the clip. They are in /Library/Application Support/Cineform/LUTs/DB/ and .../LUTs/last. To allow express files and full resolution RAW decode to use the same metadata, all versions of the clip being converted from the original source gets the same GUID. If you do an Express conversion (422) then HD422, and finish up with RAW, there is not a problem. If you try Express/HD422, then RAW and then one of the 422 formats it has a problem.
 
Thanks Craig for your prompt rely.

The problem is exactly you described on the resizing, do you want to hook up with Matrox to fix this?

I will check on the crash fix. Thanks.

Our plan is to go R3D to Express(for preview)/444(compositing and online) then to DPX for Davinci/DI/Arrilaser. Sounds okay?

Compositing portion is going with CF444, come back as CF444 then edited with others on FCP2K, then to Davinci as DPX.



CraigDavidson said:
FCP does funny things playing back source material that is not 1920x1080. I noticed that Desktop Cinema mode (RAW) with an express file will show the image in the correct aspect ratio and size, but when you start playing, it jumps up to 1920x1080 and of course the aspect ratio is wrong.:wacko: If the source is being scaled down to 1920x1080, the CineForm decoder can letterbox the result so that the aspect ratio is correct.
I think I know what your crash is. Try removing the active metadata settings for the clip. They are in /Library/Application Support/Cineform/LUTs/DB/ and .../LUTs/last. To allow express files and full resolution RAW decode to use the same metadata, all versions of the clip being converted from the original source gets the same GUID. If you do an Express conversion (422) then HD422, and finish up with RAW, there is not a problem. If you try Express/HD422, then RAW and then one of the 422 formats it has a problem.
Click to expand...
 
I noticed the sizing problem playing an express clip to Cinema Desktop mode with a monitor connected to whatever video card Apple installed in the Mac Pro. I need to double check, but if I recall correctly, FCP requests the image at 1024x512, and then displays it at 1920x1080. For anything 1920x1080 or larger (2Kx1K) FCP requests 1920x1080, so we can letterbox the result to maintain the correct aspect ratio.

Your planned workflow sounds okay. What is the finished size?

Kaku Ito said:
Thanks Craig for your prompt rely.

The problem is exactly you described on the resizing, do you want to hook up with Matrox to fix this?

I will check on the crash fix. Thanks.

Our plan is to go R3D to Express(for preview)/444(compositing and online) then to DPX for Davinci/DI/Arrilaser. Sounds okay?

Compositing portion is going with CF444, come back as CF444 then edited with others on FCP2K, then to Davinci as DPX.
Click to expand...
 
It will be in 2048 x 1024. Trying 2:1 on 35mm film for the first time.
 
Craig,

What do you think the fastest way to replace, say H proxies on the timeline, to Cineform clips? My client came back with edits with H proxies, so I want to replace them with Cineform 444 clips.
 
Kaku Ito said:
Craig,

What do you think the fastest way to replace, say H proxies on the timeline, to Cineform clips? My client came back with edits with H proxies, so I want to replace them with Cineform 444 clips.
Click to expand...

I can't think of an easy way to do this with the current software. If you rename the CineForm 444 clips from the A002..._001.MOV format to A002.._H.MOV and then copy them to the folder where the FCP project expects them, it will use the CineForm files.
 
Okay, I can tell the editor to use express files from now on, so we won't have this problem. I'm communicating with Hans so maybe Clipfinder to reconnect in this situation in the future, too.
 
Craig,

Hans directed me to use Clipfinder and reconform, but since Remaster rename the R3D clips with three digits like "001", so I had to use Automator to eliminate those three digits, then reconforming all worked. Even each CF clips shows only the timecode starting from 0.00.00.00, conforming all worked, then I wonder how, so I opened the CF clip with QT player and checked the properties and found out that the original timecode is there and you can turn it on to show in QT player by click the radio button. Is it possible to make the original timecode appear in CF clips all the time?
 
Kaku,
Do you know how much extra work it was to hide the timecode track:sarcasm:
The time code should be correct in the clip information window of FCP. Where did the time code show up as 0.00.00.00?
Kaku Ito said:
Craig,

Hans directed me to use Clipfinder and reconform, but since Remaster rename the R3D clips with three digits like "001", so I had to use Automator to eliminate those three digits, then reconforming all worked. Even each CF clips shows only the timecode starting from 0.00.00.00, conforming all worked, then I wonder how, so I opened the CF clip with QT player and checked the properties and found out that the original timecode is there and you can turn it on to show in QT player by click the radio button. Is it possible to make the original timecode appear in CF clips all the time?
Click to expand...
 
Craig,

I double click the clip to show in the viewer, was trying to locate the in point copied from the proxy clip, but it didn't match....maybe I was on the older version of remaster?
 
Sounds like you may be. The earlier versions did not have time code. I do notice that FCP complains about a mismatch of Reel Name. We use the A001C003 format for the reel, and it looks like the proxies use just A001. Reconnect to source complains about this, but not the time code.
 
I'm on my regular machine to re-remaster :).
 
I have three machines to work with cineform going so hard to keep up with the update, then the time code issue was encoded with the older version of NEO, I encoded with the latest NEO ReMaster and the time code appear in FCP, thanks.

But now (sorry), even with the licensed Mac, watermark appears on some clips that are encoded from the same batch. Some have and some don't. What should I be careful avoiding this?
 
Kaku Ito said:
But now (sorry), even with the licensed Mac, watermark appears on some clips that are encoded from the same batch. Some have and some don't. What should I be careful avoiding this?
Click to expand...

I think you may have missed an update. The license control application we use gets confused if it has too many requests simultaneously, which happens when multiple threads start at the same time. Release 2.1.2.66 addressed this issue. Check the version in the "About Remaster" dialog.
 
CraigDavidson said:
I think you may have missed an update. The license control application we use gets confused if it has too many requests simultaneously, which happens when multiple threads start at the same time. Release 2.1.2.66 addressed this issue. Check the version in the "About Remaster" dialog.
Click to expand...

Craig,

It is 2.1.2.66, but I have it set to process 4, so should I roll it down?
Oh, did you come out with an update by the way?
 
Try rolling it down. I will look at it some more. In the meantime, the update is almost ready, just doing the final testing.
 
Even with "2", very first two that gets send to work at the same time, watermark appeared on the second one. So, ReMaster cannot control to get the license control it seems.
 
I can increase the interval between starting of the conversion. We have no problem on our old, slow first generation Mac Pro. You just need a slower machine.:wink:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top