John Sieber
Forum Replies Created
-
I get you guys and feel the same way – I will never jeopardize my business by breaking the law, whether that loses me clients or not… but what I’m getting at here, and what actually has me bothered, is the overwhelming amount of lifted tunes appearing on the video sharing sites. These sites (Youtube/Vimeo/etc.) all have disclaimers about using copyrighted materials, but don’t seem to be policing them – obviously if somebody places “music, of course, by U2” in the credits of their video. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe they paid for some royalty free “U2” song… but I doubt it. It’s this that has me confused – did I miss some new legislation? Is it really ok now to use commercial tunes in your video and post online if you’re not using it for a “commercial” purpose?
It’s funny, I posted this same question on another forum that is perhaps less professional populated and more amatuer/craft/hobby in nature, and nobody is replying to it there – plenty have viewed it…
-
>>>The progressive setting is determined by the frame rate which is why it is grayed out. Also the project settings are only for the DVD menus. They have no bearing on the video that you place on your DVD. The DVD spec does not support progressive menus. <<<
So there’s no way to have a progressive menu on a DVD, even if the content is 24p?
I thought it was suggested somewhere that you create progressive menus for the sake of sharp text and such…
>>>It will only burn that way of you rendered it as 24p. That is the only progressive media that the DVD spec allows. If you rendered as 30p or 25p, DVD Architect will recompress your video to make it DVD complaint.<<<
So if I render as 30p, then drop this into DVDA, it will RE-render and change the frame rate to the 24p spec?
-
Well, in that the video looks correct in other viewers prior to Vegas, and then looks good as well when dropped into Vegas, but then looks bad AFTER rendering out of Vegas, It must be something in the render process or the codecs Vegas is using right? I had just enough time to poke around with the “custom” settings for the main concept widescreen dvd render template last night, and on the VIDEO tab (or maybe it was the ADVANCED VIDEO tab)are several options for “transfer” and things that go way over my head, and the options for those settings don’t sound familiar to anything anyone around here has ever written about, BUT, one or more of them had a “Linear” setting (which was not selected by default). I wonder if this isn’t where the tones are getting compressed?
-
Ok, works like you said, though it seems odd the way they set it up – perhaps meant for something else. It works groovy, but I was also using the drop shadow feature in the track motion dialog… so, I still have to use that funtion to complete the pip effect I’m looking for. Thanks for the help.
-
Not sure I follow you there… If you wanted that dv video to be it’s actual 480 pixels high within the 1080 video frame (thereby creating a PIP), why would you change its dimension to 1080 in the event crop? I still don’t think this is working the way it should – I tried it with the event crop instead of the track motion last night and it didn’t work – (project set to HD 720p) in the event crop dialog, the size is already showing 640×480, but the image is filling the video window top to bottom. Does that setting actually relate to the size of the area that image or video is allowed to move within WITHIN the entire video or is that setting controling the size of the media itself? I’m not sitting in front of it right now (will have to try again tonight), but it seems that I tried every single setting combination in the event crop dialog and could never get the video to shrink to its native size and then be able to move it anywhere within the video frame other than within the original area it snapped in to.
-
No good. I think this is somewhat related to the other thread you replied to… the aspect lock just keeps any cropping in proportionate ratio WITHIN the area on the screen where the still image first appeared when imported. WITHIN that “frame”, I am able to shrink or expand the image, but I am not able to move that frame area or enlarge it to cover the entire video area (1280×720), or at least not with the event crop. With the landscape oriented still image, I am able to right click and choose “match output aspect” and then the still image expands to fill the entire video frame and I am then further able to move it WITHIN the entire frame or zoom it in or out. I can’t seem to do that with a portrait still image. I don’t understand what the difference would be.
-
It’s the stills that are pushing me to want to start with an HD project… I’ve basically got better than 4k quality in my stills – the only thing dragging it down is the current quality of the video I’ve shot. I suppose in theory, since I will be continuing to shoot these projects over the next year, I should set it up in HD in the assumption that I will be adding HD content at some point. I’m still timid about any computer processing hassles I will run into working with HD on the timeline.
But for the projects that are shot already, waiting to be edited – would those vegas projects really not display any better projected in HD if created as an HD video? The stills will surely look better (if I plan that way now and don’t down size them to fit DV)
In real world use, is it better to up-res now (at the Vegas properties level) or let the projection system up-res (from DV)?
I suppose I could always change the project properties and output render setting at any time, though I’d have to do a lot of work to go back and replace all the low res stills with the higher res originals and the aspect ratio and screen size would all change as well…
Thanks for your help! The COW rocks!