vegas and exposure room at DVinfo.net

Ian Planchon · November 29th, 2008, 02:57 PM

I would do a search, but I cant seem to get dvinfo to let me do that. everytime I log into search, it logs me out.

but for some reason I can post....dont get it.

anyway, what settings are you guys using for HD video on exposure room?

Seth Bloombaum · November 29th, 2008, 06:42 PM

This video was shot in 720/30p, kept in that format through edit, then rendered to a 6Mbps Windows Media 9 at 1280x720x30p.

I was trying some more widely recommended render formats, such as MP4, h.264, but gamma or setup wasn't tracking right (washed out blacks), so, rather than solving that problem, I worked around it; having previously had very good results with 720p WM for large-screen projection.

At the XR high-rez setting this clip is pretty close to what I saw when editing it... I'm pleased with the results and with Exposure Room.

BTW, I have the same video up on YouTube - there's really no comparison.

Michael Wisniewski · November 29th, 2008, 07:18 PM

Seth do you use the Studio to RGB level settings when going to Exposure Room?

Seth Bloombaum · November 30th, 2008, 12:02 AM

Yes, SOP for me is to use the Studio-to-computerRGB setting in the levels filter when preparing for on-screen playback.

I just took a quick look at the MP4 I'd done first for this project. Levels are off (blown whites, grey blacks) in QT player, however, levels look fine in Vegas and it scopes well, but shows some non-jaggy ghosting in areas of rapid motion. So, levels may be a QT player problem, but there's something also going on with maintaining progressive.

I'll be interested to check this on a mac with QT, but if the player can't be trusted as a reference I'm a little leery of what exposure room may do with it. I'm certainly happy with the WMV intermediate and the final look.

***edit***
It does look like the exposure room encode to flv from my wmv has very slightly flattened things out - maybe 5 ire units. Seems to me that an actual range of 0-95 IRE may be better than 0-100 for an intermediate render. I'd like to do more testing on it.

Ian Planchon · November 30th, 2008, 12:53 PM

exposure room keeps telling me wmv isnt an accepted format...how did you get yours to work?

Hugh Mobley · November 30th, 2008, 02:34 PM

I have put up FLV, WMV and Mpeg4 and to me WMV at 5-6mbps seems to be it. however they still compress again into flv, like any video sharing site with some tweeks. I think Vimeo does a better job compressing. I am using Xvid4psp to convert an avi to flv and that works. still get some artifacting tho. The mgeg4 seems to the worse for me. haven't tried avchd yet

Ian Planchon · November 30th, 2008, 03:39 PM

i just dont get it. I will keep playing with it though. for some reason it just wont let me use wmv. and mpeg4 doesnt look good at all.

Ian Planchon · November 30th, 2008, 07:36 PM

so I guess the best way for me was to just convert to FLV first, then it uploads. its still not as crisp as on my monitor, or compared to what I have seen on ER, but it will do for now, till I can get it tweaked a bit.

Hugh Mobley · December 5th, 2008, 08:26 PM

try this, render your clip thru vegas to avi intermediate, use the same size as your camera produced, I render to avi 1440x1080. if you download Xvid4psp here are settings I use. from each dropdown select flv, video, vivid,flv1 hq ultra, audio go into audio settings, use 196 or 224, go into video and set size to 640x360, render out. don't forget, when you use a video sharing site, any site, they are going to compress it again when going thru their conversion process. but doing it this way its only compressed twice, since the avi was not, your chances of better results are there,

Erik Phairas · December 5th, 2008, 08:41 PM

I just signed up to ER yesterday.. I was trying an experiment with really saturated colors and massvise file size to see how it would look...

This was a 1.5 gig MP4.. looks ok I guess... rendered in vegas. I don't know how some of these guys make their video looks so sharp and colorful when posted on vimeo or ER... My looks fine before uploading, but online... I am not happy with them.

The Ring of Fireflies By erik phairas On ExposureRoom

Seth Bloombaum · December 5th, 2008, 09:07 PM

Well, obviously you were color-correcting with a fairly heavy hand, using cc for efx...

Mostly, I liked the color, but obviously I'm not comparing it to your original.

Exposure room, Vimeo, Youtube - they're all using the original Sorenson Spark codec because it's free. I think this is where you're losing color saturation, especially sat in the highlights. The VP6 codec would be another story, but so far as I know none of the free sharing sites are using it because of cost.

