I would really like to understand the point.


Play HD on a 4K device and the results would be the same...

just for kicks, at the moment. I don't have a 4k camera yet, but would like to start futzing with the workflow of it. It's about making content NOW for myself. 4K TVs will release in a few years and I think it would be fun to make 4K files look as best they can from my HD stuff - not relying on the TV to upscale. It's just for fun for me to learn, grow, embrace new stuff. :)

Boris FX Uprez
There's a free trial and, if you like it, it's only $99.00

Mike

is that better than Vegas itself upscaling to 4k?

Im also interested in this. The Boris plugin says its "SD to HD", not HD to 4k. So does anyone know if this plugin can do that too?

Just as a side note, dont forget Skyfall was shot with Arri Alexa cameras in 2k and up-scaled to 4k for cinema projection. So if you want your HD on the silver screen at any time - this may be a good move. But probably more interesting is the up-scale for 4k TV as mentioned. I think there is merit getting converted to 4k and not just relying on the projector or TV to do it for you. Some would have better conversions than others.

Paul.

It's also conceivable that most playback hardware would upscale better than any software solutions. Witness that BluRay players playing back DVDs on HD TVs upscale better than Vegas or any plugins ever did.

If your PC stutters with 1080i/p, imagine how it will be with 4k ...

I am curious how you would view the file?

Dave T2

4K TV is coming. Its just a matter of time. But honestly, i personally do not need this yet, i have no device to view it on at home - not yet! For now, its more about delivery to other devices - like cinema projectors. I find that interesting enough to ask the question - how.

Paul.

I tried this about a week a go. I am using a full resolution (5184x3456) of my 60D stills pics in timelapse sequence. I rendered it out to 4096x2304 . It only a very short clip and result in 27GB. The file is big, The 4K video look just as good as it get.

As a "producer" (ha ha!) I'd like to be in control of the end to end quality... making sure I have the best 4k image possible going to disc or bio-cube or wet-wired implant, whatever.
Don't want to rely on the end hardware for upscaling MY ART! ;)

VLC played back my test just now - 1 frame every 20 seconds. :) 7 second file was 3.5GB!

I'm going to try another one to keep it 4k but make a smaller footprint

k, more stuff:

- using the smaller YUV (like the SD or low HD version) does make smaller files, but you must manaully switch the resolution in the setup to 4k.

- after some PLAYBACK testing:

Windows Media Player: plays a frame afterwhile here and there, audio kinda works
Quicktime: see above
VLC: seems a little quicker but still like above

MEDIA PLAYER CLASSIC WORKS! I'm sure it is not played as FULL 4k, but it does playback a 4k file near or at full speed with some artifacts and interlace issues... but it DOES play it, which is a plus.

Vegas 12 Pro plays it back, but choppy. Still better than WMP, QT, VLC

Took a couple stills from 1920 and 4k versions, and I DO think there is something good coming out of doubling the pixel count... even on HD playback. The chroma and/or color changes seem to be smoothed out on close inspection. Yes, I KNOW it is not adding any extra pixels to the color, but I think maybe rendering out smooths the color flow in the pictures. Might even be helpful in color grading.... not that that is hurting today at all.

It is not just taking each HD pixel and doubling it up - well maybe it is I don't know - but seems to check and fill better.

I should have test it in 32 bit mode but I did not. :(

"I'd like to be in control of the end to end quality... making sure I have the best 4k image possible"

Your goals of higher pixel dimensions and then reducing file size are completely at odds.

Let's say you have 1920x1080 AVCHD at 16Mbps. You upsample it to 4096x2304 or thereabouts. If you keep the same codec, you will need 72.6 Mbps bitrate just to keep the same quality as your original (minus encoding losses). IOW, your new file will be 4.54x larger than your original. Anything less than that and you have thrown away quality (especially in motion scenes) that was in your original 1920x1080 file. It's just math.

Quality or Size. Pick one.

I agree with you. I was only experimenting with files size adjustments via the renders. There would be no reason to make a 4k file and then worry about how big it is. I'm just playing with options.
Maybe when Hollywood calls again, I can afford to get a real 4k camera to use!
(last time they called I was out and they didn't leave a message) :D

So other than BruceUSA with his stills time lapse 4k experiment, has anyone on the forum produced 4k content? if so, how.

wwjd, i think we are thinking on the same lines here - which way is best to upscale.

Its pretty obvious the file sizes are going to be bigger than standard HD, 4 times bigger in fact. Thats the price to pay without reducing bandwidth. Thankfully, hard drives are so cheap now. But whats the best way to achieve the upscale?.

Paul.

What would the distribution media be ?

geoff

i just have to repeat the 'why'!?

i suppose people climb mountains because they're there.

musicvid wrote: Your goals of higher pixel dimensions and then reducing file size are completely at odds.

But consider Ben Waggoner's "power of 0.75" rule, discussed towards the bottom of this page and others (I think Dorkyman's comment on it has relevance too).

wwjd, AviSynth gives a choice of resizing algorithms that might be better for upscaling, including Lanczos4, Spline36 and Spline64. You could sharpen after the upscale using LSFmod, which attempts to sharpen without increasing ringing.

But, keeping things simple, do the upscale in Vegas and then apply a simple sharpen to it with a value of zero and see how that looks. Make sure the sharpen happens AFTER the upscale, which probably means writing an intermediate.

distribution media... I imagine it is coming soon. YOUTUBE offers their version of 4k now. Blu-Rays have like what 50GB? I would guess those players have more capability than we think, as they can program in new codecs whenever they want as a downloadable update. I recall a lot of "HD is silly" before it dropped but here we are with HD everywhere, easy, quick, small enough to handle.

Nick, thanks for the info regarding AviSynth. I have just successfully created a 10 second video clip from 1080p into 4K. After the installation of AviSynth (this is new to me) i also installed VirtualDubMod for its GUI. With the resize filter set to Lanczos3, i seem to be getting pretty good scaling quality. Still need to get zoomed in up close to see the real results but for now it looks promising. No sharpening as yet, will test that later.

So current workflow is:
Vegas (or any other NLE) render to none compressed AVI 1080p.
Import clip into VirtualDubMod and rescale to 4k using Lanczos 3.
Save as new 4k AVI.

The only thing is, as predicted, the files are huge. Something like 6 gigs for 10 seconds. Its all uncompressed AVIs. im looking into compression now.

An interesting experiment, thanks for the info.

Paul.

on the upside, the technology will suddenly scale to match our needs in the near future - it always does: we need larger faster drives... out they come. we need cheaper 4k cameras... they are almost here, some are here now. The TVs are being produced as we speak.

Is it good we can make 4k Movie theater ready productions for beans now? Not really, unless we have the story, the talent and the crew to bring it to life. Or else it is 95% crap filler like most of Youtube!!! :D

someone mentioned upscaling of DVD.... I think it is interesting to note, I'm pretty sure we are now getting more resolution than we used to on the old style TVs. With DVD being 720x480, and many old TVs having resolutions below 400, I think we are freeing the previously restricted DVDs and showing ALL the resolution, then upscaling and sharpening that. So, yes the hardware does better, but it can now that our viewers are allowing DVD to show better.