Videomaker – Learn video production and editing, camera reviews › Forums › Technique › Editing › effects in FCP
March 8, 2009 at 1:10 PM #46840
I have a client that wants a count down clock on screen for 30 mins and the last 10 secs they want a beeps every sec.
Anyone have any idea how to create such a thing in FCP?
March 8, 2009 at 3:36 PM #192848
If it’s just a simple countdown you could just use a timecode generator and run it in reverse. You can clip, crop or mask out the hours and frames so that just the minutes and seconds are showing. You should be able to find a free beep online or just create one with “bars and tone”
It you want a more elaborate design, you mayneed to use motion orafter effects.
March 8, 2009 at 3:58 PM #192849
the time code gen will work, what menu is it under?
March 8, 2009 at 9:35 PM #192850
It in the effects pannel under video filters>video>timecode generator
You could also use timecode reader as well.
March 10, 2009 at 7:05 PM #192851
Thanks man, I’m finding new things i didn’t know FCP could do. what format should I render this clip so that i can use it anywhere later? I started to render this 30 min clip in SD Mpeg-4 and it was going to take 14 hours to finish, so I want to only do this once I don’t care how long it takes as long as I don’t have to keep doing it.
March 10, 2009 at 7:16 PM #192852
If it’s SD you should just be able to export a standard quicktime .movfile using basic DV/NTSC compression.
You seem concerned about final playback? Do you know how the client plans on using this countdown?
If you absolutely need a specific format later….it is much much much faster to convert a final .mov file than it is to keep rendering out a project.
Also, a .mov DV/NTSC file willencode more quickly from the timline than mp4…..if you need an mp4, convert the .mov to mp4 later.
March 10, 2009 at 8:14 PM #192853
Just FYI, MPEG isn’t good for editing. Don’t save your stuff as MPEG, especially if your source is encoded with intraframe compression or you will toss out a lot of data converting to a GOP codec.
Anyway, If you’re talking about your saving 30 minute countdown project, I agree, just save it as a .mov with DV/NTSC, but if in the future you ever make something that is more complicated, ProRes422 is good for archiving. ProRes422 is good for editing actually…
March 10, 2009 at 9:33 PM #192854
Thanks guys, that’s why I asked.
“If you absolutely need a specific format later….it is much much much faster to convert a final .mov file than it is to keep rendering out a project.”
I want to make this clip the best Quality it can be so i can use it in any project or format i need later. Down converting is easy, up converting is almost impossable, at least that’s the way it is for Audio, Like I’ve said before I’m a noob at video.
“ProRes422 is good for archiving. ProRes422 is good for editing actually…”
So should do and save all my work in this format and just convert for final format?
I want to get serious about video, for audio I have tons of audio clips that I already have edited and ready to go, that I can just insert into a project in just a few seconds. these are all in 96 Khz 24 bit format, so they will fit into any project that I am working on because I always capture and edit in this format and down convert to 16 bit 44.1 Khz for cd’s. I want to do the same for video, but I have no experience with video formats.
Or I may be aproching this all wrong, what do you experts think?
March 10, 2009 at 11:02 PM #192855
“So should do and save all my work in this format and just convert for final format?”
Yea if your computer can handle ProRes, I’d edit and archive with DVD data disks in that format. I’ve read that people transcode HDV to ProRes during the capture. I’m assuming it is possible while you capture DV as well, but I’m not possitive. If not, take your footage into Compresor and do the transcoding there. If are delivering via DVD, DVDSP will automatically encoded it as MPEG when you import your assets.
As for audio, 48KHz is what video uses, but I think you can still use 24-bit. Don’t go below 16-bit.
March 10, 2009 at 11:32 PM #192856
The DV/NTSC .mov file is typically the best for DV footage….
This countdown is actually an animation so typically you would export to an animation .mov file. This will preserve the full quality of the animation, however, an animation.mov creates a very large file. Animations are typically very short, so since your animation is 30 mins, it wouldn’t pe practical for you to use the apple animation codec or some type ofequivalent format.
I think since this seems to be just a simple SD 720x480text countdown, simple DV/NTSC compression would be ok. If you have a more complex, colorful shortanimation with some action, it will be best to use the animation settings.
The main difference in working with animations opposed to DV footage is that DV footage is already DV/NTSC compressed. It makes no difference if you convert it to an uncompressed format, because you’ll only get a larger file. Animations on the other hand are basically uncompressed to begin with…you are creating it from scratchso it will benefit the final image if you keep it uncompressed instead of exporting to DV/NTSC.
Uncompressed files give you a better result when converting than when converting DV/NTSC files.
But as I said before…I think for this particular project it will be best if you to just export to DV/NTSCassuming it’s 30 mins and just basic text….you’d probably wouldn’t even notice the difference.
As for ProRes…That would bethe recommended methodfor editing HD video, especially HDV.
All you really need to know for now is to use the DV/NTSC .mov format for basic DV footage. 720×480
And usethe animation .mov file for short animations…you could also get away with using other popular editing formats like photo-jpeg .mov and png .mov.
there is obviously more to know…you can’t learn it all at once and it may be a bit confusing, but you’ll get the hang of it…just like you got the hangof audio.
March 11, 2009 at 12:43 AM #192857
“The DV/NTSC .mov file is typically the best for DV footage….”
If you are going to do some real color grading or compositing, ProRes is the way to go. I’m fo ril, yo.
