Newbie want summary and help!

[Fredrik Forsell]

Hey guys, I would like your expertise to answer some questions that, I bet, would take me days or weeks to find out myself.

Some background: I have a Canon XM2 (GL2). I have just started to get a grip of Vegas 4. Now I'm interested in this "movielook" thing. And there the trouble starts. I bet that it isn't just one answer to the question of how I should be getting the best filmlook, but at least something is easier then the other but has similar results.....I hope. Now, I'm thinking of these alternatives:

1. Taken from another post:

"for a softer "looK' you might try putting the same clip on 2 video tracks ..

color color correct the TOP track .. and add satuation

2nd track use some type of BLUR FX to soften it ..

then set opacity on top track around 50-60% ( depends on how much BLUR you added) set to your EYE .. always check it on a NTSC monitor ..."

or

2. Edit my material in, for example, Vegas then save it in best quality, opening up After Effects and use Magic Bullet

or

3. Avid xpress dv, powerpack; film scriber.

Which one of the alternatives above do you recommend (are there any better)? Does all do the same thing and equally well?

And another thing that is related to this. My camera is a pal camera. Should I capture the material to the computer as 24p or 25 interlaced (I shoot Normal mode...)if I want the movielook? Does it matter? Should I wait with changing frames until rendering it or do it already when I capture it (if I'm after film like effect)? If I capture it as 24p, do I save time by not having to deinterlace it later? Or is it, in fact, NOT deinterlaced if I do so? (I always shoot in NORMAL mode) I have read many other posts about deinterlacing. I can't say I get all of it, that's why I'm asking this question. I understand that there are other things you have to think about as well, like saturation, lightning and so fourth, but this is one step that I don't understand.

Well I would really appreciate if someone took the time to recommend any of the above alternatives and comment on the capture question.

I am a newbie, but I still want to know how to get the best results when I shall learn them. Cause so far I have read this, decided for that, the next day about something else, changed my mind again and so fourth. And of all the subject in this forum that I have taken part of, this about getting a movielook is the thing I have the most difficulties in grasping. That's why I would be thankful if someone could lead me on a way that will (after a long learning period, of course...) give me good "movielooking" results, if I now how to handle the tools:

alternative 1, 2 or 3 (or someething else), and how should I capture it to computer?

[Jeff Donald]

What platform and software do you have? If money doesn't matter I think Magic Bullet has the best look. However, everyones taste is different and you should do some experimentation to judge what looks best to your eye. Example number one can be done in almost any NLE. Example 2 and 3 require specialized software that may beyond many budgets.

[Don Donatello]

"Should I capture the material to the computer as 24p or 25 interlaced (I shoot Normal mode...)"

if you transfer from a DV camera over 1394 to computer you are just transferring DATA ( it does not change from tape to HD) .. therefore if you shot interlace it will be interlace ... if you shot frame mode then it will be frame mode ...

IMO frame mode has more a film like /feel VS. interlace ..

below is a link (Film Look Techniques for Video) that compares many of the ways to get a film look using software , frame mode , progressive ... you might try "Deinterlace Blend" method with Vegas ..


http://www.lafcpug.org/feature_video_film.htm

IMO you are not going to get "the film look" from a $3000 video camera .. if you are stuck on that "look" you will not be satisfied .. however if you are flexable you can get a "film like " image and that will vary by your own personal tuning of the image ..experiment with different methods & come up with your own "look" ...

[Richard Alvarez]

I think you may be mistaking the purpose of the Avid Powerpack. It is designed to allow you to EDIT FILM. Not make your video LOOK like film. (Although there are some nice "film like" effects and transistions. It's not like it's a "Magic Bullet" application.)

Bill

Avid XpressDV powerpack user

[Fredrik Forsell]

thanks for you answers

don I don't expect to get true filmlook, whether that exist or not. I just want to know how to change my footage so it looks even better. And the talk about "filmlook" in the threads on the dv community seemed to be right on target...On a homepage called cinealta there was an article about that. Saturation, contrast etc. Very usful homepage (found it in a thread here somewhere).

JEFF: I use Windows XP professional. Let's pretend I have an unlimited budget. What programs would you go for if that was the case? Still Magic Bullet? I read in Dons link below your reply about a plugin, that got a good grade, called Reelsmart Deinterlacer and Motionblur. Now for me that doesn't seem to be the same as Magic Bullet; you can do that but also more stuff then that with Magic bullet, am I right?

DON: thanks for the answer about capture

BILL: I got the tip to use power pack cause there would be something in there that was called film scriber. Got it from a friends friend...and perhaps my english wasn't good enough, I must have misunderstood him:)

[Jeff Donald]

If I had an unlimited budget I would shoot on film. But since we're looking for software fixes, I will limit my response to software solutions. I picked MB because of the large number of variables it has for manipulating the image. I've been using it for about 6 months and I'm happy with the look. It integrates into After Effects and brings all of AE tools into play. Like any software, there is a learning curve. The rendering is slow, even on powerful computers. I would limit my test scenes to very short lengths to minimize the wait.

I have used some of the Reelsmart plugins and used them before MB. They render much faster and I still use them occasionally to take the edge off video when I’m in a hurry. The results are nice, but not in the same league as MB.

I don't think I can emphasize enough the learning curve on MB. It has taken me six months to getting fairly comfortable with it and be able to predict the results. The slow rendering times can limit the features you select to use. Time is almost always a consideration for me.