DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Wedding / Event Videography Techniques (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/)
-   -   Slide Shows (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/58145-slide-shows.html)

Jennifer Graves January 12th, 2006 03:58 PM

Slide Shows
 
I am starting to do more slide show videos for couples using stills. I give a discount to those who scan the pictures themselves and put them onto a cd. I actually prefer that because I hate scanning.... anyways, I tell them to use 150 dpi when scanning. Is this what everyone else uses for slide show quality?

Waldemar Winkler January 12th, 2006 04:35 PM

I would consider 150 dpi a minimum. Even higher is I expect to do a lot of panning and zooming within the photograph.

I used to prefer scanning photos myself because I had the option of re-scanning at a higher resolution if I felt I needed to do so. however, I recently discvovered that clients generally provide images at their camera's highest resolution which is usually better than 150dpi. I can always resize if I need to do so.

Ben Lynn January 12th, 2006 05:25 PM

For 4x6's and 5x7's, 300dpi is a safer margain. For 8x10's and larger, 150dpi is ok. That's what I used in the past.

Ben Lynn

A.J. Briones January 12th, 2006 06:47 PM

it's nice to get them as hi-res as possible, but they will just get sized down anyway, at least in our case. we use fcp for the slideshows and huge images tend to cause jaggies, especially with ken burns-esque motion. photoshop is better at interpolating the images down than fcp.

Peter Jefferson January 12th, 2006 08:51 PM

150 dpi up to 300dpi with enlargement up to about 300% to give some spacial leverage

Try not to throw on pics with stupidly high pixel counts coz the downscaling that ur NLE will do will slow down your processing immensly.

Keep it simple and youll get a good workflow, in the end, u dont really want to throw on a 6mb jpg to the timeline coz itll jsut chunder away.

Vincent Croce January 14th, 2006 07:01 PM

I tend to stick with 300dpi, mostly for the zoom/pan reasons stated above. I don't find it bogs down my render times noticeably-if it did I would deal with the extra time, as the results are worth it to me. Of course any pics I don't have to scan at all is a bonus...
Vin

John Harmon January 15th, 2006 12:10 AM

I usually do it at 600 dpi, mainly because I also use Imagematics StillMotion Creator for the "Ken Burns effect." That's as high as anyone should ever go.

Bill Dooling January 15th, 2006 12:56 AM

If you scan them yourself you can also boost the contrast, retouch, color correct, and just plain deliver a better product, most customers are horrible at scanning.

Bill

Eugene Bare January 16th, 2006 09:19 AM

not too far off subject
 
I am having trouble getting my photo's that are not the same H & W to show up full screen without showing empty black screen on the sides. Can anyone fill me in on what they do, im sure it is somthing simple. I am useing photo shop and pro show gold to do my slide show. I have Primere pro, after effects and encore as well. Advice?

Richard Zlamany January 16th, 2006 12:46 PM

When croppping use the same or similiar aspect ratio of your project. I use 500 x 480 crop tool to minimize the black bars on the side for 720 by 480 project.

Mike Oveson January 16th, 2006 03:45 PM

I usually scan photos at 300dpi. Accepting scans from clients has been problematic in the past, so I prefer to do it myself. 300 dpi usually gives you enough room to zoom, pan, etc. I'd say 98% of the photos in my slideshows have motion, so I don't usually crop them to eliminate empty (black) space on the sides of the screen. I can't stand having empty space (black bars) on the screen as it seems so boring.

Dan Shallenberger January 16th, 2006 03:57 PM

I agree with other and prefer scanning myself. It's not much fun, but you do have so much more control over then scan quality. Plus, I'm always worried that the client will show others, but omit that the bad scans were their own, leaving a potential client to think I scanned the images that poorly.

I've also found that After Effects does an AWESOME job with photo montages. When bringing hi-res images into FCP, it didn't do well, and I got jaggies and flicker a lot. Doing the same show in AE looks perfect, albeit forever long render times. I know that not everyone has AE, but if you do, it's so much better than FCP for montages with hi-res images. Just FYI.

Dan

David Chandler-Gick January 24th, 2006 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jennifer Graves
anyways, I tell them to use 150 dpi when scanning. Is this what everyone else uses for slide show quality?

Actually, DPI doesn't matter. It's only relevant if you were going to output a print.

What matters is the overall dimensions and the absolute minimum is 720x480. If you plan on doing any Ken Burns type effects, then you will have to have larger dimensions.

Joe Allen Rosenberger January 24th, 2006 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Chandler-Gick
Actually, DPI doesn't matter. It's only relevant if you were going to output a print.

What matters is the overall dimensions and the absolute minimum is 720x480. If you plan on doing any Ken Burns type effects, then you will have to have larger dimensions.




DPI does matter if your doing zooms, etc.

Joe Allen Rosenberger January 24th, 2006 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jennifer Graves
I am starting to do more slide show videos for couples using stills. I give a discount to those who scan the pictures themselves and put them onto a cd. I actually prefer that because I hate scanning.... anyways, I tell them to use 150 dpi when scanning. Is this what everyone else uses for slide show quality?



Jennifer....re think giving discounts for anything, you problably already put in a ton of hours with the edits, stick to your rates. I bet if you didn't give a discount for your client scanning their own pics, they would still pay your standard rate with no complaints.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:02 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network