23.976 discrepancy

Dears all, i am working in Logic on a movie set to frame rate at 23.98.
I just set Logic to 23.976 and the first 3 reels are ok TC in Logic is matching the burned TC on film.
I got problems from reel 4 to 6 : on the paper : The tc in Logic and the burned on film are not matchig, i mean the matching is random 5 or 6 fps on the 24....
Obviously i've tried the same on PT and all it's ok.
Any suggestion ?
Thanks in advance.

Thanks. Could you get them to also check other parts of the code too. eg. when I had a work area set in Adobe After Effects CS5.5 and then loaded that project into Adobe Media Encoder (dynamic link etc.) and rendered just the work area I think it was about a frame out then too - I don't think it was a GIF in that case but another type (maybe AVI/H264).

Similar Messages

Had anyone worked with 23.976 fps video?

It's the new hi def video frame rate that is supported in Logic 8, but I'm having some problems.
I also have a Canopus ADVC110 firewire to analog video out and the video is glitchy and crash prone.
I don't know if the Canopus really supports 23.976. Is there another video box that does support this frame rate?
Any info regarding this would really help me. Thanks
Marty

Some more info on La Wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24p
23.976p
Many 24p productions, especially those that are made only for TV and video distribution, actually have a frame rate of 24 * 29.97 / 30 frame/s, or 23.976frame/s (24/100.1% to be exact). Many use the term "24p" as a shorthand for this frame rate, since "23.976" does not roll off the tongue as easily. This is because the "30frame/s" framerate of NTSC is actually 30/100.1%, also referred to as 29.97frame/s – this framerate is matched when video at 23.976frame/s has a 3:2 pulldown applied. Similarly, 60i is shorthand for 60/100.1% fields per second.
Film productions may be shot at exactly 24.000 frame/s. This can be a source of confusion and technical difficulties if material is treated as normal video, since the slightly differing framerates can be problematic for video and audio sync. However, this is not a problem if the video material is merely treated as a carrier for material which is known by the editing system to be "true" 24frame/s, and audio is recorded separately from moving images, as is normal film practice.
Fun stuff!
Hey iS - you always show up for the interesting threads

Purchase Order Items open vs ME2M discrepancy

First posting so if this is not the right section please move this topic. Was the closest I could come to correct forum placement.
Hello all, I am in the process of setting up BPM to monitor u201CN* of Purchase Order Items openu201D from various plant locations and I am noticing the number BPM gives is different than what the system you give if I used ME2M.
For example: I am setting up BPM to monitor Number of Purchase Order Items Open for plant location 2102. The set up is scarce and I only have a few fields filled out in the set-up:
-Document Type u2013 Single Value u2013 NB, UB, FO, ZPC, ZGR
-Plant (Item) u2013 2102
-Doc. Category u2013 F (Purchase Order)
-All of fields are left blank
When this runs I will get an example of 1487 (it changes on an hourly basis so I canu2019t give a static value).
When I try to verify this number using ME2M I get a value of 1237. A difference of 250.
The configuration I am using for ME2M is as follows:
-Plant u2013 2102
-Scope of List u2013 ALLES
-Selection Parameters u2013 WE101
-Document Type - NB, UB, FO, ZPC, ZGR
-All other fields at left blank
Any reason for this discrepancy? The closest I can guess is SAP is pulling in some additional information OR my configuration is incorrect. Anybody run into this issue that has some tips?
Thank you
-nic

I know that ME2M has nothing to due to with BPM.
I am confused as to why when I set up BPM, in Solution Manager, to monitor Purchase Orders that are open I am getting a different number than when I use the transaction ME2M in SAP ECC.
For example:
When the process runs in Solution Manager I get back 1425 open POs
When I go into SAP ECC and use the transaction ME2M it will only pull up 1175 open POs
Somewhere along the lines I am missing or adding 250 POs. The current setup (listed above; not sure if BPM is configured the same for everyone) is listed above.
I have tried various set-up options in both BPM Solution Manager and SAP ECC (ME2M) but can't seem to find where these additional numbers are coming from.
Thank you
-nic

Vendor balance shows discrepancy between S_ALR_87012082 and FAGLB03.

Dear expert,
These 2 reports currently shows discrepancy in balance.
I came to know S_ALR_87012082 report ( vendor balance in local currnecy) has more vendor records than FAGLB03.
Namely, some of vendors are not displaying in FAGLB03 but showing S_ALR_87012082 .
Could you inspire me why this problem arised and how to fix it?
Is it related to balance carry forward something?
where should i doubt?
Sincerely,
J.
Edited by: Jimmy Choi on Jan 3, 2011 5:51 PM

If you do not see balance carryforward amounts in FAGBL03 are you using all vendor Recon accounts?

