capture, not good quality

[brucefl]

Hello,

When I do a capture in VS10, it isn't very clear? When I check the input to windows movie maker or open it up in yahoo or another program, it is a lot clearer/cleaner?

[Ken Berry]

We have a very unclear picture here ourselves with the lack of any solid information you have provided (apart from unclear video). However, to hazard a guess, the prime suspect is probably just the preview window in Video Studio, which is notoriously poor in its quality. But it is really only that: a preview window 'designed' to give only a general idea of the video and the effects of editing. Normally, when you have finished editing and burned your project to disc, you will get much better (to excellent) quality when the DVD is played on your TV.

Another possible culprit, though, is that you have captured DV footage from a mini-DV camera, but you have not used Firewire to do so. Instead, you may have used the USB cable which came with the camera. But unless your camera is a recent, high end (i.e. quite expensive) one, USB is normally only used to transfer still photos taken by the video camera or, at most, low quality streaming video. Firewire is the only way of transferring high quality DV format video from a mini-DV camera. And if your computer does not have a Firewire port, you will need to have a firewire card installed.

Yet another possibility is that you have captured to some lower quality format. But with the information you provided (NOT!), it is impossible to say...

[CycleWriter]

However, to hazard a guess, the prime suspect is probably just the preview window in Video Studio, which is notoriously poor in its quality. But it is really only that: a preview window 'designed' to give only a general idea of the video and the effects of editing. Normally, when you have finished editing and burned your project to disc, you will get much better (to excellent) quality when the DVD is played on your TV.

Wow! If that's true, that is unacceptable for a program that is marketed as a complete video editor. I might be willing to accept that for a dedicated capture program where you are expected to later import the video into a full-featured editor, but since VS is sold as an all-in-one solution, there should be no excuse for the quality of the video window preview to be anything but representative of the final output. How can you use any of the image-processing plug-ins if you can't see the actual results of how they'll affect the video? The more I read this forum the less I think I want to stick with my version of VS or spend money on an upgrade. Why do we, as consumers, put up with this? Why isn't there any oversight of companies that market buggy software that doesn't live up to its marketing hype? How do these companies get away with this?

[heinz-oz]

Well, if that is "unacceptable" may I suggest to go with a professional editor instead? One thing is for certain, your video will always look different on the PC to what you will get on the TV. For starters, your TVs resolution is way lower than that of your PC monitor.

The only way to actually see exactly what your footage is going to look like on the TV, get a dual head video card for your PC, I use a MATROX Parhelia, to preview on a TV screen and don't use the preview window at all.

It's one thing to only want to spend for a consumer type program but expect or demand professional features. It ain't going to happen. I don't even use VS because it was too basic for me when I started out video editing.

[CycleWriter]

Well, if that is "unacceptable" may I suggest to go with a professional editor instead? One thing is for certain, your video will always look different on the PC to what you will get on the TV. For starters, your TVs resolution is way lower than that of your PC monitor.

Sorry, but I don't buy into the idea that just because VS costs less that the developers get a pass on making it do what it is advertised as doing. Nothing I've read in any of the VS literature or manual says anywhere that the preview window rendering may be substantially different from the final output. Again, how is one supposed to make adjustments to the video quality using the tools in the program without any real-time, accurate rendering of what those adjustments will look like? How can I adjust brightness, saturation, contrast, etc. with no idea what the final product will actually look like? And I edit using an LCD that is substantially similar to the widescreen LCD in my living room that I use to view the final product on.

The only way to actually see exactly what your footage is going to look like on the TV, get a dual head video card for your PC, I use a MATROX Parhelia, to preview on a TV screen and don't use the preview window at all.

I AM using a dual-head setup and, like I said, I preview on an LCD similar to my home HDTV.

It's one thing to only want to spend for a consumer type program but expect or demand professional features. It ain't going to happen. I don't even use VS because it was too basic for me when I started out video editing.

Without getting your knickers in a twist, tell me how it is that Ulead is allowed to market and sell a product that promises a certain level of performance and functionality without having to actually make good on any of it? If Ulead can't deliver on their product claims, why do they waste our time and money continually upgrading and adding more features? The included features should work and the output should not be hit or miss just because the product is aimed at the lower end user. That's a bait-and-switch philosophy in my book.