One thing to experiment with is limiting luminance by 5% or 10%. It seems to help highlight saturation, at some cost of overall contrast range.

Erik Phairas · December 5th, 2008, 09:18 PM

yea see on vimeo I didn't mess with the colors at all and it came out like this...

The Ring Of Fireflies on Vimeo

it's nearly black and white.. LOL So I made the colors too strong on purpose thinking it would look ok after ER took out some color.. only it seems I over did it a bit.. :)

Hugh Mobley · December 6th, 2008, 01:06 PM

Some basic info.If you go thru Exposure Room and check out other videos, no matter what the size started with they end up much smaller, that could be the issue, Vimeo has their conversion down better than ER, and they convert with the files larger.Its too bad the best HD video site is no longer around, it was HD Hosting.com I think. I found it thru the forum I use for my video sharing site. I was just about ready to put a site up with their hosting and all of sudden GONE, It put vimeo and Er to shame, but! never could find out what happened. They said they had worked on the HD conversion for two years to get it what it was. These are the basic scripts which make a video sharing site run, they all have them in some variation:

# LAME MP3 Encode
# Libogg
# Mencoder
# Flvtool2
# FFmpeg
# Libvorbis

I can't write code, but sites who have script and code writers tweek these

Hugh Mobley · December 6th, 2008, 01:19 PM

Its too bad these guys can't get their buffering issue solved, but when they do they are improving all the time. resolution is pretty good

HD Tube Broadcast in high definition

Erik Phairas · December 6th, 2008, 07:40 PM

On this one I started the project as 32bit flaoting point, and only bumped the saturation a little bit... Looks good to me..

YouTube - Redline Revolt buggy Dumont Dunes

This is an HDR SR11 BTW.

November 29th, 2008, 02:57 PM	#1
Ian Planchon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: an Alaskan living in Des Moines, Iowa Posts: 513	vegas and exposure room I would do a search, but I cant seem to get dvinfo to let me do that. everytime I log into search, it logs me out. but for some reason I can post....dont get it. anyway, what settings are you guys using for HD video on exposure room?

November 29th, 2008, 07:18 PM	#3
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Seth do you use the Studio to RGB level settings when going to Exposure Room? __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

November 30th, 2008, 02:34 PM	#6
Hugh Mobley Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Placentia, Calif Posts: 549	I have put up FLV, WMV and Mpeg4 and to me WMV at 5-6mbps seems to be it. however they still compress again into flv, like any video sharing site with some tweeks. I think Vimeo does a better job compressing. I am using Xvid4psp to convert an avi to flv and that works. still get some artifacting tho. The mgeg4 seems to the worse for me. haven't tried avchd yet __________________ Hugh Mobley www.petplanetvideos.com http://exposureroom.com/members/hmobley.aspx/

December 5th, 2008, 08:26 PM	#9
Hugh Mobley Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Placentia, Calif Posts: 549	try this, render your clip thru vegas to avi intermediate, use the same size as your camera produced, I render to avi 1440x1080. if you download Xvid4psp here are settings I use. from each dropdown select flv, video, vivid,flv1 hq ultra, audio go into audio settings, use 196 or 224, go into video and set size to 640x360, render out. don't forget, when you use a video sharing site, any site, they are going to compress it again when going thru their conversion process. but doing it this way its only compressed twice, since the avi was not, your chances of better results are there, __________________ Hugh Mobley www.petplanetvideos.com http://exposureroom.com/members/hmobley.aspx/

December 6th, 2008, 01:06 PM	#13
Hugh Mobley Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Placentia, Calif Posts: 549	Some basic info.If you go thru Exposure Room and check out other videos, no matter what the size started with they end up much smaller, that could be the issue, Vimeo has their conversion down better than ER, and they convert with the files larger.Its too bad the best HD video site is no longer around, it was HD Hosting.com I think. I found it thru the forum I use for my video sharing site. I was just about ready to put a site up with their hosting and all of sudden GONE, It put vimeo and Er to shame, but! never could find out what happened. They said they had worked on the HD conversion for two years to get it what it was. These are the basic scripts which make a video sharing site run, they all have them in some variation: # LAME MP3 Encode # Libogg # Mencoder # Flvtool2 # FFmpeg # Libvorbis I can't write code, but sites who have script and code writers tweek these __________________ Hugh Mobley www.petplanetvideos.com http://exposureroom.com/members/hmobley.aspx/

November 29th, 2008, 06:42 PM	#2
Seth Bloombaum Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,420	This video was shot in 720/30p, kept in that format through edit, then rendered to a 6Mbps Windows Media 9 at 1280x720x30p. I was trying some more widely recommended render formats, such as MP4, h.264, but gamma or setup wasn't tracking right (washed out blacks), so, rather than solving that problem, I worked around it; having previously had very good results with 720p WM for large-screen projection. At the XR high-rez setting this clip is pretty close to what I saw when editing it... I'm pleased with the results and with Exposure Room. BTW, I have the same video up on YouTube - there's really no comparison.

