For each clip in the timeline that needs to be corrected (audio added) use locate in project, double click the located clip to bring it to the source monitor, ensure that 'bring in video only' is not selected, but both video and audio, and drag to the timeline over the previous clip.
Harm's method won't work if you've trimmed the clip in the sequence or if you've used multiple instances of the clip in the sequence. There's apparently a bug in CS3 that prevents this from being as easy as it should, but it works better and as expected in CS4. Here's what you do:
- Double-click the sequence clip to load it into the Source Monitor.
- Press the Q-key to go to the video in point. Note the timecode.
- Press the W-key to go to the video out point. Note the timecode.
- Select the clip in the sequence and park the CTI on top of it.
- Press the M-key to do a match frame operation.
- Set the Source Monitor to display either audio-only or audio+video.
- Enter the TC of the in point. Press the I-key to set the audio in point.
- Enter the TC of the out point. Press the O-key to set the audio out point.
- Drag the audio from the SM image to the sequence. Line it up with the video portion of the clip that's already there.
In CS4, you can Q, I, W, O during the match frame operation without having to manually note the timecodes from the clip instance. You should be able to do the same in CS3, but I can't here.
Of course you are correct. I've grown so accustomed to CS4 and have nearly forgotten everything about CS3, that I (incorrectly) assumed this to work in CS3 as well.
My laptop won't run CS4, so it's still got CS3 installed. Handy, eh?
I'd tell the students to shift workflows.
Always being down the audio. Mute the track. If you ever want to bring audio back, it's as simple as moving to an unmuted track, or for all of them just unmute the track.
But that doesn't help the students who have already done it a different way.
True. Your advice does that. Mine prevents future occurrances.
Jeff, thanks so much for that clear and useful process, much appreciated.
Jim, that's a good point that I'll have to address in our teaching.
Harm, at least now we know what to look forward to in 5 (looks like we'll be skipping 4)!