Vegas Video discussions from 2006 (Q3Q4)

Jarrod Whaley · September 13th, 2006, 02:02 AM

You could also split the clip, apply 100% B&W (or desaturate in color corrector, whatever) to the first part, and then do a dissolve from one to the other.

Edward Troxel · September 13th, 2006, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Luce

is there a keyframe feature on the sony b&w filter? I couldn't find it. I'm using vegas 5.

Yes, there's a keyframe on the Sony B&W filter. Use it all the time. As was mentioned, it's at the bottom of the effects dialog - there's a timeline there. If you can't see that timeline (it's resizable) then it's probably been resized to "nothing". Move the mouse slowly toward the bottom of the dialog box. As soon as it turns into an up/down arrow, click and drag upward.

Technically you can use any filter that can adjust the saturation so you have multiple options to do this effect.

David Delaney · September 13th, 2006, 11:30 AM

I am at the point where I have to render my HD footage to DVD. I would like some suggestions on how to go about this - which codec do I use? I remember hearing that HD get converted to SD, but how is this accomplished? I don't want the client looking at this and saying, er...this doesn't look like HD. Any help appreciated.

David

Edward Troxel · September 13th, 2006, 12:12 PM

DVD = MPEG2. Just do a File - Render As, pick the proper MPEG2 preset, and proceed as normal.

David Delaney · September 13th, 2006, 05:36 PM

So just render as an AVI? I am not using DVD architect because I find that is doesn't seem to work for me..

Also, is this going to maintain my 16:9 ratio? I want the black bars on the top and bottom on people's TV screen and not to stretch out - so do I need to render it how?

Edward Troxel · September 13th, 2006, 08:48 PM

Render as MPEG2 and pick one of the widescreen presets. That will give you a DVD compliant 16x9 file. You should render the audio separately as AC3. Then use those files in whatever authoring program you're using.

Jon McGuffin · September 14th, 2006, 10:27 AM

I've asked around a little on this subject and am still a little "fuzzy" as to the answer. Perhaps some of you more knowledgeable can help me (and others) out.

Vegas 7.0 includes new features that evidently allow it to edit and manipulate HDV footage more efficiently. How did they implement this and is a secondary software like Cineform's ConnectHD still necessary?

#1) How did Sony implement "better editing HDV" in Vegas 7?
Are they simply just using your processor more efficiently to edit Mpeg-2 footage on the timeline? It's my understanding you do not want to edit in Mpeg-2 on the timeline for a variety of reasons, some including speed of editing as well as frame cut problems due to Group of Pictures (I & B Frames and what not).

#2) Is there a benefit/need to Cineform's ConnectHD Intermidiary codec still? Will the 3.04 version of of ConnectHD even work with Sony Vegas 7 well? I understand using this intermediary codec allowed for a much quicker editing process on the timeline by somehow converted the Mpeg-2 HDV video via capture into a proprietary video format for editing on the timeline. Something I'm not too familiar with is what happens when I have my edit session complete and I'm ready to export to various formats? Does this video have to pass back through the ConnectHD intermediary codec or can I export directly from the timeline to Windows High Definition Video, Quicktime Sorenson, DVD video disk, etc.

In a nutshell, is the $200 spent on ConnectHD still necessary with Vegas 7.0 and if so, what are the benefits it provides?

Jon

Jon McGuffin · September 14th, 2006, 10:32 AM

Okay, another "newbie" type of question here. I'm just getting into Video editing and have purchased two HDR-FX1 Sony Camcorders and am going to be setup with a good editing computer running Vegas 7.0.

While awaiting my camera's, I've been playing around with Vegas 6.0d and my Sony 1-chip DV camera. When using either Vegas, (or any other video editor for that matter) the video coming in has a really dark look to it. It's clearly not as lit up as what is being shown to my on the flipout LCD monitor on my camera.

Does anybody know why these editors are showing my video to be so dark? Is there a way to configure my editor or computer up front to have what is displayed on my monitor reflect the true look of the captured video?

