Return-Path: Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net ([208.80.4.154] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP-TLS id 5271649 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 20:15:39 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDDE01C5B7D for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:16:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from [10.10.10.72] (unknown [65.223.213.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 760BA1C07CB for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:16:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Bruce Tovsky Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_976FDA13-4FB8-4381-ABEF-FC5B4C209C64" Message-Id: <98268C73-890C-4A1C-9745-635FF6A4415F@skeletonhome.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\)) Subject: Re: [AE] [AE] 29.97 versus 23.976 for corporate? Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 15:16:58 -0400 References: To: After Effects Mail List In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508) --Apple-Mail=_976FDA13-4FB8-4381-ABEF-FC5B4C209C64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 couldn't determine, since it was baked into the file i had received from = the label. no chance to go back to the camera sources and recut the doc! b On Oct 31, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Stephen van Vuuren = wrote: > > having just had an international spot kicked back for "frame = blending" issues i'd have to say that this statement has some flaws. in = the US it's pretty acceptable to see these artifacts from the = 23.98-to-29.97 conversion - really they're usually just motion blur. = but to the australians it's a problem. the conversion was "baked" into = the ProRes masters, so nothing to be done on my end. > =20 > What pulldown scheme? Unless the pulldown was done incorrectly that = should not be a big deal to get back to the original 24 frames which is = what I meant by visually seamless. I=92ve done pulldown reconstruction = on bad transfers and while it=92s a pain if the cadence changes every = single cut it=92s certainly doable to remove frame blending. > =20 > stephen van vuuren > 336.202.4777 > =20 > http://www.insaturnsrings.com/ > http://www.sv2dcp.com/ > http://www.sv2studios.com/ > =20 > A film is =96 or should be =96 more like music than like fiction. It = should be a progression of moods and feelings. The theme, what=92s = behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later. > =96Stanley Kubrick --Apple-Mail=_976FDA13-4FB8-4381-ABEF-FC5B4C209C64 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 couldn't determine, since it = was baked into the file i had received from the label. no chance to go = back to the camera sources and recut the = doc!
b

On Oct 31, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Stephen = van Vuuren <stephen@sv2studios.com> = wrote:

> having just had an = international spot kicked back for "frame blending" issues i'd have to = say that this statement has some flaws. in the US it's pretty acceptable = to see these artifacts from the 23.98-to-29.97 conversion -  really = they're usually just motion blur. but to the australians it's a problem. = the conversion was "baked" into the ProRes masters, so nothing to be = done on my end.
 
What pulldown scheme? Unless the pulldown was = done incorrectly that should not be a big deal to get back to the = original 24 frames which is what I meant by visually seamless. I=92ve = done pulldown reconstruction on bad transfers and while it=92s a pain if = the cadence changes every single cut it=92s certainly doable to remove = frame blending.
 



= --Apple-Mail=_976FDA13-4FB8-4381-ABEF-FC5B4C209C64--