[Carlton Rahmani]

Wow! What a bunch of crap I see here. A bunch of guys all wasting their time to disparage how a vlogs are ‘edited’ (or not). Imagine what sound mixers and cinematographers might say. Whoever said that vlogs were supposed to be a high art, subject to all the high standards established by film and other media?
Yeah, most–about 99.9999%–of vlogs are a waste of time, either making them or watching them. But I personally love the hell out of Viral Video Film School.
Oh No! The guy doesn’t all the fluid transitions from one point to another that WIKIPEDIA–your citations, not mine–states need to happen. Doesn’t mean that the CONTENT of VVFS isn’t some of the most entertaining and even intelligent found on Youtube.
But this isn’t in defense of VVFS, alone. . .THEY’RE FREAKING VLOGS!!! Some dude rants in front of a webcam–or at least it appears that way–quickly cuts out what he doesn’t want, and that’s it. AND. . .you don’t have to pay a PENNY to watch! You don’t have to watch at all, as a matter of fact.
And, more importantly, if any of you can do anything more watchable, I’d like to see it.
Seriously, it’s kind of disheartening to see that there’s so many people looking down their noses at what I already thought was universally acknowledged for its artlessness.

[Carlton Rahmani]

I’m pretty sure that’s it. At least, I hope so–I just went ahead and downloaded it. Running some of my beyond-SD vids on it–MP always lags on this stuff–to see how it looks.
Thanks.

[Carlton Rahmani]

There’s actually TWO ways you can do it, using them in sync–at the same time–you CAN increase the velocity BEYOND 5x.

Actually, you don’t even have to use the velocity envelope: All you have to do is click at the end of the clip, then, pressing ‘ctrl’, ‘shrink’ the clip down as far as you can take it. If you don’t press the ctrl button, you’re just trimming the clip down to a certain point; but with ctrl, you’re squeezing the video (and accompanying audio) into a shorter timelength. I just did a test with this, and was able to take a roughly 60-sec clip and shorten it down to about 15-seconds, which, if you do the math, is 4x increase in speed.

If you add on the velocity envelope, you can increase the speed of this clip an extra 300-percent. The clip that began at originally 60-seconds is now five-seconds long, and complete.

I don’t think that the velocity envelope can be applied to the audio–remember that ‘squeezing’ will–but there are ways you can work around this, such as exporting the audio you’ve accelerated through squeezing, export it as a wav. (or some other audio-only format), then reimporting this and try and line it up with the video that you’ve sped up using a velocity envelope but squeezing the NEW audio clip down to the desired length.

(I know I’m making this sound more cumbersome than it actually is. . .)

The thing about the velocity envelope is that you can apply several difference speeds to a piece of video throughout its length. So you can begin with the video at normal speed, then have it go to a higher speed, then freeze it on a single frame–if you set the velocity at that point at zero-percent–or whatever else you want to do. Only, you have to make sure you set enough nodes to maintain a constant speed throughout the desired section. Meaning, if you want one part of the clip to be a steady 100% velocity, then the next part 200%, you have to make sure that you set a node at BOTH ends of the area that you want to be 100%, THEN another node at the 200% point. . .otherwise, the video’s speed will gradually increase from 100 to 200-percent from one determined point to the next.

Also, it is not a sin to take the same piece of video and duplicate it, then have one clip set at one speed, and attach the second piece on at the place where you want to have the speed change.

Overall, it’s completely possible, and not too hard to do. Yes, this sounds a little complicated, but mess around with it and see what you come up with, and how easy it is. Messing around is how you learn.

[Carlton Rahmani]

My best advice is to leave the photos as they are in their original dimensions, then crop/resize them to fit as you want in the screen. I’ve done quite a bit of work with photos and JPegs, including stuff that’s been photo edited, and this has been the best approach for me.

Try it, and let me know how it works for you.

