workflow problems with scenalyzer, compression, letterboxing and some other things at DVinfo.net

Reese Leysen · April 26th, 2007, 02:32 AM

Here's our problem:
We're shooting with a lens adapter in 16:9 on the pdx10p. We're using Scenalyzer to capture. Our movie will be anamorphically letterboxed and because of the lens adapter the image also has to be rotated, these things have to happen before editing (which happens in Vegas because Premiere does not support the not-so recent CPU in the PC that's used for editing).

To do this, we just throw all the clips into After Effects, apply the rotate and letterboxing to all compositions and render it out to Quicktime Animation to keep it lossless (very important).

Problem: this whole process (from capture to completed rotate/letterboxing render) takes about 4 hours and 90gb.

I've checked out other lossless formats that take up less space but they seem very heavy and our editor has to be able to work smoothly (and doesn't have a super-powerful workstation).

Ideas?

Thx. :)

Tom Hardwick · April 26th, 2007, 02:36 AM

You don't say what the 'lens adapter' is you're using on the PDX10. You mean a 1.33:1 anamorphic? If so, why not use the in-built 16:9 capability? I'm at a bit of a loss to understand the 'ananamorphically compressed and rotate' terminology. What is it that you're trying to achieve on the final viewing screen?

tom.

Reese Leysen · April 26th, 2007, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

You don't say what the 'lens adapter' is you're using on the PDX10. You mean a 1.33:1 anamorphic? If so, why not use the in-built 16:9 capability? I'm at a bit of a loss to understand the 'ananamorphically compressed and rotate' terminology. What is it that you're trying to achieve on the final viewing screen?

tom.

The lens adapter is the Letus35A which allows us to use 35mm lenses, the camera is set to (true) 16:9 so we get a nice wide image out of it. Downside is that this adapter flips the image. We're also letterboxing it to 2.35:1 Anamorphic just because it works better for the look of our movie (is this a bad practice, aside from the loss of resolution aspect?).

Tom Hardwick · April 26th, 2007, 03:05 AM

Ah-ha. Much clearer now. If ''it works better for the look of our movie'' then it's not bad practice in my book, and the PDX10's resolution is so good (as long as you keep the aperture at f/4) that it can take a hit without flinching.

tom.

April 26th, 2007, 02:32 AM	#1
Reese Leysen Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Belgium Posts: 114	workflow problems with scenalyzer, compression, letterboxing and some other things Here's our problem: We're shooting with a lens adapter in 16:9 on the pdx10p. We're using Scenalyzer to capture. Our movie will be anamorphically letterboxed and because of the lens adapter the image also has to be rotated, these things have to happen before editing (which happens in Vegas because Premiere does not support the not-so recent CPU in the PC that's used for editing). To do this, we just throw all the clips into After Effects, apply the rotate and letterboxing to all compositions and render it out to Quicktime Animation to keep it lossless (very important). Problem: this whole process (from capture to completed rotate/letterboxing render) takes about 4 hours and 90gb. I've checked out other lossless formats that take up less space but they seem very heavy and our editor has to be able to work smoothly (and doesn't have a super-powerful workstation). Ideas? Thx. :)

April 26th, 2007, 02:36 AM	#2
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	You don't say what the 'lens adapter' is you're using on the PDX10. You mean a 1.33:1 anamorphic? If so, why not use the in-built 16:9 capability? I'm at a bit of a loss to understand the 'ananamorphically compressed and rotate' terminology. What is it that you're trying to achieve on the final viewing screen? tom.

April 26th, 2007, 03:05 AM	#4
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Ah-ha. Much clearer now. If ''it works better for the look of our movie'' then it's not bad practice in my book, and the PDX10's resolution is so good (as long as you keep the aperture at f/4) that it can take a hit without flinching. tom.