November 30th, 2008, 12:02 AM	#4
Seth Bloombaum Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,420	Yes, SOP for me is to use the Studio-to-computerRGB setting in the levels filter when preparing for on-screen playback. I just took a quick look at the MP4 I'd done first for this project. Levels are off (blown whites, grey blacks) in QT player, however, levels look fine in Vegas and it scopes well, but shows some non-jaggy ghosting in areas of rapid motion. So, levels may be a QT player problem, but there's something also going on with maintaining progressive. I'll be interested to check this on a mac with QT, but if the player can't be trusted as a reference I'm a little leery of what exposure room may do with it. I'm certainly happy with the WMV intermediate and the final look. *edit* It does look like the exposure room encode to flv from my wmv has very slightly flattened things out - maybe 5 ire units. Seems to me that an actual range of 0-95 IRE may be better than 0-100 for an intermediate render. I'd like to do more testing on it.

November 30th, 2008, 12:53 PM	#5
Ian Planchon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: an Alaskan living in Des Moines, Iowa Posts: 513	exposure room keeps telling me wmv isnt an accepted format...how did you get yours to work?

November 30th, 2008, 03:39 PM	#7
Ian Planchon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: an Alaskan living in Des Moines, Iowa Posts: 513	i just dont get it. I will keep playing with it though. for some reason it just wont let me use wmv. and mpeg4 doesnt look good at all.

November 30th, 2008, 07:36 PM	#8
Ian Planchon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: an Alaskan living in Des Moines, Iowa Posts: 513	so I guess the best way for me was to just convert to FLV first, then it uploads. its still not as crisp as on my monitor, or compared to what I have seen on ER, but it will do for now, till I can get it tweaked a bit.

December 5th, 2008, 08:41 PM	#10
Erik Phairas Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 628	I just signed up to ER yesterday.. I was trying an experiment with really saturated colors and massvise file size to see how it would look... This was a 1.5 gig MP4.. looks ok I guess... rendered in vegas. I don't know how some of these guys make their video looks so sharp and colorful when posted on vimeo or ER... My looks fine before uploading, but online... I am not happy with them. The Ring of Fireflies By erik phairas On ExposureRoom

December 5th, 2008, 09:07 PM	#11
Seth Bloombaum Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,420	Well, obviously you were color-correcting with a fairly heavy hand, using cc for efx... Mostly, I liked the color, but obviously I'm not comparing it to your original. Exposure room, Vimeo, Youtube - they're all using the original Sorenson Spark codec because it's free. I think this is where you're losing color saturation, especially sat in the highlights. The VP6 codec would be another story, but so far as I know none of the free sharing sites are using it because of cost. One thing to experiment with is limiting luminance by 5% or 10%. It seems to help highlight saturation, at some cost of overall contrast range.

December 5th, 2008, 09:18 PM	#12
Erik Phairas Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 628	yea see on vimeo I didn't mess with the colors at all and it came out like this... The Ring Of Fireflies on Vimeo it's nearly black and white.. LOL So I made the colors too strong on purpose thinking it would look ok after ER took out some color.. only it seems I over did it a bit.. :)

December 6th, 2008, 01:19 PM	#14
Hugh Mobley Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Placentia, Calif Posts: 549	Its too bad these guys can't get their buffering issue solved, but when they do they are improving all the time. resolution is pretty good HD Tube Broadcast in high definition __________________ Hugh Mobley www.petplanetvideos.com http://exposureroom.com/members/hmobley.aspx/

December 6th, 2008, 07:40 PM	#15
Erik Phairas Major Player Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 628	On this one I started the project as 32bit flaoting point, and only bumped the saturation a little bit... Looks good to me.. YouTube - Redline Revolt buggy Dumont Dunes This is an HDR SR11 BTW.