Does Vegas need greater than 4096x4096 resolution for output?

Kinvermark wrote on 1/23/2019, 3:43 PM

The forum has recently seen a lot of posts about Vegas not supporting 8K output. Some people are adamant that they cannot use Vegas without this ability.

So, for those that want greater than 4k output, please explain why and what specific output formats you need.

Examples:

1) Large signboards or architectural projection.
2) 8k broadcast future proofing.
3) Exchanging media with other programs (or render & replace operations within Vegas) without loosing resolution on >4k sources.(this last one is my personal objective, and is a "nice to have" rather than a "must have.")

 

Comments

Musicvid wrote on 1/23/2019, 7:04 PM

Are there currrently any implementations of HEVC at Level 6? Not holding my breath.

Dimitrios wrote on 1/23/2019, 7:28 PM

RIP Data limits

RogerS wrote on 1/23/2019, 7:47 PM

It would be semi-useful for slideshows so you can crop in/pan on them as a video file instead of a photo sequence.

Steve_Rhoden wrote on 1/23/2019, 8:16 PM

As a professional editor, greater than 4k is definitely needed, because if a project comes in for the dimension for example (6,096 x 1280) for a display video board for an outdoor event.... What you gonna do?.... it is needed. i dont understand the nonesense what some editors are saying that 8K Support is not needed because of this and that, are you kidding?. 8K support is needed for those odd display dimensions for video boards or display events when required by a client.... I have to resort to after effects when projects like that comes in, which i hate doing and wish i could simply do it all in Vegas.

Kinvermark wrote on 1/23/2019, 8:32 PM

@Steve_Rhoden

Good to hear from you. I started this thread here and on ccow to try to define just what the use cases are and what output formats are required. The more details we can give the better for making the case to Vegas' devs.

So what format do you render to for the 6096x1280 video board? Any other typical sizes? Maximum size?

wwjd wrote on 1/23/2019, 8:32 PM

1. future proofing productions because we can. Vegas algorithms are currently good enough to upscale HD and 4K into higher res, blending in between new color pixels. Leading to....

2. Archiving. Saving a master of higher res, higher quality to recut that version down the road

3. YOUTUBE already supports 8K now, and can be used to show off new tech displays coming soon.

4. and Premiere is crashy ATM, so i can't tell get a list of the 8k outputs from it

4.5 and I don't own the full Resolve YET. Its going to replace Vegas since Vegas isn't updating these parts.

ANYWAY, these are features I'd use right now but can't. So, gotta use other NLEs.

 

Kinvermark wrote on 1/23/2019, 8:41 PM

Any idea about preferred formats? Would you archive with something like cineform or prores? Does there need to be allowance past 8K? This may seem ridiculous to some, but remember that we are not necessarily talking about final delivery - there are other use cases.

Musicvid wrote on 1/23/2019, 9:01 PM

What 8K cameras are currently out there and their prices?

EricLNZ wrote on 1/23/2019, 9:05 PM

What 8K cameras are currently out there and their prices?

Try "Binging" 8K video cameras and there's plenty but I shudder to think about the price.

Kinvermark wrote on 1/23/2019, 9:12 PM

There are also a few "prosumer" cameras that shoot more than 4k (but less than 8k). The Panasonic GH5 that I own has a number of ~6k modes including an "open gate" mode which has an oddball (not 16:9) aspect ratio. This could, for example, be used for digital pan/zoom while maintaining UHD resolution. The same can be done with timelapse image sequences from many, many cameras of course.

Musicvid wrote on 1/23/2019, 9:29 PM

I asked about implementation. All 8k cameras on BandH are 360 vr, starting at 2800 us.

Nutting for you cinematic geniuses, yet.

Kinvermark wrote on 1/23/2019, 9:37 PM

I am definitely not in the market, but how about a RED:

https://fstoppers.com/originals/cheapest-package-shoot-8k-video-hint-its-not-cheap-210601

at a mere $40,000.

 

Musicvid wrote on 1/23/2019, 9:46 PM

I'm sure Warren Miller already owns one.

Kinvermark wrote on 1/23/2019, 9:56 PM

Here's a planned consumer one: https://www.eoshd.com/page/2/

It's from Sharp. Very strange. I wouldn't buy it. Other Japanese DSLM camera makers seem to be heading towards 8k sometime in the next couple of years. Something about the Olympics.

 

Musicvid wrote on 1/23/2019, 10:21 PM

A lot of us spent a whopping $20 for an Amazon 4K Fire stick. There are a handful of channels streaming true 4k content. Do you have any idea how bad most of that stuff really looks?

wwjd wrote on 1/24/2019, 11:02 AM

play this, full screen, one notch ABOVE your screen's native resolution

BruceUSA wrote on 1/24/2019, 11:42 AM

play this, full screen, one notch ABOVE your screen's native resolution

8K video on youtube impressive. There are quite a few very high quality videos on youtube that will wow a lot of people . Specifically the one I saw is New York City. I watched on my high end Samsung 4K Quantum Dot TV. The image is wow. Vegas need and should implement 8K output in VP 17. I have try 8K in Davincci Resolve and its wokrs great. I shot 5K h265 and up res to 8K and out put 8k, works out beautifully.