Jon

Seth Bloombaum · September 14th, 2006, 10:48 AM

Jon, the question may be "why is the video on my camera lcd so bright?" Or, "why is my PC monitor so dark?" Or "why is my camera underexposing these scenes?"

Because Vegas capture did not change your brightness, nor did Vegas (unless you've inadvertantly made adjustments to track video level in the track header, which is easy to do).

To figure out what's going on, you need to do some measurements:
Put suspect video on the timeline. Open the scope. (view | video scopes). Select the waveform monitor.

If you have the cursor over a scene with whites in it and they are somewhere between 90 and 110 units then the original exposure in the camera was close enough and your PC monitor is showing you a dimmer picture than you want.

Peak values in the waveform monitor of less than 95 or 90 in a scene that has white means that the camera is underexposing the scene. LCD monitors on cameras are not totally trustworthy guides to exposure, they can be made too bright (or dim) too.

Bottom line - a firewire transfer of DV tape using Vegas Capture doesn't change a thing - it's just a transfer of the 1s and 0s that are on the tape. Vegas doesn't change anything unless you select a filter, touch the "level" slider in the track header, or touch the "opacity" envelope on the clip on the timeline.

Glenn Chan · September 14th, 2006, 11:26 AM

You should also setup the scopes correctly.

If you didn't change the Vegas preferences, then the default codec will decode to studioRGB color space. So in the scopes preferences/settings, check the box beside studioRGB.

The 7.5 IRE setting determines where Vegas puts black level on the scopes; this also happens to be a confusing setting, as it tries to emulate what an analog vectorscope would show (but it doesn't know what an analog vectorscope would show). I just leave it unchecked, so that black level should end up at 0 on Vegas' scopes. Anything under 0 will usually get clipped.

With the 7.5 setting checked, then anything under 7.5 will get clipped. Vegas has no marking for 7.5, so I do things the other way.

Jon McGuffin · September 14th, 2006, 11:36 AM

Thank you both for the help. I do realize that Vegas or any of my other NLE's aren't changing the video to look so dark, but what I couldn't figure out was why it display on my monitor so dark. Obviously, the first thing I did was try to up the brightness on my monitors (2 - 19" Samsung CRT's) but of course, that washed everything else on the screen out and made everything way to bright. So I knew that couldn't be the problem.

I talked to a guy who's married to Apple and FCP and he gave me the typical answer "PC's suck for editing, you should be using a MAC as they display stuff the way it should" Well, I won't take anything away from a Macintosh but I know damn well that PC's don't suck and there certainly aren't millions of editors out there all starring at dark video on their screens and just living with it.

Michael Wisniewski · September 14th, 2006, 11:58 AM

Hi Jon,

As usual, Seth & Glenn are pointing you in the right direction. There's nothing wrong with your equipment.

As a general rule of thumb - TVs and LCDs tend to make video look brighter while computer CRTs tend to make video look darker. This is normal, and just something to keep in mind when shooting & editing. Seth & Glenn's advice will help you adjust your system for the differences.

Holger Leonhard · September 14th, 2006, 01:24 PM

Itested today the V7 demo - HDV now is running native (m2t - HDV rawfiles, captured straight from the cam) with full 25 fps framerate @preview - or draft quality, 1/4 output preview size and additional color correction.
System is a P4 / 3GHz 533 / 2GByte Dual-DDR (older system).
I would say VERY big improvement against v6 !
I guess on a actual system (core 2 duo or similar) Vegas now will fly like a rocket. :-)

Steven Houser · September 14th, 2006, 01:31 PM

Here is actual Look of Film HD ! First test shot HDR-FX1

http://www.box.net/public/3x1cch85ku

I would like to post full Quality but I have no server to host it!!

Here is Low Quality Render test TO WATCH not real quality!!!
http://www.box.net/public/5k7n1y8cri

Jon McGuffin · September 14th, 2006, 01:31 PM

What if I intend on editing 1080/60i though? Would this be no different?

