Uprezz

Luke

Luke

Well-known member
Ok, this is what i did.
1.Captured my clips in vegas
2.Imported a clip into APpro1.5 timeline (used proper 24pa timeline).
3.Followed the Uprezzing tutorial provided by disjecta. http://www.pinelakefilms.com/uprez.html
4.After completing the final stage (rendering on time line) i exported the clip as microsoft DV AVI.
5.opened up vegas, put the exported clip from APpro1.5 on widescreen 24pa time line(played smooth as could be and was much much sharper than the origonal)
6.Rendered clip using mpeg 2 DVD A2 widescreen setting.
7.Placed in DVD A2 widescreen project. Played in preview window and was smooth.

I havn't burnt a DVD yet but is there a drawback to doing it this way. It seems like it should play smooth once on a DVD. The clip looked amazing after the process. Ive heard there is a way to do it with PNG files in vegas but disjectas process is so dang easy and the render time isn't all that bad. Also, I didn't really do this to get it to play properly on a widescreen TV, i did it mainly for the added sharpness, so i also put the imported clip from APpro 1.5 into a non widescreen timeline in vegas and it letter boxed the footage on the 4:3 preview window. Then i rendered as as mpeg 2 DVD a2 non widescreen. The reason i tried it this way as well is because 99% of the time it will be played on a 4:3 set and i wanted to make sure it would play the same on any DVD player.(if i render as widescreen and burn as widescreen i understand that the DVD player will automaticly letterbox but if the DVD player is not set up correctly, somtimes the image will be streached out.)
So what do you think? Any drawback to this. I know i could have captured and edited in APPro 1.5 but i injoy vegas so much more.

Luke
 
Well . . .

If you uprezzed DV into something bigger, like HD, then rendered out a DV AVI . . .

You lost the uprez.

What are you trying to do?

What you did in PPro, you can also do in Vegas. Not sure why you used PPro at all?
 
David, thank you for the speedy response. How do i do it in vegas? I did a search and must have missed somthing. The difference is awsome, and if i could do it in vegas that would be better yet.

Luke
 
I think he is refering to the footage stretch technique disjecta posted about using photzoom pro to "uprez" in the vertical direction. The main reason for using premiere being the easy exportation into an image sequence.

Luke, the only thing I question is the need to letterbox the footage and make a 4:3 DVD. Just use an anamorphic project setting, burn to DVD and it will play back correctly on both 4:3 and 16:9 sets (DVD player adjusts for this).
 
But still . . .

You're uprezzing your DV footage, and then downrezzing it back to DV.

I'm sure the footage looks DIFFERENT after you do that, but it won't be any higher-resolution. A number of things could account for the apparent sharpness you see, having nothing to do with having uprezzed it first, and can most likely be achieved without doing it.
 
Disjecta's method was a way of converting letterboxed footage into anamorphic footage. I believe he went this route as the converted footage was much sharper than squeeze footage.

Normally I would agree, but in this case he's merely chopping the top and bottom of the frame (black bars) off using Photozoom to do the high quality stretching.
 
Yes shaw that is what im refering to. Larry, thank you for the link but it just brings me to the DVXuser home page. David, you are right, the footage does look different and from what i see in the vegas preview window it looks sharper and better overall. But the preview window means nothing so i will burn a DVD with the two back to back to see how it looks on a TV.

Luke
 
I'd be curious to see it.

You can sharpen the image and do other adjustments within Vegas, working in DV, that would -- I'm willing to bet the farm -- achieve the same look.
 
I dont get it. What exactly does it do special that you cant by putting black bars and then working on sharpening your footage a bit? Looks like all it is is black bars with the gamma turned down a bit and a small sharpen on it.
 
skettalee and David, im starting to think that as well. Just thought i would give it a try. I compared the uprezz to a regular clip with the sharpen plug in set at zero, and they look very close. Why is it that when the sharpen tool is set to zero it is still sharper than without it? Zero to me should be like zero effect. Can you give me any more pointers on how to slightly sharpen video in vegas. Thanks for the help.

Luke
 
Though it's counterintuitive, try the Unsharp mask. Don't go overboard.

720x480 is 720x480. No matter what you do, that's all the resolution you have when you're at DV. Uprez it. Downrez it back. I think it's a waste of time, especially doing a TIFF sequence. 2=2 everywhere in the universe.
 
For my last short film I also went through a process of uprezzing footage, to match DVX footage to that of the DSLR footage that I shot. The whole thing was edited at 720p, and I can honestly tell you that vegas did as good a job if not slightly better in some scenes than photo zoom. I found for the most part that the vegas uprezz looksmore naturalistic than the photo zoom pro footage, and by adding a slight 0 sharpening it looked almost identical, only able to tell the two part after looking at two frames side by side for about a minute, and even then I could not tell the difference every time. vegas is fast and efficient, and does a great job of uprezzing the footage to HD. Personally photo zoom is just not worth the time and effort for me.
 
David Jimerson said:
Though it's counterintuitive, try the Unsharp mask. Don't go overboard.

720x480 is 720x480. No matter what you do, that's all the resolution you have when you're at DV. Uprez it. Downrez it back. I think it's a waste of time, especially doing a TIFF sequence. 2=2 everywhere in the universe.
Click to expand...

While mathematically you are of course, quite correct, there are any number of processes for successful uprezzing DV to other resolutions. It won't look like it would had it been acquired at a higher native resolution, but it can look very, very good. Whether it's a Faroujda or S&W, or just plain ole' Vegas, it can be reasonably made to look great at much higher resolutions if pains are taken in processing. Brian Mercer has performed some amazing uprez stuff, all the way to 2k, working in small increments.

He's got a number of posts on it at another community location for Vegas.
 
Spot said:
While mathematically you are of course, quite correct, there are any number of processes for successful uprezzing DV to other resolutions. It won't look like it would had it been acquired at a higher native resolution, but it can look very, very good. Whether it's a Faroujda or S&W, or just plain ole' Vegas, it can be reasonably made to look great at much higher resolutions if pains are taken in processing. Brian Mercer has performed some amazing uprez stuff, all the way to 2k, working in small increments.
Click to expand...

With this, I agree.

However, I was saying that if you take DV, uprez it to something else, and then downrez it back to DV, you gain no advantage. Any perceived increase in sharpness, etc., comes from something other than the uprez/downrez process, and can be achieved by staying in DV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top