text:
Calculate depth-of-field on BMPC 4K using a 50mm/1.8
I stand up the back of a room on a riser and capture a speaker at podium + their presentation on the screen using a blackmagic production 4K. I estimate I am 8 metres from the subject.
Currently I'm using an f2.8 lens and adjusting it in davinci as the room is poorly lit.
Is there a way to gauge the depth of field that will be in focus if I use an f1.8 lens?
Thanks in advance

I've never seen a 1.8mm lens before! Do you mean a 50mm f/1.8 lens?

yes, meant f1.8/50mm

You will need an app or chart for the calculation. There are apps on both iOS and Android for this. Just search depth of field calculator.
With a 50mm lens shooting at f/1.8 you're depth of field will be very shallow; more so the closer your subject is to the camera, with your DOF becoming deeper if your subject moves away.
Some lenses have a built in Hyper-Focal chart on the top of the lens; showing what your "Reasonably considered in Focus area is at" which changes as you change your aperture.
If you need a less shallow depth of field, you can always stop down the lens. Also keep in mind; the 50mm 1.8 is not incredibly sharp at 1.8 to begin with. Most lenses have sweet spots in terms of tack sharp; typically about 1/3 into the f-stop range.
The only lenses that will give you pristine tack sharp focus at apertures like 1.8, are for example the Master Primes by Arri; running $30k per prime.
Hope this helps.

Going to f/1.8 will brighten up everything, the Screen and the Presenter, and reduce your DOF. With a less expensive Lens your going to be stopping down to get a sharper image; wasting time and money, and not accomplishing what you want.
What you want (I'm guessing) is for the Presenter to be better lit, presumably you can see the Screen (otherwise you have a lot of problems).
Trying to light the Presenter in that setting either would physically block the Screen or give odd side-lighting making them spooky looking (unless you wanted to try a ceiling mounted spotlight).
What you want to do is get a Square Filter Holder and a Hard Edge Graduated Neutral Density 0.6 Filter. Just slide the Filter to darken the Screen leaving the Presenter unaffected, then crank the ISO a touch to brighten the Screen back to normal.
Now the Screen is correctly exposed and the Presenter isn't hidden in the dark, everything is evened out.
This costs less than a new Lens (unless you are planning on buying the best possible Filters, that you may not need, or the cheapest 1.8 that you would not want).

Using a Depth of Field Calculator we can see that for a BMPC 4k with 8 meters to the subject, the near limit is 7.3m and the far limit is 8.85m.  This means you'll be a little bit shy of having everything completely in focus, but it should be pretty close to acceptably in focus.  If you can get a hair more distance it would buy you a little more space and might cover your full range.


text:
DaVinci Resolve 12.5.5 - Deselect Power Window
When you're in the Color tab and have an active Power Window selected in the Viewer, is there a keyboard shortcut to toggle it on/off to see the unencumbered view of your clip?
"Deselect All" doesn't seem to deselect all.

I don't have Resolve on this machine, but I'm pretty sure there's a little box on the lower left of the viewer window where you can choose what overlays you see. Set it to none and you can work on your power window without it appearing.

yikes - my bad - I meant is there a keyboard shortcut.

You can use the key combination: Shift + `  (Shift and Backtick) to toggle the Power Window overlay on the [Color] page.
This also works for viewer overlays on the [Edit] page in Resolve 16.

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

sort: votes


text:
What keywords to use when searching for a Maya plugin developer?
I'm not very familiar with VFX production but I've been asked to do some research on companies that develop Maya plugins.
However, I'm having trouble locating such companies.
First, I tried Autodesk's website, hoping they would have an official developer directory, but they do not.  Edit: I did find the official Autodesk site, but the rest of my question still stands.
Then, I tried Googling terms such as hire "maya plugin" developer and "maya plugin" development companies.  However, I am getting very few hits.
How can I search for companies that do Maya development?  I do not want a list of Maya development companies (that would obviously be off topic); I just don't know enough about the terminology to perform a search, so I'd like to know which keywords have potential.

In addition to my answer, if you post more details about what you want the plugin to do, we might be able to give more information on what that kind of plugin might be called or if any plugins already exist to do it.

Your best bet is probably to look for developers of commercial Maya plugins and see if they are willing to do contract work.  Most studios have developers on staff to handle any project specific coding work needed.  It's a pretty specialized skill set and I doubt there is much of a market for doing it as consultants.
That said, my (limited) experience playing with APIs in 3d graphics software would tend to indicate that any developer with experience working with 3d systems should be able to pick it up pretty quickly.  The concepts, when it comes to the programing, aren't that different from DirectX to OpenGL to SoftImage or Maya.  It's still shaders, geometry, physics, etc...

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
ffmpeg: how to convert to DNxHR in Windows 10?
I have installed ffmpeg version 3.2.2 from the ffmpeg.org download page.
When I enter ffmpeg formats, I see dnxhd but not dnxhr.  What do I need to do to be able to manipulate dnxhr?
I have downloaded and installed Avid Codecs LE 2.7.3 as well but that didn't seem to help.

There's a single decoder/encoder which reads/converts to both DNxHD and DNxHR.
You have to set the correct profile switch. Available options are
 dnxhd                        E..V....
 dnxhr_444                    E..V....
 dnxhr_hqx                    E..V....
 dnxhr_hq                     E..V....
 dnxhr_sq                     E..V....
 dnxhr_lb                     E..V....

Basic minimal syntax would be
ffmpeg -i in.mp4 -c:v dnxhd -profile:v dnxhr_hq out.mov

The Avid codecs package has no interaction with ffmpeg.
[19-1-2017] At this time, the encoder does not support 444 or HQX profiles.
[4-2-2017] Now, it does.

What command did you use to get a list of supported profiles?

ffmpeg -h encoder=dnxhd


text:
ffmpeg and decklink- how to specify audio_input for hdmi video?
I'm using an Intensity Pro 4K to capture with ffmpeg via the decklink commands.
According to the documentation:

video_input
Sets the video input source. Must be ‘unset’, ‘sdi’, ‘hdmi’, ‘optical_sdi’, ‘component’, ‘composite’ or ‘s_video’. Defaults to
  ‘unset’.
audio_input
Sets the audio input source. Must be ‘unset’, ‘embedded’, ‘aes_ebu’, ‘analog’, ‘analog_xlr’, ‘analog_rca’ or ‘microphone’.
  Defaults to ‘unset’.

So I set -video_input hdmi, which guarantees I will get the video via HDMI even if the Blackmagic driver is set to something else (e.g., component, which for some reason every time I reboot it gets reset to component).
But, while I get video, I don't get audio.  I tried setting -audio_input to embedded (no effect) aes_ebu, and microphone (not supported by device error).
So, I still have to go to the Blackmagic video drivers and switch the input signal to HDMI.
Is there a way to specify the hdmi audio feed together with the hdmi video feed on the ffmpeg command line?
Reference
Full command I am using:
ffmpeg -rtbufsize 1500M -f decklink -video_input hdmi -i "Intensity Pro 4K@20" -pix_fmt yuv420p -c:a copy -c:v v210 abc.mov

list_formats output:
E:\>ffmpeg -f decklink -list_formats 1 -i "Intensity Pro 4K"
ffmpeg version 3.2 Copyright (c) 2000-2016 the FFmpeg developers
  built with gcc 5.4.0 (GCC)
  configuration: --enable-gpl --enable-version3 --disable-w32threads --enable-dxva2 --enable-libmfx --enable-nvenc --enable-avisynth --enable-bzlib --enable-libebur128 --enable-fontconfig --enable-frei0r --enable-gnutls --enable-iconv --enable-libass --enable-libbluray --enable-libbs2b --enable-libcaca --enable-libfreetype --enable-libgme --enable-libgsm --enable-libilbc --enable-libmodplug --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libopencore-amrnb --enable-libopencore-amrwb --enable-libopenh264 --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libopus --enable-librtmp --enable-libschroedinger --enable-libsnappy --enable-libsoxr --enable-libspeex --enable-libtheora --enable-libtwolame --enable-libvidstab --enable-libvo-amrwbenc --enable-libvorbis --enable-libvpx --enable-libwavpack --enable-libwebp --enable-libx264 --enable-libx265 --enable-libxavs --enable-libxvid --enable-libzimg --enable-lzma --enable-decklink --enable-zlib
  libavutil      55. 34.100 / 55. 34.100
  libavcodec     57. 64.100 / 57. 64.100
  libavformat    57. 56.100 / 57. 56.100
  libavdevice    57.  1.100 / 57.  1.100
  libavfilter     6. 65.100 /  6. 65.100
  libswscale      4.  2.100 /  4.  2.100
  libswresample   2.  3.100 /  2.  3.100
  libpostproc    54.  1.100 / 54.  1.100
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460] Supported formats for 'Intensity Pro 4K':
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   1       720x486 at 30000/1001 fps (interlaced, lower field first)
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   2       720x576 at 25000/1000 fps (interlaced, upper field first)
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   3       1920x1080 at 24000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   4       1920x1080 at 24000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   5       1920x1080 at 25000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   6       1920x1080 at 30000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   7       1920x1080 at 30000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   8       1920x1080 at 25000/1000 fps (interlaced, upper field first)
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   9       1920x1080 at 30000/1001 fps (interlaced, upper field first)
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   10      1920x1080 at 30000/1000 fps (interlaced, upper field first)
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   11      1920x1080 at 50000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   12      1920x1080 at 60000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   13      1920x1080 at 60000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   14      1280x720 at 50000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   15      1280x720 at 60000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   16      1280x720 at 60000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   17      3840x2160 at 24000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   18      3840x2160 at 24000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   19      3840x2160 at 25000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   20      3840x2160 at 30000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 0000000000f66460]   21      3840x2160 at 30000/1000 fps
Intensity Pro 4K: Immediate exit requested

