Delete one frame without affecting audio

Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

The video I got has a black frame that causes a brief flash when viewing.
Is it possible to delete that black frame without affecting the audio/video
sync? I have Premiere Pro. I'm afraid that it would be out of sync if I
extract the audio, cut the the video to half (so the black screen is
eliminated), and put them back to timeline. Any better ways to solve this?

THANKS for the help,

cpliu
23 answers Last reply
More about delete frame affecting audio
  1. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Why not briefly put a different scene without the audio on top of it. Sort
    of like when they do a TV interview, cut/switch to behind the speakers head,
    then cut back to the main shot. If you have extra footage that "fits" the
    theme, that's what I'd try. Just an idea. Leave your main audio track
    untouched. Fade in, jump cut or use whatever fits best.

    rqo

    "cpliu" <chanciusliuDeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:Xns95E3833BEFE97chanciusliuDeleteThi@130.133.1.4...
    > The video I got has a black frame that causes a brief flash when viewing.
    > Is it possible to delete that black frame without affecting the
    > audio/video
    > sync? I have Premiere Pro. I'm afraid that it would be out of sync if I
    > extract the audio, cut the the video to half (so the black screen is
    > eliminated), and put them back to timeline. Any better ways to solve this?
    >
    > THANKS for the help,
    >
    > cpliu
  2. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    cpliu wrote:

    > The video I got has a black frame that causes a brief flash when viewing.
    > Is it possible to delete that black frame without affecting the audio/video
    > sync? I have Premiere Pro. I'm afraid that it would be out of sync if I
    > extract the audio, cut the the video to half (so the black screen is
    > eliminated), and put them back to timeline. Any better ways to solve this?

    I don't know offhand if Premiere has the same versatility as Avid, but
    there are likely as many solutions to this problem as editors who post
    to these forums.

    I'd have to see the clip with sound and adjacent material to determine
    my own solution, but can make a few suggestions:

    Zap the black frame and substitute the preceding (or following) one. If
    the audio is dialog, you could probably even get away with zapping the
    frame and letting the audio be one frame out of sync until there is an
    audio pause enabling a zapped audio frame to 'catch up' so to speak --
    this is not as sloppy and unprofessional as some people might think.
    When you realize the amount of looped dialog in many feature movies and
    TV shows, flawless sync is not as common as one might expect.

    Another standard fix for such problems is to insert a cutaway video clip
    if the project enables anything appropriate: eg, if someone on screen
    is talking (being interviewed, giving a speech etc.) insert a cutaway to
    the interviewer or audience, if possible, or perhaps an image that
    relates to whatever the speaker is discussing.


    CPJ
  3. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Just out of curiosity -

    if you only have one frame in a video and if your video is 30 fps, how
    can you see the frame ?

    ..In the same manner cutting out the one frame and joining the two
    segments should not be very noticable in audio. (depending on exactly
    what the audio is.)
  4. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    rqo wrote:

    > Why not briefly put a different scene without the audio on top of it. Sort
    > of like when they do a TV interview, cut/switch to behind the speakers head,
    > then cut back to the main shot. If you have extra footage that "fits" the
    > theme, that's what I'd try. Just an idea. Leave your main audio track
    > untouched. Fade in, jump cut or use whatever fits best.
    >
    > rqo
    >
    > "cpliu" <chanciusliuDeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:Xns95E3833BEFE97chanciusliuDeleteThi@130.133.1.4...
    >
    >>The video I got has a black frame that causes a brief flash when viewing.
    >>Is it possible to delete that black frame without affecting the
    >>audio/video
    >>sync? I have Premiere Pro. I'm afraid that it would be out of sync if I
    >>extract the audio, cut the the video to half (so the black screen is
    >>eliminated), and put them back to timeline. Any better ways to solve this?
    >>
    >>THANKS for the help,
    >>
    >>cpliu
    >
    >
    >

    Better yet, include a subliminal message like "Reduce the National Debt"
  5. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:01:11 -0600, "rqo"
    <safetyo-nospam@bellsouthnospam.net> wrote:

    >Why not briefly put a different scene without the audio on top of it. Sort
    >of like when they do a TV interview, cut/switch to behind the speakers head,
    >then cut back to the main shot. If you have extra footage that "fits" the
    >theme, that's what I'd try. Just an idea. Leave your main audio track
    >untouched. Fade in, jump cut or use whatever fits best.
    >
    >rqo
    >
    Since I don't know the subject or content of the video this may not
    work. Could you just add one more copy of the last frame before the
    black frame as a video insert. If your subject allows this it seems
    like it could solve your problem????

