# DVD software ? for Nick Burns



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 12, 2004)

Hi!  

Looking for Nick Burns  (SNL) computer dude/dudette who may have experience in DVD burning software compatible with XP.  I work in Vegas Video for my editing, and am looking for a software that will allow me to set up a start-up menu with chapters that can be controlled from that menu on the DVD.  If you have used any of this software what do you like/dislike about it?  

Thanks,
MJ :asian:


----------



## Akula (Jun 12, 2004)

What sort of budget might you be looking at, because they can range from a $50 program like Pinnacle's Instant CD/DVD version 8 

to

Upgrading Vegas to the Vegas+DVD Production Suite (upgrade from version 5 runs $300.00) from Sony Pictures

to

Sonic's MyDVD line from $30.00 to $100.00

Personally, I've used Sonic's software previously, and have really enjoyed to progress the product line has made in the last few years.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 12, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> What sort of budget might you be looking at, because they can range from a $50 program like Pinnacle's Instant CD/DVD version 8
> 
> to
> 
> ...


Hi, 

I'm still working in Vegas 4.0 and from what I've read - don't need the features in version 5 for what I'm doing at this point.  I love Vegas, but have a couple of issues to keep in mind.  It's hard to know which way to go here, so I was hoping to hear from people who have used some of these products.  So thanks for responding!  

For one, I have a friend constantly telling me I need to start working in Adobe Premiere.  The special effects he's created there are awesome, so it's tempting!  Aside from the cost I hesitate, because it's another thing to learn, and I'm getting really comfortable working in Vegas.  I'm strictly amateur at this point, but would love to move out of the negative income base to pay for all these fun toys.    So I'm not sure if I want to invest too big just yet in anything that might not be compatible should I make the change to Adobe.  Do you know if Vegas+ DVD works with projects created in Adobe or Ulead or any other editing packages?  If I stay with Vegas I think I'd like the fact that both products are from Sony for interfacing purposes, service etc., So I think if there is compatibility vith the Sony product and others, and it's fairly easy to do, the money is not the biggest issue. 

Also, my burner came with a lite version of Roxio (I think version 7), but I'd need to upgrade that to do the chapters and all.  Have you ever tired Roxio?   

As I stated above ease is an issue right now.  I'd like something that is not such a huge project to learn.  Vegas took a whole lot of time to get the hang of, and there's still a lot more I'd like to start doing, but I don't want complicated software for burning.  I feel like the projects already have taken so much time (as you probably know a labor of love :inlove: though) that I just want to "make the burning happen"  I have a friend that got a Dazzle and spent a ton of time on tech service calls to India and was _very frustrated_ by the service...so I think ease of use may be top priority.  Did you find Vegas+DVD easy to use?  Have you ever worked with any of the others? 

As far as Sonic's My DVD Line, do you know what company makes that?  Since Sony took over Vegas I'm wondering if that is a different company altogether.  Pinnacle sounds familiar, is that also an editing package?  I was thinking it might be better to avoid another one of those, and just look for a DVD building package that worked universally. 

If you have time let me know what you think. 

Thanks,

MJ :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 12, 2004)

One more question.  Do you have any knowledge of Encore DVD 1.5 that's made by Adobe?  I have no idea of the cost.  

Thanks,
MJ :asian:


----------



## Akula (Jun 14, 2004)

First off, good luck on your future endeavors - this is a wide and interesting field to play in and work in.

When talking about what editing program to use, just think of it as a tool to get to your end product, sometimes it will not always be the same program.  For me, when I'm doing most of my projects, I use my favorite editing program, In-sync's Speed Razor.  It's quite powerful and flexible, but fully setup, you're looking at around $2,000 for the software alone, not bad actually when you consider what it can do.   For items that need a quick hit, or produced as a very short stand-alone clip I'll use Adobe's Premiere. At other times, I've used Final Cut, Vegas, Edit, and many others.  Basically, what I'm getting to is that once you are comfortable with a package, like you with Vegas, you will find it easier to sit down with a different editing system and start working.  If you're happy with Vegas right now, and don't feel any sort of limitations, no need to worry about switching just yet.  Premiere does have a wider market reach, but think of it this way - if Vegas wasn't a program that would be able to keep up with more well known names, Sony Pictures probably wouldn't have invested in the company.

With respect to getting to make a DVD, for most cases, once you render out the proper files, in the proper format, out of your editing system, pretty much any DVD authoring package will be able to read them.  Some are a little more picky than others, so you may have to get into the supporting material to check out the proper bitrate, format, audio....

I have tried Roxio before, and lets just say that I know a lot of people that swear by it, and also about the same number that swear at it - I'm somewhere between those two extremes.  Personally, I use Ahead's Nero for pretty much all of my burning, both CD and DVD.  Most "Lite" or "Limited Edition" software you get with burners, video cards, or whatever are just to give you a limited functionality to whet your appetite, and prompt you to upgrade to a better version.

I haven't used the Vegas+DVD version, but from the specs on thier website it seems that the interface would be fairly straight-forward to use, and it can help you create pretty much anything you can imagine.

As far as I know, Sonic is its own company, and have been around from about the first time DVD burners hit the consumer market, and they are a general consumer line, low to upper mid range.  Pinnacle is another company with a wide range of products, including a very nice editing package, and is more mid-line consumer to professional level.  Again, however, once you render out your files, ready to burn your DVD, then pretty much any authoring program will be able to see them.


----------



## Akula (Jun 14, 2004)

Sorry, meant to hit the preview button, and hit the submit - oh well.

Continuing...

Adobe's Encore DVD program is a very serious DVD authoring package that will run you about $550.00 from them direct.  If you follow the link above, you can download information sheets, watch a tutorial and so on.  I haven't used it yet, but I'm sure it's on the horizon.  You can download a demo that will work for 30 days and give you a taste, but the download is 84Mb, so unless you have a broadband connection, or plenty of free time....

By the way, who if Nick Burns?


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 14, 2004)

> By the way, who is Nick Burns?


LOL :lol:  Nick Burns was the computer guy character from Saturday Night Live...quintessential computer tech who knows it all, finds most people to be DUs (dumb users) who never bother to read the manuals.  I think it's relatable and funny if you are a tech person, and if you are DU like me it's funny in an ignorant way. :lookie:   






> First off, good luck on your future endeavors - this is a wide and interesting field to play in and work in.


 Thanks!  I love it!  It is definitely challenging to learn all of this and so much fun to do! :boing1: It really helps to keep me creative.  I'm not sure if I want it to become a second career or not, it's just very rewarding work.  I get a lot out of seeing people's reactions to what I've done with the footage they are in - it's the best!  I wonder sometimes if it would feel less that way (fun, rewarding) when you have to do it for a living, so for right now it's all play.  You sound like you have lots of experience with it all.  I can't believe how many programs are out there to choose from.  Almost as many of those as there are Martial Arts!  Is this your career?  What kinds of projects do you do?