September 13th, 2006, 02:02 AM	#721
Jarrod Whaley Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: chattanooga, tn Posts: 721	You could also split the clip, apply 100% B&W (or desaturate in color corrector, whatever) to the first part, and then do a dissolve from one to the other. __________________ -->jarrod whaley. www.oakstreetfilms.com

September 13th, 2006, 11:30 AM	#723
David Delaney Trustee Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Niagara Ontario Canada Posts: 1,121	Looking to render to DVD from HD - a little help please I am at the point where I have to render my HD footage to DVD. I would like some suggestions on how to go about this - which codec do I use? I remember hearing that HD get converted to SD, but how is this accomplished? I don't want the client looking at this and saying, er...this doesn't look like HD. Any help appreciated. David

September 13th, 2006, 12:12 PM	#724
Edward Troxel Sponsor: JET DV Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern Illinois Posts: 7,953	DVD = MPEG2. Just do a File - Render As, pick the proper MPEG2 preset, and proceed as normal. __________________ Edward Troxel [SCVU] JETDV Scripts/Scripting Tutorials/Excalibur/Montage Magic/Newsletters

September 13th, 2006, 08:48 PM	#726
Edward Troxel Sponsor: JET DV Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern Illinois Posts: 7,953	Render as MPEG2 and pick one of the widescreen presets. That will give you a DVD compliant 16x9 file. You should render the audio separately as AC3. Then use those files in whatever authoring program you're using. __________________ Edward Troxel [SCVU] JETDV Scripts/Scripting Tutorials/Excalibur/Montage Magic/Newsletters

September 14th, 2006, 10:27 AM	#727
Jon McGuffin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Carlsbad, CA Posts: 634	Vegas 7 - HDV Editing - Connect HD necessary? I've asked around a little on this subject and am still a little "fuzzy" as to the answer. Perhaps some of you more knowledgeable can help me (and others) out. Vegas 7.0 includes new features that evidently allow it to edit and manipulate HDV footage more efficiently. How did they implement this and is a secondary software like Cineform's ConnectHD still necessary? #1) How did Sony implement "better editing HDV" in Vegas 7? Are they simply just using your processor more efficiently to edit Mpeg-2 footage on the timeline? It's my understanding you do not want to edit in Mpeg-2 on the timeline for a variety of reasons, some including speed of editing as well as frame cut problems due to Group of Pictures (I & B Frames and what not). #2) Is there a benefit/need to Cineform's ConnectHD Intermidiary codec still? Will the 3.04 version of of ConnectHD even work with Sony Vegas 7 well? I understand using this intermediary codec allowed for a much quicker editing process on the timeline by somehow converted the Mpeg-2 HDV video via capture into a proprietary video format for editing on the timeline. Something I'm not too familiar with is what happens when I have my edit session complete and I'm ready to export to various formats? Does this video have to pass back through the ConnectHD intermediary codec or can I export directly from the timeline to Windows High Definition Video, Quicktime Sorenson, DVD video disk, etc. In a nutshell, is the $200 spent on ConnectHD still necessary with Vegas 7.0 and if so, what are the benefits it provides? Jon

September 13th, 2006, 05:36 PM	#725
David Delaney Trustee Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Niagara Ontario Canada Posts: 1,121	So just render as an AVI? I am not using DVD architect because I find that is doesn't seem to work for me.. Also, is this going to maintain my 16:9 ratio? I want the black bars on the top and bottom on people's TV screen and not to stretch out - so do I need to render it how?

September 14th, 2006, 10:32 AM	#728
Jon McGuffin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Carlsbad, CA Posts: 634	Imported Video is Dark Okay, another "newbie" type of question here. I'm just getting into Video editing and have purchased two HDR-FX1 Sony Camcorders and am going to be setup with a good editing computer running Vegas 7.0. While awaiting my camera's, I've been playing around with Vegas 6.0d and my Sony 1-chip DV camera. When using either Vegas, (or any other video editor for that matter) the video coming in has a really dark look to it. It's clearly not as lit up as what is being shown to my on the flipout LCD monitor on my camera. Does anybody know why these editors are showing my video to be so dark? Is there a way to configure my editor or computer up front to have what is displayed on my monitor reflect the true look of the captured video? Jon

