|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 21st, 2003, 08:41 AM
|
#1 |
|
Wrangler
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,898
|
Editing 24pStandard vs 24pAdvanced
I recently ran into sloppy performance while editing footage shot in 24pStandard. The footage played back terrible in the preview window in Vegas. Granted I was using the default NTSC 29.97 template but why should that matter? ....Isn't 24pStandard still 29.97, I thought it's only 24pAdvanced that needs to be run with the 24p Template in Vegas to handle the advanced pull-down.
Thus so far I always though of it like this: -24p Standard for the cinematic "look" -24p Advanced for true 24p using 2-3-3-2 pulldown ???? |
|
|
|
November 21st, 2003, 10:43 AM
|
#2 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Describe "sloppy" and "terrible" in more detail. 24p standard on a 29.97 timeline can introduce problems if you edit on judder frames (where one 24p frame is split across 2 frames).
|
|
|
|
|
November 21st, 2003, 10:44 AM
|
#3 |
|
Wrangler
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,898
|
Sloppy as in only reaching 9fps in the preview window.
|
|
|
|
|
November 21st, 2003, 10:46 AM
|
#4 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Probably due to edits on judder frames which require Vegas to render. The 24p standard template should resolve that.
|
|
|
|
|
November 23rd, 2003, 02:39 PM
|
#5 |
|
Wrangler
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 2,898
|
It was unedited source footage.
|
|
|
|
|
November 23rd, 2003, 02:42 PM
|
#6 |
|
Space Hipster
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,508
|
Not sure why - I've not seen that problem.
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
