-
DVD Architecton 9/28/2012
DVDA Pro 5.2 won't let me create 24p DVD!
Just use the DVD Architect 24p DVD template. It's not actually rendered with pulldown; it's rendered with pulldown FLAGS, instructions for the DVD player to insert pulldown if the DVD is being played to an interlaced TV. It's a 24p file. This is an important distinction, because saying you're rendering WITH pulldown is saying you're creating a 60i file, and not a 24p file. That's not what you want to do.
-
Videoon 5/12/2008
Why the pause every one second when rendering WMV?
The pause is where it's writing the keyframe, so yes, it's a GOP issue. :)
-
Videoon 5/11/2008
24 vs 29.7
I entirely agree with you.
-
Videoon 5/11/2008
Does Sony Vegas Pro 8 burn to a DVD (not Bluray)?
If you buy Vegas Pro 8 with DVD Architect, you have DVD capability. No, not straight from the Vegas timeline to DVD, but that's not the best way to go anyway.
-
Videoon 5/11/2008
DVDA 4.5 hangs on burn...
"So im left with using 4.5 to author and create due to the fact it doesnt kill 16:9" Not sure what this means? I never had a problem with 16:9 in any iteration of DVDA. I've noticed some issues with DVDA 4/4.5 pertaining to 5.1 surround files, but for burning, I just completed a major project with it (for mass replication) and all was fine.
-
Videoon 5/11/2008
sony cineframe 24
Doesn't have anything to do with Cineframe 24. This is a problem I've seen in V7 a few times; in each case, closing out of the capture program, turning off the capture deck, turning it back on, and restarting the capture program did the trick. I don't recall that I actually had to restart Vegas, but if the above doesn't work, you might try that, too.
-
Videoon 5/11/2008
24 vs 29.7
About rendering 24p to 29.97 . . . In DV, there's no issue; Vegas knows exactly what to do with the footage because it's captured as 29.97 and Vegas only removes the pulldown fields when it's dealing with the footage as 24p -- on a 24p timeline, or rendering as 24p. If you render as 29.97, it just keeps the extra fields in place. However, if you're dealing with footage is pure 24p, such as you'll have with some of the HD cams, you need to disable resampling in the footage before you render to 29.97, or you'll lose some the 24p motion cadence and it'll look more like 60i video. If you disable the resample, Vegas will insert standard 2:3 pulldown and the footage will still appear just like 24p. Also, small point to remember -- when you render for DVD, the "+2:3 pulldown" in MPEG-2 only refers to inserting pulldown FLAGS -- the file will still be 24p, but it will contain the information needed for a DVD player to insert extra fields when playing to a standard 60i TV.
-
Videoon 4/18/2008
Question on "Save snapshot to file" resolution
Because it saved the snapshot as square pixels. HDV is 1440x1080, but the pixel aspect ratio is 1.333. If you multiply 1440 by 1.333, you get 1920. So, the square-pixel (PAR 1.0000) equivalent is 1920x1080. That's what the preview displays, so that's what you get. If you WANT it to be saved as 1440x1080, then right-click on the preview window and uncheck "simulate device aspect ratio." But then the picture will be horizontally squeezed.
-
Videoon 4/12/2008
Track Motion
That would be using many tracks as a group to create a 3D object. For example, you could use six tracks and make a cube out of them, then rotate that cube around in 3D space using parent motion. As long as you have the positioning math right, it should be seamless.
-
Videoon 4/12/2008
Track Motion
Remember, also, that the parent motion control is along the far left edge of the parent track; using the parent track's individual track motion control will not control the child tracks.
-
Videoon 4/12/2008
Subtitles in 16:9 format?
It depends -- are you editing in a 16:9 project or a 4:3 project? If you edit in one and render as the other, you may well get graphics/text alignment problems. Also, if you have a preset graphic or text that you created in a 4:3 project, check to make sure, when you drop it into a 16:9 project, that it's 16:9 and not 4:3. If it's importing as 4:3, then yes, the text is going to appear smaller even though it's supposedly the same point size.