September 14th, 2006, 10:48 AM	#729
Seth Bloombaum Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,420	Jon, the question may be "why is the video on my camera lcd so bright?" Or, "why is my PC monitor so dark?" Or "why is my camera underexposing these scenes?" Because Vegas capture did not change your brightness, nor did Vegas (unless you've inadvertantly made adjustments to track video level in the track header, which is easy to do). To figure out what's going on, you need to do some measurements: Put suspect video on the timeline. Open the scope. (view \| video scopes). Select the waveform monitor. If you have the cursor over a scene with whites in it and they are somewhere between 90 and 110 units then the original exposure in the camera was close enough and your PC monitor is showing you a dimmer picture than you want. Peak values in the waveform monitor of less than 95 or 90 in a scene that has white means that the camera is underexposing the scene. LCD monitors on cameras are not totally trustworthy guides to exposure, they can be made too bright (or dim) too. Bottom line - a firewire transfer of DV tape using Vegas Capture doesn't change a thing - it's just a transfer of the 1s and 0s that are on the tape. Vegas doesn't change anything unless you select a filter, touch the "level" slider in the track header, or touch the "opacity" envelope on the clip on the timeline.

September 14th, 2006, 11:26 AM	#730
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	You should also setup the scopes correctly. If you didn't change the Vegas preferences, then the default codec will decode to studioRGB color space. So in the scopes preferences/settings, check the box beside studioRGB. The 7.5 IRE setting determines where Vegas puts black level on the scopes; this also happens to be a confusing setting, as it tries to emulate what an analog vectorscope would show (but it doesn't know what an analog vectorscope would show). I just leave it unchecked, so that black level should end up at 0 on Vegas' scopes. Anything under 0 will usually get clipped. With the 7.5 setting checked, then anything under 7.5 will get clipped. Vegas has no marking for 7.5, so I do things the other way.

September 14th, 2006, 11:36 AM	#731
Jon McGuffin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Carlsbad, CA Posts: 634	Thank you both for the help. I do realize that Vegas or any of my other NLE's aren't changing the video to look so dark, but what I couldn't figure out was why it display on my monitor so dark. Obviously, the first thing I did was try to up the brightness on my monitors (2 - 19" Samsung CRT's) but of course, that washed everything else on the screen out and made everything way to bright. So I knew that couldn't be the problem. I talked to a guy who's married to Apple and FCP and he gave me the typical answer "PC's suck for editing, you should be using a MAC as they display stuff the way it should" Well, I won't take anything away from a Macintosh but I know damn well that PC's don't suck and there certainly aren't millions of editors out there all starring at dark video on their screens and just living with it.

September 14th, 2006, 11:58 AM	#732
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	Hi Jon, As usual, Seth & Glenn are pointing you in the right direction. There's nothing wrong with your equipment. As a general rule of thumb - TVs and LCDs tend to make video look brighter while computer CRTs tend to make video look darker. This is normal, and just something to keep in mind when shooting & editing. Seth & Glenn's advice will help you adjust your system for the differences. __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

September 14th, 2006, 01:24 PM	#733
Holger Leonhard Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 71	Itested today the V7 demo - HDV now is running native (m2t - HDV rawfiles, captured straight from the cam) with full 25 fps framerate @preview - or draft quality, 1/4 output preview size and additional color correction. System is a P4 / 3GHz 533 / 2GByte Dual-DDR (older system). I would say VERY big improvement against v6 ! I guess on a actual system (core 2 duo or similar) Vegas now will fly like a rocket. :-)

September 14th, 2006, 01:31 PM	#734
Steven Houser Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: New Castle IN. Posts: 178	Feed back needed! Look Of Film?? Here is actual Look of Film HD ! First test shot HDR-FX1 http://www.box.net/public/3x1cch85ku I would like to post full Quality but I have no server to host it!! Here is Low Quality Render test TO WATCH not real quality!!! http://www.box.net/public/5k7n1y8cri __________________ Steven Lee Houser http://vimeo.com/testwork Last edited by Steven Houser; September 14th, 2006 at 02:01 PM.

September 14th, 2006, 01:31 PM	#735
Jon McGuffin Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Carlsbad, CA Posts: 634	What if I intend on editing 1080/60i though? Would this be no different?