Douglas Spotted eagle
Forum Replies Created
-
So based on your theory, you’re saying that 720p from a film source looks softer on a 720p display than 1080i/p will appear from the same film source when displayed on a 1080 i/p display system?
-
If you set up a 24p project prior to editing, Vegas will manage *everything* correctly for you. It’s when you edit on a 60i timeline and then change the project properties to 24p that you’ll run into issues.
You don’t need to force resample, blend/interpolate, etc.
Choosing blend/interpolate is entirely relevant to the kind of footage you shot, and you’re best bet is to allow Vegas to manage it for you based on the Project Properties. -
Look in your Project Properties window. You’ll find 32 bit in the video properties.
-
Book on Vegas 8 is forthcoming.
yes, you can remove the T/C the same way. -
you won’t run into any problems mixing the two, no.
How did you “digitize?” The footage was already digital when you Xferred it to your HDD, so I want to be clear that you merely did a firewire Xfer, yes?
Use the 23.976 project setting, let Vegas manage the i to p for you. -
Tools/Scripting/Add timecode to all media
-
The best ‘film to video’ look is 720p not 1080i – the varicam has proved this
Of course this isn’t so….HDCAM is by far responsible for the majority of HD production out there. On the SD side, the DVX100 is probably the most popular, but I don’t know that I’d consider it the “best film to video look.” HDCAM is i or p, but always 1080. RED and SI2K are also both greater than 720p. So is Genesis. And Viper, if you want to round out the top end. XDCAM HD is now being used by indies as well, for the ‘soft’ low contrast look.
The best “film to video look” that can be achieved with low-cost digital media starts with production lighting, setup, etc. It usually finishes with Magic Bullet or something similar. Reducing contrast at the shoot is the best beginning point. Being certain your camera does not have sharpening turned up is another. It seems counterintuitive, but adding sharpening to highly compressed footage is like adding high frequency equalization boosts to MP3 audio; it becomes brittle.
It’s not at all a 1080 vs 720 discussion. It’s an exposure, framerate, gamma discussion.
-
Most films are printed to DVD as progressive, and they become interlaced at either the DVD output or the display.
Commercial DVDs look great because they begin with a very high quality source. GIGO…
MPEG2 for NTSC delivery is LFF. HDV is UFF. Let Vegas manage the difference for you, use the templates or modify existing templates, but don’t mess with field order.
Still images and graphics shouldn’t be assigned fields. Let them remain progressive; field order (or lack thereof) will be assigned by your output template.
-
As harsh as it seems, my first bet would be Media Center coupled with USB.
Try firewire vs USB, as 1394 has its own resource allocations vs USB being CPU dependent. Media Center isn’t exactly known for stability and content creation. -
Changing the screen resolution should not make any impact on your render time at all.
What I’d wonder about is if when you created the fade in/out, you may have accidentally changed the opacity level of the video. This *would/could* account for the lengthy render time.
On a reasonably fast machine, the render shouldn’t have been much more than real time, and on a fast machine, could have approached a little more than half of real time.