Otacon Posted October 7, 2011 Report Share Posted October 7, 2011 Hey guys, some guys sent me some HD clips so i can have ago at editing some trials stuff, anyone know of any good render settings for sony vegas ? Whats the fps on HD video cameras ? Also do they record in 1280x720 or 1920x1080 ? I only have render settings for HD Call of duty clips, but the frame rate is 60fps and the there 1280x720 and i dont think its the same for HD video cameras. Any help would be great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted October 7, 2011 Report Share Posted October 7, 2011 Cameras record in 24fps. As for your resolution... the clip will tell you. If you make a 1080p video and try to put 720p in it, it will be too small, it won't fill the window. Read the properties of the clips! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted October 7, 2011 Report Share Posted October 7, 2011 FPS can vary too, quite easily. Should be able to grab it all from the clip properties fairly easily though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otacon Posted October 7, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 7, 2011 Thanks lads, got everything i needed to know from the clip details, 24 FPS on HD video though ? Supprising to be honest, was expecting it to be around 200-250 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted October 7, 2011 Report Share Posted October 7, 2011 It's the same as a TV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted October 7, 2011 Report Share Posted October 7, 2011 HD is the resolution, remember - smooth motion (to the human eye) only needs to be 24+. It's when you want to warp it and do slo-mo stuff that filming with a higher FPS will make any difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Otacon Posted October 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 HD is the resolution, remember - smooth motion (to the human eye) only needs to be 24+. It's when you want to warp it and do slo-mo stuff that filming with a higher FPS will make any difference Exactly, i was planning on using twixtor in after affects and stuff, but at 24fps, i think ill leave it out, will look awful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 (edited) Euro standard is 25fps progressive or 50 interlaced frames fields per second. Second one gives much smoother motion but you need to remove interlacing and convert it to 50p to retain smoothness else any motion in the video will have lines on the edges. Or you can convert it to 25p which will seem more rough. Your camera will record interlaced video unless it's stated on the camera that it captures progressive video. US standard is 24fps progressive or 60fps interlaced fields. Edited October 8, 2011 by Greetings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 US standard is 24fps progressive or 60fps interlaced. Ahem, NTSC is 30 frames a second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 Ahem, NTSC is 30 frames a second. Yeah in interlaced video, in progressive I'm pretty sure it's 24 which is why they're a bit screwed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 That would be weird, I couldn't accept that unless you found proof to back it up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 absolutely no point in interlaced video anymore on the internets. shoot any fps you like as long as its progressive and consistent. (or will end up consistent after speed up or slow down). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdoku Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 You'll probably know this already bit set the render settings to the same quality to the original clip, like the resolution, fps, audio/video bitrate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 That would be weird, I couldn't accept that unless you found proof to back it up Seems you're right. I've been living a lie for 5 years. It's probably JT!'s fault, he's American now. absolutely no point in interlaced video anymore on the internets. I beg to differ, interlaced is so much smoother. Unless you're talking about cameras which capture 50p/60p rather than 50i/60i. My camera does 25p or 50i, I've never used the 25p for sports because it sucks donkey arse. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 Yessssss. Interlaced footage should be better for action videos, it should help smooth it out a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 if you are going to put it on the internet its going to end up progressive.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JT! Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 It's probably JT!'s fault, he's American now. Only for 3 years though, there's a 2 year deficit. If the human eye can only detect 24fps, then why do tv's (here anyway) come in 60htz or 120htz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 Isnt it that 24fps is on the limit of minimum fps before a human would detect flicker ? you can notice the difference in smoothness upwards.... ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Rainbird Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 Yarp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted October 8, 2011 Report Share Posted October 8, 2011 I think it's 16 fps for your eye to register something as moving instead of seperate frames, but yeah, faster = smoother, until a point where you'd never notice. TVs are a different story. I think the hertz of a TV actually has/had more to do with the electricity than your eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe O'Connor Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 I think it's 16 fps for your eye to register something as moving instead of seperate frames, but yeah, faster = smoother, until a point where you'd never notice. TVs are a different story. I think the hertz of a TV actually has/had more to do with the electricity than your eyes. From my memory its over 18fps before you don't recognize it. That's why a lot of the really old footage you see looks funny, because they recorded 18fps. But then again you could have 75fps but a slow shutter speed and it will look jumpy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 Wikipedia says it's 12-14. Best way to check is to make an animation in flash at 12fps and see if it looks like a slideshow or a video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe O'Connor Posted October 11, 2011 Report Share Posted October 11, 2011 I don't have flash, I'll take your word for it bro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.