VirTuAlDuB... main uses/advantages?

FuTz wrote on 4/3/2004, 10:32 AM
I've been reading a few posts here and there concerning this app.
But I'd like to know in what aspects it could be usefull for someone who uses Vegas? To correct picture quality? To "deshake" non-steady shots? To de-interlace? I know this app makes all of this but is it worth it? Vegas does a lot of these things too so that's why I'm asking...
To sum it up: what's, according to you VD users, the main advantage of using VirtualDub?
Are there any graphic, effective examples of projects achieved with the help of VD that wouldn't have been possible just using Vegas alone?
Thanks for feedback concerning this application in general ...

Comments

johnmeyer wrote on 4/3/2004, 3:23 PM
Some people use Virtualdub with their analog capture cards because it lets them precisely control dozens of capture parameters (like interlacing) during the actual capture. It also permits certain filters (modifications) to be applied during capture as well.

I use it AFTER the capture because there many, many other filters that cannot operated in real time, but which can do amazing things to the video. My interests lie primarily in video restoration (old VHS footage, damaged video, etc.). Vegas has virtually no fX filters that are useful for this. By contrast, Virtualdub has dozens of spatial "cleaners," temporal cleaners, and chroma noise cleaners that make a significant difference in the viewability of the old video. There are also filters to remove logos which can be used on footage recorded off the air to eliminate those annoying station ID logos, and also to remove date/time stamps that just sit there and distract your viewing (works pretty darn well, too).

You can also perform simple script operations that operate on the video frame-by-frame. However, if you ever want to get into that, you should instead use AVISynth, which has a marvelous, although geeky, script language that lets you perform just about any operation you can imagine. For instance, you can take the odd field from the previous frame of video and combine it with the even field of this frame of video, and then do that over and over for the entire video. That sort of thing.

You can save each frame of video into a still image file, creating thousands of still images. You can also combine thousands of still images into a video file. You can do some of this in Vegas, but once you know Virtualdub, it is easier (I think) in VD.

If Sony could drum up some decent third party support for plugins, Virtualdub would be less interesting to a Vegas user. As it is, other than Satish's plugins, Boris, and a few others, there isn't much available, compared to Premiere. I complain about this every chance I get, hoping to make a dent in their thinking. Of course, maybe they'll get mad and kick me off the board ...
JohnnyRoy wrote on 4/3/2004, 4:41 PM
Ditto what John Meyer said. I use VirtualDub to clean up analog captures before editing them in Vegas. VirtualDub also has the ability to just work on the video or audio stream and just copy the other. I have some 3D tutorials that are in DivX but the audio is way too low. If I bring them into Vegas to correctly this, there is no way to just correct the audio and render them without re-rendering the video and loosing quality. But I can open them in VirtualDub and tell it to just do s stream copy of the video and only process the audio to increase the volume. You just can’t do that with Vegas.

VirtualDub is just like a swiss army knife. It’s got 1001 uses.

~jr
B_JM wrote on 4/3/2004, 6:53 PM
ditto again ..

and in many repects its a big time saver (as is avisynth) , both do higher quality resizing and crops than vegas in a fraction of the time ..
MarkFoley wrote on 4/4/2004, 3:50 AM
I use VirtualDub on footage that was taken in less the ideal (and no contol over) lightning conditions where the gain on the camera had to be cranked. Donald Grafts's smart smoother does a real nice job of getting rid of the induced grain...also gives my XL1 footage a nice soft (almost film-like) appearance .
FuTz wrote on 4/4/2004, 8:41 PM

Thanks for replies guys.
From what I can see now, I could use it for a few night shots I did here and there to improve image quality I guess (Grainy picture/18dB boosts).
jsteehl wrote on 4/5/2004, 7:05 AM
Now that Wax is available is there any disadvantages of using VD directly in Vegas? Have not tried it yet (I'm rebuilding my PC). Are all the VD features exposed?

-Jason S.
JohnnyRoy wrote on 4/5/2004, 7:21 AM
> is there any disadvantages of using VD directly in Vegas?

One reason to still use VirtualDub might be to apply any of the temporal filters. I haven’t been able to try the temporal filters in Wax 2.0 yet so I don’t know if they work in Wax or not. The reason they didn’t work in PluginPac Adapter is because temporal filters need to check the frames before and the frames after the current frame to determine what is noise and what is signal. The Vegas SDK API does not give you access to any frame but the current frame. (you don’t get access to the video stream, it just feeds one frame at time to your filter) In PluginPac Adapter, you would just get a black frame when you applied a temporal filter. In Wax 2.0 you get video instead of a black frame, but I haven’t really looked at it to determine if the video has been affected by the filter. (I have to wait until the next time I do an analog capture)

Perhaps Satish can confirm if temporal filters work or not in Wax 2.0.

~jr
Zarxrax wrote on 4/5/2004, 9:27 AM
"Are all the VD features exposed?"

No, only most of the plugins can be used. There's a lot more to virtualdub than just the plugins, as was already mentioned. My main usage is for encoding the audio/video streams to different codecs, trimming/joining video without having to reencode, etc.
johnmeyer wrote on 4/5/2004, 9:57 AM
You definitely cannot use the temporal filters via Wax.