> When talking about what editing program to use, just think of it as a tool to get to your end product, sometimes it will not always be the same program. For me, when I'm doing most of my projects, I use my favorite editing program, In-sync's Speed Razor. It's quite powerful and flexible, but fully setup, you're looking at around $2,000 for the software alone, not bad actually when you consider what it can do.


  I've never heard of this one.  Ooooh, just too many choices sometimes.   I agree $2,000 is not a lot if you need it for business.  If one day I take that path I'd probably take out a business loan and get the best of it all.  Also, I am sure you are right if I get more into it I will be able to make the transition to other programs more easily.  


> if Vegas wasn't a program that would be able to keep up with more well known names, Sony Pictures probably wouldn't have invested in the company.


  I was thinking similar thoughts about it.






> With respect to getting to make a DVD, for most cases, once you render out the proper files, in the proper format, out of your editing system, pretty much any DVD authoring package will be able to read them. Some are a little more picky than others, so you may have to get into the supporting material to check out the proper bitrate, format, audio....


  This is the fear...the word proper...and the reason the Nick Burns' of the world are so appreciated...  There is so much to know, for this reason I may just stick with Sony for the compatibility factor for the time being.  It took so long to learn Vegas and now I just want to burn stuff...ugh at the thought of having to figure out something else - it's not appealing, right now anyway. 



Here's another question for you...my project is like 7.4 gig...it won't all fit on one DVD what do you do with large projects like that?  It runs about 35 minutes long, but I hate the interruption of having to change discs while people are in midview.  Since this one is for personal use (for my black belt thesis) I was considering putting it back onto a digital tape and showing it through the camera.  Then I thought maybe I'd make copies for people onto DVDs... 



> I have tried Roxio before, and lets just say that I know a lot of people that swear by it, and also about the same number that swear at it - I'm somewhere between those two extremes. Personally, I use Ahead's Nero for pretty much all of my burning, both CD and DVD. Most "Lite" or "Limited Edition" software you get with burners, video cards, or whatever is just to give you a limited functionality to whet your appetite, and prompt you to upgrade to a better version.


Somewhere buried on my system I may have Nero (not sure which version) I had problems with cd burning using it (probably another lite version)...it wouldn't track the tunes in the order I wanted them.  It was frustrating so I gave up on it.  I'll have to see if the version I have does DVDs.  Does Nero allow you to burn a DVD with chapters and chapter titles?




> Adobe's Encore DVD program is a very serious DVD authoring package that will run you about $550.00 from them direct. If you follow the link above, you can download information sheets, watch a tutorial and so on. I haven't used it yet, but I'm sure it's on the horizon. You can download a demo that will work for 30 days and give you a taste, but the download is 84Mb, so unless you have a broadband connection, or plenty of free time....


I have broadband it's just finding time to try it out before the trial runs out.  Lots of times I'll download stuff and then get sidetracked before I get a good chance to try it out.  Did you ever notice thirty days pass real quickly?

Thanks for all of your advice it's been very helpful, and good to talk to someone who shares this interest. 



MJ :asian: 



BTW :ultracool scuba pic


----------



## Akula (Jun 14, 2004)

> I get a lot out of seeing people's reactions to what I've done with the footage they are in - it's the best! I wonder sometimes if it would feel less that way (fun, rewarding) when you have to do it for a living



When you do this from a work point of view, for me at least because it's my company, that effect is not diminished.



> I can't believe how many programs are out there to choose from. Almost as many of those as there are Martial Arts!



Definitely - thinking of a strange parallel, you would have karate, kung fu, and so on just as you would have editing, post production, effects, 3D.... Then within, say karate, you would have Kenpo, Shotokan, Goju-ryu (apologies ahead of time for misspellings and/or improper usage) as you would have Vegas, Premiere, Speed Razor...for editing.  Okay, that was a bit of a tortured parallel, so I'll move on. 

This (video production) is a part of what I do.  Essentially, my clients come to me and say they want XYZ done, and from there I provide everything that is needed for that particular project.  Sometimes it's a basic written report, other times it's a video with a CD and printed materials and a web sitelet -  hence, use the best tool for the job.  Unfortunately, a very large percentage of previous projects are is covered by non-disclosure agreements and/or other vehicles, so I can't really get into specifics.  Generally, they range from internal communications to public information projects, mostly from a documentary/editorial point of view.  I've been careful to avoid the wedding/reunion video route, only because that's just not where I wanted to go.



> If one day I take that path I'd probably take out a business loan and get the best of it all



Think of this here as a warm-up to sticker shock if you want to go here (the best that is).  I just checked out Discreet's web site, and they are running a special right now on thier flint® and smoke® system pre-installed on a computer for the low price of $109,990.00.  And yes, this is a low price for this system.  Unless you're doing TV/Cable broadcast items you won't need to go here though.



> my project is like 7.4 gig...it won't all fit on one DVD what do you do with large projects like that? It runs about 35 minutes long, but I hate the interruption of having to change discs while people are in midview. Since this one is for personal use (for my black belt thesis) I was considering putting it back onto a digital tape and showing it through the camera.



Offhand, this sounds large for a 35 minute presentation, you might want to check your compression/audio settings to make this smaller.  A normal 4.7Gb DVD should be able to hold much more that 35 minutes.  When doing a larger-size DVD, keeping in mind my clients normally have the resources to pay for this, I get the CD replicated though a regular production house, and they have the equipment to easily deal with this, getting it on one disc.  If you can't make it smaller, maybe consider just running the files directly off a laptop, in full screen mode.  For a real impression, run it off a laptop, and throw the image through a video projector and fill up a wall.

The chapter titles,text, and menus are typically stored in the .ifo files generated through the authoring program.  Include these in the burn information and it shouldn't be a problem.



> Lots of times I'll download stuff and then get sidetracked before I get a good chance to try it out. Did you ever notice thirty days pass real quickly?



Yes, just about the time you start making good progress learning a new program from a demo, or even just getting used to an interface, you all of the sudden find yourself looking at 'Your trial has expired.  Please buy the full version"  I guess that's the whole point of a demo anyway, still frustrating though.  Some demos I've used were even better because they didn't expire, they just took out some functionality, like being able to output your project.  

Scuba pic - from Rarotonga in the Cook Islands.  I was about 80 feet down, and the diver was at a depth around 60 feet.  Great trip!


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 14, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> When you do this from a work point of view, for me at least because it's my company, that effect is not diminished.


 Thats good to know.  




> Definitely - thinking of a strange parallel, you would have karate, kung fu, and so on just as you would have editing, post production, effects, 3D.... Then within, say karate, you would have Kenpo, Shotokan, Goju-ryu (apologies ahead of time for misspellings and/or improper usage) as you would have Vegas, Premiere, Speed Razor...for editing. Okay, that was a bit of a tortured parallel, so I'll move on.


   Not so tortured I got it! 




> Generally, they range from internal communications to public information projects, mostly from a documentary/editorial point of view. I've been careful to avoid the wedding/reunion video route, only because that's just not where I wanted to go.