Here’s some quick quotes I got from this link:
“With the release of Final Cut Studio 2 and Final Cut Pro 6 (FCP), Apple introduced ProRes 422, a new codec that gives high definition (HD) quality at standard definition file size. You can also convert your HD, HDV, DV, etc., footage within FCP to ProRes 422, which I have done, to gain the codec’s benefits.”
“The most common use for ProRes 422 is to convert existing footage, be it native HDV, DVCPro HD, even DV, to the codec for more powerful editing.”
“Keep in mind, though, that if you use ProRes 422 or the HQ version, your file size will be bigger than, say, native HDV or DV, but still smaller than HDCAM and other high-end HD formats.”
March 11, 2009 at 12:54 AM #192858
yea…ProRes is great but I don’t think he has it yet….
March 11, 2009 at 1:20 AM #192859
oh really? that’s a shame. People who aren’t using FCP 6 are hard to come by these days.
March 11, 2009 at 12:33 PM #192860
Nope I don’t have it, It came with this computer when I bought it. It’s a 1.2 Ghz Mac Mini G4 I’m just now breaking into video, I plan to get Adobe Master collection suit CS4 this summer when I upgrade to a duel Quad core Power Mac.
As for audio, I convert down to 48 Khz before I insert a clip. Is 24 bit standard for DVD’s?
March 11, 2009 at 12:44 PM #192861
ok finished it last night and rendered it into DV/NTSC as I sleeped. I used the time code gen in FCP, enlarged it and centered it, then just crop off the hours and 10th’s. Works good, the client wanted it simple and cheap.
Do you guys normaly charge the client for rendering? and do you charge your standard rate or a reduced one. I kinda feel greedy charging a standard rate for my extreamly slow G4. What is your opion on this?
March 12, 2009 at 12:25 PM #192862rgbParticipant
I usually charge the client for the rendering setup and about 1/3 of the render time as you cannot use the computer while its rendering. I wouldnt charge them the full amount of time but 1/3 is fair in my opinion.
March 12, 2009 at 1:42 PM #192863
Yea, I don’t charge for the complete render time either. I don’t think its fair because I’m not really doing anything, but they should pay something since it requires some knowledge to do it properly.
I usually charge $25 per hour, but I dunno how good your are. Since you said you’re just breaking into video, it’s probably not approriate for you to charge that much yet.
March 12, 2009 at 3:04 PM #192864
also…you really don’t want to create animations in FCP, that’s what motion and After Effects is for…The renders may still take long but not as long as Final Cut…
Final Cut will be faster when you’re just rendering actual video with some baic effects.
And when you’re rendering…it’s always nice to jump ontoanother computer….that’s how crap actually gets done….Clients like that… ; )
I would atleast recommend qa uick $400 emachine just to have an extra computer around when you need it for some extra power…you’d be suprised at what those little buggers can do for you….I’ve had some seriously long 3D renders running on2 G5’s, so I started doing some extra work on an emachine…I was very impressed….It wasa little sluggish on renders just likesimilar computers that cost twice as much, but I was able to knock out many extraHDanimations and various 3D elements that saved soo much time…..I mean, they aren’t supercomputers, but people really underestimate those things.
March 12, 2009 at 3:05 PM #192865
nope, I know zip to almost nothing about video rendering, Video editing I know a little because some of it is like audio editing. Audio I charge $135 per hour, most of that is for my equipment. Add to that my little G4 mac mini with 512m of ram, that i’m using for video editing, I can’t charge much. I do all my rendering at night when I’m sleeping so maybe $35 total for rendering may be fair.
March 12, 2009 at 3:07 PM #192866
Wish I had motion, but it didn’t come with the computer. Hopfuly this summer that will all change.
March 12, 2009 at 6:18 PM #192867
March 13, 2009 at 4:50 PM #192868
Yea, kinda holding out till I can afford a real system. I can afford a 2.66 Ghz 24″ Imac with 8 gigs of ram “Not bought from apple” and the Adobe master collection suit right now, is it worth holding out till July or aug to get a 2.66 Ghz Quad Core power mac 8 gigs of ram with the master collection suit? My monitor with the power mac will be this old 17″ LCD I have until I save more. Or hold out till Next Jan and get a Duel Quad core 2.93 Ghz with 16 gigs of ram and a crappy 17″ monitor 🙂
I’m getting the master suit because I want to start making Video content for web sites, I will also be designing web sites and hiring artist that can use Illistrator to make content.
The real question is how long do I sit here with a G4 mac mini? It won’t even run CS4
March 13, 2009 at 5:15 PM #192869
Or how about the Mac book 2.4 Ghz with 4 gigs of ram will this little thing run CS4 well? In well I mean well enough to run a video editing business with it.
March 13, 2009 at 5:52 PM #192870
I think the 24″ iMac sounds like a good idea. I’d save up for one of Apple LED monitors to go with it so you can have a duel monitor set up.
March 14, 2009 at 9:11 PM #192871
Ok Looking at a 24″ Imac:
3.06 Ghz Core 2 Duo 8 Gigs of 1066 Mhz DDR3 1 Tb Drive Video Card
Nvidia Geforce GT 130 512 Mb or
ATI Radeon 4850 512 b
I was told the Radeon is a better card what do you think?
This is the setup I’m thinking of, and add adobe Master suite. is this system good enough to do Video editing full time?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.