-
Videoon 4/11/2008
Consumers are off the fence - Blu gaining on DVD
Good grief, there's only one fanboy in THIS thread. Of all the things in the world worth getting worked up about, HD optical disc just isn't one of 'em.
-
Videoon 4/11/2008
Who has switched From Tape
"I'm still on tape and will be for as long as I can. I simply don't think you can beat its archiving ability. All my stuff goes on optical media... which I KNOW will fail long before the tape does. I think HDD's and flash are certainly much more convenient and much faster... but then there's that archiving issue" If you really want to, you can shoot tapeless and archive to tape.
-
Videoon 4/11/2008
Who has switched From Tape
"That's a good one. Didn't know about that advantage. Very useful." Man, you're going to LOVE being able to delete clips on the fly, and from anywhere on the card . . . :)
-
Videoon 4/11/2008
Who has switched From Tape
"Well David, maybe you should click on "Forum Settings" above, under Forum View select "threaded and click on the submit button. Your eyes will be opened for you." Then that is my mistake; I wasn't aware of that function, and it's not in a place where you'd find it in most message boards. But, that being the case, looking at the reply tree as it exists, JFJ's post looks even MORE like what I thought it was.
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
Who has switched From Tape
JFJ, Yes, this is a message board, and if you're going to respond to a specific post, especially in a thread this long on a board which doesn't allow nested replies, you should probably reference the post to which you're responding. Your post, addressing no one specific, looks to all the world as saying "you people are deluded. Tape is where you should should be." If that's not the conclusion you wanted people to draw, then you should be more clear. "Or maybe your suggestion is somehow more valid than mine" I didn't suggest anything. I didn't tell anyone what they should or shouldn't use. "or maybe you're being defensive about your latest purchase/choice," Not being a moron, I don't buy into a workflow until I know it suits me, and I don't stick with/defend a workflow if it no longer suits my needs just because I paid for it. "or maybe you really do manage to have issue after issue with tape based cams?" Just the typical stuff, plus all the limitations you don't really appreciate AS limitations until you don't have to deal with them anymore. "In the end the reply is my opinion and experience - not yours. Capice?" And that's fine. But you need to more clear; you made a pretty sweeping blanket statement. To which I responded with MY opinion and experience. Which includes, re: tapeless workflow: it IS there, and I do recommend it, especially if you shoot and edit a lot of video.
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
Who has switched From Tape
"Boy, some of you must not take basic care of your transports (or are trying a bit hard to justify one's latest purchase?)...cause I've only seen tape issues on a rare occasion. Even then it was a quick dropout at best. Of course, using a single tape over and over past it's suggested use isn't what anybody would consider wise. But some of these replies are reminiscent of the hopeful, nerdy BS in "having to move to BlueRay to thoroughly enjoy/see a film". Do you really think flashmem is ironclad?...if so I've got several dead units you can buy. Anyone care to reiterate the price of the 32gb flash? What will it be in '09? Is 32gb even close to enough anyway without driving you bonkers worrying about space with any more serious projects? I think the answer is still staring the consumer/prosumer right in the face - go price any tape (even the high quality). Then add up flash mem cost vs. their limited length (and then factor in how you're handling/carrying the extra flashmem - another worry when you're out on a fun trip/whatever. They aren't infalliable, not at all). Most signs point to tape still being the smartest choice. Yes you have to take the time dumping it over, but come on...is this really that difficult or strenuous? Do you REALLY need to get that same Disneyworld or magic Mountain crap into your editor a bit faster than tape?...at the expense of limited mem space? * not that those places aren't fun/valid...just comparing to another "Galapogos" and the like mentionings. IMO, tape still makes the most sense. Utilize it until alternate mem options grow into it's own." With all due respect, you're pretty much at the beginning of the objection cycle here, bringing up points that pretty much everyone asks before they ever try a non-tape-based workflow and really understand its advantages. Many of us dealt with each and every one of these questions/issues YEARS ago, and since have been happy as all get out being away from tape. Suffice it to say, the advantages immeasurably outweigh the drawbacks, and I no longer see much reason to commit my images to a long clumsy strip of magnetized garbage bag. Now, tape may make the most sense for YOU right now, but you shouldn't presume to tell the rest of us what makes sense for US . . .