CPU:  i9 Core Ultra 285K OCed @5.6Ghz  
MBO: MSI Z890 MEG ACE Gaming Wifi 7 10G Super Lan, thunderbolt 4
RAM: 48GB RGB DDR5 8200mhz
GPU: NVidia RTX 5080 16GB Triple fan OCed 3100mhz, Bandwidth 1152 GB/s     
NVMe: 2TB T705 Gen5 OS, 4TB Gen4 storage
MSI PSU 1250W. OS: Windows 11 Pro. Custom built hard tube watercooling

 

                                   

                 

               

 

Kinvermark wrote on 1/24/2019, 11:50 AM

I don't understand. The Youtube stream is only 1080P. So where does the 8K come in? How are you viewing above 1080p?

My monitors are both UHD (32 and 40") and the image looks pixelated at desktop viewing distance.

BruceUSA wrote on 1/24/2019, 11:57 AM

I don't understand. The Youtube stream is only 1080P. So where does the 8K come in? How are you viewing above 1080p?

My monitors are both UHD (32 and 40") and the image looks pixelated at desktop viewing distance.

If you have slow internet speed you may not see the 8K options. I watched on my 1080P screen and 4K screen the 8K options is there..

ps. You need to login youtube via google chrome in order to see 8K option.

Last changed by BruceUSA on 1/24/2019, 12:04 PM, changed a total of 2 times.

CPU:  i9 Core Ultra 285K OCed @5.6Ghz  
MBO: MSI Z890 MEG ACE Gaming Wifi 7 10G Super Lan, thunderbolt 4
RAM: 48GB RGB DDR5 8200mhz
GPU: NVidia RTX 5080 16GB Triple fan OCed 3100mhz, Bandwidth 1152 GB/s     
NVMe: 2TB T705 Gen5 OS, 4TB Gen4 storage
MSI PSU 1250W. OS: Windows 11 Pro. Custom built hard tube watercooling

 

                                   

                 

               

 

Kinvermark wrote on 1/24/2019, 12:14 PM

Ok, using google Chrome gives me the higher res. options. That's better :). Impressive images!

So, from your experiments, does feeding youtube an up-rezzed file yield better results than feeding it the original resolution? (even for "normal" HD playback). I can imagine it might just fool youtube into giving better quality.

wwjd wrote on 1/24/2019, 12:24 PM

I FEEL (have not scientifically PROVEN this) that even uprezzing has gains: both little extra sharpness when applied, and MORE COLOR because new pixels stuffed in get gradiated/tween colors in them, not just copies of nearby. That I HAVE proven to myself in tests. (just a side note, not related to the question from Kinvermark, as I have not uploaded that way)

 

wwjd wrote on 1/24/2019, 12:31 PM

play this, full screen, one notch ABOVE your screen's native resolution

8K video on youtube impressive. There are quite a few very high quality videos on youtube that will wow a lot of people . Specifically the one I saw is New York City. I watched on my high end Samsung 4K Quantum Dot TV. The image is wow. Vegas need and should implement 8K output in VP 17. I have try 8K in Davincci Resolve and its wokrs great. I shot 5K h265 and up res to 8K and out put 8k, works out beautifully.

Thanks, Bruce, hadn't seen this one! Can't wait to check it out at home. This is literally "10 minutes into the future". It's coming and looks GLORIOUS! This is what Nolan is trying to do while shooting all his movies in IMAX. Of course, I am all about having an interesting STORY first. But the tech is getting sweet.

Musicvid wrote on 1/24/2019, 2:19 PM

wwjd wrote on 1/24/2019, 10:02 AM

play this, full screen, one notch ABOVE your screen's native resolution

I think I have the capability to view that lovely camera work in both HD 1080p and in 4k.

I'll get back to you with impressions if I can see any differences.

Trensharo wrote on 1/24/2019, 2:34 PM

8k is a thing in the professional world... If the tool wants to be taken seriously by professionals, it has to support their workflow. 6K and 8K are things. It's not uncommon to shoot at 4K even if you're delivering at 1080p. Having the extra space in the frame for zooming is important, and if you have to use stabilization, you basically lose nothing when you shoot at higher than necessary resolution and have to crop in.

16k is also a thing on large display screens (outdoor screen on large buildings, etc.). Avid just added 16k support, for precisely that reason.

So it really isn't worth debating 6K and 8K. The market is there, already preparing for what's beyond that.

In order for VEGAS Pro to gain market share (or be taken seriously by professionals), it has to support their workflow requirements. Raster sizes is just a basic prerequisite (before you even touch on things like Interoperability with other industry-standard applications, collaborative workflow, etc.).

EDIT: IIRC, Video Pro X supports up to 6K and has Native DNxHD Import Support. So MAGIX clearly is in the know about where they need to go. VEGAS just hasn't gone there, yet.