    >"cpliu" <chanciusliuDeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    >news:Xns95E3833BEFE97chanciusliuDeleteThi@130.133.1.4...
    >> The video I got has a black frame that causes a brief flash when viewing.
    >> Is it possible to delete that black frame without affecting the
    >> audio/video
    >> sync? I have Premiere Pro. I'm afraid that it would be out of sync if I
    >> extract the audio, cut the the video to half (so the black screen is
    >> eliminated), and put them back to timeline. Any better ways to solve this?
    >>
    >> THANKS for the help,
    >>
    >> cpliu
    >

    Bob Ford
    Images In Motion
    <www.imagesinmotion.com>
  6. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Bob Ford" >
    > Since I don't know the subject or content of the video this may not
    > work. Could you just add one more copy of the last frame before the
    > black frame as a video insert. If your subject allows this it seems
    > like it could solve your problem????
    >
    > Bob Ford

    That's what I was gonna say. Either the last frame before the black, or the
    first frame after.

    Bill F.
  7. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Thank you all for the suggestions. I will try replacing the black screen
    with a frame from the previous screen method. Let's see if Premiere Pro can
    take that task.

    Thanks,

    cpliu
  8. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:45:31 GMT, "Bill Farnsworth"
    <bill.farnsworth@verizon.net> wrote:

    >
    >"Bob Ford" >
    >> Since I don't know the subject or content of the video this may not
    >> work. Could you just add one more copy of the last frame before the
    >> black frame as a video insert. If your subject allows this it seems
    >> like it could solve your problem????
    >>
    >> Bob Ford
    >
    >That's what I was gonna say. Either the last frame before the black, or the
    >first frame after.
    >
    >Bill F.
    >
    Wow, now I feel important since you and I had the same idea.
    I respect your input on this group considerably Farny....:-)

    Also the suggestion to just cut the frame sounds like it would also
    work depending on what it does to the audio.

    Bob Ford
    Images In Motion
    <www.imagesinmotion.com>
  9. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    I agree best solution is to cut the video frame and at the next audio pause cut
    a frame out there. If there is no music this should work. One frame out of sync
    is not that big of deal for a short time with lip sync. In fact in the film days
    you could often only get to one half frame accuracy between visual and audio
    sync. But yes, you do see one frame. Remember academy leader and the 2 beep.
    That 2 is one frame.

