FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

I got a job that I'm bouncing now that is, I'm told, 23:976. It's an OMF from FCP w/QT. When I imported it into the template, I noticed it came in with the 2 pop 1/2 a frame late. (This is also reflected in the Ref audio embedded in the QT movie.) The entire OMF audio was placed in between frames. So, of course, I spot it to the frame and made sure the pop landed exactly within the 2. This is the first time that I have worked with an editor who also gives tail pops.
When I went to bounce stems, I made sure that each stem had head and tail pops before each bounce. I found out that every single OMF has the tail one frame ahead of the tail 2 pop! The OMF head to tail including slugs are the same length as the QT movie.
The editor told me that the 2 clip contains the pop in it. She is not, however a fan of FCP, usually she works in AVID.

Anyone know why this would be and better yet am I going to have to re-spot everything back a half a frame and re-bounce?

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

I just heard back from the editor who told me that head and tail line up perfectly!???

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

did you check your session setup rate? did it come in as 24? or 23.976? ... i am just wondering if your grid mesasuring stick is wrong.

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

First thing I did was to open a post template I have and go to session set up...23:976.
The OMF said "24" I asked about that and was told by two of the editors that it was 23:976.
I wonder if it is on their end?

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

and then you imported the OMF via import session data?

i am starting to think that it is not on their end, or your end, just a limitation in FCP's OMF implemetaton. but that is just a theory...

DIGI, are you govenor of the OMF? and if so, can you follow up with Apple to see if they are implementing it properly? or, is that asking too much? or, barking up the wrong tree?

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

Correct...from the Workspace Browser.

It does seem odd.

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

Uh.....

Without opening a huge can of worms on this topic, I can tell you that we have seen slippage in FCP in HD. We have been told it is an error based around how QT handles the first frame of video on output. So at 24P video, if Bars/Tone go down at 00:58;40:00, it is possible that your first frame of video may be at 00:59;59:23 or at 01:00;00:01.

We have also seen the 1/2 frame issue in OMF/Quicktime deliverables from FCP on sources delivered by clients utilizing the FCP edit system at 1080i/60. I believe the mixer on that series also pays extra close attention to sync.

It is a FCP issue, it may be dependent on the video capture card being used, various companies including Apple are aware of it, and it shouldn't kill your workflow.

It seems as if you've got the correct things going to work through this:

An open dialog with the editor
Good working knowledge of what SHOULD be happening
A technical understanding of how your session may be off
A keen eye for double checking anything that should be sync

We have delivered dozens and dozens of FCP edited HD programs both seamless and cut to clock using Editrace to recut the seamless session from the FCP EDL. So it's do-able. Just not perfect.... yet. These have been 1080i/50 and 1080i/60 programs, with linear PCM laybacks and Dolby E encodes.

FWIW.

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

Wow.
Thanks Brad.
FWIW the editor is happy with the layback to FCP.
I may pass this on but there is a huge political swirl around this particular job.
(FCP vs. Avid)
So I may wait until all the dust settles.

Re: FCP::23:976::OMF anomaly
 

Yeah, it's really not a deal breaker. It's just a frame offset. No big deal. Alot of people havent noticed, because the place where you would notice, the top pf the show, is usually a dissolve from black.... Hard to tell if it hits 1 frame early or late. And it will get fixed.

Glad the layback went well!