Bob Peterson
Forum Replies Created
-
Where did you purchase the extra tutorials?
-
You should not expect preview quality to produce a pristine image no matter what format the source file is in. Vegas is NOT TRYING to give you a pristine image in preview. That is the point of preview mode. Preview is meant to give you the best possible framerate while you are editing the file. If you are doing things that require you to see a high quality image, you should switch to best(full) which will show you the kind of image quality that a render is capable of producing if you render at a high quality.
-
I upgraded from the basic version to the advanced version hoping that the advanced version would produce even better results for what I had found so useful in the basic version. I did not see any improvement in the basic functions, like denoising and spectral repair, that I had found so useful. They seemed to be identical to the basic version. The advanced version does include additional functions that may or may not be useful. That is what you have to figure out. I have not yet found a lot of uses for the additional functions, and I am a bit disappointed with the advanced version.
I really do not like one change that was made between version 2 and 3. Version 3 has dropped the scan button from the gain control. Thus, it has no ability to tell you how much the gain can be increased before clipping occurs. I now usually run version 2 to find this number, and may or may not do additional processing in version 3. I am very perplexed as to why they dumbed down the gain control.
-
A screen capture utility can do this. I had one several years ago called Replay, but I’m sure the gamers have lots of choices for video screen capture.
-
To ease the pain while you are trying things to find an approach which works, I suggest that you obtain and use a RW DVD. I use them all the time while I an fine tuning a video, and it saves a ton of money for wasted DVD blanks. I also suggest a search on the forum for software which will tell you, assuming that your version of Vegas supports this, the maximum bit rate you can safely use to render your video and burn it to a DVD. I use BITCALC which is discussed on the forum.
-
There probably are not any good options for capturing a component input coming directly into a computer. Most recommendations in this group suggest using a Canopus device to convert analogue video to a digital form. I use an old video camera that performs the same function by utilizing a “pass through” capability built into the camera. As you know, Vegas certainly does not support this kind of capture.
-
If you are happy with them, I would not give them up. The ONLY reason I gave up my CRT was that it died.
-
The biggest con I had was that I was able to achieve a near perfect color calibration with an analog monitor. What I saw on the screen (photographs) was virtually identical to what was produced by a photo printer. I also had good confidence within my video editing activities. Not so with a digital monitor. Even with a Spyder 4, I cannot achieve the same level of accuracy for either photos or video. It is always a series of guesses where the image is viewed on the target device, and guesstimated adjustments are necessary to get the image looking good. Not too hard, but a real PITA.
-
When you say “the same footage”, do you mean that the same source file is going into both Vegas and another piece of software? If so, the result you are seeing is expected. Vegas would apply the broadcast filter only during preview or when rendering an output file. It does not apply a filter to the source file because it is not a destructive editor. It does NOT change the source file.
-
As others have said, or implied, the stills will be reduced to the size that which the output format supports. That is part of what the rendering process does. So, the question is not whether the high resolution will be lost in rendering, it is what software will be used to perform the reduction. My bias is to ALWAYS use the software which is built specifically to accomplish a given task. For stills, my view is that the conversion to a new resolution is ALWAYS done best by software which is designed to do that job. I don’t believe that software which is designed to render video is best when the job is to reduce the resolution of a still photo. That job should be done by a still photo editor.