    "manitou910" <manitou910@rogers.com> wrote in message
    news:t9OdnYjehvdDTXPcRVn-iw@rogers.com...
    > cpliu wrote:
    >
    > > The video I got has a black frame that causes a brief flash when viewing.
    > > Is it possible to delete that black frame without affecting the audio/video
    > > sync? I have Premiere Pro. I'm afraid that it would be out of sync if I
    > > extract the audio, cut the the video to half (so the black screen is
    > > eliminated), and put them back to timeline. Any better ways to solve this?
    >
    > I don't know offhand if Premiere has the same versatility as Avid, but
    > there are likely as many solutions to this problem as editors who post
    > to these forums.
    >
    > I'd have to see the clip with sound and adjacent material to determine
    > my own solution, but can make a few suggestions:
    >
    > Zap the black frame and substitute the preceding (or following) one. If
    > the audio is dialog, you could probably even get away with zapping the
    > frame and letting the audio be one frame out of sync until there is an
    > audio pause enabling a zapped audio frame to 'catch up' so to speak --
    > this is not as sloppy and unprofessional as some people might think.
    > When you realize the amount of looped dialog in many feature movies and
    > TV shows, flawless sync is not as common as one might expect.
    >
    > Another standard fix for such problems is to insert a cutaway video clip
    > if the project enables anything appropriate: eg, if someone on screen
    > is talking (being interviewed, giving a speech etc.) insert a cutaway to
    > the interviewer or audience, if possible, or perhaps an image that
    > relates to whatever the speaker is discussing.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > CPJ
    >
  10. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    To clarify my remark about one frame and 2 beep. I was referring to comment by
    marks542004.
    "DanR" <dhr22@sorrynospm.com> wrote in message
    news:TdGHd.3778$2e7.2432@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
    > I agree best solution is to cut the video frame and at the next audio pause
    cut
    > a frame out there. If there is no music this should work. One frame out of
    sync
    > is not that big of deal for a short time with lip sync. In fact in the film
    days
    > you could often only get to one half frame accuracy between visual and audio
    > sync. But yes, you do see one frame. Remember academy leader and the 2 beep.
    > That 2 is one frame.
    >
    > "manitou910" <manitou910@rogers.com> wrote in message
    > news:t9OdnYjehvdDTXPcRVn-iw@rogers.com...
    > > cpliu wrote:
    > >
    > > > The video I got has a black frame that causes a brief flash when viewing.
    > > > Is it possible to delete that black frame without affecting the
    audio/video
    > > > sync? I have Premiere Pro. I'm afraid that it would be out of sync if I
    > > > extract the audio, cut the the video to half (so the black screen is
    > > > eliminated), and put them back to timeline. Any better ways to solve this?
    > >
    > > I don't know offhand if Premiere has the same versatility as Avid, but
    > > there are likely as many solutions to this problem as editors who post
    > > to these forums.
    > >
    > > I'd have to see the clip with sound and adjacent material to determine
    > > my own solution, but can make a few suggestions:
    > >
    > > Zap the black frame and substitute the preceding (or following) one. If
    > > the audio is dialog, you could probably even get away with zapping the
    > > frame and letting the audio be one frame out of sync until there is an
    > > audio pause enabling a zapped audio frame to 'catch up' so to speak --
    > > this is not as sloppy and unprofessional as some people might think.
    > > When you realize the amount of looped dialog in many feature movies and
    > > TV shows, flawless sync is not as common as one might expect.
    > >
    > > Another standard fix for such problems is to insert a cutaway video clip
    > > if the project enables anything appropriate: eg, if someone on screen
    > > is talking (being interviewed, giving a speech etc.) insert a cutaway to
    > > the interviewer or audience, if possible, or perhaps an image that
    > > relates to whatever the speaker is discussing.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > CPJ
    > >
    >
    >
  11. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    marks542004@yahoo.com wrote:

    >Just out of curiosity -
    >
    >if you only have one frame in a video and if your video is 30 fps, how
    >can you see the frame ?
    >
    >.In the same manner cutting out the one frame and joining the two
    >segments should not be very noticable in audio. (depending on exactly
    >what the audio is.)

    You have two situations... one "bad" video/audio frame in the
    project, or one video/audio frame missing.

    First, the second case. You can cut any one or two video/audio frames
    from a project any no-one on earth would be able to find it. Some
    people say they can, but even trained musicians cannot detect less
    than one fifth of a second missing from a sound, most of us cannot
    detect a missing half second.

    Now, the second case. Almost anyone can see and hear an extraneous
    video/audio frame in a project. Think of a flash going off or a loud
    sound "blip." A flash is much less than the length of one frame, yet
    almost everyone can see it go off. A "flash" of black is not nearly
    as noticeable, especially in a dark sequence, but under the proper
    conditions most people will still notice something amiss, even if they
    don't know what happened.

    So, if the original poster wants to handle the "flash" of light or
    dark, or a "blip" of sound, the easiest and least detectable way is to
    simply cut the clip on the offending frame, and remove a frame on
    either side of the cut. No-one will be able to see or hear the
    missing 1/15 second (assuming NTSC).

    I cannot imagine anyone telling the original poster to go to all the
    trouble of "replacing" the offending frame, or even more stupid,
    telling him to take a chance of screwing-up his sound sync.

    Hope this helps,

    Susan
  12. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Susan wrote:
    > marks542004@yahoo.com wrote:
    >
    >> Just out of curiosity -
    >>
    >> if you only have one frame in a video and if your video is 30 fps, how
    >> can you see the frame ?
    >>
    >> .In the same manner cutting out the one frame and joining the two
    >> segments should not be very noticable in audio. (depending on exactly
    >> what the audio is.)
    >
    > You have two situations... one "bad" video/audio frame in the
    > project, or one video/audio frame missing.
    >
    > First, the second case. You can cut any one or two video/audio frames
    > from a project any no-one on earth would be able to find it. Some
    > people say they can, but even trained musicians cannot detect less
    > than one fifth of a second missing from a sound, most of us cannot
    > detect a missing half second.
    >
    > Now, the second case. Almost anyone can see and hear an extraneous
    > video/audio frame in a project. Think of a flash going off or a loud
    > sound "blip." A flash is much less than the length of one frame, yet
    > almost everyone can see it go off. A "flash" of black is not nearly
    > as noticeable, especially in a dark sequence, but under the proper
    > conditions most people will still notice something amiss, even if they
    > don't know what happened.
    >
    > So, if the original poster wants to handle the "flash" of light or
    > dark, or a "blip" of sound, the easiest and least detectable way is to
    > simply cut the clip on the offending frame, and remove a frame on
    > either side of the cut. No-one will be able to see or hear the
    > missing 1/15 second (assuming NTSC).
    >
    > I cannot imagine anyone telling the original poster to go to all the
    > trouble of "replacing" the offending frame, or even more stupid,
    > telling him to take a chance of screwing-up his sound sync.
    >
    > Hope this helps,
    >
    > Susan

