Micro35 (original thread)

Les Dit · February 7th, 2005, 06:50 PM

Can someone post a link to a good resolution chart to shoot?
preferably one with resolution targets or stripes.
thanks!
-Les

Joshua Provost · February 8th, 2005, 11:37 AM

Les, try this:

http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/respat/#EIA1956

Wing Gee · February 8th, 2005, 12:27 PM

if we purchase the guide, will we have access to buy pre fabbed parts from you without buying one of the kits? like buying the macro, GG, rail mount etc.. i noticed the rail mount looks machined, and some of us wont be able to get that quality look without a mill.

Thanks

James Hurd · February 8th, 2005, 12:36 PM

Wing,
Yes. You'll have access to those parts.

By the way, no machining has been done. Not even on the rails.

Got stickers coming!

Les Dit · February 8th, 2005, 12:55 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Joshua Provost : Les, try this:

http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/respat/#EIA1956 -->>>

Those look useful. Is there a link to the res target James used, to keep things consistent ? We should have a common test target I would think. One with resolution patterns.
-Les

James Hurd · February 8th, 2005, 09:38 PM

Here's a link to the one I used:
www.micro35.com/reschart.pdf

I dig Jushua's chart, I just don't have to to re-shoot them.

I've noticed that the Vegas program really compresses the video caps. Oh well.

Jim Lafferty · February 8th, 2005, 09:59 PM

Vegas outputs uncompressed PNG from the timeline if you set the Preview to "Best(Full)" and save as PNG. You shouldn't see any compression under those conditions.

James Hurd · February 8th, 2005, 10:03 PM

Hey Jim,
I did that but I still see a pretty big difference in the footage as its being played from the camera (during the video capture) from the still .png cap. Jagged edges etc...

Jim Lafferty · February 9th, 2005, 12:44 AM

Hmmm, could it be a motion sampling issue? In other words -- the look of footage always strikes me as better than still grabs because of the interframe motion, especially where interlace artifacts are concerned (those jaggies...)

At any rate, I don't think Vegas is compressing the images -- have you gotten better results with the same footage in other NLE's?

- jim

James Hurd · February 9th, 2005, 09:05 AM

Haven't tried. I'll try premiere next time.

Thanks Jim

Cosmin Rotaru · February 9th, 2005, 09:19 AM

You need to take a snapshot of a static image or use a real progresive camcorder to take full resolution snapshots. If you recorde interlace, then you need to deinterlace the snapshots to get rid of the jaggies. But you will also loose resolution, even with the best deinterlace algorithms available. You can set Vegas to deinterlace snapshots, or use some other application (like Photoshop) to deinterlace the interlaced snapshot! :)

James Hurd · February 9th, 2005, 09:23 AM

I'm shooting progressive. (DVX100A)

Cosmin Rotaru · February 9th, 2005, 09:51 AM

A! Don't mind me, then. I thought you shot interlaced... You should get perfect snapshots from progresive material. I don't get it. Vegas project is set to progresive and all? I don't think it matters, anyway...

Leo Mandy · February 9th, 2005, 10:26 AM

I believe even when using progressive, the footage will still conjure up interlacing problems. You have to de-interlace the footage afterwards.

Aaron Shaw · February 9th, 2005, 12:00 PM

James are you recording in 24p? If so you could be encountering normal interlace from the pulldown.

There should be no need to deinterlace at all.

February 8th, 2005, 12:27 PM	#198
Wing Gee New Boot Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Seattle, Wa Posts: 7	if we purchase the guide, will we have access to buy pre fabbed parts from you without buying one of the kits? like buying the macro, GG, rail mount etc.. i noticed the rail mount looks machined, and some of us wont be able to get that quality look without a mill. Thanks __________________ Http://Turborocco.com Http://swingsetfilm.com

February 9th, 2005, 12:44 AM	#204
Jim Lafferty Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 636	Hmmm, could it be a motion sampling issue? In other words -- the look of footage always strikes me as better than still grabs because of the interframe motion, especially where interlace artifacts are concerned (those jaggies...) At any rate, I don't think Vegas is compressing the images -- have you gotten better results with the same footage in other NLE's? - jim __________________ Realism, anyway, is never exactly the same as reality, and in the cinema it is of necessity faked. -- J-L G

February 9th, 2005, 09:19 AM	#206
Cosmin Rotaru Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Romania, Timisoara Posts: 453	You need to take a snapshot of a static image or use a real progresive camcorder to take full resolution snapshots. If you recorde interlace, then you need to deinterlace the snapshots to get rid of the jaggies. But you will also loose resolution, even with the best deinterlace algorithms available. You can set Vegas to deinterlace snapshots, or use some other application (like Photoshop) to deinterlace the interlaced snapshot! :) __________________ Cosmin Rotaru

February 9th, 2005, 09:51 AM	#208
Cosmin Rotaru Major Player Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Romania, Timisoara Posts: 453	A! Don't mind me, then. I thought you shot interlaced... You should get perfect snapshots from progresive material. I don't get it. Vegas project is set to progresive and all? I don't think it matters, anyway... __________________ Cosmin Rotaru

February 7th, 2005, 06:50 PM	#196
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	Can someone post a link to a good resolution chart to shoot? preferably one with resolution targets or stripes. thanks! -Les

February 8th, 2005, 11:37 AM	#197
Joshua Provost Major Player Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 493	Les, try this: http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/respat/#EIA1956

February 8th, 2005, 12:36 PM	#199
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	Wing, Yes. You'll have access to those parts. By the way, no machining has been done. Not even on the rails. Got stickers coming!

February 8th, 2005, 12:55 PM	#200
Les Dit Major Player Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Southern Cal-ee-for-Ni-ya Posts: 608	<<<-- Originally posted by Joshua Provost : Les, try this: http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/respat/#EIA1956 -->>> Those look useful. Is there a link to the res target James used, to keep things consistent ? We should have a common test target I would think. One with resolution patterns. -Les

February 8th, 2005, 09:38 PM	#201
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	Here's a link to the one I used: www.micro35.com/reschart.pdf I dig Jushua's chart, I just don't have to to re-shoot them. I've noticed that the Vegas program really compresses the video caps. Oh well.

February 8th, 2005, 09:59 PM	#202
Jim Lafferty Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 636	Vegas outputs uncompressed PNG from the timeline if you set the Preview to "Best(Full)" and save as PNG. You shouldn't see any compression under those conditions.

February 8th, 2005, 10:03 PM	#203
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	Hey Jim, I did that but I still see a pretty big difference in the footage as its being played from the camera (during the video capture) from the still .png cap. Jagged edges etc...

February 9th, 2005, 09:05 AM	#205
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	Haven't tried. I'll try premiere next time. Thanks Jim

February 9th, 2005, 09:23 AM	#207
James Hurd Micro35 Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 221	I'm shooting progressive. (DVX100A)

February 9th, 2005, 10:26 AM	#209
Leo Mandy Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 749	I believe even when using progressive, the footage will still conjure up interlacing problems. You have to de-interlace the footage afterwards.

February 9th, 2005, 12:00 PM	#210
Aaron Shaw Major Player Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 587	James are you recording in 24p? If so you could be encountering normal interlace from the pulldown. There should be no need to deinterlace at all.