The white balance part is pretty cool. The brightness fader seems to blow out the highs though. Any chance of modifying it a little so that it moved the brightness midpoint instead of just adding to the brightness?
The plug-in is based on the OpenFX standard, if this is what you mean. OpenFX is a standard for video effects that has been adopted by Vegas as of Version 10 Pro, in addition (and replacement in the future?) to DirectX.
thanks for your post. The brightness fader is here because in some cases, changing the colors through white balance correction may "burn" some of the colors. So dimming brightness let's you keep the highs once color balance is performed.
I understand you would like it to be more conservative about the highs, and more intensive for the mids and lows. Do I get you right?
I take note of your remark for a next release.
Thanks for your feedback, and please feel free to give me more information about what you are expecting.
Take a look at his demo. Based on that and the one time I've used the Vegas one I'd say an emphatic YES!
My one minor concern is the licensing scheme. 29 Euro is a good price but it appears to be node locked. That kind of licensing scheme is quite common with the high end plugs which also have the alternative of a floating licence at a higher price.
I suspect the average Vegas user to whom this product will appeal may be a little put off by having to buy a separate license for each machine.
Hi Andy. I don't think it's lousy but it could be more powerful. That said, you can do some pretty good correcting with the WB filter and touch it up with the Sony Color corrector. My opinion only of course.
Andy_L, I have to ask, were your viewing comparatives the same? Was Vegas set to best? Had you rendered out the clip/still? You see, I'd need to be convinced we're comparing like for like. Is there a more scientific quantative approach we could take?
Could you bring the PS result back into VP alongside your VP CC, I don't know what/how successful this would be, and see if we could register a Scope analysis?
It was your "foggy" comment that was making me think that maybe we don't have a controlled comparison going on? I think that's fair of me.
Pretty much as Andy says below and as you can see in the comparison on Richards site. The six vector CC tool in Vegas works pretty darn well, with skill you get pretty much the same outcome as Richards plugin. The auto whitebalance plugin seems to add a lot of noise in the shadows, that might explain Andy's "foggy" comment, especially if he had encoded the output. On top of that the autowhitebalance plugin left me feeling yes, the white was white but everything else just felt a bit off.
All of that said, please rely on your own judgement. I rarely use any form of colour correction so I'm no wizard at this.
>[I] I rarely use any form of colour correction so I'm no wizard at this.[/I]
Yes, always best to set WB from the off - sound advice.
However, when needing to scoot about from venue/room/pasture etc etc, things can get awfully messy and having some sane, straightforward, remedial approach is much appreciated. At this point I would also suggest that the Noobie could benefit from setting up a set of CC Presets for he FULL SONY CC to get them through.
"The auto whitebalance plugin seems to add a lot of noise in the shadows"
Another good reason for getting white balance right (or very close) at the start, apart from the difficulty in setting the right correction. With low temperature incandescent light the blue can be so weak that it is down in the noise. Bringing it up brings up the blue noise.
Thanks for all your comments, which I find quite valuable.
To RRA: I have initially developed this plug-in for my own needs, finding no satisfying white balance tool on the market, compared to what is available in the photography world. Then figuring out that other people around me were interested, I decided to package it and make it available to the Vegas community. I have other needs that I intend to package as well, and also some users already asked me complementary tools. So, my current wish is to go further in plug-in developments.
If you read French, you may also have a look at http://vegas.babasse.net/?p=611. This is a benchmark which has just been released and which compares Sony White Balance, AAV Color Lab and FBM Software's White Balance.
Regarding pricing, the one which currently applies is a launch offering with a special fare, and it currently works as one license per host, just like the Vegas licensing model itself.
I hope I answered all questions, please let me know if you have any further question.
Nice to hear that, I wish you successes, keep us informed about new offers.
To pertain to pricing scheme : I agree with others on this forum, licencing which is different then Vegas licencing scheme, will create artificial obstacle for buyers.
Please consider, editing on Vegas platform is our job. In order to evaluate and choose platform, we had taken under consideration also Vegas licencing scheme (and this is very BOLD key succes factor).
I have accepted this rule, that can have installed the same licence on my working station in home and on my laptop (what is necessary, when I'm going to customer, to demonstrate or discuss possible changes). I can't run both licences simoultanously. I respect this rule. IMHO this way of licencing is very well balanced and very in terget with my needs. Just perfect.