Discrepancy between F.19 and F.05 on GR/IR accounts

Hi,
In my opinion, the documents reported as GNB (goods received not invoiced) in transaction F.19 should be exactly the same documents that are being revalued in F.05 using Open Items, GR/IR account, radio button on "Valuate GR/IR" accounts.
By definition, GNB are a liability that needs to be remeasured to current rates.
I am now observing that most F.05 includes documents that F.19 does not consider GNB (a spot check on some of these documents confirmed that F.19 is correct anf F.05 should not revalue these documents).
Has anyone come accross this discrepancy, and have a solution? We are currently not able to correctly state the liability resulting from the goods received without invoice.
Thanks for your help, and best regards,
Pascal

Thanks for the reply.
I have double checked again if I used the same key date, but that was not the problem.
We also have no manual postings (we have had this problem in the past and ran into significant problems with that).
The download of the results from both F.19 and F.05 was done, and I can identify exactly which documents are revalued in F.05 and are NOT considered GNBs in F.19, but I can't tell the reason.
When I find one such document, and I look up all the documents that have the same PO number (and line item number), I can tell that F.19 is correct; The sum of all documents is a debit (therefore BNG and should not be revalued), but in this particular case, the goods receipts are being revalued, even though the invoice receipts exceed the value of the goods receipt).
From looking at these documents, I can't figure out what makes them different from all the other transactions that are correctly revalued.
Any pointers on what I should be looking for in these documents are very welcome.
Thanks, and best regards,
Pascal

Discrepency of GR and IR quantity.

Hi,
in the event if the GR and IR quantity is different, my users are using MR11 to "clear-off" the discrepency amount. However, understand that the posting will be made to the Inventory G/L account.
Is there a way which the "clear-off" can be posting to another expense G/L account?
Thanks for the advice in advance.

Hi
Result of MR11 will not hit Inventory accounts. it will take PRD account. Mean to say Open item in WRX will setoff at PRD account. You have 3 account modifier for PRD.
PRF for goods receipts against production orders and
order settlement
PRA for goods issues and other movements
PRU for transfer postings (price differences in the case
of external amounts)
Mainatin GL accounts as per your requirement in OBYC with these combination
Regards
Antony

Inventory Audit Report and Inventory G/L Account discrepancy

Good Day!
Hi Everybody. I had experienced a discrepancy between the Inventory Audit Report and Inventory G/L Account.
Before everything else, our client does not have any PO, GRPO. Only A/P Invoice and A/P Credit Memos so there are no difference being posted.
There were also no transactions posted directly in Inventory G/L Account but from observation, there is a minor difference. This only happened with two transactions in AP Invoice with Negative Quantity.
The AP Invoice is composed of a single item, the unit price is 180.00 x -58 pcs quantity. Total amount is -10,440.00.
G/L Account posting is
Inventory 10,440.00
A/P 10,440.00
In the FIFO layering, the item cost is 200.00 (based on the current stock value) and the current stock quantity before posting is 80 pcs . Since this is a negative quantity A/P Invoice, it seems that the cost of the item when the transaction will be posted is 200 (based on the current stock value) so when I view the Inventory Audit Report amount, it says the inventory cost/posting is -11,600 (200 x -58).
But on actual G/L Account, the posting is -10,440.00 from A/P Invoice, that's why the inventory discrepancy occurs. It seems that SAP B1's Inventory Audit Report confuses the FIFO cost posted versus G/L Account's posted based on the document. Since the document is A/P Invoice, SAP B1 assumes that the transaction will post the amount as the additional inventory cost and posting the inventory cost into Inventory G/L Account. However, since this is a negative document, the system is releasing the items, thus, FIFO kicks in. The Inventory Audit Report catches the amount based on FIFO costing. The problem is that the Inventory Audit Report is more accurate than the Inventory G/L Balance.
Any suggestion to fix this guys?

HI,
i'my afraid you're in the wrong place. This is the Chinese forum. Please go to SAP Business One Application for help.
Best

Crystal Reports 2008 parameter panel discrepancy.

Hi,
I have a report designed using Crystal Reports 2008. The report has a dynamic parameter called Location which is populated from a table. It is a Value - Description pair so it is:
Value = LocID
Descripition = LocationName.
The Show on Viewer(Panel) attribute is set to Editable.
The Prompt with Description Only attribute is set to true.
In the Crystal Reports stand-alone Designer everything works fine. It prompts with the Description. After making a selection, the Parameter Panel shows the selected items(the Description, NOT the value) correctly. This is the desired behavior.
But when the report is viewed in the Crystal Reports Viewer that comes with .NET 2008 the Parameter panel shows the Value, which is LocID and not the description which is LocationName. This is NOT very useful.
I have tried other third party Crystal Reports viewers as well. They all exhbit the same discrepancy.
How can this be resolved?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
- Rajan.

