Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hello,
I'm a PP beginner and apparently do not fully understand how the sequence's frame rate, the synchronization feature and the Export option "Final Cut Pro-XML" work and relate to each other.
This is my use case:
I utilize PP to synchronize multiple clips before processing the clips with another tool in which I have to enter the clips' start timestamps to apply the synchronization there. I have to repeat this procedure for multiple batches of grouped clips and thus would like to use as much automation as possible, getting the results in a machine-readable file. In each batch of grouped clips there are clips with 30 FPS and clips with 29.97 FPS.
Currently, I use following workflow for each batch of clips:
What I don't get:
What makes me curious is that the calculated timestamp sometimes deviates by a couple of seconds from the start timestamp of the respective clip displayed when hovering over it in the sequence window.
My first idea was that the different frame rates of the clips or alternatively the frame rate of the sequence need to be considered in step 6 instead of just assuming 30 FPS. I see that the XML file also contains tags for frame rate (<timebase>) and ntsc information (<ntsc>) but no matter which frame rate I assume, I fail to reproduce the start timestamp in the sequence window for at least some of the clips. Switching the sequence's frame rate between 30 and 29.97 seems to have an effect on the synchronization results as well as on the exported XML file but I still can't reproduce the start timestamp in the sequence window.
Is there something wrong with my workflow or does a more straight-forward workflow exist for my purpose? Do I misunderstand how frame rates and timestamps are used by PP?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi @SteveSa,
I read your note. You are having trouble synchronizing clips for preparation to use in another application. Is that right? Is this some kind of multicamera editing app? Sorry that I'm not fully understanding your workflow. Timecode can come in not only different frame rates, but also different flavors of timecode style. Drop frame and non-drop frame, which is for frame counting purposes. See if this article uncovers the anomaly you are facing: https://blog.frame.io/2017/07/17/timecode-and-frame-rates/
Let us know what happens after trying things from the article.
Thanks,
Kevin
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi @Kevin-Monahan,
thanks for your reply!
Yes that is right. Actually, the other application allows coding the video data (i.e., adding annotations at specific timestamps for an evaluation of the recorded scene) for each batch of clips.
Thank you for the article regarding drop frame/non-drop frame. To double-check my understanding and the implications for my use case, I would like to know:
Best, Steve
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi @SteveSa,
Thanks for the question. Any clip can contain either drop frame or non-drop frame timecode. It depends on the camera person and how they recorded the original footage. You can verify the different timecodes by inspecting the numbers. If they contain a semi-colon, it is drop frame timecode. If it contains a colon, then it is non-drop frame. Most cameras shoot non-drop frame by default. Non-drop frame timecode is typically only used for broadcast TV.
This article contains info about the ramifications of timecode variants, and how to count the frames here: https://sonix.ai/resources/what-is-drop-frame-vs-non-drop-frame-timecode/
See if that answers your questions.
Thanks,
Kevin
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hi @Kevin-Monahan ,
thanks again for your reply. It has taken some time for me to test and verify what I am dealing with.
I do now know that the 29.97 FPS clips are non-drop frame. Note that within the sequence view of PP the colon/semi-colon display seems to depend on the sequence settings and not on the source files, that is why I asked the camera manufacturer to get the non-drop frame information.
Having that knowledge, consider questions 1 & 2 in my last post as no more relevant.
The questions not yet answered by the linked article are:
Best, Steve