PDA

View Full Version : Capturing Video Frames For Photos



Willi
07-24-2007, 07:02 AM
Hi All,
I've been experimenting with capturing video frames from my Bat Mitzvahs and Weddings and creating proof books. I've been capturing the stills I want in PNG which seems to be the most stable in the VT. They are'nt very big I'd say 740 x 460 and look ok. Is there anyway to get a higher rez grab, or should i be capturing them in a different format. I think this may be the next trend in our company to provide an affordable option to our cutomers who would normally just do video. Also, if anyone knows how to manipulate the "snippets" in photoshop so I can make them printable for 8 x 10s that would be cool too. Thanks a ton guys.

Willi

SBowie
07-24-2007, 08:16 AM
Someone recently posted the file "QESuperResolution_b550.zip " to the files area of the VTNT group at Yahoo Groups. Reports are that it works very well for what you are trying to do.

Jim_C
07-24-2007, 09:01 AM
Hey Steve and Willi,

That was me. It was freeware to begin with, now it appears to be abandonware as for all signs of the makers web page is all but gone. So I figured it was OK to post for public use.

Amazingly, it does actually work. One of those 'creating something from nothing' programs you hear about.

Select an avi.
Select the frame.
Select the size and aspect.
Create.

It doesn't really make the still look any better,but it is much bigger and looks pretty much the same as the original.

I have been doing color correct work in VT or Vegas. Then saving about 3-5 seconds surrounding the still I want as an uncompressed avi then using that in the program.(attached)

Good luck,
Jim

Willi
07-24-2007, 09:47 AM
Thank you very much. I'll let you know how it all works out. I think with the new disc cameras coming out this may be a good direction for us. Thanks again.
Willi:thumbsup:

SBowie
07-24-2007, 12:34 PM
Thanks again, Jim. I downloaded it, but haven't gotten around to unzipping it yet. In principle, it sounds like a variation on the "Snappy" system, which provided some bucks for our 'old friends' at Play back in the day.

wvp
07-25-2007, 07:14 AM
...Is there anyway to get a higher rez grab, or should i be capturing them in a different format. ...
QESuperRez does work but takes some time and in the end does not compare to a picture taken from a still camera.
I would think you will get better results grabbing stills from HD footage or there are some (small size) video cameras now that offer not only decent still image quality but the ability to record the image to memory card while you are also recording video to tape.

billmi
07-25-2007, 07:52 AM
Is there anyway to get a higher rez grab, or should i be capturing them in a different format.

No, there isn't, because the image does not exist in a higher res to start with.

Any software purporting to capture in a higher resolution (yeah, I remember those Snappy ads...) is just capturing the same image you are getting now, and then scaling the image up. Some software packages can do a better job of that than others.

To use your captures you need to find the cleanest way to magnify still image which is usually a process of anti-aliasing, bluring and smoothing to cover over the blockiness of the lower resolution pixels (if only we had the software that they have on the CSI shows, where a block of 12 pixels from a security-camera suddenly can be magnified to show the killer's high-res reflection in someone's pupil - I think it comes from the same company that makes the 5-minute DNA analysis machines they use) Pretty much just scaling the image in Photoshop will usually do a pretty decent job, within limits.

The other option, and the only real way to get a higher resolution image is shooting a higher resolution image to start with such as shooting HD and grabbing stills from that - and that won't come close to the resolution you will get shooting stills separately with a decent digital SLR.

The big question is - how big do you need the stills to be? What is your target resolution.

SBowie
07-25-2007, 08:07 AM
The other option, and the only real way to get a higher resolution image is shooting a higher resolution image to start with such as shooting HD and grabbing stills from that - and that won't come close to the resolution you will get shooting stills separately with a decent digital SLR.All very true; shooting a larger format to begin with, whether HD or megapixel, is great when you don't need to work with what you already have. That said, note that both Snappy and this other app both do image processing and interpolation involving neighboring frames, in addition to simple scaling - hence the reports that they do in fact, produce a superior scaled result.

ps. - my wife has firmly instructed me to never again give her the 'What a pile of horse $%^&!!!" diatribe while watching CSI. :)

Willi
07-25-2007, 09:18 AM
The big question is - how big do you need the stills to be? What is your target resolution.


Well my thoughts are to be able to supply a Video job customer with a photo album option. We have had increases in our video packages to the point where our customers don't use us for photography. Or, they use us for photography and use the DJs for video which they provide very cheaply ( and poorly ). Thus giving our customers who may not have a lot of money budgeted for their needs video and photography cheaper . After reading these posts I believe that this as a viable high quality option is not far off. I'm grabbing 30 "snaps" using my VT today and uploading them to my photo lab to see if I can at least make and offer my customers a proof book. Thanks guys, I look forward to seeing even more discussion in this area and if anyone else thinks this is a good idea.

Willi

Rich Deustachio
08-01-2007, 10:03 PM
As long as your customers know going in that your not going to get the same quality still from video as a pro digital still camera.

Willi
08-02-2007, 06:12 AM
We've been in businesss for more than 27 years in LI NY. We have never spent a penny on advertising and do, on average 10 - 15 jobs a week. Ofcourse our sales staff would tell them about the process. In a previous post I mentioned it would be "packaged" as an alternative to using someone else if they could'nt afford our photography and video packages together. In our area the Djs are providing video now, and ofcourse the quality is'nt even close to what our 6 shooters can do. Thanks for lookin out but we would never sneak anything by or try to pass off anything but our best quality work to our all referal custormer base. :thumbsup:

kleima
08-06-2007, 10:07 AM
Willi,

Your best bet is to start shooting with an HDV camera that does 720p. Because the signal is progressive it is ideal for still captures, and does not show the artifact that an interlaced signal will show on a still. The stills I capture from the JVC HD100 look phenomenal. In fact, I used them in conjunction with still images we shot on a Canon Digital Rebel XT (8 Mega-pixels), and had a commercial coffee table-type photo book printed (offset, not laser) - the kind with a fancy glossy dust jacket. Well, I have asked several professional/semi-professional photographers/videographers to tell me which images come from the Rebel and which come from the HD-100. Invariably they say that the images from the HD100 are the ones from the Rebel! Somehow, they actually give the impression of looking better despite being 1/8 the resolution. So, they really do look good even in print!