Best Filter to Use for Dark Video

tdsilk wrote on 4/18/2005, 12:51 PM
Hello,

I recently recorded a concert using a GL2 where the stage was dimly lit. Of course when I captured the video to Veg5 it needed to editing. I've played with the following filters:

1. Color Corrector 2
2. Levels (to brighten)
3. Brighten and Contrast (to brighten)

So my question is: Is there a better way to brightening a video in Vegas 5 that was shot in a dimly lit enviroment?

Thanks,
tdsilk

Comments

Cheesehole wrote on 4/18/2005, 1:06 PM
Try Curves.

(brighten / contrast is mostly just there for neophytes)
shogo wrote on 4/18/2005, 1:41 PM
Color Curves by far the best IMO. I have been totally amazed at how well it brightens dark pictures. While able to maintain the natural colors

My wife shoots wedding pictures and I used a couple of them that were dark and she couldn't believe that I was able to make them look so good for the wedding DVD. She was planning on deleting them until she saw what Vegas and Curves were able to do!
p@mast3rs wrote on 4/18/2005, 1:43 PM
I use Mike Crash's AutoLevels. Works amazingly with dark videos.
BillyBoy wrote on 4/18/2005, 2:05 PM
For those wishing to remain amateurish keep using brightness/contrast and anything with "auto" in it.

For those interesting in doing it the right way:

www.bb-video.net

Jimmy_W wrote on 4/18/2005, 3:08 PM
You can almost read the word Professional in that last sentence. LoL
JImmy
craftech wrote on 4/18/2005, 5:40 PM
Adjust the "gamma" in the main color correction filter to brighten. Adjusting the gamma doesn't destroy the video as the brightness adjustment does.


John
FuTz wrote on 4/18/2005, 8:28 PM
pmasters:
I tried using this filter (auto level) and I noticed that if , in my shot, I have different levels of light, it "pumps". Do you have the same behavior?

Apart from that, I really like the Smart Smoother and Denoiser filters. Really doing a great job. And having these filters as plugins instead of standalone rules.
p@mast3rs wrote on 4/18/2005, 8:36 PM
Futz, yeah sometimes it does. But then thats when you use the controls below and tweak it. Its the closest thing I have seen to Adobe's Shadow Highlights.
FuTz wrote on 4/18/2005, 8:54 PM

I'll eventually try to tweak this one for sure since, like I said , Mike's other filters are little wonders in my opinion...
Cheers ! ,\/,,
John_Cline wrote on 4/18/2005, 9:09 PM
Billy,

Could you possibly refrain from including a "put down" or complaint in every one of your postings? Oh, what's that? You can't? I didn't think so.

John
shogo wrote on 4/18/2005, 9:19 PM
I have put a sample of the pictures that I was talking about on my site.

This was with the built in curves filter I think you will be more then pleased if you take the time and play with them. This also can give a more filmic look to your video as well as it makes blacks more natural and the contrast alot more prononced.

Left one is before right one is after.

http://www.totalsolutions.bz/curves.html
BillyBoy wrote on 4/18/2005, 10:08 PM
Special message to John Cline, aka forum crybaby and asshole:

KISS MY ASS!
FuTz wrote on 4/18/2005, 11:12 PM

Now, isn't that a bootleg from that NYC mid-70's band ?
Grazie wrote on 4/18/2005, 11:30 PM


DON'T TOUCH Brightness! Don't touch Contrast!

Use Colour Corrector PLUS your Scopes . . that is what they are there for.

Scopes and CC . . Scopes and CC

I've brought back trult dimmed stuff with this process.

Grazie

DelCallo wrote on 4/19/2005, 2:09 AM
BillyBoy:
Nice work - and I did not feel put down by your first post - although your second disappointed me. Previous exchanges notwithstanding, why bait him, JC, and why take the bait, BB?

FWIW, I don't have time to work through your tutorial at this hour, but have bookmarked it for another time. Looks thorough and well-done to me, BB.

Thank you.

Caruso
BillyBoy wrote on 4/19/2005, 6:53 AM
My second response is due to the constant bullshit from Cline. Check his posting history. Over time, anyone on the receving end of his frequent bile would react the same as I did.

My first comment, ie "amateurish" is a reflection on the METHOD not any person using it. Its roots go back a long ways and I credit Russell Brown, Senior Creative Director at Adobe Systems who is one of several undisputed wizards with Photoshop. On his TV show he used to go ballistic (in a funny way) at the mere mention of using bright/contrast for correction.

http://www.russellbrown.com/

As one of the TEAM that developed Photoshop, the undisputed champ in photo enhancement, he was often heard to say the only reason Adobe include a brightness/contrast "feature" in Photoshop was for the neophytes that simply didn't know any better. He would then go into a long detailed demonstration on WHY Curves and others adjustments are vastly superior.

Silly me.... I modifed his concepts for those interested in using superior color correction methods in Vegas and shared them with other forum members in a series of tutorials. Heck, you don't even have to buy a book or DVD to learn vastly superior methods. <wink>

tdsilk wrote on 4/19/2005, 6:59 AM
Hi Shogo,

The problem with omy footage is that it's dark as well as grainy. If my video looked as good as your dark video I would be very happy and could probably lighten it with no problem. What type of camera did you shoot with?

Thanks!!!
shogo wrote on 4/19/2005, 11:17 AM
Actually that was a still from a Canon EOS 10-D she took the shot in manual and it was way underexposed. I am slowly convincing her to use manual but she is still learning as you can tell.

