|
|
Posted by PTravel on 07/02/06 17:14
"Neil Smith [MVP Digital Media]" <neil@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:ph7fa29vsjm3tf0r2kbf8dl55cmjm6pinb@4ax.com...
> On 1 Jul 2006 16:24:55 -0700, "RP" <RobertPerezLaw@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I have in mind a kind of still image photo montage, peppered with
>>occasional video clips for variety, but the primary asset will be still
>>images with a soundtrack. I've seen the kind of photo montage that I
>>have in mind (it's certainly not a very original idea) and one effect
>>I've noticed in professional productions is a kind of panning across
>>still images separated by cross dissolves. The panning provides a real
>>sense of motion and brings a professional look that I never enjoyed in
>>my Dad's video, and I'd like to try that out in this next project.
>
> It's just generically labelled as "Ken Burns" style video. MS
> Photostory can do a good job of creating this content style without
> needing any fussy NLE tricks or expensive hardware :
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/photostory/default.mspx
>
> I'm sure you could re-import the video into your NLE. In this program
> it creates the file as WMV using the windows media v9 image 2 codec,
>
> I'm not clear if the cross dissolves are actually embedded in the
> video as "instructions" for directshow.WMP, or created as video data -
> the NLE would need to be able to read WMV content and apply the
> filters using Directshow.
>
> So it's worth checking to see if that's the case (i.e. the dissolves
> could be lost in the NLE import).
Your suggestion is that, rather than using Premiere Pro, which the OP
already has, he should buy a consumer-level program that generates WMV? And
THEN import it into his NLE to add the video?
Sorry, but I can't imagine a worse solution. There is no "expensive
hardware" required and Premiere Pro is exceptionally easy to use to produce
this particular effect. Moreoever, it will do it with infinitely more
control than some toy consumer program. WMV is a lossy format that has to
be internally transcoded by most editors.
Why in the world would anyone want to do it this way? It's harder, more
expensive, and will result in poorer video.
>
> I tried it in ULead videostudio and it appeared to work for most
> transitions, but some motion transitions seemed to be "lost" or much
> faster than the specified values or when viewed in WMP.
>
> Scene motion across the images was correctly interpreted by the
> program though.
>
> Cheers - Neil
> ------------------------------------------------
> Digital Media MVP : 2004-2006
> http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/mvpfaqs
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|