-
mixing HDV with DV?
Posted by Adam Rose esq. on April 24, 2007 at 6:20 pmHave a prog shot on digibeta & a Z1. Digi was captured as DV and HDV captured straight as mpeg – no cineform.
Project is PAL DV 16×9.
Am seeing some HORRIBLE jaggies on the Z1 footage. Worse than a sawtooth comb, on some pans.
any ideas to rectify the problem? Was expecting to render back to tape eventually.
Thanks
Terje A. bergesen replied 19 years ago 4 Members · 11 Replies -
11 Replies
-
Gary Kleiner
April 24, 2007 at 6:30 pmWhat setting is your preview window? What does the footage look like straight from the deck or camera?
Gary Kleiner
Learn Vegas and DVD Architect
http://www.VegasTrainingAndTools.com
-
Adam Rose esq.
April 24, 2007 at 7:53 pmpreview window tried on all settings / sizes
can’t check the footage in camera, as camera has been returned to hire facility.
the static shots look fine, of course
🙁
-
Adam Rose esq.
April 24, 2007 at 8:03 pmoh, and the footage is fine in the project that is pure Z1 footage.
the jaggies only happen when imported into the DV project
both are interlaced PAL.
-
Ron Shook
April 24, 2007 at 9:15 pmFuddam,
[Fuddam] “the jaggies only happen when imported into the DV project”
I’m curious about this. Have you tried rendering a portion of the timeline of this DV project including both SD and HD material to DV and/or HDV to determine if it’s only a preview problem? Perhaps when it’s a mixed timeline there’s too much manipulation happening for Vegas to do a very good job with RT preview. On a pure HDV project there’s no scaling involved.
Ron Shook
-
Adam Rose esq.
April 24, 2007 at 10:40 pmturns out the render to SD AVI is fine, so no worries then 🙂
you’re probably right re the mixed timeline – I have no real idea. Is a fast machine, by the way.
-
Ron Shook
April 25, 2007 at 4:57 amFuddam,
[Fuddam] “turns out the render to SD AVI is fine, so no worries then :)”
Excellent!
[Fuddam] “Is a fast machine, by the way.”
If it’s the machine in your profile, it’s a pretty modest ‘puter by todays standards with lower than average memory. Scaling is pretty processor intensive and I don’t think that it’s unusual that this processor couldn’t handle it better in RT. I’m wondering if dual proc systems do a considerably better job, and would more system memory help appreciably?
Ron Shook
-
Adam Rose esq.
April 25, 2007 at 12:32 pmlol
thanks for reminding me to update my profile 🙂is now an E6600 with 2GB, so quite a difference from the old beast.
-
Ron Shook
April 25, 2007 at 8:56 pmFuddam,
[Fuddam] “is now an E6600 with 2GB, so quite a difference from the old beast.”
Hmmm! It’s a little disconcerting that the E6700 w/2GB that I’m putting together for Vegas won’t work appreciably better in this situation than your machine. Probably Vegas won’t use both cores well until the 64 bit version. We’ll see.
Thanks for the update.
Ron Shook
-
Terje A. bergesen
April 26, 2007 at 8:55 pmThere is no reason that a 64 bit version of Vegas would use your cores better than a 32 bit version. These things are not related in any way. Since Vegas runs very well on multi-core systems in other situations, this is not related to cores…
—
Terje A. Bergesen : https://terje.bergesen.info/ -
Ron Shook
April 26, 2007 at 10:13 pmTerje,
[Terje A. Bergesen] “There is no reason that a 64 bit version of Vegas would use your cores better than a 32 bit version.”
OK, thanks! Would a 64 bit system be more efficient in processing real-time effects and compositing, and without the 64 bit system would a quad core processor perform appreciably faster with Vegas than a dual core, than on the same MOBO with comparable clock speeds?
Ron Shook
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up