 Sounds interesting! I've come to appreciate watching documentaries! I can understand the wedding/reunion avoidance...I don't think I'd like that either.  My favorite things to work on are sports videos.  I love matching motion to music.  It's very cool how with the right music it seems to work out and can totally change even otherwise boring footage if done the right way.  I'd also love to one day make (just for fun) a short film ...comedy, horror, documentary anything...  




> Think of this here as a warm-up to sticker shock if you want to go here (the best that is). I just checked out Discreet's web site, and they are running a special right now on thier flint® and smoke® system pre-installed on a computer for the low price of $109,990.00. And yes, this is a low price for this system. Unless you're doing TV/Cable broadcast items you won't need to go here though.


 :xtrmshock GET OUT!!!  You're kidding!!! :lol:  LOL ok, not looking to take out a second mortgage...  




> Offhand, this sounds large for a 35 minute presentation, you might want to check your compression/audio settings to make this smaller. A normal 4.7Gb DVD should be able to hold much more that 35 minutes. When doing a larger-size DVD, keeping in mind my clients normally have the resources to pay for this, I get the CD replicated though a regular production house, and they have the equipment to easily deal with this, getting it on one disc. If you can't make it smaller, maybe consider just running the files directly off a laptop, in full screen mode. For a real impression, run it off a laptop, and throw the image through a video projector and fill up a wall.


I was surprised it was so big myself, but it's only the second thing I've done so I wasn't sure what to expect.  It's a lot of interview stuff, but there are also a bunch of generated media items and special effects.  I rendered the project as an .avi file, but I still don't get all the compression settings.  The first project was I think 20 minutes and was about 4 gig.  Since it's not a rush job (no render time issues or anything) I was going for quality, and don't yet understand at what point you sacrifice quality for size.

  A laptop would make my life so much easier all around, but *sigh*...still paying for the DVD burner...one toy at a time. 




> The chapter titles, text, and menus are typically stored in the .ifo files generated through the authoring program. Include these in the burn information and it shouldn't be a problem.


  That's great I'll look for it.  Thanks! 




> Some demos I've used were even better because they didn't expire, they just took out some functionality, like being able to output your project.


 Good marketing strategy especially if you like the project!  




> Scuba pic - from





> Rarotonga in the Cook Islands. I was about 80 feet down, and the diver was at a depth around 60 feet. Great trip!


Most :supcool:  shot! 

MJ :asian:


----------



## Akula (Jun 15, 2004)

Some quick hits - 

Sports are inherently fun to shoot, and once you build relationships with facilities/event directors/coaches, you can get access to areas other than the normal spectator areas, without having to be specifically 'press.'

Making shorts also works as a good exercise to work on your creative juices.  When your're done, don't be too afraid of entering them into some local film competitions, you may be surprised.

The Discreet package mentioned previously, last time I saw it, ran for more than double the price listed in the previous post.  In reality, a few studios/production houses that get this package, and then you can rent out time on those machines.  That's the way to go.  Also, Discreet makes other software the works really well with smaller productions - for fun, check out combustion and cleaner (really recommend both).

Now back to the DVD items -

When you render out the video files, the number of special effects/graphics/elements aren't really as important as they are when making the composition.  The different layers are merged into one, so from the computer's point of view, its just one item (usually).  When you bring the videos into your authoring program, it should try to convert them to another format like (MPEG2).  The .avi format is a bit of a space hog on your hard drive and not really conducive to DVD - most authoring programs will try to convert this for you to a usable format.

Think of it this way, drawing a digital image parallel.  When you working with a file in Photoshop or pretty much any image editing program, the application stores the information about each inidivual pixel, much like the .psd, .tiff and even .bmp formats.  When you want to put that image on a web page, you want to make loading it faster.  That's where the .jpg or .gif formats come into play.  The .jpg format, instead of remembering what each individual pixel does, goes something like 'this shade of blue is very similar to this other shade of blue, so I'll just make them the same.'  The compression setting for .jpg determines how far apart 'similar' colors are.  By blending the information like this, the size of the file starts dropping, sometimes dramatically.  Most of the time, this change isn't really perceptible unless you print really big, and you're right in front of it, or you compress so much it looks like someone drew it.  

That's very similar to how the mpeg format works - you can compress it to a point where you get a smaller file, but don't really see the difference.  As an example, I understand that if you have a satellite tv system like Dish Network, DirecTV and so on, you're actually recieving an mpeg2 signal, and its still good quality (actually better than my cable signal now).  A normal DVD you would burn in your computer on a 4.7Gb disc, should be able to hold close to 2 hours, with this compression, without any noticeable drop in on-screen quality.

Go ahead and play with the different settings.  Instead of trying your whole production on each run, pick a representative 5 second clip and render out using the different formats - try something like MPEG2 at 70% quality and see if you like the results, and check the file size.  If you don't like it use different settings, and you will find a combination of you like, and a file size that will work for you.  When you have your combination, render away the whole show.  After all, it's your project, you should decide on the final appearance.

The previous was more of an exercise to let you see what the different settings do.  Just keep in mind that most authoring programs will perform this step for you when you import the .avi into it.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 15, 2004)

First let me say this is all very helpful!  Thanks for giving your time here. 


			
				Akula said:
			
		

> Some quick hits -
> 
> Sports are inherently fun to shoot, and once you build relationships with facilities/event directors/coaches, you can get access to areas other than the normal spectator areas, without having to be specifically 'press.'


I kind of think, like everywhere else in life, you need connections for those types of jobs...one of the trends I'm seeing here where I live is that colleges are requesting sports resumes from High School kids and the parents are paying pretty well for them.  I'm not sure if that's what I want yet, but I might just start there and see where it goes.



> Making shorts also works as a good exercise to work on your creative juices. When your're done, don't be too afraid of entering them into some local film competitions, you may be surprised.


 Hee hee wouldn't that be fun?  I wouldn't rule that out.



> The Discreet package mentioned previously, last time I saw it, ran for more than double the price listed in the previous post. In reality, a few studios/production houses that get this package, and then you can rent out time on those machines. That's the way to go. Also, Discreet makes other software the works really well with smaller productions - for fun, check out combustion and cleaner (really recommend both).


  The price is crazy!  I considered checking out renting really good quality camera equipment for the short film stuff.  That is also a budget buster.



> When you render out the video files, the number of special effects/graphics/elements aren't really as important as they are when making the composition. The different layers are merged into one, so from the computer's point of view, its just one item (usually). When you bring the videos into your authoring program, it should try to convert them to another format like (MPEG2). The .avi format is a bit of a space hog on your hard drive and not really conducive to DVD - most authoring programs will try to convert this for you to a usable format.


This is very helpful.  I definitely have hard drive space issues...I fill it as fast as I add it it seems.  I have rendered lots of stuff into MPG2 format for sending to a friend via FTP.  I can honestly say I don't notice a drop in quality.  Someone told me .avi was the best, and I'm too perfectionist for my own good sometimes is all.  