Output of E:\>ffmpeg -rtbufsize 1500M -f decklink -video_input hdmi -audio_input embedded -i "Intensity Pro 4K@20" -pix_fmt yuv420p -c:a copy -c:v v210 abcde.mov
ffmpeg version 3.2 Copyright (c) 2000-2016 the FFmpeg developers
  built with gcc 5.4.0 (GCC)
  configuration: --enable-gpl --enable-version3 --disable-w32threads --enable-dxva2 --enable-libmfx --enable-nvenc --enable-avisynth --enable-bzlib --enable-libebur128 --enable-fontconfig --enable-frei0r --enable-gnutls --enable-iconv --enable-libass --enable-libbluray --enable-libbs2b --enable-libcaca --enable-libfreetype --enable-libgme --enable-libgsm --enable-libilbc --enable-libmodplug --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libopencore-amrnb --enable-libopencore-amrwb --enable-libopenh264 --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libopus --enable-librtmp --enable-libschroedinger --enable-libsnappy --enable-libsoxr --enable-libspeex --enable-libtheora --enable-libtwolame --enable-libvidstab --enable-libvo-amrwbenc --enable-libvorbis --enable-libvpx --enable-libwavpack --enable-libwebp --enable-libx264 --enable-libx265 --enable-libxavs --enable-libxvid --enable-libzimg --enable-lzma --enable-decklink --enable-zlib
  libavutil      55. 34.100 / 55. 34.100
  libavcodec     57. 64.100 / 57. 64.100
  libavformat    57. 56.100 / 57. 56.100
  libavdevice    57.  1.100 / 57.  1.100
  libavfilter     6. 65.100 /  6. 65.100
  libswscale      4.  2.100 /  4.  2.100
  libswresample   2.  3.100 /  2.  3.100
  libpostproc    54.  1.100 / 54.  1.100
[decklink @ 0000000002872cc0] Found Decklink mode 3840 x 2160 with rate 29.97
[decklink @ 0000000002872cc0] Frame received (#1) - Input returned - Frames dropped 1
Guessed Channel Layout for Input Stream #0.0 : stereo
Input #0, decklink, from 'Intensity Pro 4K@20':
  Duration: N/A, start: 0.000000, bitrate: 3978870 kb/s
    Stream #0:0: Audio: pcm_s16le, 48000 Hz, stereo, s16, 1536 kb/s
    Stream #0:1: Video: rawvideo (UYVY / 0x59565955), uyvy422, 3840x2160, 3977334 kb/s, 29.97 tbr, 1000k tbn, 1000k tbc
Incompatible pixel format 'yuv420p' for codec 'v210', auto-selecting format 'yuv422p'
Output #0, mov, to 'abcde.mov':
  Metadata:
    encoder         : Lavf57.56.100
    Stream #0:0: Video: v210 (v210 / 0x30313276), yuv422p, 3840x2160, q=2-31, 200 kb/s, 29.97 fps, 30k tbn, 29.97 tbc
    Metadata:
      encoder         : Lavc57.64.100 v210
    Stream #0:1: Audio: pcm_s16le (sowt / 0x74776F73), 48000 Hz, stereo, 1536 kb/s
Stream mapping:
  Stream #0:1 -> #0:0 (rawvideo (native) -> v210 (native))
  Stream #0:0 -> #0:1 (copy)
Press [q] to stop, [?] for help

What's the full command you're using? And does list_formats show any audio selection?

@Mulvya Updated my question.

With the audio option set to embedded, does ffmpeg show any input audio stream?

@Mulvya When I enter the command E:\>ffmpeg -f decklink -video_input hdmi -audio_input embedded -list_formats 1 -i "Intensity Pro 4K", the output is the same as when I do not specify -audio_input.

Of course, that's because you're listing formats. You need to add it to the capture command and check.

@Mulvya Ok, added the output of the capture command.

It does detect audio: Stream #0:0: Audio: pcm_s16le, 48000 Hz, stereo, s16, 1536 kb/s. If it's silent, then this may be need to be changed at the driver level.

Using embedded (or omitting -audio_input) is the intended way to get the audio of HDMI or SDI signals.
Please make sure that there is a 2ch-stereo audio signal on HDMI. If it is 5.1 or 7.1 you might have to use -channels 8 in the commandline before the -i.
Note: please pay attention to the pix_fmt warning. Leave that option out of your commandline.


text:
ffmpeg- What's the difference between "NN000/1000 fps" and "NN000/1001 fps"?
I'm trying to select the correct capture options for ffmpeg and I'm confused by this kind of listing:
[decklink @ 00000000010564c0]   17      3840x2160 at 24000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 00000000010564c0]   18      3840x2160 at 24000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 00000000010564c0]   19      3840x2160 at 25000/1000 fps
[decklink @ 00000000010564c0]   20      3840x2160 at 30000/1001 fps
[decklink @ 00000000010564c0]   21      3840x2160 at 30000/1000 fps

Based on the fact that 24 and 30 have two entries and 25 only has one, I assume that the two 24 options are true 24fps and 23.9fps, and the two 30 options are true 30fps and 29.97fps.
But which is which?  And why is this kind of notation used?

Yes, 24000/1000 is 24 fps and 24000/1001 is 23.976fps. Some refer to the X/1001 frame rates as "drop down" (as in "dropped down from the integer") but this is easy to confuse with "pull down" which often refers to the cadence of frames when fitting 24 or 25 fps material into a 30 fps program.
You can also think of these notations as 24,000 divided by 1,000 equals 24 and 24,000 divided by 1,001 equals 23.976023976 repeating. This notation is also the exact same thing as saying 24 divided by 1 equals 24 and 24 divided by 1.001 equals 23.976023976 repeating. It is, of course, quite ridiculous to articulate the repeating decimal values.
The 1001 options and their resulting notation are a legacy from analog color television systems. As Mulvya points out "it's because that's the smallest set of numbers that represent the value as integers". These standards are still around today mainly for backwards compatibility (with black and white television sets) and 'cause that's just the way TV grew up. Prior to color television, the NTSC frame rate was actually exactly thirty frames per second.
As for the 30000/1000 and 30000/1001 notation it comes from the NTSC video standard. "30"fps NTSC is actually displaying 30/1.001 frames per second (sometimes referred to as "29.97" or "30DF" for short, but to be precise 29.97002997... repeating frames per second). Due to this slight difference (.01%), NTSC uses either Drop-Frame (DF) or Non Drop-Frame (NDF) time-code counting. Drop-Frame "drops" frame counts in a pattern such that every ten minutes the time-code duration will correspond to the actual playback duration. No image frames are dropped and this was mainly a consideration for broadcasters fitting their programs with commercial breaks. Non Drop-Frame on the other hand more accurately represents a count of the total number of frames in a program (for those who enjoy counting in base 24:60:60:30...)
As for 25000/1000 there's no 25/1.001fps standard because 25fps is a PAL standard and PAL video systems were engineered using 50Hz AC power which did not have the same issues as NTSC when color came about.

You mentioned 50 Hz AC. Are you saying that these non-integer frame rates were used to avoid interference with AC power supply frequency?

@VioletGiraffe both NTSC (29.97fps) and PAL(25fps) were engineered for use with AC mains. The characteristics of the US standard with AC (60Hz) led to the implementation of NTSC color video with 29.97 (30/1.001). The implementation of PAL color with the European AC standard (50Hz) did not require the same engineering considerations. This blog explains some of the history/engineering considerations for the non-integer standards. 24/1.001 came from fitting film (24fps) into NTSC. Fitting 24fps film into 25fps (PAL) video is much easier

@Mr.Kennedy, the non-integer frame rates are "drop frame", not drop down.

@MichaelLiebman "drop frame" refers specifically to the time code, "some" refer to the non-integer frame rate as "drop down" - i.e. dropping the frame rate down from the integer, e.g. 30 drop down is the frame rate of NTSC & drop frame skips from 00;09;59;28 to 00;10;00;00. This was common parlance in the late nineties and early '00s prior to the ubiquity of digital standards.

In my entire career in television, which started in the mid-90s in the US, I've never heard the term "drop down" frame rate. I could not find any reference to that term in the SMPTE journal.

@MichaelLiebman "some" not "SMPTE" - likewise been working professionally in television video film and CG since 1987. "Drop Frame" is a time code convention, not a frame rate. If you'd like to discuss the issue further we can start a conversation as this is not adding anything to answering the OP's question.

"Fitting 24fps film into 25fps (PAL) video is much easier"  I have to take issue with the fact that speeding up your video 4% and making everyone sound slightly like chipmunks is "easier".

Those are rational numbers. So, 24000/1000 = 24.000 and 24000/1001 = 23.976. These are in fact the exact representations i.e. 23.976 is an approximation but 24000 divided by 1001 isn't.
As for why 24000/1001 and not 24/1.001, it's because that's the smallest set of numbers that represent the value as integers. Else, a floating point variable would be needed for the denominator.

Regarding your last paragraph, are you sure integer data types are the reason it's represented in thousands? My understanding of programming is that if you do math on integer data types that results in decimals, the decimals are simply truncated in your result. If this is true then that certainly can't be the reason why they represent them in thousands.

For storage in files. You can always cast the variables during operations.

From ffmpeg's rational.h: "While rational numbers can be expressed as floating-point numbers, the conversion process is a lossy one, so are floating-point operations. On the other hand, the nature of FFmpeg demands highly accurate calculation of timestamps." framerate is stored as a AVRational struct which has two ints - one for numerator and one for denominator.

@Mulvya I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand. How can a data structure be lossy? You still have to do the math on the numerator and denominator. And if there's only a finite number a frame rates that are used why can't they just be enumerated?

I didn't say or quote anything about a "a data structure be lossy". Floating point numbers have precision limited by the space devoted to their storage. A rational rep can maintain better accuracy because in code involving framerate manipulation, ffmpeg uses custom routines that keep the value in num/den form i.e. it is not collapsed to a single floating-point or integer result.

