-
Does Vegas 8 have Quicktime Sorenson codecs?
-
[rob mack] “The only problem with using a script and the preview window is that Vegas will automatically correct for your project’s Pixel Aspect Ratio setting, so you can’t get uncorrected frames out of some project templates like SD and HDV templates. This is the only problem aside from the user errors you’re encountering, but it’s a show stopper for most applications where you’d want to export an image sequence.”
Ok, just found a way around this but does require some work. If you change the project settings to a PAR of 1.000 and change the PAR on the clip to 1.000 you will then get a 720×480 image out of Vegas (using a standard NTSC clip as a test) when set to Best (Full).
It would be possible for a script to change those settings and then reset them back when done.
Edward Troxel
-
Wouldn’t a genuine “Frame sequence” render option be more convenient than fiddling with the preview window-script thingee?
The Vegas design team did modify the product to include an XDCAM browser and support for the XDCAM file system. Perhaps someone who is using a $50,000 XDCAM camcorder is participating in projects requiring a greater degree of precision than those of a consumer user.
Maybe the Vegas design team is correct in their belief that Vegas users are basically a simple folk who can’t handle genuine frame rendering. Maybe they done taken ‘er as fer as she can git…
-
You’d have to do it to every piece of media in the project. I think Randall C’s approach to things like this was to actually have the script make a new copy of the project and then do all this manipulation to the copy. Less likely to screw up the original that way.
Square Par stills brought into a non-square project would have to have their par changed to a non-square setting to counter the squaring of the project. Whew! 😉
Could get hairy.
Rob
-
Hmmm. I think since still sequences are covered in so many ways they just don’t feel it’s a pressing need. Reasonably clever people seem to figure it out.
Rob
-
Rob,
I think you bring up good points about what would actually comprise a “properly written script” to accomplish this task.
We do have Final Cut Pro and Premiere Pro systems here, and proponents of those systems can just select “render as…” choose a template, and 2 seconds later the correct process has been implemented. I’m trying to be an advocate for Vegas, but I just can’t convince people that some kooky convoluted chain of actions is better than the “render as” button. Final Cut has been gaining a lot of ground lately… -
[Rob Mack] “Could get hairy.”
I definitely agree.
Edward Troxel
-
People have their preferences, and if your entire operation revolves around exporting frame sequences then maybe it’s worth it to invest in one set of hardware and software that requires less of a learning curve for that button press than another platform that might require a bit more knowledge than ought to be required.
Different systems have different strengths. Vegas has a certain amount of speed and lightness that can be appealing, and it’s probably better suited to desktop usage than FCP. It will run on most desktop systems out there while FCS requires you to purchase Macs. Certainly the cost of entry is less.
They’re both prosumer applications that were built out to try to compete in higher end markets than they were originally designed for, and FCS pushes a lot higher up the production food chain with Apple’s server solutions.
It may very well be that Vegas is not the right fit for your group, but this particular issue is just so miniscule that it’s hardly worth obsessing about. If you or your coworkers can’t get your heads around the fact that different systems have different methods of doing things then I’d say you need to settle on the one you know and stick with it.
We just went through a migration here from Media100 to PPro/Axio (because we’ve sworn never to go with an Apple platform ever again. Too much experience.) There was a certain amount of hammer-headedness about trying to get the new systems to do things just like the old systems and this is so common that I think it’s very hard to get editors to move, especially when they have to change their OS too. It’s all boiled down to twitch responses and it’s too painful to switch edit systems.
This thread is pretty well hijacked and I think we can put it out of our misery at this point.
Rob
-
Rob,
Premiere Pro and Final Cut Pro provide frame sequence rendering as an official rendering option. They guarentee the accuracy of the results and provide customer support to resolve any difficulties. I suspect that with Vegas Pro, the official policy is something like “our product does not offer frame
sequence rendering, we are not responsible for results obtained using scripts written by hobbyists that you found on internet message boards”.
I think that frame sequence rendering should be a formal render menu option that is part of the product, instead of something that can only be obtained through workarounds created by helpful enthusiasts.
I agree that the thread did get hijacked, thanks for contributing your observations, which have been quite helpful. -
You underestimate what the provided script is doing, but you’re right, the proper place for a still sequence exporter is in the render dialog.
The script method requires you to know your way around Vegas a bit more than the average Joe. But then, so does the frame server-virtualDub route.
Rob Mack
-
Another advantage to having “Render frame sequence” as a render option is being able to select rendering with networked computers. Can the script method utilize multiple computers?
Some projects incorporate content that changes position and scale. Such as an HDV project 1440 x 1080 PAR 1.333 with moving overlays made from scaled down DV PAR 0.9 moving across still photos PAR 1.0. My concern with a script to render at the PAR of the project is that the process of changing the scale of all the content would be inaccurate, the content might be scaled down to a size that is close to within a few pixels of a Real frame. But some of the overlays could be a bit stretched and in slightly different positions.
There was a recent frame sequence post at the Sony forum about a project that involved 45,000 frames. Would you want to individually check 45,000 frames to verify that they correctly estimated the amount to rescale all the source content to closely approximate the project pixel aspect ratio?
Another reason to include “frame sequence” as a render option is so that it becomes an official part of the product that is featured in the ‘Help” files and manual. Not everybody goes out searching internet sites for workarounds. Some people will reach the conclusion that the product can not perform the process that they require.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up