I am just trying to find a decent rendering option that gives good crisp video and a reasonable file size. I have been experimenting with several options and settings. I just found something very strange.
My first inclination is to go for an AVI file because it's my understanding that this is uncompressed. IN this example, I have a simple video that has audio (music) playing and just one photo still for the entire song. When I make the AVI file (with the Video for Windows > NTSC selected), I end up with a file that is over 1 GB even though the song is only roughly 5 minutes long. the crazy thing is that the picture (again, just a a still photo) is distorted. On the photo there is one section of black background and some text over it. The text is blurry and I can't even read it. Seems ridiculous for an uncompressed 720p AVI file with just a still photo, doesn't it????
If I do the same thing on the very simple "windows movie maker" program with the same photo and audio file, the resulting AVI file looks BETTER than it does with this sophisticated program from Sony. What's going on ?
So i tried Windows Media Video V11 (wmv). I get a much smaller file, just 37 MB. And the video is MUCH better.
Is there something wrong with the video rendering? I would think if the file is uncompressed and many times larger, it would look better, not worse. and why is Windows Movie Maker better at making an AVI file than Sony Movie Studio????
If anyone has an idea of what I might be doing wrong or how I can improve the video quality of my AVI files please let me know. Or, should I just go with the WMV, since it looks WAY better and stop worrying about
My first inclination is to go for an AVI file because it's my understanding that this is uncompressed. IN this example, I have a simple video that has audio (music) playing and just one photo still for the entire song. When I make the AVI file (with the Video for Windows > NTSC selected), I end up with a file that is over 1 GB even though the song is only roughly 5 minutes long. the crazy thing is that the picture (again, just a a still photo) is distorted. On the photo there is one section of black background and some text over it. The text is blurry and I can't even read it. Seems ridiculous for an uncompressed 720p AVI file with just a still photo, doesn't it????
If I do the same thing on the very simple "windows movie maker" program with the same photo and audio file, the resulting AVI file looks BETTER than it does with this sophisticated program from Sony. What's going on ?
So i tried Windows Media Video V11 (wmv). I get a much smaller file, just 37 MB. And the video is MUCH better.
Is there something wrong with the video rendering? I would think if the file is uncompressed and many times larger, it would look better, not worse. and why is Windows Movie Maker better at making an AVI file than Sony Movie Studio????
If anyone has an idea of what I might be doing wrong or how I can improve the video quality of my AVI files please let me know. Or, should I just go with the WMV, since it looks WAY better and stop worrying about