> Think of it this way, drawing a digital image parallel. When you working with a file in Photoshop or pretty much any image editing program, the application stores the information about each inidivual pixel, much like the .psd, .tiff and even .bmp formats. When you want to put that image on a web page, you want to make loading it faster. That's where the .jpg or .gif formats come into play. The .jpg format, instead of remembering what each individual pixel does, goes something like 'this shade of blue is very similar to this other shade of blue, so I'll just make them the same.' The compression setting for .jpg determines how far apart 'similar' colors are. By blending the information like this, the size of the file starts dropping, sometimes dramatically. Most of the time, this change isn't really perceptible unless you print really big, and you're right in front of it, or you compress so much it looks like someone drew it.


  I can relate to most of these formats and see the parallel, and it makes perfect sense, thanks!



> That's very similar to how the mpeg format works - you can compress it to a point where you get a smaller file, but don't really see the difference. As an example, I understand that if you have a satellite tv system like Dish Network, DirecTV and so on, you're actually recieving an mpeg2 signal, and its still good quality (actually better than my cable signal now). A normal DVD you would burn in your computer on a 4.7Gb disc, should be able to hold close to 2 hours, with this compression, without any noticeable drop in on-screen quality.


LOL if it's good enough for "the dish" it certainly should do for my little project.  



> Go ahead and play with the different settings. Instead of trying your whole production on each run, pick a representative 5 second clip and render out using the different formats - try something like MPEG2 at 70% quality and see if you like the results, and check the file size. If you don't like it use different settings, and you will find a combination of you like, and a file size that will work for you. When you have your combination, render away the whole show. After all, it's your project, you should decide on the final appearance.


MPG2 is the only one I've ever rendered at but I never played with the quality..I'll experiment.



> The previous was more of an exercise to let you see what the different settings do. Just keep in mind that most authoring programs will perform this step for you when you import the .avi into it.


  If you render to MPG2 and then import it into the authoring program than does the authoring program accept it more readily, or does it not make a difference?  I'm wondering when would you use .avi?


----------



## Akula (Jun 15, 2004)

> I considered checking out renting really good quality camera equipment for the short film stuff. That is also a budget buster.


This is a good way to go, it's better to rent a $15,000 camera than to buy your own and have it sit on a shelf a lot.

One camera to possibly plug in that won't break your budget is something like a nice, used Canon XL-1.  For what you seem to be doing, this would serve you well, as you can also change lenses and get really good quality without going broke.  When Canon released the XL-1s, they made some major jumps forward, and as a result, the people with the previous XL-1 traded up, there's some out there in fairly pristine condition.  Another advantage with this camera is that it's physically larger - when you are on a shoot clients will sometimes expect you to show up with a larger camera than a smaller 'camcorder' size.  Even though a smaller camera like the Panasonic AG-DVX100A will give you better quality picture, and better flexibility, the Canon XL-1 is more what they expect to see.  For a lot of clients, don't even bother trying to explain the difference.  In fact, a lot of larger cameras today have the same guts as a smaller one, they just put it in a bigger case, to allow you to change lenses, get easier control....



> Someone told me .avi was the best, and I'm too perfectionist for my own good sometimes is all.


and


> I'm wondering when would you use .avi?


What's best all comes down to what you want to do.  When do I use .avi?  Simply, I don't... in fact, I intentionially avoid it.  Outside of the fact that Microsoft developed the .avi format, other reasons are that the format isn't as seamless across different platforms such as a mac, and I've also had problems in linux and even within different editing programs as well.  Depending on usage, I'll usually go with Quicktime for Computer/CD ROM deployment, and Mpeg if output to dvd/tape.  Sometimes the request will come in for a different format, but I usually talk the client out of it.

When bringing mpeg2 into an authoring program, the application simply has to do less work to get it ready to package up, thereby speeding up the entire process.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 15, 2004)

> One camera to possibly plug in that won't break your budget is something like a nice, used Canon XL-1.


.Yes I've heard of this camera.  When the time comes I'll check it out.  





> Another advantage with this camera is that it's physically larger - when you are on a shoot clients will sometimes expect you to show up with a larger camera than a smaller 'camcorder' size. Even though a smaller camera like the Panasonic AG-DVX100A will give you better quality picture, and better flexibility, the Canon XL-1 is more what they expect to see. For a lot of clients, don't even bother trying to explain the difference. In fact, a lot of larger cameras today have the same guts as a smaller one, they just put it in a bigger case, to allow you to change lenses, get easier control....


People are funny huh?  When I went to buy a vacuum a few years ago the salesman turned on all of the units for me.  I could barely hear what the salesman was saying.  I asked why the vacuums had to be so noisy, and he told me that they were made that way, because people needed to hear the sound in order to believe that the vacuum was really good at cleaning.




> What's best all comes down to what you want to do. When do I use .avi? Simply, I don't... in fact, I intentionially avoid it. Outside of the fact that Microsoft developed the .avi format, other reasons are that the format isn't as seamless across different platforms such as a mac, and I've also had problems in linux and even within different editing programs as well. Depending on usage, I'll usually go with Quicktime for Computer/CD ROM deployment, and Mpeg if output to dvd/tape. Sometimes the request will come in for a different format, but I usually talk the client out of it.


Ok sounds very reasonable...



> When bringing mpeg2 into an authoring program, the application simply has to do less work to get it ready to package up, thereby speeding up the entire process.


Very good!  Thanks!

Thanks so much for sharing!  I think my quarter's probably up for now,  but I'd love to talk again sometime about all this.  Really thanks for taking the time to explain all of this to me.:asian:   _If you ever do something that you can tell us about...I'm sure we'd all love to see some of your work!_


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 21, 2004)

I'm dropping in to let you know that I rerendered the project as an mpg2 today, and it's *amazing  *it brought it down to a very managable size (1 gig!!).  I really only notice a difference in quality in the clips that I used from other sources.  I did match the output aspect though when I first brought the clips into the project, but it's not too bad.   It will definitely fit onto one disc, so thanks RC!  I'll play with the burning :rpo: another day...


----------



## Akula (Jun 21, 2004)

> I'm dropping in to let you know that I rerendered the project as an mpg2 today, and it's amazing


Glad to hear it.  

A quick thought regarding your comment about clips from other sources.  Are these other sources a different size than the regular NTSC standard?  If they are smaller, and you needed to scale them up to fill the screen, maybe make a generic mask in Photoshop or other imaging program of choice, and then in Vegas, put the video in your project at a smaller size, and use the mask to fill in the dead space (this is also a great place to put captions, information...)




> If you ever do something that you can tell us about...I'm sure we'd all love to see some of your work!


I would actually like to, but in the foreseeable future, it doesn't look like a possibility.  That's actually one of the things that helps retain clients - the confidentiallity of everything that goes on.