The original framerate for broadcast television was 60 fields (half of a frame) per second in the U.S., and timing was based on the oscillation of AC power (so, clearly, European television needed a different framerate under the oldest technology).
However, when color was added to NTSC, the color signal interfered the audio signal. By this time, more advanced means of timing were available, so the quick fix was to reduce the frame rate ever so slightly. Color was done slightly differently in PAL and this adjustment was not necessary so there is no 25000/1001.


text:
Is there a Youtube-supported subtitle format that does positioning + Unicode?
I am trying to add Asian language subtitles that are positioned at the top of the screen, not the bottom, to a YouTube video.
There is a list of subtitle formats that YouTube supports.
Using the program Subtitle Edit, I imported the .sbv file that was automatically generated from my YouTube video, edited it, saved it, and then imported it back into YouTube.  The subtitles show up fine, but they are positioned at the bottom of the screen by default.
So, I next attempted to use the Subtitle Edit software to convert the subtitles to a format that supports positioning.
In Subtitle Edit, I have everything set to UTF-8.  Then I tried:

EBU STL (Asian fonts get turned into question marks)
SCC (Asian text is stripped completely from the file)

I also tried making a WebVTT file and adding code like this: 00:00.000 --> 00:33.000 line:13 position:50% align:end size:100%, but I have been having trouble getting it to work even though the YouTube docs say that positioning is supported.
EDIT:
To experiment with WebVTT, I was using the code generator here, but as far as I can tell the line option is not supported by YouTube.
So how can I change the position of subtitles on YouTube when using a language that requires Unicode formatting?

Based on this Medium post by Michael Lockrey, I have been able to get positioning to work like this:
TIMECODE align:left size:25% position:0% line:50%

Make sure there are NO spaces around the colon: align: left will NOT work.  I lost an hour of my life because I didn't realize this.

Google Subtitle Workshop... it's an outdated program, but allows for full flexibility in terms of subtitles, size, language, position, lines, size, color, position, etc.
It's an old program, but it still works, and it can be combined with foot pedals- or a control surface, if you have them, to make transcribing faster.


text:
repeat crossfade in a sequence of images
I am trying to animate a series of drawings. I have 10 drawings of 10 states of an object and I would like to have a crossfade between each states and this repeated for about 2 min back and forth.
I am using After effects and I have imported the image sequence, made a composition (30fps, 2 min long) changed the time remapping so each drawing is displayed during 15 frames (0.5 seconds).
My issue is that the change between drawings snaps and I need a crossfade between them. The other option I can think of to is create a composition with all the drawings and manualy create key images for opacity but this is going to be very long as it has to go on for 2 minutes.
Is there a way to crossfade each drawing into the next one in Affter effects?

There's always more than one way to do things in AE:
Method1
Import the drawings as separate source files, rather than as an image sequence (in the import dialog uncheck the image sequence checkbox). Once you've got all your images imported select them all and drag them into a new composition.
They will appear as a stack of layers with only the top layer visible, but don't fret. Next step is to trim them to the length you need. The easiest way to do this is to select them all and move the playhead to the last frame you want (frame 15 in your case) and hit alt/option] which is the shortcut for trimming the end of a layer.
Now right click one of the selected layers and from the contextual menu choose Keyframe Assistant > Sequence Layers…. To get a crossfade you need to check the overlap box, and use the Dissolve Front Layer transition (I have never been able to work out why you would ever use the Dissolve front and back layers option, because it means that halfway through both layers will be 50% transparent, meaning that the background will show through). You might have to go back and add extra frames to your layers to allow for the overlap, so if you want a 5 frame overlap on a 15 frame layer you'll need to make it 20 frames.

This is the built-in tool for doing exactly what you want to do.
Method 2
Do what you're doing, but make sure that frame blending is turned on for your image sequences. It's the little filmstrip icon in the switches column (you may have to hit f4 to toggle the visibility.

There are two values for frame blending, you want the first one, which is basically dissolving between frames — the second one does a kind of morph between successive frames which can do a good job in some circumstances, but can look very weird in others.
Now because frame blending is a bit computationally expensive, AE doesn't show it in the comp window by default. You'll have to turn it on to see it, and you do that by hitting the filmstrip button at the top of the layers area in your timeline:

Click it and it will go blue, and you'll see your frames blending.
Although this might be easier to set up, it does have the disadvantage that the frames are going to be constantly dissolving, with only one frame each where they are 100% from the individual drawing.

Awesome, thx for the detailed answer. I had tried the second method but I had missed the last step and couldn't see the effect. Now it works, this will save me a lot of time!


text:
Rendering video from Photoshop CS6 leaves background grey where it should be white
On export of an animation from Photoshop, the rendered video has a grey background where it should be white.
We have tried multiple settings and documents and nothing we've tried works.
These are the exact setting we are using. And also tried numerous other options.
Does anyone know what might cause this? Using CS6. Thanks.
We have now tried every conceivable solution and not found it. Oddly enough, when we play the video in Windows Media Player it is perfect but not in VLC. Also, uploaded the video to YouTube

 and in the player it is grey but when you open it in the Video Manager, it is white.
It also appears as white in Google+, Facebook and anywhere else.

It is probably worth checking your Image>Mode settings.
I find they tend to change my colours between exports and prints etc.


text:
Why is my Premiere timeline scrollbar thumb non-proportional?
In almost every app on Earth, the width of the scrollbar thumb (aka scroller or knob) is proportional to the amount of content present in the window, relative to total content.
Yet in Premiere Pro CS6, it seems to follow a totally different logic. For example, in this simple one-clip timeline, I'm scrolled all the way to the left, and the clip pretty much fills the timeline.

But dragging the scroller right just a little bit (as seen below), the clip flies offscreen, even though the scroller area is clearly overlapping its previous area.

What's up with that?? Is my install bugged, or is this just a bizarre UI oversight by Adobe?
UPDATE: More screengrabs and descriptions
The image below shows 4 states:
1) Fully zoomed out. TONS of empty space.
2) Zoomed to fill the timeline with the clip.
3) Scrolling until the end of the clip is just in sight.
4) Scrolling all the way right.

The scrollers of states 2 & 3 have a 50% overlap, which means the clip should also be ~50% visible. It seems like Premiere thinks the timeline is twice as big as it actually is, as demonstrated by the 50% overlap. I was using dual-monitors, so I thought perhaps my dual-monitor setup was the cause, but disconnecting the 2nd prior to Fred Rick's reset didn't help.
Any more suggestions out there?

What happens if you drag the end of the scroll bar out to zoom out all the way?  What does it look like then?  Have you had any other clips in the sequence or had that clip further down the sequence earlier?

Thanks for asking :) I've added a screenshot of the fully zoomed out state. There were not clips in the sequence earlier.

are you sure it added?  I don't see any edits in the last 16 hours.

i commented you while finishing the post :)

Well this is not my Direct Answer but tried this?:
trash the preferences and then create a new project. Then go to window>workspace and uncheck the import workspace from the project and reset it again. Then try opening your project and check.
My Buddy Google gave me that:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/5796914
Cheers

This looks like it is for when the scrollbar is missing from the workspace entirely.

I just tried this to the letter, and the problem persists. Thanks for the great suggestion!


text:
Using a Nikon D5100 or Sony SR68 to shoot video of an event
I've been asked, on a very short time schedule, to shoot video at a party on behalf of someone too ill to attend.
In my custody are my Nikon D5100 and a Sony Handycam DCR-SR68. I am not experienced at using the former for video (I'm a still photographer by avocation) or the later at all (it is borrowed.)
Conditions are likely to involve mediocre light levels. I have a tripod. Understandable sound would be good. I don't need continuous recording for long periods of time; it can be clips in the 5-15 minute range.
Are either of these devices likely to satisfy, or should I go rent something fancier?

There is custom patch for the D5100 that allow 54mpbs recording also on the D5100 that might help if you plan to post-process the video footage. Checkout NikonHacker.com

bmargulies, There are few questions here:

Are you looking for a multicam setup?  If so the two cameras are unlikely going to match unless you are willing to put in time to post production work. (fix it in post! http://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/large/639498971.jpg?1345259967)
What is the purpose of this video If its a 'creative' project (as in you are making a video about the event and not 'of' the event) then you should go for a camera that gives you some aesthetic flexibility which normally starts with a good eye and a good lens.
What is the budget for the shoot? If you have a budget then you should get the setup for the purpose.  If its a documentation then consider hiring a couple of cameras of the same model for a muticam setup.  If its creative then I would check how flexible your Nikon is to get the story/feeling/looks that you want to achieve - then see if you need to hire something better.

I'll also touch on what you mentioned about light levels.  If you are working with low light then here you would have two options:

Use the budget camera: DCR-SR68 and other off the shelf budget cameras will work well but at the cost of image quality (ie. the footage will look just like its budget)
Add flexibility to lighting - 1) get a LED Ring light, if you have a decent budget then you can hire out a Gekko George light.  2) You can also hire a lens that have a really low f-stop, just one stop can actually make enough of a difference. 3) Get a camera that can shoot RAW - RAW footage gives you more flexibility in post to push up the levels to brighten the footage and merry this with a decent noise reduction plugin and you will be looking at decent footage.

Hope this helps!

I use my Nikon DSLR to record videos, so I'll share some pointers with you.
DSLR are capable of producing very good video images. This is thanks to their sensor size and optics, compared to many handycams.
However, since their primary use is not video, there are some things to keep in mind:

I don't recommend using autofocus. It is slow (Nikon in Live View uses contrast detection, which is slower and AF will search back and forth for sharpest point) and noisy (rattling of lens motor is audible).
Set focus (with AF) before you start recording, then lock it (swith to MF) and continue with filming.
DSLR will be great with static scene, when you can put it on tripod, but if you need to use it hand-held...
Low light - Nikon does well in low light. Maybe use fast lens and set a bit higher ISO.
Sound quality - built-in microphone has limited range. It is omnidirectional. In noisy surrounding it will pick up everything, but the person you want to record.
Pay attention to menu settings. You can select manual mode in menu, where you will set aperture, shutter speed and ISO, or you can leave that to camera.
Maximum framerate for Full-HD is only 25 fps.

It's 30(30/1.001) in NTSC and 25 PAL.

It depends on the quality desired.  The best bet is to test them both out before hand and see what you are comfortable with.  Most DSLRs do not have autofocus while recording, so you would need to manually focus the lens, however the quality is usually very high.  The handicam on the other hand will provide Autofocus however you would want to test how it handles low light before hand.