    "even trained musicians cannot detect less than one fifth of a second missing
    from a sound"
    It depends on what's missing. Take the word "train". Remove the first frame of
    that spoken word and you have "rain". Remove the frame that contains the
    beginning of a piano note and it will sound terrible. Even removing a frame in
    the middle of a sustained violin sound or the like will often cause a "glitch"
    sound. A bump in the sound that is noticeable.
  13. Archived from groups: rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    With Avisynth it should be too easy:

    DeleteFrame(n)
    DuplicateFrame(n-1) // or DuplicateFrame(n+1)
  14. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    cpliu <chanciusliuDeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote in
    news:Xns95E3B1F0194D7chanciusliuDeleteThi@130.133.1.4:

    > Thank you all for the suggestions. I will try replacing the black
    > screen with a frame from the previous screen method. Let's see if
    > Premiere Pro can take that task.
    >
    I compared the video of a previous version and found it was an extra black
    screen that causes the flash. So instead of adding one extra frame, I
    deleted the black frame and delete 1 frame of audio from the beginning of
    the video. It looks fine.

    Thank you all for the help.

    cpliu
  15. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "DanR" <dhr22@sorrynospm.com> wrote:

    >
    >"even trained musicians cannot detect less than one fifth of a second missing
    >from a sound"
    >It depends on what's missing. Take the word "train". Remove the first frame of
    >that spoken word and you have "rain". Remove the frame that contains the
    >beginning of a piano note and it will sound terrible. Even removing a frame in
    >the middle of a sustained violin sound or the like will often cause a "glitch"
    >sound. A bump in the sound that is noticeable.
    >

    Hi Dan,

    What you say "sounds" plausible, except it incorporates two failures
    in logic.

    First, you assume that since it is easy to perceive the presence of
    visual or aural noise, it is equally easy to perceive the absence of
    that noise. In other words, since it is easy to see a flash or hear a
    blip in sound, that it is equally easy to see or hear them when they
    are missing. Test after test has shown this not to be the case. You
    really have to remove quite a bit of sound for it to be noticeable,
    otherwise, we would not be able to listen to audio CDs.

    Second, because Train and Rain "look" very similar when they are
    written, you assume they "sound" very much alike, and that you could
    turn one into the other with the removal of 1/30th difference in
    sound. If you inspect the waveform of the two words, you will find
    they are very different. Since we get 90 percent of our comprehension
    from context, it is almost impossible to change the meaning by
    removing a small segment of sound.

    Of course, if you remove enough sound or video it will become
    noticeable. If there are 10 flashes during one second, and you remove
    ten frames from that second everyone will be able to tell. If there
    are ten flashes during one minute, people may, or may not tell. Ten
    from a five or ten minute speech and no-one is likely to notice.

    If you conduct a double blind test of your examples, you are likely to
    find that no-one would notice what you assume would be so obvious.

    Susan
  16. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    DanR wrote:
    > Susan wrote:
    > > "DanR" <dhr22@sorrynospm.com> wrote:

    > Removing a snippet will destroy the symmetry of that sine wave to
    some extent.
    > (depending on where in the cycle the edit occurs) In the analog world
    this is
    > often audible. I admit I'm not sure what happens in the digital world
    after that
    > sound is resampled.
    In the 'digital world', if you have the tools to do it, you would look
    for a zero crossing in the wave form to make a cut.
    If you cut in the top of a wave, you get a click (sudden change to
    zero).

