Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Premier Pro Workflow question

Feb 4, 2014 3:06 AM

Hi,

 

I am wondering, from an industry standard point of view, what the reccomended workflow would be for the following situation (I know that each project brings its own special requirements, but I was hoping that some of you on the forum have worked with this type of project before, and can give some advice)

 

We are producing several, roughly 20 minute episodes of a childrens show. The episode has several scenes, and each scene is comprised of several shots. Our characters are hand operated miniature figures, and they are filmed against either a blue/green screen, or in miniature scale sets. The footage is first brought into Premier, where rough keying and compositing is done, to achieve each rough shot. These are then edited into their respective scenes. Once the rough editing is done, the project is handed over to Afer Effects, where the footage is replaced with the originals (As low res proxies are used in the edits), proper keying and compositing is done, and effects are added. This is then rendered as a DI, imported back into Premier as a video layer and then rendered out in the final delivery codec.

 

My question is as follows:

 

Is it better to create one project, with multiple sequences, one for each scene and then a sequence for the episode (Master sequence) - or is it more advisable to create several seperate premier projects, one per scene and then import these into a new master Episode project? I guess it might be a matter of "What you prefer", but I was wondering if there is a suggested industry standard as to how this is normally approached.

 

Thank you for any advice,

 

Pierre Devereux

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 4, 2014 6:18 AM   in reply to Pierre Devereux

    Pierre,

     

    You might be happier with one project per episode. A 20 minute episode may have a few sequences per scene due to nesting, etc, and many scenes. But it is probably going to be a lot neater way to keep track of things. Just organize your Project Panel into bins that allow you to have one bin per scene. That will make it easier to keep track of your sequences.

     

    I am curious why you bring it back to Premiere Pro for the final export. That DI seems like it could create an unnecessary generational loss.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 4, 2014 9:03 AM   in reply to Pierre Devereux

    Hi Pierre,

    as you know, there is no one and only proper workflow. The equation includes such variables as projects complexity and human resources allocation. You can keep everything in a single project. However, if it grows bigger, it can slow things down, hence you may want to split it into separate scene projects, importing locked down scene sequences into a master episode project. Splitting work into separate scene projects also allows to assign those projects to several artists. Similarly, you can decide that it's faster to assemble the master episode project out of scene DIs from scratch instead of replacing dynamically linked compositions in scene sequences and assign this job to a less trained artist.

     

    P.S. Steven, they accomplish heavy compositing and VFX work, which is spread between three artists. Replacing complex compositions with digital intermediates is a common practice.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 4, 2014 11:01 AM   in reply to Pierre Devereux

    I would find it much easier to have one project per episode.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 4, 2014 12:55 PM   in reply to Fuzzy Barsik
    P.S. Steven, they accomplish heavy compositing and VFX work, which is spread between three artists. Replacing complex compositions with digital intermediates is a common practice.

    Fuzzy,

     

    Read the question again.

     

    i aked why the need for the DI to get from After Effects to Premiere Pro for the final export. Why not just export from After Effects and avoid a generational loss? Or a huge lossless DI. Either way, I don't see the point.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 4, 2014 1:15 PM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    Steven,

    read the reply again. As well as original post.

    With complex compositing, which they accomplish, they have to render DIs out of AE. So as to see the point check this thread about Dynamic Link workflow, in which, aside from other things, truly yours provided the render time comparison for both DIs and dynamically linked compositions scenario under some circumstances (i.e. 'AE project of moderate complexity').

     

    And please, do not exaggerate generation loss alongside with DIs' size.

    1. They tested various production codecs and made conscious choice for both proxy and intermediate codecs.

    2. Enough disk space is a requirement in VFX.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 4, 2014 6:57 PM   in reply to Fuzzy Barsik

    Let's try again.

     

    I fully understand the point of a DI to work in other programs.

     

    I do not understand generating one just for the stated purpose of using it to export from Premiere Pro.

     

    He said "This is then rendered as a DI, imported back into Premier as a video layer and then rendered out in the final delivery codec."

     

    That indicated to me that the only purpose for that particular DI was to export to the final delivery codec. I am curious why that would be necessary. Is there a codec that Premiere Pro has access to that After Effects does not? Or are there other layers (other tracks?) being combined to create the final output.

     

    Because if the point is just to export from Premiere Pro, I don't see why they do not export to that codec instead of a DI.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 5, 2014 12:04 AM   in reply to Steven L. Gotz

    Steven, I'm not in the mood to chew the meal for you on conditions when you both do not understand the subject in question completely, are not willing to read quite detailed explanation provided in the referenced link, while replying to me in quite impolite manner.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 5, 2014 5:53 AM   in reply to Pierre Devereux

    ... placing them into the premier timeline allows us to do any last minute edits quickly (transitions, small cuts etc) and then a much quicker final render to delivery codec. There are also other tracks added before the final render, sound layers being one fo them.

    That satisfied my curiosity. Thanks.

     

    As Fuzzy pointed out, there are things I have not had experience with, but one way to learn is to ask. Sorry, Fuzzy, if I appeared rude. It was not intentional. I was just trying to get it figured out.

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points