Let me know how the burning and viewing go.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 21, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> Glad to hear it.
> 
> A quick thought regarding your comment about clips from other sources. Are these other sources a different size than the regular NTSC standard? If they are smaller, and you needed to scale them up to fill the screen, maybe make a generic mask in Photoshop or other imaging program of choice, and then in Vegas, put the video in your project at a smaller size, and use the mask to fill in the dead space (this is also a great place to put captions, information...)


I think that the masking idea would have helped _a lot_ a few months ago, but at this point I'm running out of time, especially since I could play with one clip for hours and not get bored of it - I just get lost in it all.   Instead of doing that I used the event crop/pan feature to zoom in on the clip (say like if it was originally in letterbox version) they looked fine, a little loss in quality because of the zooming, but they look even a bit grainer after rendering the project in mpg2 format.  It's ok though...nothing I can't live with, but if it was for a professional production I wouldn't be happy with the way it looks.  I actually had a clip from my footage that I tried cropping and wound up with a black space on one side, and I was getting frustrated not understanding all of the cropping features so I made a caption and it looks relatively good, almost purposeful.  In the future I'll try the masking it's a great idea...I've only done a little of that with the blur/cookie cutter feature to make a blurred face (not for this project) and it looked perfect!  Very :ultracool !

As far as the NTSC standard goes, I'm not sure how to tell what a piece of media was originally sized at other than seeing when it doesn't fill the screen properly, so I'm just getting into the habit of matching the output aspect on any media that I'm not sure of, especially pics.    



> I would actually like to, but in the foreseeable future, it doesn't look like a possibility. That's actually one of the things that helps retain clients - the confidentiallity of everything that goes on.


Too bad, but totally understandable!  

I have another question for you.  Maybe you can give this one a shot...on a burning topic.  Do you, or have you, ever burned any DVDs for use in another country?  I got a DVD from a friend in France and it won't play on our DVD player, and I remember reading that my burner could be set for US or European use, and could be switched back like only two or three times and then it would be permanent.  When I start my projects I use the defaults (NTSC ), if I were to make something for this friend in France, or any foreign country, is it the size the project is created in or the burner that determines viewing ability in a foreign country or both?  



> Let me know how the burning and viewing go.


 You got it...Thanks!


----------



## Akula (Jun 22, 2004)

> I just get lost in it all.


Totally understandable.  In fact, at times just for the entertainment value of it, I'll fire up my editing system and do whatever comes to mind.  A lot more productive than a video game on the PC - although that happens too.



> I got a DVD from a friend in France and it won't play on our DVD player, and I remember reading that my burner could be set for US or European use, and could be switched back like only two or three times and then it would be permanent.


If this DVD was a 'factory' production disc, then they are usually embedded with what are called region codes.  Basically this lets the studios control the release dates of movies and DVDs.  From thier point of view, if you are in Europe and want to watch a movie in a theater, the release date for that movie could be 2 months after the release in the US, where the DVD just became available.  This keeps people from shipping the DVD to Europe, thus not cutting into the all important box office revenues.  DVD players read this region code, and decide whether or not to play it.  You can buy a multi-region DVD player.  Here's a quick list of region codes

Region 1 - U.S., Canada
Region 2 - Japan, Europe, South Africa, and Middle East
Region 3 - Southeast Asia and East Asia
Region 4 - Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Islands, Anything south of the US
Region 5 - Eastern Europe, Former Soviet Union, Indian subcontinent, Africa, North Korea, and Mongolia
Region 6 - China

When you burn your own DVD, region or country codes do not matter.

If the DVD was a burn, then there is another factor at work here.  Its the good old NTSC vs PAL system.  There's another called SECAM, but I won't get into that now, but it's basically a PAL signal tranmitted differently, and it's also what France uses.  The NTSC signal plays at a lower resolution, but faster frame rate than the PAL/SECAM signal.  Unfortunately for us (fortunate for equipment makers) the three signals are pretty much incompatible.  Sure you can buy players, and televisions that can see these signals, but for the average DVD, they usually only come in one flavor.  One quick workaround is that if your media can be burned on both sides, make one side NTSC, and the other PAL (adjust project accordingly).  Be mindful however, that because the PAL signal is a higher resolution, then your DVD files will be larger.

By the way, the DVD players in computers do read multiple regions, but 'lock' into a specific region if you change among different region's disks a lot.  This is in part the computer industry caving to the movie industry, but if you do get locked, there are ways to unlock out there.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 22, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> Totally understandable. In fact, at times just for the entertainment value of it, I'll fire up my editing system and do whatever comes to mind. A lot more productive than a video game on the PC - although that happens too.


  I don't think everyone understands this passion, but I totally love it...it's fun to experiment with all of the different media and FXs.  It is more productive than video games I agree, but I do admit when it first came out I played all of the Leisure Suit Larry games by Sierra...hee hee:boing2: 




> You can buy a multi-region DVD player. Here's a quick list of region codes


Thanks for the codes and this is good to know.



> When you burn your own DVD, region or country codes do not matter.


This I need to know...



> If the DVD was a burn, then there is another factor at work here. Its the good old NTSC vs PAL system. There's another called SECAM, but I won't get into that now, but it's basically a PAL signal tranmitted differently, and it's also what France uses. The NTSC signal plays at a lower resolution, but faster frame rate than the PAL/SECAM signal. Unfortunately for us (fortunate for equipment makers) the three signals are pretty much incompatible. Sure you can buy players, and televisions that can see these signals, but for the average DVD, they usually only come in one flavor. One quick workaround is that if your media can be burned on both sides, make one side NTSC, and the other PAL (adjust project accordingly). Be mindful however, that because the PAL signal is a higher resolution, then your DVD files will be larger.


So let's see if I have this...if I burn something on my pc for my friend in France I need to use either PAL/SECAM signal when rendering the project in Vegas or whatever editing program I'm using?



> By the way, the DVD players in computers do read multiple regions, but 'lock' into a specific region if you change among different region's disks a lot. This is in part the computer industry caving to the movie industry, but if you do get locked, there are ways to unlock out there.


This is probably what I was reading in my burn manual...a headache I'd rather avoid...

The DVD my friend sent is a short film he made and copied for my daughter because it's a _Spy Kids_ theme, so I guess he'll have to render a new one using an NTSC signal so we can view it right? :lookie: 

BTW if you don't mind saying (it's ok if you don't), what is your name?

Thanks,
MJ


----------



## Akula (Jun 23, 2004)

> So let's see if I have this...if I burn something on my pc for my friend in France I need to use either PAL/SECAM signal when rendering the project in Vegas or whatever editing program I'm using?



Yes, just make sure whichever you use, that your friend in France has equipment that can use that signal.



> The DVD my friend sent is a short film he made and copied for my daughter because it's a Spy Kids theme, so I guess he'll have to render a new one using an NTSC signal so we can view it right?



Sounds like this should work.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 23, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> Sounds like this should work.


....cool thanks!


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 26, 2004)

RC,

Just to let you know it was a PAL/NTSC issue.  He had never burned anything for viewing in the US so he'll rerender and resend.  

 Thanks for the advice!