You're a photographer, so you think that this is all about the pictures. But, although almost everyone looks the same at all parties (Halloween excepted), sometimes someone says something new and clever. So sometimes good sound is better than great pictures, if you can't afford both.
If good sound is important at your event rent a decent external microphone and, at least, a pistol grip for it (a boom would be better) and someone to 'man' the mic.
Test, in advance. Your camera should, in any event, take an external audio input. The Sony that you mention does NOT take external inputs.
Also, 5-15 minute takes are quite long for DSLRs, which tend to overheat in long takes and then just shut down when they do. A better, higher-end, consumer camcorder might be your best tool for this. .

Older DSLRs might have had overheat issues, but most shut downs I've seen recently are related to memory cards being too slow and running out of buffer or hitting the 29 minute 59 second limit set by the EU on "non-video cameras".


text:
GoPro 3 Black gets stuck in ">" Play mode when diving
I have bought a touchscreen backpanel for my GoPro3 black and whenever I take it diving, it switches to ">" play mode (the black triangle shows up on the front panel and keeps stuck there). I cannot switch it off or operate any of the buttons.
Can it be that the touch panel reacts to pressure from the back cover? I am not using the touch back panel by the way. Any idea what else can be causing this? I have the latest firmware.

It sounds like your probably correct about the pressure of the back panel activating it or possibly the conductance of the water that is around it.  It could be either depending on the type of touch screen they used.

Yep - a quick google search shows various comments about this on forums - the solution seems to be to get a better casing. Eyeofmine.com gets a good recommendation on http://www.scubadiverinfo.com/3_cameras_gopro_hero2.html


text:
Stabilizing GoPro videos
When I watched videos on GoPro's youtube profile, they seem to me almost perfectly stable. And when I attached my action cam to helmet and tried to record during skiing, the video was very shaky.
I am aware, that videos on their profile are advertising videos made by pros. So my question is to pros - can you tell if the videos were stabilized with some software? Do consumer products have such capabilities?
If the videos were not stabilized, what can be done, to achieve more stable videos, when recording from helmet or hand held (pole-mounted) camera?

Seems as though GoPro should include built-in image stabilization! Many cameras (including my Sony Handyham HD) do.

Software that I know of:

Virtualdub with Deshaker plugin:
http://www.guthspot.se/video/deshaker.htm
Sony Vegas Pro since version 10 has a built-in stabilization plugin
Depan for Avisynth - http://avisynth.org.ru/depan/depan.html - it can get quite complicated but there are sample scripts to help getting started.

Youtube can detect if the footage is shaky, though it's not always working so well and it applies to the whole video.
My personal favorite is the Virtualdub route. Just remember to save it to a lossless format if you plan on editing it further.

+1 for Virtualdub and Deshaker.  It's a complex but powerful tool.  Here's a video on how I use it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ob2dsbw80ZY

I would like to add that any software that can track points can be used for stabilisation. Biggest problem with software stabilisation is that you loose part of your frame. Personally i just use my 3d trackers solution as stabilisation  datasource because its by far the best solver i have.
I would recommend physical stabilisation. For consumers the best way to stabilize things is to add more weight. Something that is moderately rigid and hard to rotate is a good choice. Like a pole with weight on relatively far below your grip is good. The innertia of the object makes the shot more stable.

image 1: Three types of planar noise. In three dimensions you have 2 more rotations.
To better understand what to stabilize one has to look at how different noise affects the camera, this is illustrated in Image 1. There are 2 kinds of noise noise due to rotational vibration and noise due to translational vibration.
The rotational vibration is much much worse than translational vibration because it grows the further you are from the camera. As a result you want to make the weight counter rotation as much as possible. It turns out that moment of inertia grows with the distance from pivot. So you need to put the weight as far as possible. Bust still not so far that pivoting the camera becomes impossible.
This is also why gyro stabilization works as it turns out that you can store inertia in rotation so at big speeds even small masses have high moment of inertia. The gyro stabilization does nearly nothing to the translational noise.
The translational vibration is also something that the software stabilization is much better at removing. The same mass that's stabilizes the rotation will however also stabilize the translational noise. Mainly because you need more force to get the camera moving eliminating the highest frequencies of noise.
The second thing to do is to ensure that your connection to a noise source is isolated. Heavy rubber pieces are good. You want the inertia to be able to filter the noise, too rigid connection makes it impossible.
Physical stabilization also makes the results of software stabilization easier and much better in quality. Even very little stabilization helps a lot.
other resources:

14$ camera stabilizer

This article is relevant to the physical stabilisation: http://petapixel.com/2014/02/23/tip-stabilize-gopro-videos-using-face/

@AJHenderson arrived home where i can draw (hopefully nice) pictures and made some changes clarifying the subject. But yes heaviness has its drawbacks but the increased force needed is what does the stabilization.

@AJHenderson Yes but when skiing the pole is a much better target because of this. Camera mounts on the head do benefit form this tough. Yes theres 2 things to ensure. 1. make sure the helmet fits as snug as possible, then in the helmet mount put the camera on a stick with a weight on the bottom. Its slightly problematic but it does work. The human head is stabilized. But a pro is actually much better at stabilizing their head than a hobbyist. Even a small amount of additional stabilization is of much value.

@AJHenderson No dont put a gimbal its far too complicated tech, getting it right requires lot of fine tuning same goes with spring dampers. Rubber mounts allow for easy systems that do damp vibration and act as a simple high pass filter with the weight in the mass spring system. Remember you dont need to eliminate the noise just kill the most problematic part. Slow motion also helps by the way. If i were to go for a real damper i would get me some piezo engines n top of this. Whats good for a helicopter is good for you.

@joojaa - oh, ok, I gotcha now, so you are just talking about a small mount to dampen shocks (since the weight and shaft will cause the system to move counter to the motion but be buffered by the rubber which will force it back to position slower).  Got it.  Ok.  Thanks for explaining, that's what I was missing.  The link to the pipe based system was misleading to me and got my mind going in the wrong direction even though it is the same basic principal at work.

There is also Prodrenalin - PC based standalone tool for GoPro videos, includes stabilization and other features

A super simple solution for physical stabilization is the GoPro Floaty Backdoor.  It's a square piece of foam that goes on the back of the case.  You naturally hold your head stable so just bite into the foam and hold it in your teeth.  The best part is that it leaves both hands free.


text:
Smartphone app for JVC Adixxion
For JVC Adixxion, there is "ADIXXION sync." app, available for Android and iOS devices. The app's page states, that it is dedicated to JVC GC-XA2.
Will this app work also with GC-XA1 model? Are there any limitations, or features, that would not work with XA1?

You could try it and see, but I'd assume that if it is designed to work with the XA2, it is unlikely to work with a previous model.

"ADIXXION sync." does not work wit XA1.
However, another app, WiVideo works with XA1. It is available for Android and iOS. For PC, the camera comes with Windows version of WiVideo.

Glad you were able to figure it out.  Thanks for updating with the answer.


text:
Does music under CC-SA license require the same license for video?
If I use music, that is released under Creative Commons Share Alike license as background for my video, does that fact cause whole video to be derivative work, thus requiring it to be released also under CC-SA license?
Can soundtrack and video be treated as two separate works (if they are contained and released as single file)? Can different license be attached to image and sound?
It's obvious to me, that if soundtrack music is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA (Creative Commons, Attribution, Non-commercial, Share Alike), whole work cannot be used commercially, because that would break the Non-commercial clause of soundtrack. And then I would like to release video part with ND (No Derivatives) clause, so it could only be used unaltered.

From the by-sa legal terminology:

Section 1 – Definitions.
Adapted Material means material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights that is derived from or based upon the Licensed Material and in which the Licensed Material is translated, altered, arranged, transformed, or otherwise modified in a manner requiring permission under the Copyright and Similar Rights held by the Licensor. For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image.

In other words, using it as a sound track in a video makes the video a derivative work and requires share-alike unless that provision of the license is unenforceable in your local jurisdiction.  (ie, still see a lawyer, but you most likely must share alike the video.)


text:
In search of a Helmet-based steadicam solution for GoPro Hero 3
I recently tested my GoPro Hero 3 for the first time during a run in the park using a helmet mounting. It's not bad footage but it's very 'bouncy'. I've been looking at a few options to stabilize the camera. There are some interesting steadicam options out there and some very fine DIY videos on YouTube. However most helmet-based steadicam solutions involve mounting the camera on a long pole which includes a counter weight.
I'm going to be running the Tough Mudder (http://www.toughmudder.com) soon and I don't think sticking the rig of a long pole will be particularly convienent, least of all for the other runners whom I might injure.
Is there an alternative steadicam-style helmet mounting that I could buy or make?
Thank you.

Unfortunately, the physics of a Steadycam require a counterweight (sometimes provided by springs) and distance to minimize the impact of movement by using the inertia of the system.  The best you might be able to do in a small size would be a shock mount.  If you had a power source, you could presumably put a small gyroscope in to try and further stabilize the rotation, but that would become pretty (very) expensive really fast.
A shock mount is probably your best option within a semi-affordable range and will deal with the actual movements forward and backward, up and down, etc, but not rotation.  It does appear that people have made multi-axis gyro mounts that would work, but they've all been custom builds and the power and weight is still probably prohibitive to wearing it in a run.  It would also still have to be shock mounted to account for lateral movements as the gyro would only deal with rotation.

http://www.multi-rotor.co.uk/index.php?topic=213.0 <-- may link rot, but this has a do it yourself version that keeps the weight down pretty well.

Thank you very much for your advice. I'll have a look into the shock mount solution. It might do the trick. I had always wondered if a full steadicam solution for a helmet was even possible. Again, thank you for your suggestion. Kind regards

I would skip the wearing of rediculous hardwear on my head and just remove, or greatly lessen, the bounce using good image tracking software in post-production. Avid Media Composer handles this well. Adobe After Effects does it too. There a number of cheaper programs (including one offered by GoPro, I think) that may, or may not, do this well. Here's one: http://www.guthspot.se/video/deshaker.htm
Experiment!

This works to an extent, but you can't overcome the loss of sharpness you get from motion blur when there is a bunch of motion in the video.  It still normally looks ok after stabilization, but it isn't as good as avoiding the issue in the first place (though it is better than nothing when physical stabilization is prohibitively expensive or implausible.