Hi Don,
Thank you for your response. The assemblies and their versions are as follows;
CrystalDecisions.CrystalReports.Engine - 12.0.2000.0
CrystalDecisions.Enterprise.Framework - 12.0.1100.0
CrystalDecisions.Shared - 12.0.2000.0
CrystalDecisions.Windows.Forms - 12.0.2000.0
Thanks,
- Rajan.

After downloading iOS 7 on my 4S I show 8,976 on my email icon. How can I eliminate them all without going one at a time?

After downloading iOS 7 on my 4S it shows 8,976 on the email icon. How can I move them all to trash without doing it one at a time?

Apple's official advice is here... HT2905 - How to find and remove duplicate items in your iTunes library. It is a manual process and the article fails to explain some of the potential pitfalls.
Use Shift > View > Show Exact Duplicate Items to display duplicates as this is normally a more useful selection. You need to manually select all but one of each group to remove. Sorting the list by Date Added may make it easier to select the appropriate tracks, however this works best when performed immediately after the dupes have been created. If you have multiple entries in iTunes connected to the same file on the hard drive then don't send to the recycle bin.
Use my DeDuper script if you're not sure, don't want to do it by hand, or want to preserve ratings, play counts and playlist membership. See this thread for background and please take note of the warning to backup your library before deduping.
(If you don't see the menu bar press ALT to show it temporarily or CTRL+B to keep it displayed)
tt2

Forum discrepancy: how to FTP iWeb to Godaddy once and for all!

I've been lurking on the forum and getting all sorts of good advice. Thank you everyone who posts here!
However, I've noticed a discrepancy about FTP'ing to Godaddy with authoritative advice-givers on both sides of the issue.
Here's the issue:
When you publish to a folder in iWeb, iWeb generates two top level documents: an index.html file and a folder named Site (by default, or whatever you may have renamed it in iWeb as your "site."). The index.html file also appears to be contained inside the Site folder along with all the other docs pertaining to your website.
The question is:
Which is better, to FTP both documents to the server, the index.html file and the Site folder, OR just the contents of the Site folder (and ignore the top level index.html file)?
There are multiple recommendations in this forum for both answers.
Here's one saying FTP both:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=7986754&#7986754
Here's one saying FTP the contents of the folder only:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=8050644&#8050644
If I understand it correctly, a benefit of uploading both is proper RSS notification. Is this correct and how important is this? Are there any other benefits or is this the only one?
On the other hand, the benefit of uploading the content of the Site folder only is that the resulting URLs do not include the word "Site" (or whatever you've substituted for it), following your domain name, and before your page names.
In my opinion, the website looks more professional and clean without the word "site" following the domain name and before the page name, so I'd therefore rather upload the contents of the Site folder and not the Site folder + the index.html document.
So... if I continue doing it this way, is there any serious drawback, or would this be the way to get the most professional-looking results hosting an iWeb site on Godaddy?

Ethmoid wrote:
My answer to this question is that I always advise people to upload the whole site folder, plus the separate index.html file. If you start loading individual pages from the folder, you risk messing the site structure up and your site not working at all. I tried this with my own site at one time and it would not display correctly until I uploaded the whole site folder and then it worked perfectly.
Thanks for the response.
Is there any technical reason why loading the complete contents of the folder produced by iWeb '08 would imperil the site structure, or is this advice based on your one experience? My own experience is no problems at all uploading the complete contents of the main folder to Godaddy. So... has anyone else experienced problems?
I always say that it is not the url of a site that makes it professional or not, it is the content and the design. When I look at a site, I always look at the content and the design and then decide, I don't immediately look at the url. If you really don't like the word site, then change your site name to something more applicable to your site. I named mine the first 3 letters of the title and it looks a whole lot better than site and I am happy with it.
Remember that old adage never judge a book by its cover, well the same applies here, never judge a web site by its url!!
Arguably a website is the "book cover" for whatever company, organization, or person it is about. However, I don't want to derail the topic into a discussion of whether a URL matters. For those for whom it matters, it matters, and for those for whom it doesn't, it doesn't!
For me, it matters not because I care, but because I anticipate some of my visitors will care. So if I can serve up a professional-looking URL by uploading the contents of the folder rather than the folder itself, are there any compelling reasons, aside from not pandering to the superficiality of humanity, for doing it any other way?

