Adobe Premiere & Premiere Pro discussions from 2004

[Mark Williams]

Roger,

You can also download the 15-day trial at xentrik and it should work. Its only a 5mb download.

Mark

[John Britt]

<<<-- Originally posted by Roger Golub : I can't find a hue / saturation tool for example. -->>>

Don't worry, it's there.

In Premiere 6.5, Hue-Lightness-Saturation is listed in Video effects under "Image Control" as "Color Balance (HLS)." Drop it into your video on the timeline and you'll get Hue, Lightness, and Saturation controls.

This is *not* the same effect as the "Color Balance" listed under the "Adjust" folder.

While not having the most powerful color correction tools, Premiere 6.5 does have quite a few to choose from -- Levels, Channel Mixer, Color Balance, Color Balance (HLS), and a couple more I believe.

Before Premiere Pro, I think that Adobe simply assumed that people who needed more powerful correction tools would just get After Effects. I've done OK with color correction in both Premiere 6.5 and After Effects.

[Mark Jefferson]

OK, here is how I used to color correct (I use AE now). Put your clip in the timeline. Apply the following filters and settings. You may have to tweak the settings to get color grading you want.

Video->Adjust->Color Balance
R=120
G=115
b=105

Video->Image Control->Color Balance (HLS)
Saturation=5

Video->Adjust->Levels
Set input level to 10/1.00/255

Video->Image Control->Gamma Correction
set to 12

Video->Adjust->Brightness & Contrast
set Contrast between 10-15

Video->Sharpen->Sharpen
set to 5

Next, copy your clip and place it directly above. Change the transparency setting to "Screen" and change the opacity to 15%

Here is a URL to a Before & After:

http://www.slakrboy.com/test.jpg

Like I said before, you may have to play with the settings to get things to look the way you want.. Good luck!

[David Stoneburner]

Another plug-in is Video Finesse by Synthetic Aperature. It provides a waveform and huge amount of adjustments. You can download a demo that puts red lines on the rendered output. In the past I have used the demo just for the waveform.

[Peter Richardson]

Hi everyone--I am attempting to capture into Premiere Pro and have been receiving the following two error messages: "Can't find timecode during capture" and "dropped frames during capture." I have attempted capture using a Panasonic DVX100 and Panasonic DV952D. Neither camera has worked. Prior to starting this project, I was able to capture 4 hours of video into Premiere Pro on a previous project with no problems, using the exact same setup as I am now using. I am capturing to an external Western Digital Hard Drive, attempting captures with it connected to both the Firewire and USB 2.0 ports. The USB 2.0 seems slightly more stable, but I still receive this error message.

I have captured into Avid Xpress Pro on a Powerbook with the same cameras, tapes, and external Hard Drive and it has worked perfectly. Does anyone have a guess as to why Premiere Pro is suddenly giving me these error messages? Additionally, I have uninstalled Premiere Pro and reinstalled, and the errors continue. Thanks!

Peter

P.S. The machine I'm using is a dual processor AMD with 1GB RAM. The WD hard drive is 7200rpm with a 2mb buffer. THanks!

[Peter Richardson]

An update: Just got off tech support with Adobe. The "expert tech" told me that Premiere does not support external Firewire hard drives, and that the fact that I was able to capture four hours of video before was "luck." She said they do not support external drives (except removable SCSI) for either capture or playback. She said my only option is to install additional internal hard drives. Has anyone else heard of this? THis seems absolutely ridiculous to me. I used to be a big Premiere fan, but give me a break. On Xpress Pro, I have three firewire drives daisy-chained into ONE port, PLUS my DVX100 on the end of this daisy chain and never a problem with captured, realtime playback etc. Tech support said that b/c Adobe uses MSFT DirectX this will not work with the Premiere system. Fortunately I am using a client's computer and it is not my $700 wasted on a useless program (sorry, I'm pissed). If anyone has any suggestions, they'd be much appreciated. THanks!

Peter

[Ming Dong]

I checked after reading your post and found that Adobe Premiere Pro System Requirements says this, "...dedicated 7200rpm UDMA 66 IDE or SCSI hard disk"

[Peter Richardson]

Thanks Ming. Sure enough, there it is in black and white. There must be users on this forum that use external firewire drives with Premiere, though...anyone?

Peter

[Edmond Chan]

Ken,

Thanks for the link, it really take me 2 days to digest all the info... as least now i know more about DV and can start to ask some make-sense question...