All true. But a little motion-blur can be an asset when your subject is in motion! We even get it with our naked eyes when we go out for a run, so it's art's way of imitating life.

yes, but that's motion blur that moves in the direction of the subject.  Motion blur moving in the wrong and rapidly changing directions when the subject doesn't appear to be moving is very disconcerting.

How would a partial sphere (mounted to a tripod and camera) react if contained in another sphere (3/4 round with a thin rubber seal) and floated on a pool of oil? Would that produce a steady picture during motion?

If you could make it truly frictionless then yes, this kind of a gimbal system would work to allow free rotation and help with rotational stability.  Unfortunately, we do have friction, so we need either gyroscopes or extra weight to help counteract the force of friction on the system.  Additionally, that won't deal with actual physical changes in position, just rotation.

You could get creative and use some PVC pipe or metal PVC ties to attach something like this http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1095844-REG/feiyu_fegmg3_ultra_3_axis_handheld_gimbal.html. It won't really help up/down movement that much, but it will greatly help your roll, pitch, and yaw.
Honestly its the best solution that will also have other applications when you don't want it on your helmet, and just want to get some nice gopro shots.


text:
Mount a Camcorder on my Hat?
Aside from just gluing (or velcroing) the camcorder onto a baseball hat beak, is there something better? Would this type of thing work?
http://www.amazon.com/Calumet-Quick-release-Video-Head-Adapter/dp/B003LRWB3S/ref=sr_1_102?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1347397880&sr=1-102
or is it irrelevant. If your answer is "get an Go Pro" or whatever, I still need to know how to mount it.
Thanks!

The key thing to remember about mounting any camera is stability. What makes Go Pro so attractive to many cinematographers are the many mounts available for it that fit the camera snugly on a helmet, car, surf board, or what have you. There will always be some motion when attaching a camera to say a helmet, but with the Go Pro helmet mount, you have minimized any residual motion. The only motion that is left is that of the helmet moving.
Trying to mount a camera to a baseball hat and expecting the stability of a helmet mount Go Pro or Contour camera is not easy or trivial.
First of all a baseball cap is not rigid like a helmet, there is flex built into the cap even in the beak. Adding an adapter may make things worse. You will have to experiment. Consider ways to make the cap as rigid as a helmet and ways to attach the camera so it moves with the cap without any swaying or extra movement.
For every design you think will work you will need to make test shots that cover the conditions of the actual production.
I think this can be done. But without your camera or your cap in my hands I would not venture a guess on how you go about it. This is truly hands on experimental kludge-0-matic work.

Thanks for this, great answer and +1. Just FYI if it makes a difference, the initial intention is to create videos of iPad demos and so forth. While it's hardly essential to get the thing on my head, the advantage is that I can vary the subject and not have to think about it. Anyway, the point is that some OIS should be enough, I think, for my use case.

You're very welcome, hope this works out for you.

Yep, just did some initial tests with velcro: I'm going to need to get my friends who make costumes and stuff like that to help out. I should've paid attention in Arts and Crafts in elementary school!

I've got a GoPro and filzilla is right, stability can be an issue.  There is the head strap mount that will fit on your head, or helmet, or even hat, and it works well.  The chest mount works a bit better, more stable and it doesn't move around with your head (much easier to watch).  I'm sure you could get it to work decently with the chest mount.  You may find that, in this case, using it on a tripod or Gorillapod would be better for stability.
I still like the GoPro for the flexibility it gives, despite the stability issues, it's just good to have it in the bag.


text:
How to check video, AB test, on different screens: balancing colors, etc
Is there a standard way of checking a render as it would be seen on different screens (iPads, monitors, tvs, whatever) for colors etc..
Maybe AB/Testing software? (Wanted to add the tag ab-testing, but my rep isn't high enough yet)
As a reference I have a song & corresponding music video (see link below).
I'm wondering if I affected (washed out) the colors too much. I'd like to know the differences on different screens. How can you effectively check on different screens (on your own pc). Reference:

Thanks,
Yves

Yves - when making your own videos you can do whatever you want with them. Posting here to ask our opinion on your video is a bit odd and feels off topic. If your question is How can I check my video on different screens? then that may be on topic, but doesn't need the video included in the question.

Thanks for your suggestion? I thought I'd provide an example. My apologies if that felt differently. I do however want to know "How can I check my video on different screens?" / "How can I do AB testing on my own screen".. Is there a tool? I'll try to edit the post.
I edited the post now - I hope this is a better format of posting in the AVP stackexchange site. Thanks.

Hi Yves - that works much better. The focus is now on your question - the previous one just felt a bit like spam. I see that wasn't intended now, so have upvoted.

No prob, thanks for pointing it out. I should've put more attention to formulating this question. On stackofverflow this is easier, but with creative questions - it's sometimes a bit more difficult. Anyway, let's hope some answers come on. Thx again :)!

The standard way to deal with this is to use color calibration.  Unfortunately, color accuracy on consumer devices tends to be all over the charts.  There is no way to guarantee that the color will be similar, even on multiple of the same model of device, or even on the same exact device over time.
Thus, the best practice is to setup a color calibrated environment that you can verify the content looks correct in.  You can then run your encodings for different profiles and compare them in an environment where you know the differences will show up clearly.  The results on end user devices may vary based on how good their screens actually are, but building to a standard high quality, calibrated display should produce the best overall outcome across devices.
If you want to get really advanced, you can also generate or obtain ICC profiles of the average for the device screen you want to display the video on.  This profile can then be applied to the video on a calibrated display to alter the colors to be similar to that produced by the device.  It still won't take in to account pixel density though.  If you want to know exactly what it will look like on a display, there is no substitute for actually sending it to that display since pixel layout and density, as well as the surface type and size, make a gigantic difference in the way the video looks.
Using the device itself is also helpful for ensuring that the video can decode and play smoothly within the constraints of the device.

Unlike print graphics there is no way of really controlling the colour in video as seen by the final user, unless you know the profiles of all the devices it will be played on. The best you can do is that your material is properly exposed and balanced to give it the best chance out there in the cruel world.
Using scopes is the objective way to test your material. Waveform monitors, histograms and vector scopes give you information about levels, colour and balance that is independent of the playback device, but you've got to know how to read them.
Here's a good vectorscopes 101 tutorial from Glenn Chann and a How to for Premiere (but can be extrapolated for any software)


text:
Making Premiere Pro Project Codecs Cross-Platform Compatible (Windows & Mac)
I work on a Mac and I need to send a Premiere Pro CS6 project file to someone who works on Windows. He has QuickTime Pro 7 installed.
The project contains the following types of clip assets:

Apple Animation (with alpha transparency) - .mov
H.264 - .mov
H.264 MPEG - .mp4

All sequences in the project have the following settings:

When he tries to open the project in Windows, he gets the following error:

This project contained a sequence that could not be opened. No sequence preview preset file or codec could be associated with this sequence type.

Could someone help me understand this error, and perhaps help in resolving this issue? Is it caused by missing codecs for the actual assets (I suspect the Apple Animation file) or simply by some settings in my project?

You could troubleshoot by removing that file and sending a test version. That said, Animation files work fine on my Windows machine. One thing that sticks out is the quicktime (Desktop) preview file format. Maybe change that to all I-Frame MPEG?

I don't have that format. All I have is these... http://i.imgur.com/MpNIMf2.png

It has nothing to do with a codec or Apple (I assume he/she has QT installed on the PC anyway).
Here's what's going on: the PC version of Premiere is cracked and/or was not fully installed/updated. As such it is indeed missing the "Sequence Presets" that you have on your Mac. Hence the translation problem.
By "Sequence Preset" I mean the DSLR, RED, etc presets you see when you decide to "Create a new sequence". A cracked and/or poorly installed copy of Premiere will have all the important presets missing.
I recommend getting your hands of a legit copy of the program or running a thorough update of the program (it should solve your issue then, if the PC version is legal). Et oui!
The "Sequence Presets" look like this on Premiere CC (and are very similar on CS6 and previous versions):


text:
Best format for audio track with a single/few images
What would be the best (e.g. most compact) format for a "video" that is actually an audio track with a single static image the whole time? (example)
And if it was not one static image, but a slow slideshow (maybe 1 image every couple of minutes)?
EDIT
One more case: What if it is a short clip (1-2 seconds), that itself is full quality (I think that means 25 FPS, right?), but is played in a continuous loop throughout the entire audio?

I didn't realize that when I post a link to youtube, it will embed the video. How do I make it just a regular link?

Figured out how to link to youtube.

The best compression would come from a variable frame rate format.  Variable Frame Rate formats are designed to adjust their frame rate based on the level of activity in the video.  For something with a very low effective framerate, this would allow it to store the image far fewer times and simply describe how long the image should stay up for.  It would then use more frames when necessary for any transitions.
The one downside to variable framerate formats is that there aren't a whole lot of well supported ones and even fewer good encoders to support working with them, but it is what would give the best results.
Handbrake appears to support VFR output.

Thank you. I see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_container_formats that MP4 and OGG both support VFR. Is this automatic, or does it have to be configured, or is it dependant on the authoring software, or what? I have never authored a video, and am kind of clueless. I am fine with it not being well supported. I only need this to play on a few controlled computers, where I can install whatever player is needed.

@baruch - it would probably be automatic, but it would depend on the encoding software you used.  I'm not familiar with any particular encoders for doing this.  I've mostly seen it coming from low power cellphone cameras that need to use simpler compression, but it also happens to be useful for what you are trying to do.

Most video codecs lets you control the interval of what's called keyframes (or intra frames). Those are snapshots of the video, of which the codec will then try to interpolate lost data between. If you only need the image to change every x seconds, and you are OK with 1 second distortion/tween/morph/artifacts then simply set the keyframes interval to 1.
I'm not an expert (never tried what you want to do) but I think H.264/MPEG-4 would be a good match. Hope this helps!

If you have access to the player (if this is for an app you're making, or a website etc), you could try to mimic this behavior using just an image viewer for your platform and an audio player.

