DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   Alternative Imaging Methods (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/alternative-imaging-methods/)
-   -   Micro35 (original thread) (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/alternative-imaging-methods/37830-micro35-original-thread.html)

Les Dit February 7th, 2005 06:50 PM

Can someone post a link to a good resolution chart to shoot?
preferably one with resolution targets or stripes.
thanks!
-Les

Joshua Provost February 8th, 2005 11:37 AM

Les, try this:

http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/respat/#EIA1956

Wing Gee February 8th, 2005 12:27 PM

if we purchase the guide, will we have access to buy pre fabbed parts from you without buying one of the kits? like buying the macro, GG, rail mount etc.. i noticed the rail mount looks machined, and some of us wont be able to get that quality look without a mill.

Thanks

James Hurd February 8th, 2005 12:36 PM

Wing,
Yes. You'll have access to those parts.

By the way, no machining has been done. Not even on the rails.


Got stickers coming!

Les Dit February 8th, 2005 12:55 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Joshua Provost : Les, try this:

http://www.bealecorner.com/trv900/respat/#EIA1956 -->>>

Those look useful. Is there a link to the res target James used, to keep things consistent ? We should have a common test target I would think. One with resolution patterns.
-Les

James Hurd February 8th, 2005 09:38 PM

Here's a link to the one I used:
www.micro35.com/reschart.pdf

I dig Jushua's chart, I just don't have to to re-shoot them.

I've noticed that the Vegas program really compresses the video caps. Oh well.

Jim Lafferty February 8th, 2005 09:59 PM

Vegas outputs uncompressed PNG from the timeline if you set the Preview to "Best(Full)" and save as PNG. You shouldn't see any compression under those conditions.

James Hurd February 8th, 2005 10:03 PM

Hey Jim,
I did that but I still see a pretty big difference in the footage as its being played from the camera (during the video capture) from the still .png cap. Jagged edges etc...

Jim Lafferty February 9th, 2005 12:44 AM

Hmmm, could it be a motion sampling issue? In other words -- the look of footage always strikes me as better than still grabs because of the interframe motion, especially where interlace artifacts are concerned (those jaggies...)

At any rate, I don't think Vegas is compressing the images -- have you gotten better results with the same footage in other NLE's?

- jim

James Hurd February 9th, 2005 09:05 AM

Haven't tried. I'll try premiere next time.

Thanks Jim

Cosmin Rotaru February 9th, 2005 09:19 AM

You need to take a snapshot of a static image or use a real progresive camcorder to take full resolution snapshots. If you recorde interlace, then you need to deinterlace the snapshots to get rid of the jaggies. But you will also loose resolution, even with the best deinterlace algorithms available. You can set Vegas to deinterlace snapshots, or use some other application (like Photoshop) to deinterlace the interlaced snapshot! :)

James Hurd February 9th, 2005 09:23 AM

I'm shooting progressive. (DVX100A)

Cosmin Rotaru February 9th, 2005 09:51 AM

A! Don't mind me, then. I thought you shot interlaced... You should get perfect snapshots from progresive material. I don't get it. Vegas project is set to progresive and all? I don't think it matters, anyway...

Leo Mandy February 9th, 2005 10:26 AM

I believe even when using progressive, the footage will still conjure up interlacing problems. You have to de-interlace the footage afterwards.

Aaron Shaw February 9th, 2005 12:00 PM

James are you recording in 24p? If so you could be encountering normal interlace from the pulldown.

There should be no need to deinterlace at all.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:52 PM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network