 MJ :asian:


----------



## Akula (Jun 27, 2004)

Glad to be of assistance.

How's the selection process for DVD authoring software going?


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 27, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> Glad to be of assistance.
> 
> How's the selection process for DVD authoring software going?


Hi RC!  
Right now I'm just working on how to get my project printed back to tape through Vegas...think I finally got it!  Now I just need a couple of hours to convert it.  Also I want to view it on the tv before the showing, because of the color corrections in the titles.  My first project looked so great, and then when I put it back to tape I was so disappointed in a couple of the titles...bleeding and funky colors, but I had no time to make corrections before the viewing.  I got a couple of tips like outlining the words in the titles, but I still need to learn a bit about the colors for television as opposed to the computer.  I did read somewhere if it looks good on the computer it's probably wrong.  :uhohh: uhoh...I think it looks too good still :lol: 

It looks like the version I have of Nero needs updates for authoring so with time running out I may just work on that issue after my test in two weeks.  I'll worry about showing the video for the test, and then make the copies when I have more time to trial stuff...remember we talked about how fast those 30 days go?, so I'll have more time to really check the programs out after the test.  It makes sense to wait at this point I think. I'll stop back and let you know how it goes.  

Here's something fun - after my test my friend has agreed to show me how to make a baby talk like an adult.  I can't wait!  It's a lot of key frame work but so worth it!  What's not to love about all of this!  

I'll also drop back and let you know how the viewing goes and the burning when I get that far.

Talk to ya later,
MJ


----------



## Akula (Jun 28, 2004)

> Also I want to view it on the tv before the showing, because of the color corrections in the titles. My first project looked so great, and then when I put it back to tape I was so disappointed in a couple of the titles...bleeding and funky colors, but I had no time to make corrections before the viewing. I got a couple of tips like outlining the words in the titles, but I still need to learn a bit about the colors for television as opposed to the computer. I did read somewhere if it looks good on the computer it's probably wrong.



You know, this is one item I thought about bringing up earlier, but didn't feel like typing too much at the time.   When you think of color images on the computer, the RBG values range from 0 to 255 per color channel, whereas your standard television uses the ranges of 16 to 235 (roughly).  The quick way to adjust this is to take your graphics program, and adjust the output levels to 16 and 235.  From experience, the color range is visually more restictive.  Pay a little closer attention to reds.  Personally, I like to clip the reds from about 35 to 180.  On the computer screen the titles will look dark, washed out, boring... but on the tape, they should be fine.

Also, the tv has a problem generally going directly from black to white.  This is just a product of how the signal is processed in the tv.  When making your titles, either use anti-aliasing, or apply a blur of up to 1 pixel.  Strange, but by adding the blur, the titles will look clearer on the television screen.

By the way, you are staying in the title safe area, right? :ultracool


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 28, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> You know, this is one item I thought about bringing up earlier, but didn't feel like typing too much at the time.  When you think of color images on the computer, the RBG values range from 0 to 255 per color channel, whereas your standard television uses the ranges of 16 to 235 (roughly). The quick way to adjust this is to take your graphics program, and adjust the output levels to 16 and 235. From experience, the color range is visually more restictive. Pay a little closer attention to reds. Personally, I like to clip the reds from about 35 to 180. On the computer screen the titles will look dark, washed out, boring... but on the tape, they should be fine.


It's interesting about the red, because come to think of it that was the one color in my last project that looked _awful _in the final product - the rest, even if a little different from what I intended, was livable.  When it comes to the color correction I've just left the default settings in place...mostly because I didn't understand it all.  So just now I went looking for the vectorscope (radar like screen) to check it out and _*PHEW*_ the defaults are set to the parameters you described (which probably explains why the other colors looked fine in the last project), but I know I used red at least one time for an intro to a   _Fighting Cats_ segment in this project.  I'll have to check that one for sure.  As far as making the changes I'm not even sure how to even begin to describe how I haven't a clue how to use the vectorscope. :lookie:   I do have the sound editing down using the mixer though!  I don't see a place to select a color range in numerical values when generating the media.  Does the correction for individual titles have to take place using the vectorscope?  If I select an individual title I can see along the timeline how the color range is shown on the vectorscope allowing for the fades in and out, but I don't see a place on the vectorscope to plug in a change for that particular title.  I'll have to play around with it tonight, or just completely change the background color of that title.  :uhyeah: that's the ticket...



> Also, the tv has a problem generally going directly from black to white. This is just a product of how the signal is processed in the tv. When making your titles, either use anti-aliasing, or apply a blur of up to 1 pixel. Strange, but by adding the blur, the titles will look clearer on the television screen.


With this, are you talking about there being a problem when fading or cutting from black to white?  Or are you referring to black and white being next to each other in a title?  If it's the second choice, I think I may have addressed this.  I read somewhere that you should not use a pure white on black and instead use an off-white color to avoid an undesirable result.  If this is not what you mean than do you apply the blur or anti-aliasing to all of your titles or just when there is the black and white issue?



> By the way, you are staying in the title safe area, right? :ultracool


Yes, that one I've got down....like... uhhhhh.... a semi-pro :lol: 

MJ


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 28, 2004)

I had a couple of minutes so I fooled a bit with it and found the histogram and other tools (RGB Parade)  but I'm still not sure how they work:idunno: ...I wanted to put a screenshot of it here, but I couldn't figure how to put a pic here, and I'm out of time for now so I'll try again later.


----------



## Akula (Jun 28, 2004)

> As far as making the changes I'm not even sure how to even begin to describe how I haven't a clue how to use the vectorscope.



Basically, the vectorscope is a testing tool to let you see the color balance of your video, compared to a baseline (the color bar pattern you've undoubtedly seen before).  If you have your camera put the color bar pattern on the tape you're shooting, then you can take tapes shot at different times, with different lighting conditions, and then use the vectorscope to color balance the different scenes.  Maybe you noticed if you shoot under florescent lights, the footage might look a little green, or with regular incandescent lights, it might look a little yellow/orange - this will help balance that out a little, if you don't try to adjust for this when shooting (white balance on the camera.)  I like to use the vectorscope more as a guideline and then tweak from there to get the balance I'm looking for at the moment.  

Think of the move "Matrix" when the scenes shot in Thomas Anderson's office building, or the police interogation room where they had an overly greenish/lowered contrast feel, whereas when he was 'Neo' the colors were more vivid and real.  The film makers decided to use these different colors to convey different settings/moods.  Play with the colors at times to develop different moods, afterall, this is your film, so make it look like you want to, show it to a few friends and ask for thier opinions, and make adjustments from there if you feel they are necessary.



> I don't see a place to select a color range in numerical values when generating the media. Does the correction for individual titles have to take place using the vectorscope?



