Glad you sorted it. Lesson learnt! On 30 June 2011 02:43, Leonel Dolara <[email protected]> wrote:
> ** > > > Dear Neil, > > Yes it was that. When rendering I changed the "as source" and set > "lower" and when rendered the blinds were not there anymore. > The downside is that for rendering a 21 minutes video it took 45 > minutes! Note that when left "as source" it was rendering "upper" and > took 25 minutes only. So my "lower" solution took me 20 minutes more! I > suppose this is normal, but frustrating also. > > Cheers, > > */Leonel Dolara/* > > *Actor y Director* > > *leoneldolara.webs.com <http://www.leoneldolara.webs.com/>* > > El 29/06/2011 10:51, BEDFORD NEIL escribió: > > > Hello Leonel, > > > > Sounds like interlace problems to me. > > It could be that the screen you are viewing it on just doesn't do > > interlace. Try playing it with Windows Media Player or VLC to see if that > > makes any change (or another viewer at least). > > > > If not, try that G-Spot (free) program to see what the original exactly > is > > and try to keep the outputted file the same. Personally, if the HD > version > > is OK, I would convert that using one of the free converters and try to > keep > > all the settings (apart from the codec of course) as close as possible, > > aspect ratio etc. In the field selection I think its upper first for PAL > > and lower for NTSC however if you re-encode in Adobe PP. > > > > Your almost there now... > > > > Cheers, > > Neil. > > > > On 29 June 2011 14:09, Leonel Dolara<[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> ** > >> > >> > >> Dear Greg and Neil, > >> > >> Thanks a lot for your clarifying answers. Yes, all the computers that I > >> tested on with the HD version of the movie where kind of old and no more > >> than one core for them. I myself have a quad core so of course it could > >> play > >> it well. > >> I have just tested the MPG version on the old ones and it plays very > well, > >> so my problem is solved. And I understand and agree with you both about > the > >> explanations for the files to be the same size. And when I rendered in > mpg > >> I > >> used Maximum bitrate and Maximum everything (8mbps of video) so the mpg > >> file > >> could have been smaller. > >> > >> Just one more little question: on the mpg version I found that the faces > of > >> the movie shot originally in HD are a bit pixelated (it shows on the > faces > >> because they move, but I guess it is all the frame. You get to see > >> horizontal lines when the faces move as if there were a transparent > blind > >> before them) , as if the deinterlace is done wrong (I guess). Could that > be > >> that I selected it in upper and should be lower? For the record is not > the > >> natural blurness that you see in a mpg video compared to the HD version, > >> it's something else. > >> > >> Thank you all! > >> > >> > >> 2011/6/29 BEDFORD NEIL<[email protected]> > >> > >>> Hi Greg, > >>> > >>> Been there, seen it, got the t-shirt. Good fun back then, wasn't it? > >>> > >>> I'm not 100% on this, but what I do know is that, uncompressed HD video > >> is > >>> large in size (obviously). Reading a few forums on this, it seems its > >>> about > >>> 400-675GB an hour in size. Go to R3D and this shoots through the > roof... > >>> > >>> However, this handy size calculator says different, but doesn't include > >>> adjustable bit-rates or FPS etc: > >>> > >>> <http://www.fastvideoindexer.com/articles/VideoSizes/VideoSize.htm> > >>> > >>> I believe APP does some clever math and utilises the GFX card (CUDA) > >>> support > >>> for rendering on the fly, making it seem to take much less time than it > >>> does > >>> with SD video. > >>> Problem is, we may have the technology to edit HD, but some people are > >>> still > >>> struggling to view HD video on You-Tube and Vimeo, let alone any files > we > >>> may create for them. > >>> (I sometimes create a Lo-Fi version too, for people that have these > >>> 'issues'.) > >>> > >>> Playing around with the output settings for the final render, I have > >> found > >>> the 'Vimeo HD' setting seems to be the best quality against file size, > no > >>> doubt the You-Tube one is similar. Tried outputting 1080 HD to an AVI > >>> once, > >>> ouch! > >>> > >>> Interesting thread and no doubt others will chip in with their > >> experiences > >>> too. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Neil. (Still learning.) > >>> > >>> On 29 June 2011 08:36, Gregg Eshelman<[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> ** > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Which is also why it's possible to edit uncompressed SD video on old > >>> boxes > >>>> like a Pentium III which might be barely capable of playing a DVD > using > >>>> software decoding. Done there, been that. ;) Also experienced the fun > >> of > >>>> maxing at 7 frames per second encoding to MPEG2, and that with a dual > >> 450 > >>>> Mhz PIII server. The single CPU Socket A box I had at the time could > >> get > >>> up > >>>> to 10, 12 with a tailwind! > >>>> > >>>> Does the same apply to HD where a system can edit it uncompressed with > >>> ease > >>>> but not be able to play it well or at all, and take forever to > compress > >>> it? > >>>> Or are the requirements for editing high enough that playback and > >>>> compression at least as fast as realtime are no problem? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> --- On Wed, 6/29/11, BEDFORD NEIL<[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hence the need for a faster processor > >>>>> to decompress the video.... the more > >>>>> the compression, the more power needed. > >>>>> > >>>>>> MPEG2 is an old codec, goes back to the mid 1990's. > >>>>> MP4 is newer, more > >>>>>> optimized and can produce a better image than MPEG2 > >>>>> with higher levels of > >>>>>> compression. > >>>> > >>> > >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ------------------------------------ > >>> > >>> Yahoo! Groups Links > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> Leonel Dolara > >> Actor y Director > >> leoneldolara.webs.com > >> > >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > >> > >> > >> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Adobe-Premiere/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Adobe-Premiere/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
