By Elliot M
Hoping someone can help with this edit workflow question:
I currently shoot video on Canon DSLRs (in H264 MOV format), and edit on a late 2009 iMac (2.8ghz i7 processor, 16gb memory).
The films I make are mainly for web rather than TV broadcast, and beyond basic colour grade / tidying up, have minimal effects added (no CGI).
Until recently, I used Final Cut Pro 7, using FCP's Log & Transfer function to import and edit footage in Pro Res 422 format.
Having just moved to Premiere Pro CC 2017, I'm trying to figure out the most efficient workflow with the best resulting image.
Should I import and edit in native H264 MOV? Or ingest and edit as either Pro Res or DNxHD?
If Pro Res or DNxHD, what's the best way to ingest (or import / transcode)?
I've been reading mixed things via Google; mainly Adobe-related articles explaining a native workflow, vs various articles sponsored by transcoding software companies, saying that transcoding will have a better result.
Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
By Julien Miscischia
Hi fox ! This is my last edit, a short film about freestyle snowboarding. A beautiful day in a marvelous park (La Clusaz) with the two killers Matteo Cuny and Nicolas Palladio. Top of the pop, we finished with a beautiful sunset. So glad and happy to have shot this.
Comments are welcome dudes! Some pics of the session can be found here : http://www.switchmag.fr/decouverte/2015/11391-session-park-a-la-clusaz-matteo-cuny-nico-palladio.html
By Sebastien Farges
Hi anamorphic friends,
I'm working a lot these past months so I post less than usual ;)
Here is a teaser of the new album of Arthur H, a famous french singer. It was done before last summer, shot on GH3 + my baby Hypergonar 1.75x on my Qioptiq 35mm f1.6 MeVis-C C-mount lens.
Badfully I didn't have the GH4 yet ;)
My actual work is a 26mn Making Of a long feature movie, shot by me in 4K anamorphic in Ethiopia last november. Stay tune.
I'm new to the site and new to video work, but I've been lurking around the forums and Review Articles for a while now, trying to figure out what camera I should pick.
While totally new to serious videography, I've been doing photography and very light video on the side for about 6 years, so I wouldn't say I'm blind to the more enthusiast thresholds of acceptable quality.
With that in mind, I've narrowed it down to two models. Well... one. Two. Maybe just one. Possibly two.
Currently I'm heavily leaning towards the GX7 as:
- I assume focus peaking for someone that isn't trained in the art of manual focusing would be nothing short of magical(?).
- I will not be needing high quality external audio (for the foreseeable future) (I'll probably mostly be doing artsy montages with music on top,heh...).
But I've seen the GH3 recommended over the GX7 for video quite a few times because of:
I have read Mr. Reid's (predominantly positive) thoughts on the GX7 and that strongly weighed into me currently leaning towards it.
My question is:
Has anyone who has tried both the GX7 and a more codec-competent (higher bitrate) solution ever been strongly frustrated with the former at any point?
Like going "THAT WAS THE PERFECT SHOT! GOD HIMSELF PARTED THE SKIES AND UNLEASHED THE MOST HEAVENLY RAYS OF LIGHT THAT DUCK HAS EVER SEEN. YOU HAD - ONE JOB! " when you came home to realize that the water ripples in your perfect shot created the occasional blocky codec artifact?
I guess my question can mostly be boiled down to "Bitrate Vs. Focus Peaking". I hope it isn't overly redundant.
Any advice and personal input would be really really appreciated. Like...
...this much > [ ]