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
Who has switched From Tape
"David, I use , on average, anywhere from 10 to 20 cassettes per week. Been doing this for years. I've yet to encounter any problems with tape stretching, flaking, or anything causing dropouts. True, it may be due to my environmentally friendly shooting conditions [an auditorium that's climate controlled for humans to survive in] and my restricted use of the tapes [write once, play once for capture, put away]. $10 a tape would make this prohibitively expensive. At $2, tape becomes a commodity, and as long as it does it's job, I'm perfectly happy." Just saying what COULD happen, not necessarily that it will. I've seen, for example, TDK tapes flake. You wanted to know why people would buy more expensive tape. I'm providing an answer. Especially when there's a lot of money riding on what you shoot, it starts to make sense not to take chances on avoidable errors.
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
Panasonic SD9 - 24P Question
The SD9 has 60i. "True 24p" refers to how a camera shoots, not how it records. If it's reading the CCDs progressively at a rate of 23.976 fps, then it's "true 24p." That said, if your software can't remove the pulldown, then you can't edit it AS 24p. I don't know if 1) the SD9 records pulldown flags with the video or if 2) Vegas can recognize them. At worst, editing 24p as 60i is what editors have done with film for decades.
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
Annoying little Vegas 8 bug
Nothing nested, no prerenders.
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
Who has switched From Tape
Well, you're right in that as long as you have all the 1s and 0s, you've got the full quality of your video, and in that sense, it doesn't matter what it's recorded on. But cheaper tape can give you problems which might prevent you from getting all the 1s and 0s -- as in, producing dropouts, Cheaper tape is more prone to stretching, flaking, weather conditions, etc..
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
Who has switched From Tape
"Who has switched from Tape and onto HDD, flash or DVD to make use of these modern HDV cameras?" I've been using P2 almost exclusively for over two years now. "How have you accepted the transition encoding with the different media with Vegas?" It's driving me to drink, how much I miss the tedious hours of capturing. :) That said, using P2/DVCPRO, Vegas is workable, but limiting. There's Raylight, and it's improving all the time, but it still has a ways to go to match the integration offered by most other NLEs at this point. (FCP is still at the bottom of the pack.) "Have you noticed loss of Picture quality?" No. Tapeless is the exact same data, or better data (better codecs, etc.), that you'd have with tape, only without the need for capture and avoiding the dangers inherent to tape/capturing. Tapeless has none of the drawbacks of tape, and tape's only real advantage -- instant archiving -- is increasingly a very moot point. "Have you changed from HDV to AVHCD also? If so, happy?" Was never much interested in HDV, and I don't think I'll have much reason for using AVCHD, either.
-
Videoon 4/10/2008
30p to 24p Blu-ray
"The only way to do it is with a 60i disc: You're going to have to introduce a pulldown on the 24p stuff though." That is true, but Vegas has always been superb at taking care of that for you. The one thing that I will note is that if you have a native 24p file -- as in it was recorded as 24p natively, and not in a 59.94 stream with pulldown added -- before you render as 60i, you need to disable the resample for the clip . . . else it will be resampled and will come out having motion looking much more like 60i. This isn't a problem with DV or other 24p recorded in a 60i stream, because if Vegas treats it like 60i, it already has the proper fields in it to keep the correct cadence.
-
Videoon 1/19/2008
Blu-ray 85% since Warner Bros. announcement
I still can't for the life of me figure out why this stupid "war" has enflamed such Mac/PC-type passion, especially before anyone had even ever used or seen either one. There are things worth getting riled up over. This isn't one.
David Jimerson
Offline, Member since 4/24/2005