Again, I use the vectorscope as a general testing tool.  Even though mine is tied to the software and can make changes, I still prefer to do it on my own.  Start with how you make your titles.  If you use a titler, look there - different programs call it different things.  You might have an overall setting in your titleing software that says something like "Use NTSC safe colors" or something like that, or just make sure the red channel for the color you pick does not go above 180 or so.  If you don't use a titler and make the titles in Photoshop or somethink like that, you can either use (in Photoshop) the Filters>Video>NTSC colors, or go to Image>Adjustment>Levels and change the output range.  I usually use the latter because I can change each color channel individually, hence more of a tweak to the reds.  Most imaging programs will have at least one of these items to adjust your titles.  

Just save as a high quality image preferrable as a tiff, psd, or other non-compressed format your editing software can see, avoiding the compression issue with jpeg images.  If you have to use jpeg, use the least amount of compression possible (in Photoshop a compression setting of 12 has virtually no loss of data).  Import into your editing software and you're on your way.



> With this, are you talking about there being a problem when fading or cutting from black to white? Or are you referring to black and white being next to each other in a title? If it's the second choice, I think I may have addressed this. I read somewhere that you should not use a pure white on black and instead use an off-white color to avoid an undesirable result. If this is not what you mean than do you apply the blur or anti-aliasing to all of your titles or just when there is the black and white issue?



I should have been more specific, but I was referring to the latter issue.  Think down to the individual pixels at any certain time.  When black is immediately next to white, in video and titles, you can introduce a sort of flutter or throbing appearance.  Again, this goes back to how televisions process the information into something you can see.  You're right about not using 'pure' white or black.  Think back to the color safe range we talked about.  For a computer, white has the RGB values of 255,255,255.  Each one of these is outside the upper range of an NTSC signal, thus 'illegal' colors, and same with the black on a computer being 0,0,0, again below the bottom range of the signal.  

For a basic title, usually, I like to sample colors off of the footage itself, and use those for the titles.  I'll pick something in the lighter range that generally conveys the color of the whole scene, and then select a color in the darker end of the scenes and use that for a shadow.  If you can't sample color directly off of the video, export just one frame, bring that to your image editing software and sample the colors there.  

Yes, try use the blur/antialias for pretty much any title, even if it's huge on screen.  My titler will make the proper antialiasing adjustments on its own.  If built in Photoshop, I'll make the adjustment there before importing. If something really interesting, say out of a 3D program, I'll have it make the adjustments as the animation is rendering out.  

Oh, another reason to use the blur and/or color safe range.  Essentially the NTSC signal is converted to an electrical signal, which then determines the pixels on the screen.  If something is using an 'illegal' color, or if there is an abundance of black and white pixels immediately next to each other, this causes in simple terms, the television to get confused on what its trying to process, and the result is *audio* interference (hey, it has to put that erroneous information somewhere)  Granted this isn't as prevalent today, but still happens.  Think about it this way, you're watching tv, at a comfortable audio level, and your signal drops out for whatever reason, and you get a screen full of static.  Notice how this is much louder than what you were just watching.  It's all those black and white pixels next to each other 'fighting' (actually its an electrical thing  )

On a final note for this post, I find it mildly enjoyable that an innocent question about DVD authoring and burning has turned into a mini course in video production.  I like it...hey, wait - I usually get paid for this!  Just kidding, no worries.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jun 28, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> Basically, the vectorscope is a testing tool to let you see the color balance of your video, compared to a baseline (the color bar pattern you've undoubtedly seen before). If you have your camera put the color bar pattern on the tape you're shooting, then you can take tapes shot at different times, with different lighting conditions, and then use the vectorscope to color balance the different scenes. Maybe you noticed if you shoot under florescent lights, the footage might look a little green, or with regular incandescent lights, it might look a little yellow/orange - this will help balance that out a little, if you don't try to adjust for this when shooting (white balance on the camera.) I like to use the vectorscope more as a guideline and then tweak from there to get the balance I'm looking for at the moment


  :ultracool ...I have noticed different lighting effects on the color of a clip.  This I'll have to play with as I do more filming.



> Think of the move "Matrix" when the scenes shot in Thomas Anderson's office building, or the police interogation room where they had an overly greenish/lowered contrast feel, whereas when he was 'Neo' the colors were more vivid and real. The film makers decided to use these different colors to convey different settings/moods. Play with the colors at times to develop different moods, afterall, this is your film, so make it look like you want to, show it to a few friends and ask for thier opinions, and make adjustments from there if you feel they are necessary.


 I love the effects in the Matrix and did notice the lighting changes.  I'm starting to look at movies in very different ways than I used to.  I've shown stuff to people before and it really is helpful, but well they don't all quite get it, except for those who share the hobby, because no one loves your baby like you do  .  Ya know?





> Again, I use the vectorscope as a general testing tool. Even though mine is tied to the software and can make changes, I still prefer to do it on my own. Start with how you make your titles. If you use a titler, look there - different programs call it different things. You might have an overall setting in your titleing software that says something like "Use NTSC safe colors" or something like that, or just make sure the red channel for the color you pick does not go above 180 or so. If you don't use a titler and make the titles in Photoshop or somethink like that, you can either use (in Photoshop) the Filters>Video>NTSC colors, or go to Image>Adjustment>Levels and change the output range. I usually use the latter because I can change each color channel individually, hence more of a tweak to the reds. Most imaging programs will have at least one of these items to adjust your titles.


 I'll play around to look for how to adjust the red in Vegas.  I read a lot about it awhile ago, but I was not using it at the time and didn't absorb it.  I know you are right there is a way there.  It's also good stuff on Photoshop.  So far I did all the titles in Vegas, but I wanted to create something to import so I'll try that for the next project.  



> Just save as a high quality image preferrable as a tiff, psd, or other non-compressed format your editing software can see, avoiding the compression issue with jpeg images. If you have to use jpeg, use the least amount of compression possible (in Photoshop a compression setting of 12 has virtually no loss of data). Import into your editing software and you're on your way.[/ QUOTE] I'll do that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jul 2, 2004)

Hi RC,


Just a little problem I'm having if you happen to tune in.  I rendered my project back to a digital tape, and on viewing, in four places in short clips the quality of the pieces were negatively affected.  The tape either jumped, like looked jittery for a couple of seconds, or in one instance slowed down quite a bit during a mirror effect.  It's disappointing because they look so wrong to me and I was just wondering if you had any clue as to what might cause this.  The first project I did I put onto a VHS tape using a converter and had no loss in quality.  I thought the digital tape would be best, but now I'm not so sure.  I went back into the project to check the four spots and they all played fine on the computer.  I will try to redo it on a new digital tape tonight and see what happens.  

Thanks for any thoughts you might have on this!

MJ


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jul 7, 2004)

Ok, it's a little bit funny, but I've sort of come full circle.  The digital tape idea was so frustrating :waah:  and just wasn't working, so I wound up using Roxio's "limited edition" software to burn the  DVD with a lot of help (basically it was done for me,  because I was running out of time to try and figure it out and learn it all and Saturday was coming up way too fast :uhohh: ).  No time to learn the chapters and all, but after this week I can play with it for future burns, and then decide if I want to go for the better packages.   I was very relieved to get it done, and very happy because the quality is _excellent_!  I can't wait to show it on Saturday!!!  Instead of using the camera to show it I am bringing a travel DVD player.  It's the perfect solution at this point! 