    So that first.
    I have cut pieces out of audio speech by just removing a bit of silence
    every now and then, but even in the noise I cut on zero crossing.
    Nice that you have analog editing experience...
  17. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Susan wrote:
    > "DanR" <dhr22@sorrynospm.com> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "even trained musicians cannot detect less than one fifth of a second missing
    >> from a sound"
    >> It depends on what's missing. Take the word "train". Remove the first frame
    >> of that spoken word and you have "rain". Remove the frame that contains the
    >> beginning of a piano note and it will sound terrible. Even removing a frame
    >> in the middle of a sustained violin sound or the like will often cause a
    >> "glitch" sound. A bump in the sound that is noticeable.
    >>
    >
    > Hi Dan,
    >
    > What you say "sounds" plausible, except it incorporates two failures
    > in logic.
    >
    > First, you assume that since it is easy to perceive the presence of
    > visual or aural noise, it is equally easy to perceive the absence of
    > that noise. In other words, since it is easy to see a flash or hear a
    > blip in sound, that it is equally easy to see or hear them when they
    > are missing. Test after test has shown this not to be the case. You
    > really have to remove quite a bit of sound for it to be noticeable,
    > otherwise, we would not be able to listen to audio CDs.
    >
    > Second, because Train and Rain "look" very similar when they are
    > written, you assume they "sound" very much alike, and that you could
    > turn one into the other with the removal of 1/30th difference in
    > sound. If you inspect the waveform of the two words, you will find
    > they are very different. Since we get 90 percent of our comprehension
    > from context, it is almost impossible to change the meaning by
    > removing a small segment of sound.
    >
    > Of course, if you remove enough sound or video it will become
    > noticeable. If there are 10 flashes during one second, and you remove
    > ten frames from that second everyone will be able to tell. If there
    > are ten flashes during one minute, people may, or may not tell. Ten
    > from a five or ten minute speech and no-one is likely to notice.
    >
    > If you conduct a double blind test of your examples, you are likely to
    > find that no-one would notice what you assume would be so obvious.
    >
    > Susan

    Hi Susan... I'm pretty much going to stick with what I wrote. It is based on
    real world experience. My experience is with so called "on-line editing" and not
    Avid or computer editing so there may be differences. (and old fashion 1/4 tape
    editing) I am not saying that the human brain will "miss" a portion of audio if
    it is removed... I am only saying that an audio edit can cause an artifact. That
    artifact can sound like a blip or glitch. (hard to describe) When editing music
    it was always best to edit on the attack of a hard sound like a drum beat. An
    audio frame randomly removed would more often than not cause what I am calling a
    glitch sound. My example of "train to rain" may not have been a good one but I
    was trying to illustrate what can happen in real world editing. One frame
    removed at the beginning of a word that starts with a hard consonant sound can
    cause that word to be misunderstood. Some audio sweetening programs (Pro Tools)
    are not limited to cutting on frames and this problem can be minimized. A sound
    like a pure tone when displayed graphically (waveform) looks like a simple sine
    wave.
    Removing a snippet will destroy the symmetry of that sine wave to some extent.
    (depending on where in the cycle the edit occurs) In the analog world this is
    often audible. I admit I'm not sure what happens in the digital world after that
    sound is resampled.
  18. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "DanR" <dhr22@sorrynospm.com> wrote in message
    news:wZSId.22702$iC4.17403@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
    > Susan wrote:
    >> "DanR" <dhr22@sorrynospm.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "even trained musicians cannot detect less than one fifth of a second
    >>> missing
    >>> from a sound"
    >>> It depends on what's missing. Take the word "train". Remove the first
    >>> frame
    >>> of that spoken word and you have "rain". Remove the frame that contains
    >>> the
    >>> beginning of a piano note and it will sound terrible. Even removing a
    >>> frame
    >>> in the middle of a sustained violin sound or the like will often cause a
    >>> "glitch" sound. A bump in the sound that is noticeable.
    >>>
    >>
    >> Hi Dan,
    >>
    >> What you say "sounds" plausible, except it incorporates two failures
    >> in logic.
    >>
    >> First, you assume that since it is easy to perceive the presence of
    >> visual or aural noise, it is equally easy to perceive the absence of
    >> that noise. In other words, since it is easy to see a flash or hear a
    >> blip in sound, that it is equally easy to see or hear them when they
    >> are missing. Test after test has shown this not to be the case. You
    >> really have to remove quite a bit of sound for it to be noticeable,
    >> otherwise, we would not be able to listen to audio CDs.
    >>
    >> Second, because Train and Rain "look" very similar when they are
    >> written, you assume they "sound" very much alike, and that you could
    >> turn one into the other with the removal of 1/30th difference in
    >> sound. If you inspect the waveform of the two words, you will find
    >> they are very different. Since we get 90 percent of our comprehension
    >> from context, it is almost impossible to change the meaning by
    >> removing a small segment of sound.
    >>
    >> Of course, if you remove enough sound or video it will become
    >> noticeable. If there are 10 flashes during one second, and you remove
    >> ten frames from that second everyone will be able to tell. If there
    >> are ten flashes during one minute, people may, or may not tell. Ten
    >> from a five or ten minute speech and no-one is likely to notice.
    >>
    >> If you conduct a double blind test of your examples, you are likely to
    >> find that no-one would notice what you assume would be so obvious.
    >>
    >> Susan
    >
    > Hi Susan... I'm pretty much going to stick with what I wrote. It is based
    > on
    > real world experience. My experience is with so called "on-line editing"
    > and not
    > Avid or computer editing so there may be differences. (and old fashion 1/4
    > tape
    > editing) I am not saying that the human brain will "miss" a portion of
    > audio if
    > it is removed... I am only saying that an audio edit can cause an
    > artifact. That
    > artifact can sound like a blip or glitch. (hard to describe) When editing
    > music
    > it was always best to edit on the attack of a hard sound like a drum beat.
    > An
    > audio frame randomly removed would more often than not cause what I am
    > calling a
    > glitch sound. My example of "train to rain" may not have been a good one
    > but I
    > was trying to illustrate what can happen in real world editing. One frame
    > removed at the beginning of a word that starts with a hard consonant sound
    > can
    > cause that word to be misunderstood. Some audio sweetening programs (Pro
    > Tools)
    > are not limited to cutting on frames and this problem can be minimized. A
    > sound
    > like a pure tone when displayed graphically (waveform) looks like a simple
    > sine
    > wave.
    > Removing a snippet will destroy the symmetry of that sine wave to some
    > extent.
    > (depending on where in the cycle the edit occurs) In the analog world this
    > is
    > often audible. I admit I'm not sure what happens in the digital world
    > after that
    > sound is resampled.