This is something that she has always wanted to do so I bought her this to try and make some money at it, I just got to make her understand that it is not a point and shoot camera (although it can be) but I don't want her doing that with $1200.00 cam. ;-)

Does your camera have manual mode if so always shoot in that and never ever use gain if possible. It's always better to have the video under exposed than grainy as you can see how easy it is to fix with curves. But grain is not such an easy fix although there is some good stuff to use but it is either good and expensive or cheap and no good. (Though I hear Virtual Dub has some plugins and the Satish's frame serving works well.)
TomE wrote on 4/19/2005, 11:34 AM
Yes BB I learned how to use Photoshop even before I had a computer of my own by watching "Digital Gurus" with Deke McClelland and Russel Brown. Too bad there is not a show like it today that is available either on TV or web. (Free too --or with commericals is fine)

Someone here should produce one.



-TomE
BillyBoy wrote on 4/19/2005, 12:47 PM
I'm still looking for a pair of those thick glasses Brown liked to put on.

Sadly I can't find any serious computer how-to shows on tv anymore, not even on the more specaility channels. Shows like Screen Savers are aimed at green as grass newbie types and don't ofter any real content.
rcrawfor42 wrote on 4/19/2005, 12:49 PM
(Though I hear Virtual Dub has some plugins and the Satish's frame serving works well.)

Here's some video I cleaned up with VirtualDub. It's not great, even afterwards, but it's enough to fill in where the two other cameras missed.

craftech wrote on 4/19/2005, 8:09 PM
Again, adjust the gamma in the primary color corrector. Kick up the saturation level if it starts looking a little washed out.

John
DelCallo wrote on 4/24/2005, 2:12 AM
Ok, BillyBoy. Trying to follow your tutorial and lighten up some footage. I would like to key frame my adjustments, rather than splitting my track at the adjustment points - does that make sense?

My problem is working with Vegas' keyframer. I would like to sync the cursor at the start of my adjustments, move along the segment, making adjustments and adding keyframes where I feel necessary. My problem is that, either the Vegas keyframer is outright clunky, or I'm not using it properly.

Seems if, after adding a keyframe and making an adjusment, if I don't click on the "minus" sign once (where you would compress the timeline), then, if I click the right arrow to move down the timeline, each press of the arrow key takes me far down the timeline - in huge steps. Click once on the minus sign, and I can move "frame by frame" or at whatever precision I have the timeline expanded/contracted to. Does this make sense and are things working the way they should?

Also, when this scene ends, I would like to neutralize the color correction and color curve pluggin via yet another keyframe and move on from there with no FX applied.

Is this the way you would handle it, or is there a better way. My thinking is that I could make the return from adjustment to no FX more gradual that way - but it seems I'm having trouble.

Your input would be most appreciated.

Thanks.

Caruso
BillyBoy wrote on 4/24/2005, 8:44 AM
My preferred method is to break up the source video into similar events, then apply whatever FX filters are necessary to specific events.

If you apply correction to the whole project or a track, if the source file is longhish its much harder to get the adjustment you want with keyfaming BECAUSE of the time span involved.

Example of what I mean. Assume you have a five minute source file when you only want to effect the gamma by increasing it by .100 on the last 30 seconds. If you leave the source file whole and enter a keyframe at the 4:30 mark then its easy to make the mistake of getting the effect of the gain slowly taking place from 0.00 to 4:30 or a very gradual change if the only keyframe you enter is one at the 4:30. mark. Sometimes you may want exactly that, but not often.

However if you first enter a break at the 4:30 mark, in effect creating a new event then entering a first keyframe changing gamma to 1.100 then the effect is immediate. Again, this may or may not be the effect you want.

The keyframmer at first can be a little tricky. You almost always want to sync the cursor as a first step. Then you need to be sure that any keyframe you add in effect "takes" meaning as you insert them, they show up on the keyframmer timeline. Its simple enough once you do it a few times.

If you look at a typical project I do, the timeline is broken into hundreds, yea, even a thousand or more events if its a hour or longer. I'm a perfectionist in making color correction, you don't have to be that extreme. If you drop the FX filters you know you're are likely going to use on the timeline BEFORE breaking it into events then you only have to drag and drop once. So for me, for sure, the Color Corrector is always there. Then when its time to do color correction add keyframes to ramp up or down from the previous event. That way you can get very precise adjustment and also fade in or out if that's called for. I've never counted how many keyframes I have in a poject, many hundreds would be likely, sometimes as many as 20 or more just in a span of a few minutes....but I'm a nitpicker and sometimes just .20 adjustment or so while watching the scopes gives me just the extra pinch I think the source file needs.

As far as the cursor jumping in big steps, it depends what has the focus. The MAIN timeline should have focus, (just click on it) then the arrow keys/keypad keyes depending on far far you are zoomed in should move you frame by frame.

Another reason I like to break things up into so many events is it is much easier to end the effect. If you're talking totally ending and not adjusting if you apply by events, you can simply uncheck the FX you don't want and no effect is applied for that event.

If you want to gradually change you need to have at least a first and last keyframe. Vegas will fill in the blanks changing the effect over the time span between the keyframes. Adding additional keyframes between the first and last keyframes lets you ramp up and down at will anywhere you want. Again, you need to be careful that your keyframes "take", meaning you see the diamond markers on the keyframmer timeline.

I hope the above wasn't too confusing. Learning how to use keyframming and applying filters is one of Vegas's best and most powerful features and well worth the effort.