Keyframe interval is generally not the number of seconds between frames, but rather the number of frames.  If you put a keyframe interval of 1, then the video is going to be all keyframes.  This is the opposite of what they are looking for.


text:
Portable camera recommendation for interviews
I'm looking for a decent quality video camera that I can travel around with and conduct short interviews. I also need to be able to use a lavalier microphone with it.
Someone recommended a GoPro but that seems better suited to lots of action.
Edit (more info):
Budget: $1,000 or less.
Quality: As far as quality, the videos will be going up on a website. Currently are videos are SD so I don't need 1080p or anything, just a good clear picture. Audio quality is more important.
Simplicity is very important. I'm actually the one that will be editing the video, and the person that will be filming is not a technical person. They will not know much about filming techniques, and certainly won't want to be messing with different lenses and stuff like that.

what is your budget? what is your needed level of portability?  Do you prefer portability or quality?  How much value do you put on increases in quality?  As it currently stands anything more than a very general recommendation is pretty much impossible.

Often, the best option, particularly for interviews, is a DSLR.  The particulars of your needs may change that or harden in on a specific level of DSLR, however in general they key thing for interviews is to be able to have a sharply focused subject with a nice blur to the background.
DSLR cameras shooting HD video with a fast lens (f/2.8 or faster preferably) can achieve very nice background blurs and make great looking video.  Most also have a line input that you can run a mic into, though use of the best quality mics will often require using an external device first to deal with the mic and convert it to the type of signal the camera wants.
Personally, I shoot with a Canon 5D Mark iii and use a Zoom h4n for audio.  I record the audio separately and sync in post production, but a line out from the Zoom can also be fed in to the camera directly.  You don't need something as advanced as the 5D Mark iii, but it hopefully gives you an idea of how a setup can work.  You could substitute any DSLR with a mic or line input for the 5D Mark iii.
If portability is super key however, it might be best to go with an actual camcorder.  They can get a little bit smaller than a full fledged DSLR though the smaller the camera, the harder it is to get the background blur that you often see in interviews.


text:
optimizing / compressing video for web with Quicktime
I have a ~70mb (3 minutes long) m4v video that I need to get to a much more reasonable file size for playing on a site that will primarily be accessed via iPad.
I don't know if it matters, but the video will need to play automatically upon page load.
I've read through a few tutorials for doing this with Quicktime, however I think I'm missing something..
From the Export pop-up menu, there should seemingly be an option to choose "Movie to QuickTime Movie." I have only 480p and iPod/iPhone/iPad options(which I believe would result in a viewing frame that is too small).
How can I proceed with web-optimizing this file in Quicktime? (Or is there a better solution? I tried Sorenson Squeeze, but that had a large watermark..)

You need Quicktime 7 pro to get the full export options. Quicktime as it currently stands is a gutted shell of its former self. Can I suggest you use mpeg streamclip. Free, very widely used (by many professionals too) and a great tool for transcoding.
That is unless you're handy with the command line, in which case you want ffmpeg.

To add on to AJ's answer, Vimeo has a dedicated page on their preferred compression settings; Youtube has the same.
Check these out for some more specific information on which bitrate/codec to choose!

The simplest way is probably to use the "Export For Web" option in QuickTime.  It may only be available in Pro though.
If you want a bit more flexibility, the full Export dialog will allow you to choose an H.264 stream of your choosing for quality and data rate.  If you use the full Export, you'll want to make sure to choose to optimize for streaming when you choose a data rate.  This should organize the file so that it can start playing prior to fully downloading.
As far as choosing a data rate, your best bet is to choose based on how much you think the device/viewer's connection/web server can handle.  If you get too many artifacts, try decreasing the resolution until you get artifact free video.


text:
Which member of the crew is responsible to fill in the continuity sheet?
On a micro-budget production, considering the lack of a large crew with highly specialized jobs/titles, which of a maximum of three potential crew members would be responsible for doing the continuity sheet?  Authoritative references would be wonderful.


text:
Show create date on video
How could I display the create date on videos using a video editing program, such like Adobe Premiere or After effects? Is it possible? I wan't do it automatically!
I have a bunch of videos and want to create a one large video with all the clips AND display the create date of each video OVER the clips.
I found this program, but it costs 80$ and is no option for me: http://dvmp.co.uk/

You can just add titles with the date. Or are you looking for a way to do it automatically?

You could use shell scripting to create a text file with the date, and then use ffmpeg to create a text overlay.

Yes, I want it do full automatically! I think it could be possible with some scripts, even maybe in After Effects? I would prefer to do this in one GUI based programm, not a command tool like ffmpeg.

One possible solution is to batch rename all your video files to match the creation date. There are a lot of free applications that can batch rename files for you. If you don't want to change the original file names of your clips, you should first make a copy of the files.
Every file name will need to be different, if you have a more than one clip recorded on the same day you will need to add a incrementing number of some other value to avoid duplicates.
Here I have used Advanced Renamer to rename the files based on the meta data:

Import your footage into Premiere, arrange the clips how you like and add the 'Clip Name' effect from the Effects panel to one of your clips. An overlay on the video will display the file name.
If you want to hide the incrementing number and file extension at the end of the file name, you can either position the text far enough right that it is out of frame or use a rectangular mask to hide it.
Once you have adjusted the text in the way you like, copy the clip, select all the other clips in your sequence and use 'Paste Attributes' under the right-click menu to add the effect.

Wow, thanks! I guess this is THE solution for me. I already thought about renaming files based on the meta data. But the key was in adding "Clip name" effect to the clips.
Thank you! I hope this effect is available in Adobe Premiere CS6.

Rather than render out one large video file, you can use your existing video files after a batch rename as Ambo100 mentioned previously with Advanced Renamer. A title rendering process, such as with Adobe Premiere or other editing platform, would also take time to render, especially if it's a large archive of clips.  The model below keeps them intact, and the original filename can be prefixed with your create date, which means you'd be able to keep the original filename included as a suffix.
VLC can display the filename being played, which means you'd only need to merely save the playlist of your chosen video files versus making one video large file of all your videos.  If a user decides to stop the video once the desired video is found, VLC will also stop on that video listed in the playlist. A right-click will allow you to go to the file directly. I put nine-9s in my time for showing the video title, which equates to a video length of ~278-hours.

Thank you. In my case I have to edit the clips anyway, so the solution with "clip name" effect is the best way.
And I have to play this video on TV where I don't have apps/programms like VLC :)


text:
OBS Studio: desktop audio falls out of sync
I have an interesting problem:
When I stream to Twitch (or record), my desktop audio goes out of sync with the video over time. The microphone is perfectly synced the whole time.
Both OBS Studio and "playback device->Speakers" have 44.1kHz.
I have device timestamps on, started with it off, changed it because of the desync.

So with everything I've tried I'm not sure if I messed anything up, but....
Turning off "Use device timestamps" in the properties of "desktop audio" fixed the problem.

The "Use device timestamps" doesn't show in the latest OBS Studio version, is it there anywhere else?

Did you look everywhere ? there's like 3 different menus for audio properties. I don't even remember how to get there...

Yes, I did search everywhere, I have posted the same question right now here:
https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/audio-gets-out-of-sync.70179/#post-393050

Don't know if this will still be useful but the "Use Device Timestamps" checkbox is still in the latest version. Click the cog next to Desktop Audio in your Audio Mixer. It's in there. Having same issue and hoping this helps, thank you!


text:
How to fix white balance gone bad?
I've done about 1h of footage during a SCUBA dive with a Gopro Hero 2 (underwater housing, no filter), but the auto white balance algorithm messed up the colors and everything has a very strong green tint to it.
I understand that some light wavelengths get weaker with depth, hence the green tint, therefore I'd like to know how to fix this in post-production.
I have tried Adobe Premiere Elements 11, with the "smart fix" feature, and in some of the footage it seems to work fine. However, since the footage is quite dynamic, the algorithm gets confused and there's lots of flicker, as it constantly changes color corrections.
I have tried alternative programs that let me pick a "white" reference to correct the white balance of the video, but nothing on these clips is good enough to use to that effect.
Is there a way to determine the optimal color corrections for these clips, for example by picking them from a frame in the flickery "smart fixed" video that Premiere Elements outputs?
Any free applications that could help me here?
Samples below:

http://goo.gl/CzQyZD
http://goo.gl/CYlNYQ

EDIT: I've had some minor success with Adobe Premiere Elements 12 "auto color" mode, so it is possible to get something out of this footage. However, it flickers a lot since the color correction changes as the scene changes, even in the same clip. An example of 2 nearly-contiguous frames can be found in the comment below.
How can I force PE12 to use the same color correction across the entire clip, or at least figure out the proper color corrections from a given frame?

Stills from auto-colored clip: http://goo.gl/9YyiQM (too green); http://goo.gl/hN7GhK (reddish, but acceptable).

I had a look at it in After Effects (at first I thought that there wasn't any information at all on the red and blue channels, but there is). A few minutes' worth of mucking around with colour correction tells me that you're never going to get that to look normal. There is so little information in the red and blue channels that any attempt to balance the levels just brings up a ton of noise.
A workaround might be to colorize it to a reasonable colour, or go black and white.

Did you get any acceptable (if noisy) results? I don't mind if it doesn't look perfect, could you share some RGB/hue/tint/saturation/etc. corrections for me to try?

This is not the auto white balance screwing up.  This is the way that SCUBA footage looks without artificial light.  Even shooting with my SeaLife DC1400 which has specialized underwater white balance settings, you get a strong color cast, particularly in green water.
Water doesn't block frequencies of light evenly and as depth increases, much of the red light is lost from the spectrum.  Unless you have an artificial light to put red back in to the color, there is no signal there to be had.  The color cast comes from the color of the light exceeding the sensitivity of the sensor to be able to adjust for the imbalance between the red, green and blue light.
Update: Ok, I just looked at your footage and it looks like there may have been a technical glitch with it.  That is extremely green, even for underwater footage.  That almost looks more like a malfunction, but there still isn't enough information there to correct.  It looks like red and even blue data is almost completely absent from the recording.  I guess maybe my SeaLife DC1400 does a better job than I thought with color if there wasn't a technical problem there.
As far as ways to try and salvage it, you could go black and white with it or could try reducing the amount of green in it using a hue adjustment, but it still is only going to look "less bad" not "good".  Wish I had better news for you, but it kind of goes with the territory of shooting underwater at any kind of depth at all without a light, particularly in colder green waters.

