PDA

View Full Version : final cut



netstile123
12-11-2011, 12:15 AM
I am rendering my animation, I normaly just pick jpeg and piece them together in vegas studio. I am rendering at 1920 x 1080.

Should I be picking something else when I choose to save rgb other than LW jpeg for best quality?


Also if I do choose another format will sony vegas be able to piece them together to edit?:lwicon:

Dexter2999
12-11-2011, 12:27 AM
JPG isn't going to be best quality. Personally I use TGA. Some people don't like it because the files are bigger. I see a number of people like PNG.

Play with them.Your choice.

Sony Vegas should have no problem with either. You probably won't have any issues unless you go with something like Cineon, EXR, or use the PS passes. Vegas will handle most of the common codecs.

Philbert
12-11-2011, 01:01 AM
I've always used TGA as well, that's what they taught in school anyway. Seems to keep good quality with reasonable file size.

chco2
12-11-2011, 01:38 AM
My workflow with Sony Vegas Pro is with 32bit PNG files.

Surrealist.
12-11-2011, 02:29 AM
Vegas can handle EXR just fine. Probably currently the best format for quality. The advantages are not limited to HDRI.

http://www.openexr.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenEXR

TGA, is another good choice.

Explained:

http://www.fileformat.info/format/tga/egff.htm

Tiff explained

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_Image_File_Format

Tech Specs for Vegas:

http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/vegaspro/techspec

At the bottom is a list of supported file formats.

netstile123
12-11-2011, 08:27 AM
I had to get the project rendering and chose TGA last night to get things rolling. The individual pics look excellent and loaded into vegas good so far (plat. 11 HD). When I load my clips I get a choice of none, upper field, lower field, full uncompressed- what should I choose ? Thanks. This is an HD project.

djwaterman
12-11-2011, 08:32 AM
Yeah, never render out jpg sequences from now on. Personally I avoid any upper lower field settings, it might be important in the US with their Pal system, I don't know, I don't like field rendering, it's designed for video and attempts to smooth out motion, but I hate that smooth video look anyway.

Philbert
12-11-2011, 09:03 AM
I don't touch the fields either, I think I've heard other people say they do the same unless a job specifically requires it.

Surrealist.
12-12-2011, 03:13 AM
I had to get the project rendering and chose TGA last night to get things rolling. The individual pics look excellent and loaded into vegas good so far (plat. 11 HD). When I load my clips I get a choice of none, upper field, lower field, full uncompressed- what should I choose ? Thanks. This is an HD project.

Field choices have to do with this:


Interlaced video is designed to be captured, transmitted, or stored, and displayed in the same interlaced format. Because each frame of interlaced video is composed of two fields that are captured at different moments in time, interlaced video frames will exhibit motion artifacts known as "interlacing effects", or "combing", if the recorded objects are moving fast enough to be in different positions when each individual field is captured. These artifacts may be more visible when interlaced video is displayed at a slower speed than it was captured or when still frames are presented.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Interlaced_video_frame_%28car_wheel%29.jpg

And it carries through from the start of the production to the end and should remain consistent. It is there in LightWave so if you want you can control it at render time. Definitely not something to worry about. You are better off - as mentioned - to not render fields at all.

Because Vegas can take the progressive frames and make them interlaced anyway and it will be just fine. If that was what you needed. But likely you won't.

If this video is for internet or DVD etc. make sure and set your Vegas project to "none (progressive scan)" in your fields option under the project properties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_scan

Fields is only for interlace video.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlaced_video

And progressive looks much better. Just make sure your project is set to progressive or it will render as interlaced regardless of how you render the stills.

meshpig
12-12-2011, 07:04 AM
The idea of interlacing is simply to make the frame rate look faster on goony old CRT TV's.

Rather than draw or refresh the one screen where most of the info would be invisible to the eye, it flickers between "odd" and "even "
lines so the screen is refreshed by the same amount of data at the same rate but slightly offset so you appear to get 2 frames for the price of one.

If ever you have seen a Cinema projector at work in the projector room, it FLICKERS like an out of control bug tossed over on it's back. Frame on frame off to the audience is of course invisible... conclusion:video is cheap crap:D

dwburman
12-12-2011, 10:51 AM
Hey, sometimes I like the silky smooth look of 60 fps (well, fields per second) in NTSC video. Not so much for footage, but for motion graphics. That said, I usually don't render interlaced these days because it's a pain to work with and reduces the apparent resolution because you're only seeing half the resolution at one time. If you get the fields reversed, it looks terrible and you won't know it until you see the footage on an interlaced display.

NTSC was the standard in the United States which is 30 frames per second/60 fields per second, which may be a bit smoother than PAL which is 25 frames per second/50 fields per second. I know I could tell a difference when I switched my Amiga between PAL and NTSC modes with PAL flickering more noticeably.