• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
6

Addressing Limits on Proxy Workflow - "Modify" clip command

Community Expert ,
Feb 04, 2023 Feb 04, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The Adobe Premiere Pro "Workflow Guide for Long Form and Episodic Post Production” (dated 2022) states on page 55:

"If your workflow relies on modifying the source clips using any of the following commands [Modify Audio Channels, Interpret Footage, Modify Timecode, Modify Captions], do not use proxies in Premiere Pro. Doing so will result in unexpected behavior."

 

First, I will note that this warning is not included in the online user guide under the various appropriate sections on these commands.

Modify - Audio Channels (I've written about this poor documentation here )

Modify - Interpret Footage 

Modify - Timecode 

Modify - Captions (no documentation exists?)

If there are limitations on a function, it should be noted in the documentation, directly where users are looking to understand how a command or function works and how to use it.

 

Second, can Adobe provide an update on these limitations to its Proxy workflow? Have the problems / unexpected behaviours been addressed? Can we expect Proxy workflow to be less limited in future?

 

R.

Bug Unresolved

Views

838

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
19 Comments
Adobe Employee ,
Feb 08, 2023 Feb 08, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi, Remote Index,

Thanks again for the message. I will pass along the issue to the docs team. I agree that documentation needs to be consistent across various platforms, including exceptional cases like this guide. If not, that's a problem as you pointed out.

 

Thanks,
Kevin

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Feb 08, 2023 Feb 08, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You're right the User Guide pdf they have doesn't get into use cases and potential issues. Which is a great pain.

 

I can give some information on part of the question you have. Interpret Footage when used for speed changes. Which for some cases is the wrong tool. The other tool, Speed/Duration, does work with proxies.

 

From talking with the devs at NAB, Intepret Footage for time changes, was apparently meant and built for 'cadence' changes ... going from say 23.976 to 29.97 or something like that. Where "pull-down" and such things are involved I would guess.

 

Many users use "Interpret Footage" for other types of time changes ... such as doing slo-mo with high framerate media.

 

If you need to change the time for slo-mo work, or doing a quickie speed-up, they say to use Speed/Duration instead. You need to know the percentage change, but then I've been told by a number of users that's easily found in an online search if you don't want to do the math.

 

And Speed/Duration changes do work with proxies, always have, without issue.

 

Neil

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Feb 08, 2023 Feb 08, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

R Neil Haugen, thanks for your thoughts.

 

"Intepret Footage for time changes, was apparently meant and built for 'cadence' changes ... going from say 23.976 to 29.97 or something like that. Where "pull-down" and such things are involved I would guess."

This is a lateral idea you've presented, but nothing in the interperet footage function addresses cadences (since cadences are only important in something like 23.976 in 29.97 media where one frequency has to be represented inside another).

Interpret footage changes the way the "native framerate" of the footage is understood by PPro and will not introduce cadences if, for example, 23.976 footage is placed in a 29.97 timeline.

If I'm wrong about any of that, please correct me.

 

"If you need to change the time for slo-mo work, or doing a quickie speed-up, they say to use Speed/Duration instead."

Who is "they"? Where do they say it?

Adobe says this: Scroll to the bottom ... 

(Spoiler: nothing about favoured, depricated, or discouraged use cases.)


R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Feb 08, 2023 Feb 08, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"Who is 'they'? Who says it?"

The devs. And it's also covered in the docs I link below as well. And several times a dev has been on the forum here explaining the difference between Interpret Footage and Speed/Duration.

 

I'm not a code warrior, ain't no way I can explain it. But you can use Speed/Duration and proxies without any troubles.

 

It's just ... as noted ... one of numerous use-case things that isn't spelled out in details in the main user pdf. Unfortunately.

 

Neil

 

Adobe Long-form and Episodic Best Practices Guide 


Jarle’s blog expansion of the pdf Multicam section: Premiere Pro Multicam

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Feb 09, 2023 Feb 09, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

R Neil Haugen,

 

Thanks for the follow up. The references you've posted do not offer any insight or elaboration of the differences between Interpret Footage and Speed effects.

 

"Adobe Long-form and Episodic Best Practices Guide [Adobe]"

I've been going through this document - the only reference to "Interpret Footage" in the entire 140 page document is the one I've quoted above, which began this thread.


"Jarle’s blog expansion of the pdf Multicam section: Premiere Pro Multi-Cam [PremierePro.net]"

A search of this article for "speed" and/or "interpret" returns zero hits. It appears to be about multi-cam workflows.

 

"And several times a dev has been on the forum here explaining the difference between Interpret Footage and Speed/Duration. ... one of numerous use-case things that isn't spelled out in details in the main user pdf. Unfortunately."

I don't doubt you, I just prefer documentation to hearsay (for all the usual reasons).

 

R.

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Feb 09, 2023 Feb 09, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Devs comments here and at NAB would not be normally considered "hearsay" ... my bad about those links, I thought it was also covered there ... here's a section from their Best Practices doc ... the chapter on Proxies use, including full descriptions of making them, some limitations & etc ... this bit covers your specific question though.

 

Additional Considerations When Using Proxies in Premiere Pro

 

Modifying Clips (Audio Channels, Interpret Footage, etc�)

 

If your workflow relies on modifying the source clips using any of the following commands, do not use proxies in Premiere Pro. Doing so will result in unexpected behavior:

 

  • Modify > Audio Channels
  • Modify > Interpret Footages
  • Modify > Timecode
  • Modify > Captions

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Feb 09, 2023 Feb 09, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

R Neil Haugen, thanks again.

