Appendix 1

The Filmmaker’s Guide to Final Cut Pro Workfl ow
This is defi nitely not a common workfl ow, but someday it may be the primary workfl ow. After the
negative is processed, all circled takes are scanned and the negative is vaulted. If all goes well, the
negative will never be touched again.
The 2 K is put in sync with the sound and the 2 K dailies screened at full resolution. The 2 K is downsampled
to something editable, perhaps photo JPEG, JPEG 2000, or MPEG4, and this is distributed
to everyone in the postproduction chain via network. The edit project can also be moved around and
even linked back to the 2 K whenever the editor wants to screen in full resolution.
This workfl ow is expensive, and full of unknown problems, yet simple and straightforward, and also
likely to be the future. Not long ago, workfl ow was predictable, well known, and, more or less,
simple. Technology has opened creative doors and simplifi ed much of the fi lmmaking process, but
workfl ow has gotten more complicated—almost unfathomable at times. Perhaps its time for technology
to simplify workfl ow, too.
Virtual Digital Intermediate
Virtual digital intermediate workfl ow is very similar to the virtual fi lm workfl ow except it does not use
a 2 K or 4 K scan. In this case, the DI is actually an HD telecine to D5, HD Cam, or HD Cam SR.
In this workfl ow, the circled takes are color corrected and telecined to HD tape at 23.98 FPS and
down converts made to DV Cam at 29.97. This exact workfl ow is detailed in Chapter 6 in the section
on fi nishing on 23.98 FPS or 24 FPS HD Video. While this is the exact same workfl ow through the
HD online, the fi nal fi lm fi nish is the same as DI. In this case, the fi nished HD video is shot back to
internegative or interpositive on a fi lm recorder and the fi nal sound mix is shot to optical sound and
also printed to the interpositive.
While this is very similar to the virtual fi lm workfl ow, because the fi lm is telecined to HD rather
than being scanned to 2 K or 4 K DPX or Cineon, much of the color correction is done in the telecine
rather than in fi nishing, as it is in DI. The control is, therefore, less and the image quality
compromised.
In terms of cost savings, this is defi nitely a savings over true DI. However, it is not likely to save
anything over cutting the negative. And as the image is compromised when compared to DI or direct
printing, it seems that no one would use this workfl ow. Yet, it has become the most popular workfl ow
among low-budget, independent fi lmmakers who are making their fi lm on spec with no distribution
in place.
The advantage is not just in terms of what the costs are, but when the costs are encountered. With
this workfl ow, the fi lm can be fi nished to HD video and then shopped around for distribution and
entered in festivals that accept HD. If a theatrical deal is made, the HD can be fi nished on fi lm. These
costs can be passed to the distributor or paid from any cash advance. If the fi lm is sold in a direct
video deal to cable and/or home video, there is no need for this expensive fi lm fi nish and no money
was wasted making 35 mm prints that will never be seen.
Requiem for the Negative Cutter
It’s sad to note that in the virtual digital intermediate workfl ow, even after the HD online, if
the fi lm is fi nished to 35 mm, the negative could still be cut by simply exporting Cinema Tools fi lm
76