JPEG, a bad format? at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Windows / PC Post Production Solutions > What Happens in Vegas...

What Happens in Vegas...
...stays in Vegas! This PC-based editing app is a safe bet with these tips.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 11th, 2007, 02:01 PM   #1
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 263
JPEG, a bad format?

I read before that .jpg pictures could be a problem in Vegas, in rendering. It could crash or reboot. And instead you should use .png.
Does somebody have any explanation of why this is and why png is so much better?

For me it does not make any sense, jpeg is one of the biggest and widest format people using for pictures...
Kim Olsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2007, 02:10 PM   #2
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
Posts: 180
I have used jpeg for years without any problems at all. I use jpeg because like you mentioned, it is widely used, as opposed to png or other formats.
__________________
HVR-A1u,WCS-999,HVL-20DW2 w/diff,2xAudio-Technica Freeway 600,Flycam 3000,Vegas 7E
Jason Donaldson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2007, 02:24 PM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 263
My though too, but when people have had rendering crashes with many jpeg's in their videos, they have beed advised to use png's instead...

And I would like to know why detailed.
Kim Olsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2007, 02:28 PM   #4
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 185
not related to crashes at all, but JPEG is lossy, PNG is lossless. (edit: and PNG supports alpha channel)
__________________
---8<---
Mike Peter Reed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2007, 06:22 PM   #5
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 3,259
The explanation I've read is that Vegas uses QT to decode jpg. Png decodes within Vegas.

Jpgs direct from camera are also frequently much larger pixel dimensions than needed in the project. You never need more than 2x the resolution to be used. Vegas does sometimes have some rendering issues with stills of large pixel dimensions.
Seth Bloombaum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 11th, 2007, 06:47 PM   #6
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 192
I tend to use bmp files as they're within my comfort zone!

Is a PNG file better, and if so, why?
Graham Risdon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 07:54 AM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 313
I've used png for years because that's the way I learned how to use photos with Vegas. On a recent project I tried using a couple hundred jpegs and Vegas 7 kept crashing. I asked Sony tech support if it made a difference using png or jpeg and they said it didn't matter.
David Jasany is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 10:49 AM   #8
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum View Post
The explanation I've read is that Vegas uses QT to decode jpg. Png decodes within Vegas.

Jpgs direct from camera are also frequently much larger pixel dimensions than needed in the project. You never need more than 2x the resolution to be used. Vegas does sometimes have some rendering issues with stills of large pixel dimensions.
Thanks YOU very much!
That was a perfect answer on my question...

If this is true, my brain have gain important knowledge.

I'll never use .jpg again, I will from now on use .png in my projects....
Kim Olsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 11:11 AM   #9
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Windsor, ON Canada
Posts: 2,765
For what it's worth, I regularly do DVD slide shows with 300-400 (or more) images and I've never had any issues using JPEGs.
The only thing I'll do with them is shrink them down in size if necessary.
Mike Kujbida is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 11:49 AM   #10
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 145
Is there any discernable quality difference in the final output using JPG vs PNG? Or renderig time issues?
__________________
Phil Hamilton
hamiltonp@sbcglobal.net
Dallas, Texas

" I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here! ..."
Phil Hamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 12:19 PM   #11
Sponsor: JET DV
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Southern Illinois
Posts: 7,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum View Post
The explanation I've read is that Vegas uses QT to decode jpg. Png decodes within Vegas.
JPG works fine in Vegas and does NOT require QT. TIFF requires QT.

The only issue I've heard when using images is when a LOT of LARGE images are used. This can be helped by lowering the RAM preview size and lowering the image size (i.e. you don't need 2000x2000 when you're ending up with 720x480, for example, unless you're doing some serious zooming.)
__________________
Edward Troxel [SCVU]
JETDV Scripts/Excalibur/Newsletters
Edward Troxel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 12th, 2007, 01:47 PM   #12
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 145
It seems that if you're final output is 720x480 then having an image this exact size at 72dpi would look good when rendered - but - I have noticed it does not.

Rather, it seems that you need to start with something like 1080x720 at 72dpi to make the final render decent enough at 720x480 if you're authoring to DVD. Of course I'm looking at this on a 62" DLP...

Is this really necessary or is there something on the rendering settings within Vegas or with the s/w that creates the PNG image that could be tweaked (other than BEST quality) to make the smaller pixel size look good after the Vegas render? The concern here from my standpoint is render time given that that I am working with hundreds of images for animation purposes...
__________________
Phil Hamilton
hamiltonp@sbcglobal.net
Dallas, Texas

" I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here! ..."
Phil Hamilton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2007, 11:43 AM   #13
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,997
Depends on the amount of "Ken Burns" applied...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum View Post
The explanation I've read is that Vegas uses QT to decode jpg. Png decodes within Vegas.

Jpgs direct from camera are also frequently much larger pixel dimensions than needed in the project. You never need more than 2x the resolution to be used. Vegas does sometimes have some rendering issues with stills of large pixel dimensions.
Since I `Burns the heck out of some pictures (zooming way in on 3MB pictures) I need all the resolution I can get. But there is a noticeable degrading in preview frame rate with images that large.

I'll have to tr the switch to png and see if the native decoding affects preview play back as much as had been indicated.
Jason Robinson is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Windows / PC Post Production Solutions > What Happens in Vegas...

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:25 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network