Forum Replies Created

Viewing 1 - 10 of 11 posts
  • rickm1

    August 19, 2006 at 4:54 am

    I really can’t picture what everyone is talking about here but it sounds very intriguing.

    Can someone possibly post a link of an example clip of this transition/effect? I would love to see what this is….

    TIA

  • rickm1

    May 4, 2006 at 1:55 am

    That’s just it, I did use Uncompressed AVI. It was a huge file, but I didn’t care. The thing is, as soon as I changed the background video in DVDA, the artifacts appeared in the DVDA preview window. The jaggies were everywhere. And that was before I Rendered. Yet, if I played the AVI with Windows media player, the jaggies were gone and the font looked fine. I just can’t seem to figure this out. arggh.

  • rickm1

    May 3, 2006 at 11:24 pm

    >>First off, not everything in the world goes to DVD so the question of why they’d let you do it if it
    >>looks bad on a dvd is kind of pointless.

    yeah but I still thought I would ask it anyway.

    In answer to your other question. I’m burning it to a dvd, then popping it into a vanilla home-dvd player and playing it.

    From what I can see, the artifacts get introduced as soon as I pull the video into DVDA. I can play the rendered video with windows Media player and it looks GREAT. But as soon as I set the background video in DVDA to that same rendered video, it looks AWFUL inside of DVDA, even before I render it. Someone out there must have experienced this. I’m wondering if it’s that outline I’m using though, in other words, if I just plain should use the outline feature. If so, fine. I just want to make sure that it’s not something I’m doing wrong and that in fact others have done the font-outline thing without problems. ??

  • rickm1

    May 3, 2006 at 11:03 pm

    Wow this is frustrating. I rendered with all of the settings and my fonts look like crap!!!! I must be doing wrong here. Surely this can’t be the best one can do with fonts for DV.

    I pulled out my Nikon N70 and took a quick snapshot of the preview window, (in Auto-Preview) mode. Then I took a picture how the DVD looks on my T.V. after rendering progressive mode, best quality, etc. as per all of the instructions here. I can’t help but think something is terribly wrong….

    Check out these two photos here:

    https://www.fileupyours.com/files/35346/MyPCMonitor.jpg

    https://www.fileupyours.com/files/35346/MyTV.jpg

    I wondered if it was my pc, so I saved the project on to my laptop and rendered it from Vegas on my laptop. What I’ve noticed is that the rendered video looks great, but as soon as I pull it into DVDA, it is awful. And I mean it looks awful right ON THE SCREEN OF DVDA before I choose to render/prepare my DVD. What I see on screen in DVDA, once I set the background video to the redendered mpg, is actually what I’m getting on the DVD as the final product, but it looks terrible.

    I started playing with DVDA’s fonts, and I noticed that if I used the same font as in Vegas, and then overlayed text objects on top of the video so that the words lined up, that my font looked better. It looks like the problem is the Outline that I’m using in vegas. So what I want to know is, is it just plain bad practice to use the Font Outline option in Vegas for a menu that’s going to be used in DVDA, or am i doing something wrong? (Why would Sony/sonic foundry give us the option of doing a font outline if it would look like garbage on the DVD?)

  • rickm1

    May 3, 2006 at 4:34 pm

    Now I’m confused as I seem to be getting conflicting advice. On the other forum, I received the following from Keith Kolbo:

    Yes, most video you would render as interlaced for NTSC TV’s, but when you are going to a DVD and the video will be used as a menu background, trust me, render it progressive. Also render it straight from the Vegas time-line to MPEG. Do not render it to DV and then encode it to MPEG. Your text will look a lot better that way. If you must render a menu background to interlaced, which risks playback problems for the last frame of the menu on some DVD players, search the DVDA help file for the “render menu to progressive” switch and turn it off. It is on by default and it will rerender your video causing a loss of quality.

    Maybe I’m confused with his reply, but it seems to me he’s saying to render it to DVDA NTSC video stream (MPEG) whereas you are saying the opposite. This is frustrating…. Is there no general consensus on this situation?

  • rickm1

    May 3, 2006 at 3:24 pm

    I decided that I am making mountains out of mole-hills with the font edge, but I changed my font to from Arial Black, to Arial, then added Bold & Italics. It looks much better

    However I am now completely frustrated with how DVDA3.0c re-compresses my Menu Video every time, no matter how I choose to render from Vegas. (In DVDA, the only thing I add to the screen is Empty buttons that have no text, which lie on top of my graphics that I made in vegas. Also, I have been rendering the footage in Vegas as Progressive and it does look better that way). Anyway, when I render in Vegas with the DVDA NTSC Video Stream (progressive only) and the .AC3 Audio separately, the audio doesn’t get re-compressed, but the video does *every time*. Very frustrating. Does re-compressing the menu in dvda degrade the quality, or am I just worrying about something I don’t need to?

  • rickm1

    May 9, 2005 at 8:41 pm

    Hey Rick,

    Is Combustion a better tool than vegas for more control of chromakeying and/or compositing? I would like to get the best tool for this sort of thing. I have a copy of Pinnacle’s Commotion Pro 4.1 but haven’t learned how to use it yet.

  • rickm1

    May 9, 2005 at 5:18 pm

    Right on! Thank you, I’ll look him up.

  • rickm1

    May 9, 2005 at 3:16 pm

    Thank you, it sounds like this will put me on the right track. I wish I could get in contact with this Chanimal guy and ask him exactly he did it and with what software tool, but like I said, your post looks like it will send me in the right direction. Thanks for your help.

  • rickm1

    May 9, 2005 at 6:03 am

    I understand the theory behind chomakeying, at least to the degree that you want to use green or blue screen, which is evenly lit, as the background. I also realize that you want the foreground object and background object lit separately and that you want the foreground object to be far enough away from the background so that he/she does not cast a shadow.

    That being said, this still hasn’t answered my first question. As I said before, by all evidence, Sylvie was shot against *white* screen. I would really like to know how Chanimal composited it and replaced the white background. I would be surprised if he said it was by using a bezier mask as it’s quite a bit of video. Here is the link to the video so that those who are interested can take a look and maybe offer a suggestion as to how he did it:

    https://www.vegasusers.com/vidshare/textdisp?chanimal-supergirl-stonefield

    There is another link earlier in the forum that shows the *original* footage that was shot with sylvie against the white screen. I can post that link if you wish. -Rick

Viewing 1 - 10 of 11 posts

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy