Making edits to rendered uncompressd avis ok?

ken c wrote on 6/26/2006, 5:47 PM
Quick question, I finally ! thanks to ultimate S, finished all the core video editing work for a 2-day seminar, over 12 hours of final footage, now in uncompressed avi format... from a 3-cam shoot.

Geez it took me 110+ hours, with all the subtitles, 3-cam edits, tons of audio editing and so much more...

Quick question for Vegas pros: ok now I've got a bunch of great avi uncompressed renders...(they're mostly 15-to 45 minute clips, 5 gigs-11 gigs each)...all done for the first draft...(eg it's about 6.7 gigs per 30 mins)...

Let's say I want to edit out 3 minutes from one of the clips, and add some more subtitles... Q: rather than go back to the 3-cam timeline and do edits on source and re-render from there, will I lose any resolution if I instead just edit the draft/uncompressed single avis from within vegas?

That would make renders faster... plus easier to work with, since I won't have to navigate around all the camera angle move blue lines and all the clips scattered all over the timeline... make sense?

step 1: take 3 cams of footage, ult-s and added subtitles, rendered out to uncompressed avi for first draft

step 2: to make final edit changes, can I just edit that uncompressed avi directly from within vegas, with no loss of resolution, or, should I go back to use the source vegs/avis to make final changes?

I'll post screencaps of my timelines later, once you see this monster, that question may make a bit more sense... I'm just looking for ways to streamline my final edits, without having to load up the 1meg vegs and 'busy' timelines, for final edit renders in V6..

thanks,

ken calhoun



Comments

TShaw wrote on 6/26/2006, 5:57 PM
step 2: to make final edit changes, can I just edit that uncompressed avi directly from within vegas, with no loss of resolution, or, should I go back to use the source vegs/avis to make final changes?


Ken, you should see no loss of resolution by editing the AVIs.
I do it all the time.

Terry
Spot|DSE wrote on 6/26/2006, 6:01 PM
you'll see no loss, and the primary bennie of uncompressed is faster renders. The cost of course, is disk space and sometimes CPU speed.
ken c wrote on 6/26/2006, 8:06 PM
thanks Terry, and Douglas - appreciate it... I've never done a multicam edit project before, so it's great to find out how this all works... thanks to ultimate S I was able to get all the video footage completed for this monster project 2 months ahead of schedule - so thanks a million ... been using it daily for weeks now... and it's great to hear that I can use my uncompressed avis and edit on those vs the original (cluttered) timeline...

sheesh, having 1 cam using the regular sony broadcast tapes, but the b-cam using a camcorder, a bunch of 30-minute clips, and manually audio-syncing all that stuff together, with yet a 3rd cam, was a bear of a task ... but it's thrilling to have it almost "in the can" now... light's at the end of the tunnel..

thx as always for the help, I genuinely appreciate it!


Ken
GlennChan wrote on 6/26/2006, 9:53 PM
The SonyYUV codec might take a little less disk space..? It's still uncompressed, but 4:2:2 instead of 4:4:4 (so 8 / 12 the size).
johnmeyer wrote on 6/27/2006, 1:16 AM
If your source is primarily DV, the uncompressed renders are, IMHO, a big waste of time and disk space. If you have lots of generated media, stills, or higher res source material, then that's a different story and the uncompressed renders may buy you something. However, once you start with DV, the Sony DV encoder is so darn good, most tests have shown that no one can tell the copy from the original, even after many generations of rendering.

Won't help you with this project, but for future projects you can save a LOT of time and disk space.
Sol M. wrote on 6/27/2006, 1:58 AM
Quick question for Vegas pros: ok now I've got a bunch of great avi uncompressed renders...(they're mostly 15-to 45 minute clips, 5 gigs-11 gigs each)...all done for the first draft...(eg it's about 6.7 gigs per 30 mins)...

From the duration/file sizes you're mentioning here, I'm guessing you're actually using DV-AVI files, and not truly uncompressed AVI's, right? (Uncompressed AVI is 75GB/hour, whereas DV-AVI is 13GB/hour).

In either case (DV or uncompressed), you won't lose any quality by rendering using the same codec as the source footage (which is the previously rendered footage in your case). Also, though it doesn't appear like this will affect your current project, rendering to DV-AVI from Uncompressed AVI will result in a loss of a generation (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). Obviously, there'd be no loss going from DV to Uncompressed AVI.
ken c wrote on 6/27/2006, 7:04 AM
thanks John, good to know it... I've had to get 3 400-gig internal drives for this project... the external drives (maxtor/WD) are in general so bad for video projects (dropouts, locked up drivers/bsod reboots etc), I've found it's best to use internal drives. . so that's good to know re space-saving.

right jive re dv-avi vs truly uncomp. avi, you're right...thx for the correction.

It's been a very educational process; this will be a massive multi-DVD (at least 7) course, that has a high price point, so I want to do a top-quality job on the video ... thx to your folks help this past year, I'm much better educated from the forum posts that everyone's been making this last year - thanks for sharing your knowledge; I appreciate it.. and of course if you all ever want tips on things I know, don't hesitate to ask.

thanks!

Ken