Additional details: I've shot in the same conditions with a Canon IXUS 85IS and the results are much better, the tint in that case is blue but it's nowhere as saturated, and looks much closer to eye perception. This was an ocean dive, btw, so the water was "blue" with some green particles floating around. The gopro did well in the first 9m, then it went sour.

Yeah, was going to say, I have vibrant colors with my Sealife down to about 30 feet or so and then it gets very blue tinted.  It really does look rather extremely green though, even for underwater footage.  I kind of wonder if the temperature may have made it start bugging out or something.  Did it look ok again at the end when you were surfacing or did it stay that green?

The end of dive footage had normal colors, from ~5m up everything was fine.

@AndréFernandes - hmm, odd.  Does make me appreciate my DC1400 a bit more.


text:
Simple way to downscale from 1080p@60 to 1080i@60
I have a Canon LEGRIA HF R56 which only outputs 1080p@60 from its HDMI port. Are there any methods to downscale this to 1080p@30 or lower?
Googling this doesn't seem to throw up light. I guess I could use a HDMI capture device to downscale the signal, but then that would defeat the object of downscaling it, as I could just use that device to perform my capture.
I am doing this because my capture device, an Intensity Shuttle, has a maximum input rate of 1080p@30.
EDIT:
From @ProfessorSparkles answer below, the HDMI output could be 1080p@50. I realize that my TV simply says 1080p as the input signal, rather than the framerate.

What camera do you have and why are you trying trying to go from 60 FPS to 30 FPS?

@ScottJamesWalter I have updated my question.

What happens when you just attempt to record to your Intensity Shuttle? Does it down-convert the frame rate automatically? Going from 60 to 30 is literally just leaving out every other frame. Can the recorder do this?

Unfortunately the Black Magic capturing devices are very picky when it comes to the video input, it has to exactly match the recording setting.

@professorsparkles Indeed, this is why I need to downscale the output from my video camera

@ScottJamesWalter The shuttle flat out doesn't accept 1080p@60, this is why I need to downscale

Unrelated to your question but out of personal interest, does the camera turn on automatically when you put in the battery? E.g. have no battery attached and it turns on as soon as it gets power from a battery.

@ProfessorSparkles You need to press the power button and then open the shutter manually.

@ScottJamesWalter Actually 60i is not just twice the frame rate of 30p, the 60 in 60i refers to fields, not frames. To put it another way, 60i is twice the frame rate of 30p half the vertical resolution.

Speaking to the Canon technical team, it seems that at the time of this writing, there is no way on this particular model of camera to change the resolution of the HDMI output.

According to the specs on the Canon site your camera can record in 50i/p and 25p 1920x1080. Are you absolutely sure you can only get 60fps on the HDMI? Because that sounds rather weird that you get more FPS on the HDMI than the camera can actually record.
If you set the recording option to 25FPS normally on canon cameras the FPS should also apply to the HDMI output.

Something also to look for in the settings in European/United states settings. If you can toggle that, that may open more options for frame rates.

@ScottJamesWalter You mean the settings are different for different parts of the world?

@rhughes Yeah, broadcast standards are different for different parts of the world. Check out the differences between NTSC and PAL. Different frame rates, different resolution, etc.

The resolution won't change on an HD camcorder but the fps could definitely be region specific. Usually you can set NTSC/PAL sometimes you have to select a region with either PAL or NTSC. Which usually gives you the option for 60/30 and 50/25 FPS.


text:
Youtube convert my video on bad quality
I have some problem with video and its representation on youtube. When I upload video which was encoded with MPEG4 or H.264 codec, I get bad quality video after youtube processing.
What is this video. And what is my task.
I get source video from Iphone, Ipad, Ipod. Format of this video is - mp4. Then, I decode this video on frames with Java Library - Xuggler. This library is a wrapper of ffmpeg. After some filters on frames, I encode this frames on final video. I use codec MPEG-4 and try H.264, final format - mp4. And this final video is fine. It has the same quality as source video, when I play this video on Windows Media Player. But, when I upload video on youtube, after processing I get video with bad quality.
This is characteristics of source video, after uploading on youtube it doesn't lose quality:

And this is characteristics of final video. It loses quality after youtube processing:

Is the question just, "Why does my video lose quality when I upload to YouTube?" If so, it's because YouTube isn't in the business of providing high quality video - it provides vast amounts of streaming video, so you should expect a lot of compression, and probably transcoding.

I'm going to repost a section of my answer from this question, as it seems generally relevant:

YouTube (as well as Vimeo, and practically every other video website
  nowadays) works using the H.264 codec. Here are YouTube's
  instructions for how they'd like videos to be encoded for upload.
The TL;DR version of that page:

Container: .mp4
Audio Codec: AAC-LC
Video Codec: H.264

When you upload the incorrect codec - like AVC-HD you are using above, YouTube has to re-encode your video, resulting in the loss of quality and contrast you have been experiencing.

From my experience, they re-encode always.

This is just a result of the compression that Youtube chooses to apply.  Your initial data rate for the video (3.5 megabits for an SD video) is exceptionally high and not really designed for streaming.  Youtube probably sees that it is only an SD stream and then drops the bit-rate accordingly.
It may not be possible to get better quality since Youtube's system decides what compression settings to apply for their transcode, however you could try submitting videos which match with Youtube's suggested transcode settings and that might help.

It's 2018 now and here's what I do, in case anyone else is wondering about this.
Suppose I've created a video as a wmv or whatever (e.g. via PowerPoint).  I use an online conversion tool to convert to mp4.
This gives great results when uploading to youtube.

This is because youtube uses its own compression. When you upload, that videos is a compressed mp4 or wmv ,quicktime or something. Youtube's process compress it much more. You lose details in the corners of your movie. You lose many data when a frame makes a decent change comparing to the previous frame. And even lose quality on very dark regions and very bright regions. Youtube cannot handle contrast rate wich is bigger then the average. I tried to upload many different ways and didn't have any luck.

Welcome to the Video Production Stack Exchange.  Please be aware that answers aren't the right place for venting about your frustration with a product in unproductive ways.  I think you had some worthwhile things to say, so I edited your answer to remove the parts that weren't relevant to the question at hand and were excessive.


text:
replace a clip with a different size clip but keep the scale in Premiere CC
I have edited a 640 x 360 clip into a sequence in Premiere CC. The sequence includes changes to the scale for different shots. Now I want to replace the 640 x 360 clip with a 1920 x 1080 version of the same clip. When I do that, the apparent scale increases by a factor of 3; a shot in the sequence that should have a scale of 100% now APPEARS to be at 300%.

I'm sure it's because the new clip is so much bigger.  But is there a workaround that lets me keep the APPARENT zoom level of the original, tiny clip?  That is, can I make this new clip LOOK like its scale is 100% when the original sequence had the scale set to 100%? Can they look the same?
BTW, I know I can set the scale of each shot manually in the timeline.  But I may have 50 or more edits so I'm looking for a global solution.  I was hoping there was like a "master scale" setting for clips in the media browser, but I didn't find one.

If that's an option, that might be the perfect solution! You should add this as an Answer. If it works out, I'll give you a up-vote (and possibly mark it as The Answer, though I want to try AJ Henderson's answer below too).

After the fact, no I don't.  If you know before the fact in the future though, you can put the source on a timeline by itself and apply the scale there and make all the clips point at that timeline.  This is the same technique I use in After Effects whenever I am working with animating a base layer that I know I am going to need to change.  That way I can make a simple change to the source clip and not have it impact the overall sequence.

Thanks AJ! I'll experiment with this tomorrow night when I have free time.

I did some experimenting and it looks like this might be a winner. At the moment the exported video only has 640x360 resolution even though I'm using the 1920x1080 clip. I'm modifying my workflow to avoid that problem: the empty sequence needs to be 1920x1080, and when I put in the raw footage that's 640x360 I'll just increase its scale to 300%. Later, I can replace that tiny file with the big 1920x1080 file and the whole sequence will stay 1920x1080. If this works I'll come here and mark your answer as The Answer.

There are several more steps in my workflow, but your suggestion formed the foundation of the solution so I marked it as The Answer.

Feel free to edit the answer if you want to include whatever was missing.

There's nothing missing conceptually. I just made a big, elaborate workflow because I've hired an editor and I want it to be foolproof for him. The whole reason I'm doing this is so I can email him tiny files instead of 2 GB files.  He'll edit them, return the Premiere file to me, and I'll replace the tiny files in it with the 1920x1080 source files. That way I benefit from his editing but I still get HD quality output (and I can send the initial raw footage to him quickly instead of waiting for it overnight to upload).

Premiere CC lets you adjust the dimensions of the sequence.  It will keep the same scale changes (zoom in & out) in the timeline.  So increase the dimensions of the sequence to accommodate the larger clip, then replace the small clip with the large clip.
This isn't a perfect solution. For example, titles will appear very small, and will not be in the right positions, relative to the new larger clip. I'm pretty sure that any position changes of the clip will be reduced as well, since they're in pixels rather than percentages of the width/height of the sequence.

I am currently doing this with an entire project. You'll need to go into each individual nest or sequence, resize the sequence, and then replace the clips.


text:
big Premiere project with many clips - is it better to storyboard on paper first?
I've got a lot of footage logged from about 40 hours worth. I'm considering my next step with the aim towards getting a rough cut of the footage I've marked as being good and worthwhile of being in the film.
At this stage I've got a lot of clips that need organising and then seeing as there is limited horizontal space on the time line, whats the best way to go about lining up the clips. For example if I decide to change the sequence of clips, how do I get all the clips after it to take up the gap? I'm very new to editing.
Would it be a better idea to storyboard out as much as possible first on pen and paper before getting into Premiere in a big way.
My day job is already quite screen based, so I'm looking to minimise my time spent thinking AND at the computer.

