[brbpab94]

What happens to the quality of an image when you convert a 3.2 mp image to a 5 mp image,and what would be the benefit if any.To me I would think it would distroy the quality of the image.

I took a lot of shots at a football game and handed them over to a guy that was makeing a dvd for the kids and he said he was converting them up to a 5 or 6 mp image.he finished some and gave me a sample and I noticed that the quality of the images have degraded.He is useing sony vegas 4.2
Please help
Brian

[Noyb]

Many ways to answer this - but I wouldn't expect a degradation in the original "quality"

I'm curious - what was the orginal image format, and what did he convert it to.

Basically - upsizing adds pixels.
When viewed larger it does not improve Quality - but can remove obvious pixelation.
When viewed larger - the pic may look more outa focus... less detailed.

[linskyjack]

If you take the footage from your camera to your computer, you are getting the image in its purest form-----with only a slight bit of compression occurring in camera. If he was burning it to a DVD, then he was compressing it using the
mpeg codec in Vegas---(or whatever other mpeg codec he has on his machine). You can alter the settings, and generally speaking the larger the mpeg compressed file is, the better the quality. When you convert something that is already mpeg to mpeg, you lose quality----The idea would be to capture the footage, do your edits, titles etc, and to render it only once to mpeg----at a fairly high setting By the way, Sony Vegas 4.2 is a very old version of the program, and I am not sure what mpeg codec comes with it . I use 6.0 and the results are very good, particularly when I set it up to render at the highest quality. Again, he might be using the wrong settings and when re-rendering you will definately take a quality hit.


I repeat, never try to convert an mpeg file to a mpeg file----the loss in quality will be there.

[brbpab94]

the picture comes off the camera as jpg and what and I'm not sure what he does but the sample I have is a VOB DVD format and the quality of what I'm seeing compared to what I gave him is different

[brbpab94]

How about Pinnacal Liquid?That program is about 500 bucks It must be good

[linskyjack]

Let me get this straight---you are using stills (jpegs) to insert in a video? Are these stills taken by using the still mode on your camcorder or are they shot with a dedicated still camera (if so, how many pixels)?


If you hand him stills shot in 3 jpeg---then he increases the size, then he outputs them to a DVD---of course they aren't going to look as good. I can help you with this but I need to know what equipment you are using, and what the process is from start to finish---Also, forget about Pinnacle Liquid---its a high end NLE that stinks and at this point I dont think you need a high end NLE----

[elee]

As simply as possible: you cannot incease the information content of a file by changing its size. The increase in size results only from the introduction of "padding" bits and these "pads" will only serve to reduce the resolution of a printout with the file. The problem will only be exacerbated by the compression alogoritmns used to form the new jpeg.

[linskyjack]

Indeed, and when preparing a still for video, one should do the following:

1. Shoot raw if you can and/or the highest possible resolution. I convert my raws to png.
2. Resize in a photo-editor--720X480-----deinterlace and sharpen. As elee said, you lose when you go up, you must shoot larger then come down.
3. Deinterlace.
4. Import to your NLE
5. Edit and render to MPEG----
6. Output to DVD.

[Noyb]

I'm thinking the problem is the procedures he used to make the video.
I'm using Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0 that can be found for under $100.

I can import any still image of any size or format.
Adobe will size this image to fit the screen, unless I tell it different.

Any actual resizing of the image(s) is done during the rendering of the video to fit the resolution of the Movie format chosen.

I'm thinking he shouldn't have resized the Image to start with.
Simply stated - To resize a jpeg then save as a jpeg just turns it into second generation rumor...etc...

Just some wild guessin - he shouldn't have messed w the originals and used a newer video editing program.... But I'm still learning.

[linskyjack]

Nope---it has nothing to do with what you can import into Adobe and resizing in Adobe----Again, DV is 720x480-----If the still image you import is smaller then that, and you try to enlarge it, then you will get poor results. If your image is larger then that and you take it down, you will lose little to nothing. Before you burn a DVD, your jpegs are turned into mpeg. You aren't changing jpegs into jpegs.

Again, shoot at the highest resolution possible-----(hopefully equal to or larger then 720x480). Reduce to 720X480 before rendering for output to DVD. I also recommend that you save your jpegs as .pngs if possible, and you deinterlace them before importing. Anyhow, good luck.