Slow Motion
JHDT_Productions
26 Oct 2011 00:10
Andy I would love to get a Phantom too. Last I checked it was $1800 per day at Able Cine.
But Phantom stock clips sell pretty well from what I've seen on another site where they have a large amount of them.
Mizamook, Unless I missed a setting in Vegas the final video has a studdering look. I use After Effects with frame blending. Looks much more natural.
I used Twixtor in AE along with Frame blending and that looks pretty cool. The only thing with Twixtor is if one subject goes in front of another there is a lot of warping.
Look guys, I mean absolutely no disrespect on what anyone submits here. I was just answering the original posters question and my personal view on the subject.
But Phantom stock clips sell pretty well from what I've seen on another site where they have a large amount of them.
Mizamook, Unless I missed a setting in Vegas the final video has a studdering look. I use After Effects with frame blending. Looks much more natural.
I used Twixtor in AE along with Frame blending and that looks pretty cool. The only thing with Twixtor is if one subject goes in front of another there is a lot of warping.
Look guys, I mean absolutely no disrespect on what anyone submits here. I was just answering the original posters question and my personal view on the subject.
Mizamook
26 Oct 2011 00:31
kk5hy, thanks....from what you are saying, and the way I am interpreting it, you are not saying that Vegas outputs ALL video in a less-than-satisfactory way, but that since Vegas does not incorporate frame blending, slowed video (after a point), especially that with high motion, does not come out as well as with a plugin or program that utilizes frame-blending.....right?
And it's not a matter of respect or not...just information that can be used to ultimately improve one's quality....
ANY software, technique, or device can be used incorrectly...and sometimes one finds neat results along the way, take Autotune, for instance. A plugin (and hardware device) designed to help singers sound in tune, used incorrectly it makes the sound we all associate with really crappy pop music..and it became an effect in and of itself....but apparently SOMEBODY likes it enough to pay for the result!
And it's not a matter of respect or not...just information that can be used to ultimately improve one's quality....
ANY software, technique, or device can be used incorrectly...and sometimes one finds neat results along the way, take Autotune, for instance. A plugin (and hardware device) designed to help singers sound in tune, used incorrectly it makes the sound we all associate with really crappy pop music..and it became an effect in and of itself....but apparently SOMEBODY likes it enough to pay for the result!
JHDT_Productions
26 Oct 2011 01:00
Yes, the frame blending kind of blends one frame into the next, if you know what I mean.
From what I see Vegas doesn't have that.
But I did just download Vegas Pro 11, it has some pretty cool enhancements. So we'll see if it has something for slo-mo.
From what I see Vegas doesn't have that.
But I did just download Vegas Pro 11, it has some pretty cool enhancements. So we'll see if it has something for slo-mo.
Mizamook
26 Oct 2011 01:27
I got upgraded from 9 to 11 recently....they did some dumb things....like added steps to a lot of things that used to be much easier, for no apparent gain. I bought it for the ability to use hardware GPU accelleration, but I need a better card first.
Let me know if you learn anything about how the new version treats velocity adjustment! (I'd go check it out for myself, but I've a bunch of clips that need tagging before I do anything else)
Oh, and for jdennis, there is something you can do if you want to use the in-camera 240 fps function. If you shoot in your highest resolution (I believe that cam is HDV too, right? so shoot in 1080i, or it won't work) use the smooth slow shutter, but when you render, render it out as 720p. This way, the aparent quality loss from the hit to temporal resolution by using smooth slow shutter is balanced. Here's a shot I did that way (I don't remember, but I may have used a velocity envelope as well) In comparison to other real-time shots of the same time/event/place, it was still not quite as good, but looked better than if I rendered it out 1080.
In my tests (exploding mushrooms) I found that it does capture more of the actual event, so you might want to shoot both ways, depending on what you are trying to convey.
https://www.pond5.com/de/stock-footage/1182952
Let me know if you learn anything about how the new version treats velocity adjustment! (I'd go check it out for myself, but I've a bunch of clips that need tagging before I do anything else)
Oh, and for jdennis, there is something you can do if you want to use the in-camera 240 fps function. If you shoot in your highest resolution (I believe that cam is HDV too, right? so shoot in 1080i, or it won't work) use the smooth slow shutter, but when you render, render it out as 720p. This way, the aparent quality loss from the hit to temporal resolution by using smooth slow shutter is balanced. Here's a shot I did that way (I don't remember, but I may have used a velocity envelope as well) In comparison to other real-time shots of the same time/event/place, it was still not quite as good, but looked better than if I rendered it out 1080.
In my tests (exploding mushrooms) I found that it does capture more of the actual event, so you might want to shoot both ways, depending on what you are trying to convey.
https://www.pond5.com/de/stock-footage/1182952
jdennis
26 Oct 2011 12:58
Thanks for all the input.... didnt realize how much was involved in creating slow motion clips. Its probably not too bad once you do it a few times. I've got lots to learn. Does anyone know where to find a "how-to tutorial" or video showing the details for different kinds of effects.
jenaddison
26 Oct 2011 15:44