:angel:Thanks so much - _really for everything_!  I totally appreciate having you to bounce all of these ideas off of and especially am grateful for your sharing all of your experience with it all (hope I haven't bugged you too much:asian: ).  I'll have to print out this whole conversation for future reference.  It's great talking to you about all of this!  On the DVD the color looks _fantastic_ including the reds and all the effects burned perfectly as I had hoped for!  YEAH!!! artyon:  



I'll drop back next week to let you know how the viewing goes.



MJ


----------



## Akula (Jul 7, 2004)

> The tape either jumped, like looked jittery for a couple of seconds, or in one instance slowed down quite a bit during a mirror effect.



Printing to tape can be an intesting experience in itself.  I can't really point to specifics without knowing what sort of deck you were using, how you were exporting out of your computer, deck settings, computer settings, cables...

One quick idea outside of the above items, especially for effects, is the computer trying to render the effect in real time as it's trying to export.  If so, this can cause very erratic screens.  One quick solution if this is the case is to render out the effect portion as its own video clip.  Import that new clip into the editing software, and drop it where the original effects are, and delete the original effect and all its layers.  The video should look pretty much the same, however it doesn't have to work as hard when exporting that section.




> No time to learn the chapters and all, but after this week I can play with it for future burns, and then decide if I want to go for the better packages.



Small steps are also a very good idea.  When you do the chapters, just think of them as placemarks in the video file itself.  For fun, get creative with the chapter names.  Instead of 'Chapter 3...'  maybe come up with a witty saying or something like that.  

Okay, this just inspired a different idea I need to write down to try and use later, but its in response to your question, so I'll share it.  When building the chapter navigation menu, break them into groups of three for ease in getting around, and have each chapter title in the triumverate be a different line of a haiku.  Just make sure each line goes a little with the chapters' themes.  For the next block of three chapters, another haiku.  Different - but I believe it could work.



> hope I haven't bugged you too much



No worries

Glad to hear it turned out, and hope the viewing goes well.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jul 7, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> Printing to tape can be an intesting experience in itself. I can't really point to specifics without knowing what sort of deck you were using, how you were exporting out of your computer, deck settings, computer settings, cables...


  Going to tape is really not what I intended to do from the start anyway so it's fine if it didn't work out.  Also, it forced me to get the DVD done, and it's the quality I was looking for so I'm really happy about it.  



> One quick idea outside of the above items, especially for effects, is the computer trying to render the effect in real time as it's trying to export. If so, this can cause very erratic screens. One quick solution if this is the case is to render out the effect portion as its own video clip. Import that new clip into the editing software, and drop it where the original effects are, and delete the original effect and all its layers. The video should look pretty much the same, however it doesn't have to work as hard when exporting that section.


  I could see applying this without the tape issue.  I haven't explored it yet, but is that the same thing basically as prerendering a section of the project while still in the project?



> Small steps are also a very good idea. When you do the chapters, just think of them as placemarks in the video file itself. For fun, get creative with the chapter names. Instead of 'Chapter 3...' maybe come up with a witty saying or something like that


 Yes I definitely like that idea. Everything else is so creative so I think the titles should be catchy or at least fitting too.  I'm in the middle of working on a project where people are in a race in cardboard cars.  It's very silly stuff and the footage is just hysterical. So I called the segment _The Tijuana Taxi_   and found a pair of swinging animated dice to put with the title and then layed a track with that tune in the background.  The whole thing came out so funny - watching it always makes me smile.  



> Okay, this just inspired a different idea I need to write down to try and use later, but its in response to your question, so I'll share it. When building the chapter navigation menu, break them into groups of three for ease in getting around, and have each chapter title in the triumverate be a different line of a haiku. Just make sure each line goes a little with the chapters' themes. For the next block of three chapters, another haiku. Different - but I believe it could work.


   Good luck with that.  If you can, let me know how the poetry writing goes.  




> No worries


OK 



> Glad to hear it turned out, and hope the viewing goes well.


Thanks!

MJ :asian:


----------



## Akula (Jul 8, 2004)

> I could see applying this without the tape issue. I haven't explored it yet, but is that the same thing basically as prerendering a section of the project while still in the project?


Basically, yes.  My system can do many different video/graphic/audio tracks before I have to start rendering sequences.  At times however, I could be dealing with up to 10 layers composited together.  At that time, I'll render the clip layers that I know are where I want them to be into a single file.  I'll then bring that in and move the original layers off.  Those 10 layers just became maybe three or four, and quicker rendering at the end.



> Good luck with that. If you can, let me know how the poetry writing goes.


Well, I don't really go into this area (writing poetry) - just hire someone to do it for me, or find someone that just wants exposure.

On a side note, I found the following different ones on a video game review section of techtv.

Samurai warriors,
As they clash in the moonlight
Hit those buttons fast

and

Late noble warriors
Or create a new fighter
Both kill gracefully

and

View nature's beauty
Under the cherry blossoms
I slew many men

and one of my favorites from here

Hear the techno beat
Clashing blades ring through the night
Samurai season


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jul 8, 2004)

Akula said:
			
		

> Basically, yes. My system can do many different video/graphic/audio tracks before I have to start rendering sequences. At times however, I could be dealing with up to 10 layers composited together. At that time, I'll render the clip layers that I know are where I want them to be into a single file. I'll then bring that in and move the original layers off. Those 10 layers just became maybe three or four, and quicker rendering at the end.


  I'll definitely explore that idea further!  10 layer composites wow!  Ok, I'm still in the four to five layer range at this point.  Something else to get into.   There's really no end to what you can do I think!!!




> Well, I don't really go into this area (writing poetry) - just hire someone to do it for me, or find someone that just wants exposure.


LOL that would be a great idea for me as well.  I'm no poet and I know it!  




> Samurai warriors,
> As they clash in the moonlight
> Hit those buttons fast
> 
> ...


These are cool - the cherry blossom one reminds me of _The Last Samuari_ - great flick!!!...I'd love to discuss with you another day how you handle issues of public domain.  That is so complicated it's nutz!!!

MJ :asian:


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Jul 11, 2004)

Hi RC,

The viewing went fantastically!!!artyon:   I got lots of big laughs and everyone learned a lot too!  It was so rewarding to see them all delight in seeing themselves.  *It was great!  What a high!!!!*  One of my training partners owns his own advertising agency  (in the business for like 25 years) and they make commercials.  His comments meant the most to me.  He loved the editing and told me I could have a career as an editor! 

Thank you so much for your help and time! The DVD worked out great!  It looks like I'll be burning a few more copies.  It looked really clear on the tv.  The colors and everything!  A big e-  to you for all of your help and advice on this.  Oh yeah, and the e-drinks are on me :cheers: !!!

Sincere thanks, 
MJ  :asian:


----------

