Broadcast Quality Effects

Norm Sanders

Norm Sanders

Script Wrangler
Is there any way to PUSH Vegas' built in effects so that when rendered they have the same PRO quality level as the broadcast stuff you see on ESPN, many of the movies, etc?

For example, in movies when they show the light rays, they are so sharp & rich ... vs. when I do them in Vegas, while they look cool, they seem dull in comparison & more blotted together vs. individual sharp & rich rays. Am I making sense?

Can After Effects Pro 1.5 do a MUCH better job than Vegas' built in effects? I HATE the idea of having to render a project to an AVI, only to have to bring it into another for additional FX/edits, then render back out again to bring back into Vegas for MPEG2, etc.

I LOVE Vegas' one stop shop that if offers, but just looking for a way to have more robust looking effects.
 
If your going for awesome quality and looking really really pro.

Go After Effects then. After Effects could go wayyy beyond Vegas' built in effects. I started using AE about a week ago...and im like amazed as to what you can do with this program, effects wise.
 
Remember that you're limited by your source video. DV is simply low-resolution, and the colorspace is quite limited. Film effects are extremely sharp because film is extremely sharp.

Now, I'm not saying other programs don't do better effects than Vegas -- certainly, they do. But there's only so much you can with the resolution and color space of DV.
 
Thanks, guys. I understand film will offer more in that realm, but I'm even thinking about the killer effects we see on ESPN, etc. Then again, that's probably uncompressed ... different still from DV. Oh well, guess I'd better check out AE and begin to tinker/learn a little.
 
i also just started using AE and am in love. And i picked up a copy of 6.5 Pro from Ebay for only $90! Soooo worth it!
 
Yeah, what's the learning curve on that thing compared to Vegas? Not that I think it'll replace Vegas, because it can't, but maybe I'll look to hold out some of my effects/titles for AE instead if it's easy enough to learn.
 
Different animal

Different animal

Just a note: You got to always remember..Vegas is a music sequencer and NLE program. Not a graphic composing program like After effects. It's apples and oranges. If you want those types of graphics you have to use different tools then drop into the timeline. Vegas is not intended to be the program to end all programs. Just like photoshop is great at what it does. Good programs should take time to learn otherwise it wouldn't worth having.
 
Yeah, yeah! :) I just meant was it as user friendly/easy as Vegas was. Not to compare the two, as they are WAY different, but kudos to the creators of Vegas who, even as powerful and productive as the software is, made it super easy to understand & start working with. That said, I'm going to give some serious thought to seeing if I can learn AE, and see if it makes a difference in some of what I'm looking for.
 
After effects depends on how familiar you are with compositers. I learned AE in a couple months and even after 3 years of using it i still feel like ive barely scratched the surface. To the same effect i jumped into combustion a year or so ago and learned it rather quickly due to my AE experience.

As far as clarity with effects, AE/combustion are much more robust and can create better quality effects but youll still be held back by the compressed avi or even any sort of SD dv for that matter.
 
That's more the answer I'm looking for thanks ... one of those comparisons. If I create the SAME exact style effect in Vegas compared to the SAME exact style in AE, which ones going to look better ... sounds like the AE comes out on top, though another fairly major step or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top