Does VF2.0 have improved slo mo over VF1.0

Glenmm201 wrote on 8/14/2002, 2:23 PM

I've been trying to find out (before I plunk down my credit card) if VF2.0 does a better job of rendering/resampling for slow motion reduced playback rates than did the VF 1.0 I own. VF1 stutters badly, it's really unusable. The trial of VF2 is crippled to not allow any preview rendering, but the Vegas Video 3 trial rendered the segment beautifully. Unfortunately, there's a $170 difference in upgrade price, and this is all I need it for.

Anyone know for sure in VF2 will render as good as VV3?

-- glen

Comments

Former user wrote on 8/14/2002, 7:35 PM

I just did a test between VF2 and Vegas. This was footage of a horse at a rodeo. I think the slo mo between the two was pretty close in quality if not identical.

But before you give up on VF1, try a couple of things. First, I believe it has the option to resample, make sure you do that. Also, render in Best quality. When doing effx such as slo mo there is a difference between good quality and best.

Hope this helps some.

Dave T2