G'day,
I have a couple of scripted drama scenes in which it was later discovered auto GAIN had mistakenly 'crept' into the vision.
Have since tried your Neat Video Demo and while the vision correction aspect seems to work well, the actor's dialogue dropped out of synch.
How can this aspect be avoided or corrected?
Regarding the Area Uniformity aspect: Can this be made to include all frame in, when acquiring a profile reading?
Do any of the above questions apply to a particular version of your Neat Video product? My purchase, of a version, would depend on whether the extremely important lip-synch problem can be corrected.
Thanks, in appreciation.
GD Bruny.
Melbourne, Australia.
Neat Video in Vegas Pro 9
Re: Neat Video in Vegas Pro 9
Please try to enable the "No Lag Mode" option in the filter settings.gdbruny wrote:while the vision correction aspect seems to work well, the actor's dialogue dropped out of synch.How can this aspect be avoided or corrected?
For which purpose? Please clarify.gdbruny wrote:Regarding the Area Uniformity aspect: Can this be made to include all frame in, when acquiring a profile reading?
Thank you,
Vlad
The "No Lag Mode" cures the dialogue-synch problem.
Regarding the Area Uniformity aspect:-
When profiling a given clip's vision, to remove unwanted gain, I get a message, saying: "Frame too small to find a uniform area...". The differing elements, withing a given frame, will only allow me to process up to 50%; in my case, a plain backgound and not the actor/s included. Although there hasw been a significant reduction in the unwanted gain, partial gain still exists. Should the same process be repeated, until the vision becomes entirely clean?
Thanks, in anticipation.
GD Bruny.
Regarding the Area Uniformity aspect:-
When profiling a given clip's vision, to remove unwanted gain, I get a message, saying: "Frame too small to find a uniform area...". The differing elements, withing a given frame, will only allow me to process up to 50%; in my case, a plain backgound and not the actor/s included. Although there hasw been a significant reduction in the unwanted gain, partial gain still exists. Should the same process be repeated, until the vision becomes entirely clean?
Thanks, in anticipation.
GD Bruny.
How large is the frame in pixels in that moment, what size is displayed below the viewer in NV at that time? Does that size match the size of the actual clip (or perhas Vegas has provided NV with a smaller version of the frame)?gdbruny wrote:I get a message, saying: "Frame too small to find a uniform area...".
I am not sure I follow, please clarify.gdbruny wrote:The differing elements, withing a given frame, will only allow me to process up to 50%; in my case, a plain backgound and not the actor/s included.
Thank you,
Vlad
I am not sure I follow, please clarify.
Clothed actors in light and shadow. They are against a background with separate, graduating light. NV tells me I can only select a portion of the frame's content when attempting to profile. That portion is up to 50% of the clip's frame; depending on which shot I try profiling.
How large is the frame in pixels in that moment,
PROJECT: 720 x 576
DISPLAY: 470 x 350 x 32
what size is displayed below the viewer in NV at that time?
360 x 222
Does that size match the size of the actual clip.
No, it doesn't.
(or perhas Vegas has provided NV with a smaller version of the frame)?
Thanks, in anticipation.
GD Bruny.
Clothed actors in light and shadow. They are against a background with separate, graduating light. NV tells me I can only select a portion of the frame's content when attempting to profile. That portion is up to 50% of the clip's frame; depending on which shot I try profiling.
How large is the frame in pixels in that moment,
PROJECT: 720 x 576
DISPLAY: 470 x 350 x 32
what size is displayed below the viewer in NV at that time?
360 x 222
Does that size match the size of the actual clip.
No, it doesn't.
(or perhas Vegas has provided NV with a smaller version of the frame)?
Thanks, in anticipation.
GD Bruny.
A smaller frame-size / preview quality has since been applied.
Profiling capability is up from 50% to 73%. A discernible background smear is present, in place of the grain, when viewing a monitor very close up. Nevertheless, the once grainy vision is now acceptable.
With thanks, in appreciation.
GD Bruny.
Melbourne, Australia.
Profiling capability is up from 50% to 73%. A discernible background smear is present, in place of the grain, when viewing a monitor very close up. Nevertheless, the once grainy vision is now acceptable.
With thanks, in appreciation.
GD Bruny.
Melbourne, Australia.