there were some really informative comments on the friday’s post about video. my goal with video is just to show people that don’t go in-world what it looks like. so the video i want to do does not need to be machinima quality, but i would like to put my best foot forward
software and hardware resources play a very large part to how good a quality you can do and for years i just used Windows Movie Maker and it did fine for me. i also went for years without the Space Navigator and the only paid thing i used was Fraps, which is only $35 USD
in this last year, i scored (as X-mas and bday presents) a Space Navigator and Sony Vegas Platinum (that’s the “lite” version). both were about $80 each, so not too terribly expensive. as frugal as i am though, it’s important to me that when i talk about this stuff that i do so from a budget point of view. if you have the bucks, then get Adobe Premiere and the ultimate gaming pc, but i’ll stick with my old XP machine as long as it boots up =)
having said all of that, using the Space Navigator is a dream and lets you do things that just are not possible without it (don’t get the lighter notebook one, unless you are very mobile, the weight of it is important – more is better for this). Sony Vegas is nice and let’s you do more that Windows Movie Maker, like that green screen test last week and the picture in picture a few days later. but Sony Vegas is not the absolute Godsend that the Space Navigator is; if i had to choose just one, i’d stick with the Space Navigator
based on the comments on friday’s post, i decided to mess with video a little more and take a more detailed look at the details! =p
so i made a short video (anti-alias of 4x in Imprudence) and then looked at the raw Fraps footage, the Sony output QuickTime footage, and then the various YouTube choices. that Fraps footage was huge in file size because it is uncompressed (618 MB for about half a minute! o_O), but should be the clearest in detail. the Vegas video is compressed with 4Mbps video sampling and reduces it down to 30 MBs and it should not be as clear but should be much better than the uploaded YouTube version
for YouTube, this one upload gets converted to four “qualities” – 240p, 360p, 480p, and 720p. 480 and 720 are considered high definition (oooh) =D
the default viewer size on the YouTube page is 640 by 360 pixels, so that means that the video shot at 1280 x 720 is actually getting resampled (omg, the numbers are making my head go numb) =\
on the YouTube shots below, i have the four sizes/qualities as standard page size and also one of the 720p as full 1280 x 720 HD YouTube
i then have a “zoomed in” detail where i took a screenshot of each and doubled it in photoshop to show the pixel detail (okay, enough! it’s kind of self-explanatory *gets out duct tape to shut self up*) =D
ps – the uncompressed PNGs are all on flickr as the original of each shot below, for anyone as pixel geeky as i am . . . *looks for better duct tape*
full-size at 1280x720 (Vegas is in QuickTime which always washes out colour and reduces contrast)
these are how they appear in the normal YouTube page at the normal size at each quality setting
magnified 2 times to show pixel details
of all these screenshots, this last one is probably the most important one to look at because this is all the end user will typically see. if you are taking your video and placing it in a web page, like we do for Enclave Harbour, there are ways to force the delivery of any of the available qualities. to learn more how to append the URL string to force the different qualities, read this post by Mark Robertson
phew, i think i am a bit tech overloaded and need to go in-world and plant some trees or something much simpler! =)
magnified 2 times to show pixel details
The first screenshot has me thinking that your export from Vegas seems to be the factor. There should be hardly any difference in clarity with those button labels on the SL toolbar between the Fraps capture and the Vegas export. It could just be one of those sneaky settings fooling with the video. I’ve run into issues like that myself even with software like Adobe Premiere.
Youtube hosts several video tutorials on using Vegas for HD. Might be something useful there to get it straightened out. Plus, their tutorials are generally in 720p. So, it gives you an example to compare to as well.
redsolarmoon
26 Jun 11 at 1:10 pm
excellent redsolarmoon! i will look into those tutorials (they have to be faster than me spending the two hours to write this post!)
i appreciate your comments because i don’t have a frame of reference for this and you do. i have already learned quite a bit from you in the last few days – you have shifted my perspective to look at this a bit differently, thank you =)
Ener Hax
26 Jun 11 at 2:08 pm
I made a list a long time ago of good video editing tools that are free here : http://forums.osgrid.org/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1876
I mostly use virtualdub to edit coupled with the free x264vfw codec capturing video with fraps, then i make final compressions with Handbrake, It should also be noted that most quality loss comes due to resizing of video and the filter you use to resize your video can make a major difference in retaining quality, i find that for general resizing purposes using a Lanczos3 filter provides the best average quality, and depending on if your enlarging or reducing you might find varying results using a bicubic or bilinear filters but for the absolute best results you want to avoid having to resize your video and capture in native resolutions if possible.
Nebadon Izumi
26 Jun 11 at 3:08 pm
oh and you also might want to check out Wax too its a very cool opensource video editing platform, its a bit difficult to use but then again what video editing software isn’t the final results can be very nice as you can see here in this example video i made :
http://www.onikenkon.com/UCI/universal_campus.480p.mp4
http://www.onikenkon.com/UCI/universal_campus.720p.mp4
Wax : http://www.debugmode.com/wax/
Nebadon Izumi
26 Jun 11 at 3:11 pm
Glad I could be of help, Ener. :) If you have any further questions, you may contact me via my email address through this comment – if it records the email for you.
One other tip I wanted to mention… Another way you can resize the SL window is by using the built-in feature which you can access by enabling your Advanced menu (Ctrl+Alt+D). Then, choose “Set Window Size…” from the menu. There should be a 1280×720 (720p) option to choose from. It may require doing it two times to register correctly. I found it a little buggy on Firestorm.
redsolarmoon
26 Jun 11 at 6:32 pm
dang Nebadon! i searched and searched for free tools (i used vDub a lot too) and never thought of looking on the osgrid forum! thank you for pointing that out, that will help others for sure =)
and wax looks very neat too! (i am downloading the mp4, should be done in about 5 minutes) thanks Nebadon!
thanks redsolarmoon on the on the viewer tip, i assumed that it meant the entire window with outer chrome, i never thought to try it and measure it (that’s what i have been doing, taking screenshots and measuring the inside, what a dufus i am for not even trying your method! derrr on me! =D
Ener Hax
27 Jun 11 at 7:34 pm
You might also consider playing around with livestream’s procaster. It’s free and you can send a live feed from SL to the web.
Niko Donburi
1 Jul 11 at 8:28 pm
Making a machinima as you saw is not only the part of hardware or filming but most of all rendering as pretty as you can your final work. By my side i use too spacenavigator, essential item for moving camera, and man y professionnal software like after effects , photoshop, Motion and final cut pro. Surely to do machinima working on mac is a gréât advantage but torley linden or man y others talentive machinimers use linux or Windows . All is question of work and inspiration,and most of all: it s all about lust…
Thank you for this brillant blog i follow all days:)
Yours
Samlowry hawks
Machinimer
Estate manager of rip ” the lost gardens of apollo”
Samlowry Hawks
5 Jul 11 at 1:59 pm
thanks Niko, that sounds like a pretty neat tool and could be great for in-world functions and events! wow, that gets my mind spinning! =)
so true Samlowry, you do need to make it as pretty as possible, that is what people expect and in addition to that is the story you present. like you said, inspiration!
without an inspiring story, you have nothing =)
Ener Hax
5 Jul 11 at 9:14 pm