MP3 conversion

[ef37a]

I am emailing a guy who wants to attach a music file but it is too big. He does not know how to compress it to MP3 on his mac and of course, I am NO help at all!

I am not even sure he has a DAW. Do all macs have Garage Band and can that do MP3s

Dave.

[MarkOne]

You can use the Apple Music app to convert file formats.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204310

And yes, all macs come with GarageBand and you can save a GarageBand project as mo3.

https://support.apple.com/en-gb/guide/ ... bf5ed9/mac

But to be honest, rather than messing with that, I’d use WeTransfer (which you can use for free up to 2GB)

https://wetransfer.com/

[Hugh Robjohns]

Don't faff about with mp3, use a file transfer service like WeTransfer, TransferNow, SendAnywhere, Hightail, Slack, Dropbox, or even OneDrive or GoogleDrive etc etc...

[ef37a]

Don't faff about with mp3, use a file transfer service like WeTransfer, TransferNow, SendAnywhere, Hightail, Slack, Dropbox, or even OneDrive or GoogleDrive etc etc...

OK! I shall tell 'im!

Dave.

[BigRedX]

Unfortunately IME if some can't figure out how to convert and audio file to MP3 on a Mac, using an on-line file transfer service will also be beyond them. Especially now, since even WeTransfer requires you to sign up to use its services.

[ConcertinaChap]

There's always Audacity. This makes conversion and simple editing pretty easy and it's free.

CC

[resistorman]

If you use gmail, you can attach large files automatically, it will save it to Drive and provide a link.

[ef37a]

Thanks all, the guy sent me the file eventually by We Transfer. Turns out it was a video file from a phone* so all that messin' with MP3 was for nought!

*Why don't peeps film things in landscape?

Dave.

[MarkOne]

*Why don't peeps film things in landscape?

Dave.

This infuriates me. Particularly when they know it’s destined for a YouTube stream.

Me: film it landscape
Person: why?
Me: is your telly propped up on its side at home?
Person: ahhh!

There is a bistro/bar/tapas place near us and they have a rolling vid of their past events on a honking big LG 65 oled and most of that screen real estate is black because it was all filmed in portrait on a phone

[ef37a]

Yes Mark! I was not that sure smart phones COULD video in landscape because on the rare occasion I want to film something I use a 'proper' camera!

Dave.

[MOF]

This infuriates me. Particularly when they know it’s destined for a YouTube stream.

Me: film it landscape
Person: why?
Me: is your telly propped up on its side at home?
Person: ahhh!

On a related note I wish programme makers would not zoom in on old 4:3 footage to fill the 16:9 frame we have now, especially when they just zoom in and leave it there without any consideration of the subject matter e.g. most of a person’s head being cropped off.

[Hugh Robjohns]

...Or when they include vintage undercranked film at modern frame rates, so everyone walks at silly speeds.

The thing is, all these format issues are well known and most are easy to accommodate in far better ways. Sadly, the producers /directors /editors either don't know, don't care, or don't have the time/budget to do it right. I suspect the first two possibilities dominate.

[sonics]

Me: film it landscape
Person: why?
Me: is your telly propped up on its side at home?
Person: ahhh!

Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and now YouTube shorts are all portrait format intended for smartphone viewing. Everyone holds the smartphone vertically, as it was designed to be used. They know no better.

[MOF]

Sadly, the producers /directors /editors either don't know, don't care, or don't have the time/budget to do it right. I suspect the first two possibilities dominate.

Agreed.

Or when they include vintage undercranked film at modern frame rates, so everyone walks at silly speeds.

When you see what Peter Jackson did with WW1 footage there’s no excuse not to at least correct for speed differences.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Absolutely. Speed correction was difficult to do in the analogue days, but now it's trivially simple and the visual artefacts are insignificant compared to the vastly more natural movements.

[ef37a]

Yeah but Benny Hill would not be nearly as funny!

Dave.

[Tomás Mulcahy]

When you see what Peter Jackson did with WW1 footage there’s no excuse not to at least correct for speed differences.

Oh wow, I just watched the trailer. Very moved by it. And I agree, it's incredible work. Rented for watching later.

[BigRedX]

Also if your holder your phone vertically you are less likely to inadvertently get you fingers in the way of the camera lenses (or at least I am).

[N i g e l]

Absolutely. Speed correction was difficult to do in the analogue days, but now it's trivially simple and the visual artefacts are insignificant compared to the vastly more natural movements.

In days of old, I heard that to convert from film 24fps to TV 25fps they just ran the film at 25 fps to sync to video.

So a 90 minute movie would last 86 minutes & the audio would almost be a semitone higher.

Is that still the case with the old films today or have they been converted to a file with digitally exacting interpolation algorithms ?