Discrepancy in Report results

Hi,
Our production environment is clustered. We have 2 nodes that OBIEE reports are running on. When two different users are running the same report, with same parameters from different machines, they are seeing different results. This report that has discrepancy shows medians. There is .1 difference in the results. Can someone please explain what might cause this issue and also how it can be solved?
Thank You,
AP

svee,
Is this caused because of the cache and is this a common issue with clustered environments? Since, this is happening in production system and our dev environment is not clustered, we can not really try out one option at a time.
Thank You,
AP

Discrepancy in report execution duration

Hello,
Everyday we are executing audit reports which tells us report execution time for all our daily scheduled reports. Here we have observed some discrepancy between the time shown in the instance history verses auditing report's data. For example, if XYZ report took 120 seconds to execute, our auditing report shows 110 seconds only (-10 sec difference); however instance status in report history shows 120 sec only.
Here are environment details:
Product: SAP BI 4.0 SP6 Patch 6
Server OS: Windows Server 2008 R2
CMS DB: Oracle 11g R2
Auditing DB: Oracle 11g R2
We would like to know why there is a difference? Please advise!
Regards,
Daya Jha

Issue resolved after doing multiple activity.
- Adding 2 new cluster in PRD environment, After refering Server sizing Guide from SAP
- Adding 4 new Web Intelligence Processing Server in PRD environment
- Assign Static port in all 4 Nodes, Previously it was Dynamic Ports
- Proper spiliting of APS as per SAP APS Sliting KBA (1792286 ,1694041)
- Change Maximum Connection Paremeter in Web Intelligence Processing Server, Because we have more Web Intelligence Business user to view the Web Intelligence reports.By Default SAP provided 50 Connections.
- Change in Tomcat Parameters like
Parameter                Old Value      New Value
XX:MaxPermSize      384 M          512 M
Maximum Memory     2,048           4,096
maxThreads              200              900
Thanks,
Daya

Discrepancy in the table payr, need urgent help

Dear All,
i have one table payr in logical database.
2 fields of it i,e kunnr and vblnr
When i goto se16 and select the data for say kunnr = '2901350' and vblnr = '20002000'
Now what happens for this combination i get no data found.
but say i enter only vblnr = '20002000' i get teh outpur with kunnr '2901350'.
BUt at the time of selection i enter data i dont get it.
I also tried entering '0002901350' than to data is not coming.
when i entered in selection kunnr = '2901350*' then i get the output
PLease help me output it this is the problem with the conversion exit or not
how to resolve the problem
Regards,
Tanvi

is the table being updated by any Z PROGRAM ,,
if so then in that program check whether the entries on kunnr and vblnr have used conversion alpha routine ..
if i dont use a routine on value 21220020 then if it is storing in the table as 21220020 then its a discrepancy cause it has to be stored as 0021220020 .
see if any database entry is like this which u have referred in the post .
if any one is missing(either on kunnr or vblnr) then its a data discrepancy problem for which u cannot handle with a select.
regards,
vijay

Help! I have an Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2014 sequence @ 59.94 fps and need to export the video as 23.976 but the video looks glitchy! Please Help!

Help! I have an Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2014 sequence @ 59.94 fps and need to export the video as 23.976 but the final video render looks glitchy! Please Help!
I made a new sequence at 23.976 and imported my 1280x720 59.94 video into the sequence... when i rendered it out it looks glitchy!
my client is not allowing 1280 x720 59.94 video files they want 29.97 progressive,25,24,or 23.98
Please Help what do i do! where did i go wrong! this is horrible omg!!!! please help!
Thank you!

Nice!
In my export setting i switched the frame rate to 29.97 and it looks good to me!
Thank you!

Import sequence files from 29.976 to 23.976....HELP!

Hi All,
Can someone help me with this very annoying issue.
I work with Nuke X, Assimilate Scratch and Maya. 99% of the time I am transfering image sequence files from program to program.
When I import a sequence file into premiere cs5 or even cs4, the sequence comes in with a DEFAULT FRAME RATE of 29.976.
I work in 24 or 23.976 frame projects. I ALWAYS have to go Rick click/Modify/ interpret footage and change to 23.976.
Is there a way to set up cs5 to assume 23.976 as a default frame rate for image sequences?
Also, Part two question:
I bought a video card that uses the MPE in cs5 and it works great. I could layer the heck out of the timelime.
But Only if the footage is from RED, Canon, quicktime, mpeg, etc.. If I import my image sequence files, I DO NOT get fluid playback.
Does anyone out there get fluid playback from targas, DPX, Tiffs?
Thanks,
Lou

Holy Crap ! You Did it!!!
I have been changing that freakin thing from 29.976 to 23.976 , ten times a day, for 2 years.
I can 't believe it has been sitting there all that time. Then again, I wrote on Creative cow forum a while back, and nobody knew how to fix that.
So...... you D Man
A bug in CS5?
Yeah that figures, Of course it would be a bug in importing sequences. Just my luck.
I bought the new Mocha 2.0 which now has NUKEX importing.....
I spent 3 days trying to figure out why my timeline was off by 1 frame when importing....
Found out "Its a Bug" and had to wait for 2.01
My whole life is all about updates.

23.976 discrepancy

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for