[heinz-oz]

I will spell it out to you, nice and s l o w, a Preview is just that, a preview? In your preferences, what have you set you preview quality to? You can change that, you know.

Where, exactly, did you say that you preview on an LCD monitor "like" your TV? Is it a TV or is it a monitor?

Your preview is not going to show you all your effects in full quality, you need to render to a new file for that. That's where you judge the quality of your video

As for the rest of it, if I were you, I'd sue them

[CycleWriter]

I will spell it out to you, nice and s l o w,

No need to be condescending.

a Preview is just that, a preview? In your preferences, what have you set you preview quality to? You can change that, you know.

Yeah, I know. That's why I have it set to high-quality.

Where, exactly, did you say that you preview on an LCD monitor "like" your TV? Is it a TV or is it a monitor?

An LCD TV is only different from an LCD monitor in that it has a tuner. It renders its input almost identically. OF course, a preview playing in a window will look a lot better than the output playing full screen, but as far as looking at effects like brightness, contrast or color corrections, there should be little, if any, difference between the two.

Your preview is not going to show you all your effects in full quality, you need to render to a new file for that. That's where you judge the quality of your video

I'm not talking about the effects, I'm talking about things like brightness, contrast, color corrections and such. Those are applied real-time and do not require rendering by VS. If VS is not a WYSIWYG-style editor in those regards, then what's the point? I'm not into making shiny coasters out of blank media.

As for the rest of it, if I were you, I'd sue them

Not so farfetched an idea when you consider how many unhappy VS users there are just on this forum alone. A class-action lawsuit might convince Ulead and others that purchasers are NOT unpaid beta testers for their products. At least MS releases free versions of their software for people to tryout and help with bug fixing. We are paying VS to do their development for them and when they find enough complaints from users they release another X.0 release with minor fixes that they then try to charge us for. If I didn't already have a lot of money invested in Ulead upgrades and SmartSound libraries I'd dump it. I've spent much of this weekend trying out other software, but much of it has many of the same problems as VS, analog capture being the one real common one.

Anyway, I was venting and not trying to stir up trouble. No need for your replies to get irritable.

[heinz-oz]

Not a problem. BTW, because LCDs are sooo great in displaying video, I still use a 20" CRT on my editing machine even though I have two19" LCDs as well. LCDs are good to display cartoons or stills but real video is still challenging for them. That's also the reason why, at home, I don't have an LCD or Plasma TV yet.

I don't use an entry level consumer product either and complain that it does not perform better than a semi-pro program costing a multiple amount of money.

On your other point, MS made us all go to XP by stopping support for earlier OSs. Did you consider Win98, or worse, WinME fixed when they did that?

If there are so many disgruntled users, form an association and take up class action against ULEAD.

[brucefl]

I'll try a few things, but I don't recall it being this poor in VS9. I am using the same set up as in VS9, for now. It is a analog vcr plugged into my intel camera. Other problem I am having is a black bar on the side and top (small one), going to try a different vcr.
I still have VS9 installed, I will check the preview again, I really don't recall it being that poor.

[brucefl]

I try to captuare at the hightest quality available, I tried different settings to see if it changed (didn't) But if I have to burn a dvd to see if it is going to be good or bad, I think I would be stepping backwards. Video card is an nvidia 6800. I could understand if the preview screen (possibly) wasn't up to par, I wouldn't think it would be that much off, or that different from VS9. Like I say I'll run it through vs9 again, since I haven't uninstalled it yet. Since like most of us in here have supported Ulead products for numerious years, then a little feedback should be good.
Like I said also, in is clear in other programs, and I would not think it would be that much difference even in preview in vs10.
Should be purchasing a differnt setup in the next few wks, think I am going with the Canopus 110.

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi Bruce

Are you using the same processes to connect and capture your footage as you did using VS9?
So where is your source footage, a camera, a tv tuner, vhs……..
How are you connecting the device, Firewire, composite, s-video, usb……..

When you say you have captured to the highest quality, What exactly are your capture properties.

Does the playback look poor in ‘project’ mode or ‘clip’ mode, or both

If in project mode:-
You have the option to select High Quality Playback.
This renders the project (will take some time) to a temporary file located here (file-preferences-preview) Then plays the project from the file.

Good Luck

Trevor