Storyboard first, then shoot, then edit.  A storyboard is a tool for organizing your thoughts before you even pick up a camera.  It's like a script, and usually follows from a script, but gives you a better idea of where to place and move the camera.  This is called "shot blocking".
The shotgun method of gathering footage with the hope of being able to string it together into a coherent story is a mistake made by many beginners.  There's nothing wrong with gathering lots of footage.  In cases like documentary work, it's often necessary.  But even when you shoot this way, you need to have an idea of what you're looking for, and how it's going to fit within your story before you sit down to edit.
As for the 40 hours of footage you already have, I'd say no, don't worry about drawing it out on paper now.  I guess you could use a whiteboard if that helps you organize your thoughts, but really you've got what you've got, and you're just going to be duplicating your effort when you sit down at premiere.
It's difficult for a one man operation to compartmentalize the processes to make good video, but you should look to the film industry for guidance.  After all, they have billions of man-hours of experience.  They've got it whittled down to a science.  Directors, cinematographers, gaffers, grips, editors, colorists, producers, writers, and everyone else you see in the credits all have their own job for very good reasons.  When you're trying to do it all yourself, it's best to wear one hat at a time.

Thats good advice. Unfortunately in my case I was shooting the footage and sending it to a film company. The film they made only used a fraction of the footage mainly about an earlier event in the journey, concerning my friend's love life. There is an idea but its open ended. Sounds vague, BUT I do for certain have some very nice bits of footage and entertaining segments from travels by bike in Iran, Pakistan, India and Nepal.


text:
link multiple audio tracks to one video track in Premiere CC
I shoot TMZ-type webisodes, where multiple people are throwing jokes around a news room.  I'm considering buying 4 lavaliere mics for my 4 performers so I can isolate their audio during editing.
I want to keep the 4 audio tracks synched with the video track as I cut and rearrange the footage. Using Premiere CC, how would I link the multiple audio tracks to the single video track?

You can link multiple clips as you would link two clips. First, put all the audio and video tracks you want in your timeline and arrange them using the timecodes, manual adjustments or however you prefer to align the individual recordings (I'm assuming you have a method for that, since you removed that part of the question in the last edit). Then select all clips that you want to link, right-click on one of them and select "link" (if some of them are already linked, you will only see an "unlink" option, in that case unlink them, select them again and then link them alltogether). You could also choose to group them, which yields a slightly different effect.
Check the Premiere Pro Support Page for more information on linking clips, as well as this page on linking and grouping clips in Premiere Elements (it's works quite similar in Premiere Pro).
One more tip: In the program preferences under "Generel", you have the option "Display out of sync indicators for unlinked clips", which will show you when clips you linked at some point are out of sync even if you unlinked them later on. This might be helpful for an editing process with several independent audio clips.

I thought I tried linking multiple audio tracks this morning and it failed. I'll have to try that again! Thanks for the answer. I'll mark your answer as The Accepted Answer once I test this.

Let me know if it worked! At least it did when  I tried it ...

It worked just fine! I'm not sure what went wrong with my first test, which it appeared to fail. Thanks for your answer!

Well I'm glad it worked! :)


text:
Premiere CC uses vertical aspect ratio in multi-camera shot
I have 2 clips. One (from an iPhone) was accidentally shot with a vertical aspect ratio. I want to make a multi-camera sequence from them. Adobe Premiere CC is giving the multicam sequence a vertical aspect ratio (1080 width X 1920 height) instead of landscape.  If I rotate the vertical clip in the timeline so it's horizontal, the sequence is still vertical and the left and right edges of the clip get cut off. I tried a few other things with no luck. (Can't remember where I found them.)
Any ideas how to rotate the multi-cam sequence and that clip?

I have to thank @ProfessorSparkles for getting me to this solution, which doesn't require saving and reimporting, or making a duplicate of the source footage.  Here are the steps:

1) I started with the 2 clips I'm using in the same bin.
2) Drag the landscape-oriented clip to the timeline.  That creates a sequence with landscape orientation in the bin.
3) Select the clip in the timeline and delete it.  (The sequence is still in the bin.)
4) Select both of the clips within the bin.
5) Right-click and select "Create multi-camera source sequence...."
6) In that dialog box, click "OK".  Premiere will synch up the 2 clips.
7) When I first did this, it asked me a question before creating the sequence.  It was something like, "The settings on this sequence don't match the existing sequence.  Do you want to keep the source sequence settings?"  CLICK NO.  That will make your new sequence match the settings (landscape orientation) of the existing sequence!
8) You can then select the blank sequence you created a minute ago and "Clear" (delete) it.
9) Drag the new sequence to the timeline.
10) Hold down Ctrl or Cmd and double-click on the new sequence in the timeline.  A new sequence will be created that shows each clip separately.
11) In that new sequence, select the clip with portrait orientation.
12) Go over to "Effects Controls".  In "Motion", rotate the clip either 90 degrees or 270 degrees.

What a relief it was to figure that out!!!

You will have to rotate and transcode these videos before making your multi cam sequence.
You can either do that by making a 1920x1080 standard sequence, inserting the video there and rotating it by -90° and export it, then re-import the newly encoded video.
If for some reason Premiere doesn't play along or you happen to do this automated because you have hundreds of video files like that (not the case here but maybe in the future). You can also use FFmpeg to rotate the video.
ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -vcodec mjpeg -vf "transpose=2" output.avi

Transcoding to mjpeg here to not loose that much quality. You can also use a lossless codec like JPEG2000 by using -vcodec j2k
Transpose takes these options:
0 = 90° CounterCLockwise and Vertical Flip
1 = 90° Clockwise
2 = 90° CounterClockwise
3 = 90° Clockwise and Vertical Flip

I was hoping there was a more elegant solution than "fix it, save, and reimport".  Seems like Premiere should be smarter than that.

I believe this should only require setting up a landscape sequence for the vertical clip and rotating it in to place.  I believe you can then use the sequence rather than the original clip as the multi-cam source in your final sequence.  I haven't specifically tried it this way before, but I often use nested sequences for this general type of problem.

I think I tried that and it didn't work; even though I was using the sequence instead of the original clip, it reverted to portrait orientation. (But I'm at my work computer right now so I can't double-check that that's what happened.)

@BrettFromLA - that would be very odd since the sequence orientation should be what matters at that point, but I also don't have it in front of me to try.

If that does work, it would be a quick solution.


text:
How to concatenate two mxf files with ffmpeg, preserving both audio channels?
I have mxf files which went over the 2G limit, so were split up in the camera to produce two mxf files.  They have two audio streams, one from each mic, like this:
Duration: 00:10:01.60, start: 0.000000, bitrate: 27165 kb/s
Stream #0:0: Video: mpeg2video (Main), yuv420p(tv, bt709), 1440x1080 [SAR 4:3 DAR 16:9], max. 25000 kb/s, 29.97 fps, 29.97 tbr, 29.97 tbn, 59.94 tbc
Stream #0:1: Audio: pcm_s16le, 48000 Hz, 1 channels, s16, 768 kb/s
Stream #0:2: Audio: pcm_s16le, 48000 Hz, 1 channels, s16, 768 kb/s

I know how to concatenate them with ffmpeg:
ffmpeg -i "concat:a01.mxf|b02.mxf" -y -c copy result.mxf

But, this combines the audio streams and produces a file with just one, merged stream.
I also know how to split out the individual audio streams into individual files:
ffmpeg -i a01.mxf -map 0:1 -vn one.aiff
ffmpeg -i a01.mxf -map 0:2 -vn two.aiff

Grabs the streams and correctly transfers them across untouched.
My question is, how to do this for the split up mxfs?  I could rip their sound, then join the video, then put the sound back in, but it seems really unnecessary, and there should be a way to use a big -map command to do all of this.

Apparently by default ffmpeg only copies one stream of each type.  To tell it to copy all streams, you need -map 0
So, this does it:
ffmpeg -i "concat:a01.mxf|b02.mxf" -y -map 0 -c copy result.mxf


text:
How do you adjust the 'margins' in the Premiere Pro program window?
How do you adjust the 'margins' in the Premiere Pro program window?
For example

there's clearly some kind of smaller black square within the black square, and that smaller black square represents margins… Not anything I put in there but there by default.
The text is getting cut off when it's outside of certain margins at the top left right and bottom.
So any text too high gets cut off at the top, any text too low gets cut off at the bottom… Any text too far to the left gets cut off on the left, and likewise any text too far to the right gets cut off on the right.
I'd like to remove or change those margins.
Any idea how?
I suppose I could work within them, but I'd be interested in being able to change them too.
Added note
My example is a simple demonstration of the issue i face. What you see there is not a whole project where it's not clear what is what. My example is an example that clearly demonstrates the problem. I am showing you that there's what appears to be a border there hiding any text. If I just made a blank project and did one textbox, then you'd see it gets cut off. (nothing to do with nesting that I see mentioned in one answer as a possibility)

related- https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/3/1010944

updated link to that related one.  https://creativecow.net/forums/thread/text-gets-cut-off/

Possibility #1: If there's not just black filled rectangles from the rectangle tool around your text, then it looks like you might have nested your text into a sequence with smaller dimensions. Find the text on your timeline and check if it is in a nest. If so, try:
1. Right-click on the nest in the timeline
2. Choose 'Reveal in Project' to find the nest in the Project panel
3. Right-click on the nest in the Project panel
4. Choose 'Sequence Settings'
5. Change the Video > Frame Size 'horizontal' and 'vertical' values to match the sequence you added the nested text to.
Possibility #2:
Another way you can achieve this effect is in the Effects controls panel for the text clip. If you were to scale the video down, it would have hard borders. Check that the video scale is at 100%.

that makes no sense.. My example was a simple demonstration of the issue i face. What you see there is not a whole project where it's not clear what is what.  My example is an example that clearly demonstrates the problem. I am showing you that there's a border there hiding any text.  If  I just made a blank project and did one textbox, then you'd see it gets cut off. All this stuff you speak of about nesting and sequencing just doesn't apply at all.

That was just the way that I would have accidentally created this error in my workflow, but I've edited the answer to add another possible cause based on the information you've added here. There are many ways to achieve the same result in Premiere.

thanks that 'possibility 2', answers it.. The reason ,why I was making that mistake, is that when I write in a textbox, the video options are expanded in effect controls, but the text options remain collapsed, so the only scale option showing is the video one.. have to manually expand the text one and scroll, to see the text options.  https://i.imgur.com/fjz9wJT.png

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/