[Carlton Rahmani]

Tried it. With both clips of video, rendered as uncompressed progressive AVIs, with also trying out different field order settings in the project properties–trying out both ‘lower field first’ and progressive scan.
In every instance there was interlacing. BUT, something I thought I would put mention, here, is that under the ‘project media’ readings, Vegas reports that the ‘field order [is] unknown’ with the videos I’m trying to work with.
They’re quicktimes, of some type.
I think I’m going to go to the producer and try and get a hold of an earlier generation of the media to try and see what I can do with the footage. . .one whose field order Vegas can at least tell/recognize. I have a serious belief that earlier editing went all screwy.
I dunno. . .

Thanks anyway, John.

[Carlton Rahmani]

I’m not bumming out Steve, too much. I appreciate that it’s still Vegas, and I’m happy with V9. BUT, the only reason why I had to put out the $500-plus for V9 from 7 is that I HAD to buy a new computer, and 7 wouldn’t run with the 64-bit drivers. I actually kept googling “Sony Vegas 10” to see if there was any OFFICIAL news about its development/release date, but the only real news was about Platinum. So, I can relate to Bruce’s griefs a little bit, particularly since this will be the first Vegas to use a GPU. . .right now I got that spare memory, just waiting to be used. . .
Don’t get me wrong: I still love Vegas. LOVE IT! But. . .man!

[Carlton Rahmani]

. . .and I just put my money on Vegas 9 (up from Vegas 7) two months ago.

[Carlton Rahmani]

Tried it, pretty much to the same settings you described–both with the render properties and DVD properties–and the result is basically the same as before. Even tried adjust the aspect ratio of both the video AND the DVD to 704×480, and got the same kind of results. Tried a few variations from there, in both video rendering AND DVD settings.

However, just to see, I watched the video as a DVD on my computer–meaning, I took the burned DVD and played off that–and everything was fine. No cutoffs, or anything like that.

So I AM wondering if it’s something with the DVD settings, on both my home player, and on my client’s.

I’m not concerning myself with it too much anymore. I haven’t seen it, before (and that’s what’s most ‘concerning’ to me), but burning through this many ‘test’ DVDs to only get the same result is a little numbing, particularly when it could be something so simple as a setting on the DVD player.

Maybe I’ll take the DVD to Best Buy and see how it looks there. That would be fun.

[Carlton Rahmani]

Thanks. I think altering the Render Settings is going to help. I’ve only had Vegas 9 for a couple of months, and am used to Vegas 7’s rendering mpegs for Architect by default, whereas I guess you gotta specify with Vegas 9.

By 720p, I mean 720×480 progressive. Even though I first watched the DVD on my own TV, which is a crt, I still create videos for widescreens, using the 16×9 ratio. Always widescreen, always progressive scanning. . .particularly since I normally watch my own videos on my computer. But just to let you know, the person who I made the video for–the ‘third party’ I was earlier talking about–has a regular widescreen TV, and nonetheless is still experiencing the cutoff edges like I was talking about. (And it was a pity that I couldn’t get it completely right this time, since I made a really nice menu with custom play icons and all that stuff. . .I like experimenting, even with Architect.)

So, I think redoing the rendering settings will fix it. Will update you with the news.

[Carlton Rahmani]

The project settings for the original video are 1280 X 720 pixels (I made it that size so it can be uploaded to youtube at a 720p setting, since they kind of downrez from major settings, I guess), but I rendered the Mpeg for the DVD at 720p.

As for being able to deliver widescreen stuff, my computer monitor is 16×9, and I rarely make DVDs for viewing. (I wish I could afford to get a high-def LCD or Plasma screen, but certain factors make that a financial improbability right now. So for editing I have to rely on why I seen on my comp screen.)

I DID try messing around with the DVD-Player settings on Architect–first at 16×9, then a 4:3–but the changes yielded the same result. Also, this video was for an outside party who had the same result while viewing the DVD on her own TV. Originally, I just thought it was just my cheap TV-DVD combo, but when an outside party reported the same problem to me, I thought I’d try and resolve the problem. Since it has never been an issue in the past, and typically using Architect’s default settings (with exception of changing the screen’s aspect ratio). . .or, for instance, a widescren DVD of Star Wars will show up completely, though letterboxed, on a 4:3 crt screen, but will also ‘fill’ a wide screen nicely.

. . .