As Mr. Adam wilt stated, "the basic video encoding algorithm is the same between all 3 formats (DV, DVCAM & DVCPRO)... the video data recorded in all 3 formats is esentially identical, though there may be minor differences in the actual codec implementations."

Does that means if the camera section and lens are the same, the result from shooting in DV and DVCAM will be identical? (At least, that what i understand from Mr. Adam's article... correct me if i am wrong!)

Let's make one simple example, if i use a PD-170 shooting in DVCAM format and shift to DV format... the image from these 2 formats will be identical??? and you will see no differences between the shifting from DVCAM to DV... (except for the audio lock issue) If so... why sony need to make the DVCAM format... only for the audio lock function???

Any comments is welcome... i really want to understand the benefit of DVCAM over DV... cos i am choosing between PDX-10 & DVC-80... and currently i am more on the PDX-10 because of the DVCAM... if not, i definitely go for DVC-80...

Edmond

P.S. By the way, is the PDX-10 really a native 16x9 CCD? someone say yes and someone say no... it really make me confuse... if yes, i think with the price scheme, that's the lowest camera range that can give me uncropped 16x9 image... or do i have other choice under 3k?

[Ken Tanaka]

"Does that means if the camera section and lens are the same, the result from shooting in DV and DVCAM will be identical?"

Yes sir. That's basically* correct.

*DVCAM's primary claims of superiority over standard DV is that it features locked audio (to prevent audio/video synch drift) and its higher tape speed uses more tape to lay down the footage. This helps to prevent drop-outs due to tape abnormalities.

[Edmond Chan]

Dear all,

Yesterday I burn 2 clips into DVD-R and compare it on a 110-inch screen... one is using the highbit rate (custom setting) 8 avg and 9 max... and the other is medium bitrate (standard setting) which are 4.2 avg and 6 max... I really can not see any different... but as i mentioned on my previous post the title i add-in have a lot of artifacts and flicking plus the picture is soft compare to the orginial DV that i shoot... (my JVC have the direct plug-in from the camcorder to the projector using a D2 - component cable. so i can see the different between the DVD and original DV.)

Question, what's wrong with my capture equipment, i am using a pinnacle DV500 card with the set-top box using IEEE1394 plug. (As my understanding, there should be no loss on the digital transfer... so... what went wrong?)

Is the MPEG decoder having problem, or my authorizing program Sonic My DVD 5.0 soften my picture?

Any input is welcome... thanks...

Edmond

[Edmond Chan]

Ken,

Thanks for the reply... so the PD170 shooting in DV and DVCAM formats will be identical... only the audio-lock is different...

But is the "higher tape speed uses more tape to lay down the footage" means better resolution or it only means it do prevent the drop-frame issue...

One more stupid question, as the technical detail shown the digital-8 formats have higher track pitch and track width than DVCAM... does that means, the digital-8 have a "higher tape speed uses more tape to lay down the footage" than DVCAM? so... digital-8 format have the same or higher quality on preventing the drop-frame issue than DVCAM...

Edmond

Once again, thankyou for your kindly reply...

By the way, do you know the 16x9 issue on the PDX-10?

[Ken Tanaka]

"But is the "higher tape speed uses more tape to lay down the footage" means better resolution or it only means it do prevent the drop-frame issue..."

Nope. Tape format does not determine a camera's resolution. It's strictly a recording technique.

I am not knowledgeable enough about Digital 8 to answer your second question.

Refer to the PDX-10 forum for more info on that camera.

[Gareth Watkins]

Hi Edmond,
Re: your query on the PDX10 16:9 format. It is indeed native 16:9, unlike it's consumer twin the TRV950. This may be why you've heard conflicting reports.

Check out this link which gives a nice explanation.

<http://www.creativevideo.co.uk/pages/cvp_dsr-pdx10p-16x9.htm>


I have the TRV 950 and kind of wish I'd gone for the PDX now... but too late. I've added an XLR module, but it would have been nice to have the native 16:9, that most recognise as the best for any of the low budget prosumer cameras.

Both cameras have their limitations due to CCD size, but in the right conditions produce blinding pictures.

Cheers
Gareth

[Jan Roovers]

To my opinion, what also counts, comparing DVCAM and DV, is the fact that recording always generates some minor failures. Only the bigger ones result in dropouts. The others are smoothed by a correctingalgorithm.

When the correctingalgorithm has to estimate for the minor holes in reading, it will affect the result due to lack of information.

DVcam not only has less dropouts but the readingalgorithm has to do less corrections. This may result in a minor better picture.

Am I right?