    What can happen in the digital world is this. A cut can occur on a
    wave-form at, let's say, the positive peak of a cycle and be rejoined to the
    wave-form at the negative peak of the next cycle. In other words, the
    voltage goes from plus x to minus x essentially instantly. Analogue
    reproduction equipment cannot follow this wave-form and we hear that as a
    click or a pop.

    We often got away with small cuts in analogue tape recording by cutting on
    the diagonal, thereby creating a 'dissolve' of sorts.

    Steve King
  19. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Bill Farnsworth wrote:

    > That's what I was gonna say. Either the last frame before the black, or the
    > first frame after.

    Or manually split the difference by blending the two frames.
  20. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    cpliu wrote:

    > Thank you all for the suggestions. I will try replacing the black screen
    > with a frame from the previous screen method. Let's see if Premiere Pro can
    > take that task.

    <sardonic> I assure you it can.
  21. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    Somewhat O-T, but a nice parallel thead...

    Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer
    in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is
    taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a
    toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae
    we do not raed ervey lteter by itslef but the wrod as a wlohe
  22. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    "Bill Farnsworth" <bill.farnsworth@verizon.net> wrote in message
    news:vNyHd.4176$J6.3685@trnddc02...
    >
    > "Bob Ford" >
    >> Since I don't know the subject or content of the video this may not
    >> work. Could you just add one more copy of the last frame before the
    >> black frame as a video insert. If your subject allows this it seems
    >> like it could solve your problem????
    >>
    >> Bob Ford
    >
    > That's what I was gonna say. Either the last frame before the black, or
    > the first frame after.
    >
    > Bill F.

    >
    I've often found that an duped frame is disturbing, though clearly not as
    disturbing as a black flash.

    My suggestion would be to drop the black frame and continue the audio one
    frame out of sync until a point where you can excise the extra audio frame
    in a silent spot. One frame out-of-sync is not noticeable.

    Toby
  23. Archived from groups: rec.video.production,rec.video.desktop (More info?)

    stankley wrote:
    > Somewhat O-T, but a nice parallel thead...
    >
    > Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer
    > in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is
    > taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a
    > toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae
    > we do not raed ervey lteter by itslef but the wrod as a wlohe

    Sounds like some of the shows I've worked on. Had a beginning and an end and the
    rest...
Ask a new question

Read More

Tuner Cards Audio Video Graphics