# NAB 2012: Singular Software PluralEyes



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 17, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=9567"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=9567" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=9567"></a></div>
<strong>Multicamera audio syncing made super quick and easy


</strong>I watched a demo by <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/brucesharpe" target="_blank">Bruce Sharpe</a> at Singular software, he was showing off their software package PluralEyes.</p>
<p>PluralEyes is a product that ties in with your existing video editing software like Final Cut, Premier, Media Composer and others. It removes the tedious work of syncing audio from multiple camera sources, and it does it in seconds.</p>
<p>We saw a demo of the upcoming PluralEyes3, which is 10-15 times faster than the already speedy PluralEyes. About 90 minutes of video from 3 cameras was synced in about 25 seconds. There was a nice applause when it completed.</p>
<p>Someone asked “why everyone didn’t use PluralEyes?” and the answer was, “because people just don’t know about us”. So I’m here doing my part. The product is pretty remarkable and it’s so unblievably well priced at $149, everyone can afford to use it.</p>
<p>If you purchase PluralEyes in the next month or two, you will get a free upgrade to PluralEyes3 when it becomes available. The public beta of PluralEyes3 starts in May.</p>
<p>You can <a href="http://www.singularsoftware.com/pluraleyes.html" target="_blank">download a free 30 day demo</a> at the Singular Software site.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.singularsoftware.com/index.html" target="_blank"><strong>Singular Software</strong></a></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## bp (Apr 17, 2012)

I LOOOOOOOVE Pluraleyes

I feel horrible for anyone who manually syncs more than 2 cameras. I mean, frankly, two is easy, but when you start stacking more cameras, it turns into a friggin nightmare. There are few things in this world more satisfying than watching PE sync up a 5-camera shoot in a matter of seconds


----------



## dromemc (Apr 17, 2012)

I've had the opposite experience: not all audio sources have clean enough audio to by synced and require a good ear and eye to manually do it by hand. Pluraleyes is not a magic bullet and I often hear disappointment in the product from people expecting it to be a cure-all. It's a good tool and can be used in many situations but don't expect it to perfectly do all of the work for you.


----------



## thewallbanger (Apr 17, 2012)

I'm with Dromemc. I've had mixed experiences with their software. This recent test of mixing 90 minutes of video and audio from 3 cameras in 25 seconds doesn't really do much for me. If they were three 90-minute, un-cut clips, then PluralEyes would only need three syncing operations. Can we get more info on the complexity of these demo videos?


----------



## bluegreenturtle (Apr 17, 2012)

Everybody doesn't use it because often the software simply doesn't work. I've been using dual eyes since it came out and have abandoned it - half the time it doesn't create the new files (just extracts the audio) and in the last time I used it it introduced a weird drift in just some of the files. It basically takes me 5 times as long to try to massage the software into working (and sometimes with no success) as it does to just synch it myself manually. I went through one tortuous project where the client saw drift in all my videos and repeatedly suggested I use plural-eyes, but it turned out that was the issue to begin with - I was already using it. I finally had to redo everything manually and then it was fine.


----------



## prestonpalmer (Apr 17, 2012)

bp said:


> I LOOOOOOOVE Pluraleyes



Us too! We have been using this since it was first released. Incredible program.


----------



## The_Arsonist (Apr 19, 2012)

Just downloaded the demo because Final Cut Pro X was having issues syncing about 50 shots I had from a 60d with distorted audio to my other rolling cams. Pluraleyes worked quite well, and only missed on a couple of the shots. No way was I going to try and manually sync 50 one minute clips shot over the course of a two hour concert.


----------



## bluegreenturtle (May 7, 2012)

Just an update on this, I tried the new plural eyes for Premiere and it worked quite well. Dual Eyes continues to be completely non-functional for me. So in my experience, Plural eyes is worth it.


----------

