Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

S

Sharp-Shooter

Active member
Hi There,

I wish to include some pictures/Still photos into a documentary I am doing. Could I have some suggestions and inputs to better my understanding. Some Pictures are old photos printed on 4" X 6" paper. If I have to scan them on a scanner, what should be the best resolution to capture these, and, what format should they be captured on as jpg, giff etc. to have the best resolution or is there a better option??

Also I keep on wondering, when I take a photo with an SLR camera, then develop and print the picture, then scan it to incorporate that into my video/website, How would such a picture compare with a still ripped from a video shot on a DVX100A.
In other words, how would a still from a DVX100A compare with a still from a 35mm film SLR still Camera.

And what is the Mega Pixel of a single frame captured from a DVX100A?? If on takes a still on a PD150 or PD170 what is the mega pixel of that picture. Is it better than the Ditigal SLR cameras like the nikon D70 that click a 6 Mega Pixel Image?

Thank you all in advance. I am delighted that this forum is full of fantastic people.

Cheers.
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

I'm not going to give any advice on scanning photos since I don't even own a scanner.

The dvx has a resolution of about 0.35 megapixels. The pd150 has the same resolution if you shoot in its 15fps "progressive" mode, or half that resolution if you shoot interlaced video then deinterlace.

The d70 has 20 times the resolution of the dvx, and twice the dynamic range. Pictures from it will look almost as good as film and ridiculously better than the dvx under normal circumstances. Once you compress everything to digital video, it will all be about 0.35 megapixels, though, but scanned photos and dSLR photos will still look better due to increase dynamic range.
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

When scanning pictures in you can take them to Wal-Mart or Sam's on there Aladdin Digital Center and they will make a CD. It is also Much Better resolution if you have the negatives and take it in to have them put them on a CD. Scanner pictures are ok, but it will be better from the negatives if you have them. JPEGs are fine. I often change them into Targa files, they seem to hold up better on the TV then Jpegs.

Now taking picture with you SLR, printing, then scanning is not the best way. At the time you develop have it put on a CD. That will save time and the images will be sharper. You can then change the files in photoshop to targa.

A still image captured in your video program for video should be fine. They will not print as well as your SLR or the D-70. However the D-70 image or the stills you transfer from you negative to cd will be much sharper. Only scan in pitcures with your scanner if the negatives are not available.

So if you are planning ahead, I would say capture your still images with a still camera.
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

DV frames are 480 x 720, or .345 "megapixels". If you scan photos with a conventional scanner at, say 600 dpi, you are already at complete resolution overkill once you import them into your NLE. Almost ANY digital still camera SMOKES a DV frame capture resolution-wise.

I have recently done two wedding photo montages for clients. I scanned in every photo with a piece 'o' crap $99 scanner as TIF files @ 600 dpi for smaller pics and 300 dpi for larger ones. Every one looked incredibly sharp, and I was able to do lots of NLE-based pan-scan-zoom "Ken Burns" effects with no problems whatsoever. My clients were totally blown away by the results--in fact, for one of them I projected the montage onto a 6' x 14' Cinemascope-aspect screen at their reception, and even blown up to that size the photos were perfect.

My only warning would be this: make sure to keep the platten very clean, and get a scanner that allows you to get at the insides so you can clean BOTH sides of the glass. Dirt particles are perfectly rendered @ 600 dpi!!

I think the extra step of actually "photographing" the photographs is unnecessary. At least TRY a few photos in a scanner as I have described, then import them into your NLE. Play around with them. I think you'll find that scanner resolution is more than adequate. Just my honest opinion...
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

Thank you guys, you really have been a great help. All advice and suggestions are highly appreciated.

Cheers!!
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

Bart - I have also done some photo montage videos, but have had a problem if I try and "pan-scan-zoom" where the image pixelates QUICKLY as I zoom. These were scanned at 600dpi, but didn't seem to zoom well.

What NLE are you using and did you do anything special with the images after scanning to "ken burns" them?

Thanks,
Larry
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

I use PPRo to create photo montages with good results. It takes a while to render but that's the only issue.
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

[quote author=ransom link=board=Events;num=1102117948;start=0#6 date=12/07/04 at 09:39:41]I use PPRo to create photo montages with good results. It takes a while to render but that's the only issue.[/quote]
And that's to be expected considering all the motion that goes on in a montage. I've had the same experience with Vegas.
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

Larry,

I use a Mac (DP 1.25 G4 w/2GB RAM) running FCP4HD and a cheap Microtek scanner. I scan the images, save them as TIFs, then import them into FCP4HD. After they are on my list of assets, I alter their clip length to a standard 8 seconds each, then pull them into my timeline one at a time. I have my display prefs set for "video + wireframe" and I go from there. I get my starting frame sizing/positioning the way I want and then make it a keyframe. Then I go to the last frame of the clip and resize/reposition it to where I would like the shot to end, and make it a keyframe. Final Cut Pro does the rest--the wireframe display shows you all of the perfectly spaced in-between steps from beginning to end. Only after I have the beginning and ending keyframes set do I render, and FCP seems to use the old TIF file to make all of the "between" frames, hence perfect resolution. With nice 3-second cross dissolves between shots, the effect is great--and pretty easy to do.

Does that make sense?

As far as color is concerned, with old photos it is a real headache. For the weddings I do, I have up to 72 stills to sort through, so I use a slightly sepia-toned B&W setting for all of the "before we met" photos, and only use color on the more recent "since we met" stills. This not only gives me that "Wizard of Oz" effect (which my clients love), but also eliminates color tweaking 50 old photos to look even remotely similar to one another. I only have to push brightness and contrast this way, and slap a sepia tint on the whole thing when I'm done.

That's how I do it, anyway. I suppose there is some pixelation with goofy vertical line patterns, but no more so than actually shooting vertical lines with a camera and panning/trucking/zooming, so who cares?
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

I have a new question - what about the frame rate? How can you get a still photo to match the 24fps video taken with the DVX? Won't the still photo and any motion effects with it appear to be 30 frames per second?
 
Re: Incorporating Still Photos into Video??

The answer is it is very easy to get the stills pan/zoom movements to render @ 23.98fps. Just use a 23.98fps timeline/sequence and everything turns out fine. Same with going anamorphic. Works great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top