 

I think most people would consider unspecified comments by unspecified people as hearsay. But we can agree to disagree about that.

 

You've quoted the same thing that I started this thread with.

 

R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Feb 09, 2023 Feb 09, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

What, dealing with Adobe documentation gets circular at times?   😉

 

My bad ... but remember, I'm just trying to help understand how the blame things actually function as another user. I've been pushing for better documentations ... for ever ...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Feb 09, 2023 Feb 09, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Your frustration and intention are appreciated. R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 12, 2023 Nov 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

There are definately sections of the user guide guide that could use something along the lines of "Caution:  This is not supported by the Premiere Pro Proxy Workflow."  As best as I can tell, it's sections that were written before the Proxy Workflow was available.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 12, 2023 Nov 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Premiere Pro's built-in proxy workflow was introduced in 2016.

 

You suggest as a possible explanation that Adobe publishes documentation "written before the Proxy Workflow was available".

 

It may be true, or it may be simply that it strikes users like me as credible conjecture that Adobe hasn't updated parts of its documentation in 7 years.

 

And yet they don't even maintain documentation for last year's version.

 

R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 12, 2023 Nov 12, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Yes, the online user guide existed before the introduction of the Proxy Workflow.  

 

For those not using a proxy workflow (for example, someone with a 2160p ProRes 422 HQ workflow on a Mac from 2017 or later with Thinderbolt storage probably does not need to think about proxies), then a user just needs the information from the corresponding sections.


Some type of caution that might adversely affect the Proxy Workflow sounds like it would be very good addition to the documentation beyond what's currently there.  I've upvoted this topic.  It would even be a great in-app feature request where when proxies are enabled any non-reomended options are flagged in some way.

 

Personally, I wish tbe Premiere Pro user guide was more like the Final Cut Pto classic user guide.  That was part user guide and part 2,000 plus pages of editing wisdom.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 13, 2023 Nov 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"the online user guide existed before the introduction of the Proxy Workflow"

 

Premiere Pro also existed before the Proxy Workflow.

 

The difference is that Adobe puts resources into maintaining, updating, and improving Premiere Pro. Though they haven't addressed the limitations of proxy workflow since it was introduced.

 

Thus, my 2 requests in the headline post from February, both of which have gone unanswered.

 

R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Nov 13, 2023 Nov 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

 I think most users would really love better overall documentation. Maybe not the 4,000 plus page Resolve manual ... which not only is HUGE, but uses such Resolve specfic terminology that unless you know exactly what they call something in their unique lexicon, you can't find it.

 

You know it's there, somewhere ... but ... where?!

 

The docs I linked above do cover the use of Speed/Duration, rather than Modify/Interpret, and the limitations of the latter. Very clearly, right off the bat in fact. As does Jarle's follow-on expansion post, so I'm puzzled you say you don't see anything. It's one of the few pieces of documentation they have that's actually decent.

 

Now, their suggestion is not what many users want to hear, but hey, I can't help with peoples emotions. Just the practical stuff of what does work versus what ain't gonna.

 

As to listing devs by name, if you have much professional pro video experience, you would probably understand that is normally considered a HUGE professional faux pax. And actually, I'm one that does occasionally, when the item is a major one, and the source was clearly talking 'in the open' with others listening, list the name of the source.

 

Which is why ... apparently ... I'm no longer an ACP or AC Expert or whatever they call their volunteer group anymore. One dev asked me to get people to connect with him over one issue, so ... I mentioned that online. All Hades broke loose ... twas kinda funny in a weird sort of way. And I got notably dumped.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 13, 2023 Nov 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"I'm puzzled you say you don't see anything."

 

No one in the thread has said this.

 

R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Nov 13, 2023 Nov 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You might look up to one of your own posts a bit above this ... which is what I referred to.

 

I could post the quote if you need of course ... but it's your post.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 13, 2023 Nov 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"I could post the quote if you need of course"

 

Please do.

 

R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
LEGEND ,
Nov 13, 2023 Nov 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks for the follow up. The references you've posted do not offer any insight or elaboration of the differences between Interpret Footage and Speed effects.

 

"Adobe Long-form and Episodic Best Practices Guide [Adobe]"

I've been going through this document - the only reference to "Interpret Footage" in the entire 140 page document is the one I've quoted above, which began this thread.


"Jarle’s blog expansion of the pdf Multicam section: Premiere Pro Multi-Cam [PremierePro.net]"

A search of this article for "speed" and/or "interpret" returns zero hits. It appears to be about multi-cam workflows.

 

 

In the Introduction, the first mention ... is do NOT use merged clips to join video/audio, as that is both common and leads to major problems ... something that many users still need to know.

 

Then the entire Chapter 5 is about proxies, and on page 55, as noted in the TOC for that chapter,  is the following ... 

 

Additional Considerations When Using Proxies in Premiere Pro Modifying Clips

(Audio Channels, Interpret Footage, etc�)

 

If your workflow relies on modifying the source clips using any of the following commands, do not use proxies in Premiere Pro. Doing so will result in unexpected behavior:
Modify > Audio Channels

Modify > Interpret Footages

Modify > Timecode

Modify > Captions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Expert ,
Nov 13, 2023 Nov 13, 2023

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

Thanks, R Neil Haugen,

 

Once again, you've posted the exact single reference which started this thread.

 

And while you have confirmed that no one in the thread has said they "don't see anything", you have provided a vivid example of how hearsay develops through personal interpretation and why solid documentation is necessary, so thanks for that.

 

R.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report