referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools

  • flowD
  • flowD's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
More
1 month 3 weeks ago #8533 by flowD
flowD replied the topic: referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools
Dear James,

I don't know how PT is working in this regard, but from my side: no path at all, so that the sounddesign-studio just can "relink" to their copies of Multichannel WAVs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 3 weeks ago #8532 by James Carrick
James Carrick replied the topic: referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools
Hi F

So if I understand what you want is to put an alias path in the AAF for the referenced in place media, i.e. not the path it can currently be seen by Project, the alias path will point to the media from the machine running PT.

Regs.

James

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • flowD
  • flowD's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
More
1 month 3 weeks ago #8531 by flowD
flowD replied the topic: referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools
Unfortunatelly I can't provide you with a PT version. It's just a general question. Original path is utopian. The sounddesigners usually have there own Server- and Path-Systems. I also asked a colleague about his experiences and, like with me, all tests eventually failed, maybe they could relink, but the channel names scrambled or other weird stuff happend.
I understand that AAF is a unconsistent format to deal with - so, hats off if you could crack that!
On that note: there's no way to go around AAF and write a PT-project directly, is it?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 3 weeks ago #8530 by James Carrick
James Carrick replied the topic: referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools
Hi F,

Yes it should provided they have access to the original path the media was located on, and what version of PT you sent it to. If you can find out the PT version, I will see if we can check it.

Yours Sincerely

James

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • flowD
  • flowD's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
More
1 month 3 weeks ago #8529 by flowD
flowD replied the topic: referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools
so, if i check "Reference WAV files in place" and send it over to another studio it should work? All the times I tried it it failed. To be fair: the last time I tried it was 2 years ago.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 3 weeks ago #8528 by James Carrick
James Carrick replied the topic: referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools
Hi F

I think this is just a configuration on your side, you can always set the AAF to be created with a link to the WAV's including multichannel, there were some issues with anything other than PT and PT version 10 opening / importing them. So I guess the question is what version of PT are you sending to.

Yours Sincerely

James

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • flowD
  • flowD's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
More
1 month 4 weeks ago #8525 by flowD
flowD created the topic: referenced AAF for multichannel .wav-files to ProTools
Good day to everybody!
This is the feature I miss the most since years: To send a referenced AAF (for multichannel .wavs) to our sound-designers. It would make our workflows so much easier and faster. For example, at the moment we are sending 6x40min episodes with dialogue and fx to a sound-departement in another country. Each file is more than 20 GB. If something goes wrong we lose literally days of conforming, uploading, downloading, reimporting. I would pay for such a feature easily the amount I spent for the pro-upgrade.
The files would be small enough to send via email...
And, as far as I know, ProTools is capable of opening multi-wav without breaking apart and reconforming to mono-wavs.
I would appreciate to know if there are any stakes on the ProTools-side that prevent you to invent such a feature.
All the best.
F

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.184 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum