Business Vegas Video??

[Applebite Media]

Anyone here using Vegas Video 17? Miss the Sony days, seemed to be a much better program back then....

Anyone have any issues encoding mp4 files with it? I seem to get a little blurring when rendering some files. Mostly when there is camera movement. This happens even though the original is clear.

I take the same clip in KDENLive, and it not only renders clear, it renders smaller. The Vegas file is 24meg, the KDENLive is 10meg. (click sig if interested in seeing it.... getting better at animation LOL). It's on the 1st page.

Anyone else having issues, maybe know how to fix this?

Thanks in advance


I also apologize in advance if this is seen as political (had too )

I did fuck up and hit business and not tech... Ooooops! My bad!

[Applebite Media]

Here is a sample of what I mean. This is the same video on my site below, (except topless, I made this R rated for you all. ), rendered in Vegas Video. The one on the main page of my site was KDENLive. See the difference? I have tried different formats for output, video stabilization, you name it... the original is clear as with the free video software. So strange LOL


https://applebitemedia.com/video/GFY_only.mp4

I apologize for the link, Cannot seem to link video from my site. Oh well.

[CurrentlySober]

No clue about Vegas (i use DaVinci resolve) but back in my day, when I needed the very best optimised for web mp4 file, Id upload the video to YouTube (as a private and unlisted unpublished video) and let YouTube process it for me. Then, Id simply download the YouTube optimised version from within the admin section and delete the version stored at YouTube.

that way I knew I always got the best optimized best quality version cause Pootube used the cutting edge latest compression algorithms...

[Ferus]

1 - start here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FifUQhcMI0
2 - finetune where needed depending on your source

[Applebite Media]

Originally Posted by CurrentlySober

No clue about Vegas (i use DaVinci resolve) but back in my day, when I needed the very best optimised for web mp4 file, Id upload the video to YouTube (as a private and unlisted unpublished video) and let YouTube process it for me. Then, Id simply download the YouTube optimised version from within the admin section and delete the version stored at YouTube.

that way I knew I always got the best optimized best quality version cause Pootube used the cutting edge latest compression algorithms...

I have an older canon HD camera and needed something to record tape, I bought this as I was familiar with the name and remember the Sony version being really good.

The rendering is lightning quick with Vegas.... might be the issue. Rendering the original 3D to mp4 takes much more time.

I have not really noticed any issues with standard video, meaning not animated 3D. I didn't have this issue with the 2D thing I made. I'm the type of person this will bother until I get it figured out

[Rochard]

I used to use Vegas Video back in the day... I think it was my first video editing software. Back then you had to have a special second video card, a 1934 video card, just to input video....

[DukeSkywalker]

Originally Posted by Applebite Media

Anyone here using Vegas Video 17? Miss the Sony days, seemed to be a much better program back then....

Anyone have any issues encoding mp4 files with it? I seem to get a little blurring when rendering some files. Mostly when there is camera movement. This happens even though the original is clear.

I take the same clip in KDENLive, and it not only renders clear, it renders smaller. The Vegas file is 24meg, the KDENLive is 10meg. (click sig if interested in seeing it.... getting better at animation LOL). It's on the 1st page.

Anyone else having issues, maybe know how to fix this?

Thanks in advance


I also apologize in advance if this is seen as political (had too )

I did fuck up and hit business and not tech... Ooooops! My bad!

It’s great

[DukeSkywalker]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I used to use Vegas Video back in the day... I think it was my first video editing software. Back then you had to have a special second video card, a 1934 video card, just to input video....

1394 aka firewire. For importing tapes. Now it’s all ssd

[Ferus]

You are welcome?....

[Applebite Media]

Yep, I needed the Firewire card too. I even have an HP laptop with firewire for portable video transfer. I know, I need to update my camera LOL. I do not shoot a lot of video and this one works fine. Working on getting the full body mocap for 3D animation. One step at a time....

I guess I will make another render and send to Vegas support and see if they can figure out why their overpriced software renders worse than free software. I really like some of the effects in Vegas and with the add-ons that came with it from NewBlue, Boris and another... it can do some real nice effects. But in all honesty, KDENLive is just as good and FREE!

Too bad Adobe went to "rentware"... such a bullshit model being sold to suckers... otherwise I would have gotten Premiere... Photoshot... Illustrator... Might have even tried their animation software... Oh well.


On another note:

How bad is the animation? I'm new at this... not marketing it until I get better... This was my first "real" attempt at making a promo... The facial mocap will be much better at expression and mouth movement. I think there are still a few areas that need to be tweaked a bit more.

The Dance off on the character page is not bad but the Dress on the girl on the left does not flow proper and gets twisted in her leg.... I need to adjust the physics on that.

[Ferus]

Originally Posted by Applebite Media

I guess I will make another render and send to Vegas support and see if they can figure out why their overpriced software renders worse than free software. I really like some of the effects in Vegas and with the add-ons that came with it from NewBlue, Boris and another... it can do some real nice effects. But in all honesty, KDENLive is just as good and FREE!

Too bad Adobe went to "rentware"... such a bullshit model being sold to suckers... otherwise I would have gotten Premiere... Photoshot... Illustrator... Might have even tried their animation software... Oh well.

Or try the rendersettings I posted that works for everyone else...

[Applebite Media]

Originally Posted by Ferus

Or try the rendersettings I posted that works for everyone else...

Missed that. I will take a look now

The only thing I didn't try is the 60fps. Will try that. Thanks again

[Applebite Media]

Originally Posted by Ferus

Or try the rendersettings I posted that works for everyone else...

Ok, that helped. Thanks!

I also adjusted one of the cameras in the original to slow the motion a little. Although that was not necessary for KDENLive. The file size is still the same size, but not so much that it will bother me but still 16 meg larger that KDENLive.

I updated the video(s). I was playing with the HDR to give it a bit more depth... I think they look better.

[candyflip]

Davinci Resolve is free and better. Vegas is abandonware since Sony sold it off.

[Ferus]

Originally Posted by candyflip

Vegas is abandonware since Sony sold it off.

Gpu support finally worked after they sold it of, and there have been more update than ever before. Their support even work with you on issues now. So it might still have its bugs, but far from "abandonware"

[Applebite Media]

Originally Posted by candyflip

Davinci Resolve is free and better. Vegas is abandonware since Sony sold it off.

I agree, however it does not pull video from tape. I have tried it.

Sucks having an older camera when technology no longer supports is. It's a Canon XH-A1 and was perfectly fine in it's day used by many, and still take great video. I may use something other than Vegas for the animated files... Even with that suggestion, it's still not quite as good as KDENLive and 16 meg larger.

[CurrentlySober]

May I suggest that you may be looking at the solution in a backwards / reverse kinda way, by placing such value upon your camera?

Not that (as you say) there's anything inherently 'wrong' with it... But it is somewhat outdated in 2021.

So rather than trying to find a solution that fits THAT camera, by getting firewire cards and needing to use older less well supported software to use that camera...

Perhaps look at it the other way around and get a new compatible camera instead? No doubt your current camera was very high end back in its day, however would a lower end, yet modern camera perhaps give you at least equal results?

Camera tech has moved on immeasurably in the last decade or so. So what is considered 'low end' today, could still deliver a better result than a a camera that was released in 2006/2008 ?

Then you could take advantage of stuff like Davinci Resolve (Free) wouldn't NEED a firewire card and in essence, you would now be competing on a level playing field within your niche... Just a thought...

TL:DR? Perhaps look at updating your camera, instead of trying to find workarounds for 13+ year old tech

[candyflip]

Originally Posted by Ferus

Gpu support finally worked after they sold it of, and there have been more update than ever before. Their support even work with you on issues now. So it might still have its bugs, but far from "abandonware"

It's abondonware in that only hobbiests who dabble on the weekends would consider it useful. No one who works with video on any professional level is trying to justify still using this piece of crap.

[Ferus]

Originally Posted by candyflip

It's abondonware in that only hobbiests who dabble on the weekends would consider it useful. No one who works with video on any professional level is trying to justify still using this piece of crap.

Their customers are not Broadcast or Media, but usually marketing and retail doing their own stuff

[Applebite Media]

Originally Posted by CurrentlySober

May I suggest that you may be looking at the solution in a backwards / reverse kinda way, by placing such value upon your camera?

Not that (as you say) there's anything inherently 'wrong' with it... But it is somewhat outdated in 2021.

So rather than trying to find a solution that fits THAT camera, by getting firewire cards and needing to use older less well supported software to use that camera...

Perhaps look at it the other way around and get a new compatible camera instead? No doubt your current camera was very high end back in its day, however would a lower end, yet modern camera perhaps give you at least equal results?

Camera tech has moved on immeasurably in the last decade or so. So what is considered 'low end' today, could still deliver a better result than a a camera that was released in 2006/2008 ?

Then you could take advantage of stuff like Davinci Resolve (Free) wouldn't NEED a firewire card and in essence, you would now be competing on a level playing field within your niche... Just a thought...

TL:DR? Perhaps look at updating your camera, instead of trying to find workarounds for 13+ year old tech

I know... I should. Hell, people are shooting video with the DSLR's. But honestly, I do not use the camera that often. I think that last thing I shot was a woodpecker in our front tree making it's home. That was last spring/summer.

I cannot justify spending 2500.00+ to upgrade a piece of equipment that does not need to be replaced. The video is still crystal clear as it was back in the day... I do not need 4k. I would rather put that into other technology that I need, like the full body mocap gear for animation.

I would have used an old version of Windows as well, I still have a copy of windows 7, but the issues with drivers and newer software was a bitch and a half so I said fuck it.

[CurrentlySober]

Fair play, but Id look again at your estimate of 2500.00+ to upgrade - You are looking at more like 250.00+ these days - You could even get a Go-Pro for next to nothing

Hell, you can even shoot half decent 4K on a $250.00 cellphone - Plus, if you did get a new 'toy' you'd probably find yourself using it more just because you had it

[Ferus]

Originally Posted by CurrentlySober

Fair play, but Id look again at your estimate of 2500.00+ to upgrade - You are looking at more like 250.00+ these days - You could even get a Go-Pro for next to nothing

Hell, you can even shoot half decent 4K on a $250.00 cellphone - Plus, if you did get a new 'toy' you'd probably find yourself using it more just because you had it

Check out "DJI Pocket 2" and some of the youtube videos shot using that cam

[CurrentlySober]

Originally Posted by Ferus

Check out "DJI Pocket 2" and some of the youtube videos shot using that cam

Exactly - Camera Tech has moved on so fast recently

[Applebite Media]

Originally Posted by CurrentlySober

Fair play, but Id look again at your estimate of 2500.00+ to upgrade - You are looking at more like 250.00+ these days - You could even get a Go-Pro for next to nothing

Hell, you can even shoot half decent 4K on a $250.00 cellphone - Plus, if you did get a new 'toy' you'd probably find yourself using it more just because you had it

I was looking new... Wanting to switch from Canon to Sony as the Sony are better in low light. It was around 2500.00 new.

Are there lower priced items that would give the same quality or better? Probably... I think the iPhone takes much better photos than my Canon 20D, but would not show up to a photo shoot with one.

When Covid is more under control and more and more business opens and people get back to work.... I may offer promo videos for companies to use on-line. I learned from porn, it does not matter how good the equipment is, it needs to look professional so the client feels comfortable.

What I mean by that is.... when I did my 1st porn shoot, I shot with a little Nikon CoolPix 5500. Took good photos, especially for internet at the time.... however, it made me look amateurish and did not instill any confidence with my model. I totally get that... you go to a hotel and get nude for strangers and they have this toy of a camera I think I would have walked out.

[CurrentlySober]

I disagree with you regarding the model being concerned with the model of camera that you are using.

Her concerns are:
1) Am I getting paid?
2) Am I safe? (Not gonna get raped or forced into acts I didn't agree to)
3) Are the pics / video taken going to be used for the purpose / site that I was told.
4) I wonder if those shoes will still be in the shop after I have been paid?
5) What will I have to eat tonight, or where shall I go to eat?
6) etc etc etc...

I honestly doubt that the make / model of camera you are using will even register with her.

I gave away all my equipment when I retired in 2013 to a pal who wanted to set up a wedding photography business, so I don't have anything even remotely professional anymore....

However I would happily book any model in the world, without a second thought and shoot her on whatever the hell I felt like using if I so chose to do so, without a single worry about what the equipment 'looks like'... As long as it got good enough results for whatever I needed it for, then that's that.

The only person worrying about the 'size' of your equipment is you....

Basically if you say to a girl that you want her to come to a hotel room, strip naked and let you take pictures of her snatch from 2 inches away, for approx 2 hours in total and you will pay her X amount... Then provided you are gonna pay her what you have agreed to pay her, and you are not gonna touch her (unless previously agreed) and its not gonna take much more than 2 hours...

You will have the happiest model in the world and she wont give a toss what your equipment looks like...

[Applebite Media]

Originally Posted by CurrentlySober

I disagree with you regarding the model being concerned with the model of camera that you are using.

Her concerns are:
1) Am I getting paid?
2) Am I safe? (Not gonna get raped or forced into acts I didn't agree to)
3) Are the pics / video taken going to be used for the purpose / site that I was told.
4) I wonder if those shoes will still be in the shop after I have been paid?
5) What will I have to eat tonight, or where shall I go to eat?
6) etc etc etc...

I honestly doubt that the make / model of camera you are using will even register with her.

I gave away all my equipment when I retired in 2013 to a pal who wanted to set up a wedding photography business, so I don't have anything even remotely professional anymore....

However I would happily book any model in the world, without a second thought and shoot her on whatever the hell I felt like using if I so chose to do so, without a single worry about what the equipment 'looks like'... As long as it got good enough results for whatever I needed it for, then that's that.

The only person worrying about the 'size' of your equipment is you....

Basically if you say to a girl that you want her to come to a hotel room, strip naked and let you take pictures of her snatch from 2 inches away, for approx 2 hours in total and you will pay her X amount... Then provided you are gonna pay her what you have agreed to pay her, and you are not gonna touch her (unless previously agreed) and its not gonna take much more than 2 hours...

You will have the happiest model in the world and she wont give a toss what your equipment looks like...

Yes, sometimes they do... If they didn't I would not have mentioned it here. The photos looked great... but hearing that made me get a different camera.

Do you remember what the nikon coolpix looked like? It looked like a toy... long and flat, half the body twisted... looked for a pic but they have changed over the years. It looked like one of those Kodak 110 cameras...

I can see someone seeing that as amateurish.

Like I said before... I was not cut out to shoot content.

[pornguy]

Make sure you have all the latest DivX codecs

[nikki99]

so no more sony????