text:
How to open MP4 container video with mp42 codec in Vegas Pro?
I've been given an MP4 video with the following information, per MediaInfo
General
Complete name                            : E:\306G5562_01.MP4
Format                                   : MPEG-4
Commercial name                          : XDCAM EX 35
Format profile                           : Base Media / Version 2
Codec ID                                 : mp42 (mp42)
File size                                : 3.45 GiB
Duration                                 : 13 min
Overall bit rate mode                    : Variable
Overall bit rate                         : 35.6 Mb/s
Encoded date                             : UTC 2016-07-16 17:57:03
Tagged date                              : UTC 2016-07-16 17:57:03

Video
ID                                       : 1
Format                                   : MPEG Video
Commercial name                          : XDCAM EX 35
Format version                           : Version 2
Format profile                           : Main@High
Format settings, BVOP                    : Yes
Format settings, Matrix                  : Custom
Format settings, GOP                     : M=3, N=12
Codec ID                                 : 61
Duration                                 : 13 min
Bit rate mode                            : Variable
Bit rate                                 : 34.0 Mb/s
Maximum bit rate                         : 35.0 Mb/s
Width                                    : 1 920 pixels
Height                                   : 1 080 pixels
Display aspect ratio                     : 16:9
Frame rate mode                          : Constant
Frame rate                               : 25.000 FPS
Color space                              : YUV
Chroma subsampling                       : 4:2:0
Bit depth                                : 8 bits
Scan type                                : Progressive
Compression mode                         : Lossy
Bits/(Pixel*Frame)                       : 0.656
Time code of first frame                 : 08:36:53:20
Time code source                         : Group of pictures header
GOP, Open/Closed                         : Open
GOP, Open/Closed of first frame          : Closed
Stream size                              : 3.30 GiB (96%)
Language                                 : English
Encoded date                             : UTC 2016-07-16 17:57:03
Tagged date                              : UTC 2016-07-16 17:57:03
Color primaries                          : BT.709
Transfer characteristics                 : BT.709
Matrix coefficients                      : BT.709

Audio
ID                                       : 2
Format                                   : PCM
Format settings, Endianness              : Big
Format settings, Sign                    : Signed
Codec ID                                 : twos
Duration                                 : 13 min
Bit rate mode                            : Constant
Bit rate                                 : 1 536 kb/s
Channel(s)                               : 2 channels
Sampling rate                            : 48.0 kHz
Bit depth                                : 16 bits
Stream size                              : 153 MiB (4%)
Language                                 : English
Encoded date                             : UTC 2016-07-16 17:57:03
Tagged date                              : UTC 2016-07-16 17:57:03

From what I can tell, this is XDCAM EX video, which is encoded in MP42 codec in an MP4 container. Vegas Pro won't even look at it. Says the file cannot be opened. How can I fix this? I can convert it (I've done Handbrake and VLC already to test), but I'd rather not, because I actually have tons of these videos and converting takes lots of time.

mp42 is the container ID, which Mediainfo wrongly calls a codec id. It refers to MPEG-4 Part 14 spec for containers.
XDCAM is actually a Sony variant of MPEG-2 video. I've worked with XDCAM natively in Vegas, which were in MOV, I believe.
You can use FFmpeg to rewrap these files.
ffmpeg -i video.mp4 -c copy video.mov

Looks like MOVs only work on Macs. The command below also worked.
ffmpeg -i video.mp4 -c copy video.vob

(You'll have to switch to viewing All Files (*.*))

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

I upgraded to version 13. Loaded the original MP4 completely and without issue. It was fast too. Thanks again for all your help.


text:
Add a timestamp to a video file?
I have some video footage from my phone's dash camera app. In the app, the video plays with the timestamp showing. However, exporting the file to my computer does the video only, without the timestamp.
Is there a simple way to add the timestamp with (preferably free) Windows software? I don't need the timestamp to be extracted from metadata. I can compare the video on my phone app to the one on my PC, and get the timestamp 'close enough' if it will let me put the start time on it manually where I want.

You can use FFmpeg, a free command-line tool, to do this.
Basic command is
ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -vf "drawtext=fontfile=font.ttf:
                        fontsize=45:fontcolor=white:
                        box=1:boxcolor=black@0.4:
                        text='Time\: %{pts\:gmtime\:1466507118}'" output.mp4

(this should be in one line)
The value you need to change is 1466507118. This is the Unix epoch time representation of your intended date and time.

Fantastic! This worked perfect once I changed the fontfile path to     fontfile=/Windows/Fonts/arial.ttf

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
How to replicate final crop parameters in after Ken Burns effect
I'm using a Ken Burns effect to zoom in on a section of running video.  After the zoom completes I want the next section of video to continue with the same crop dimensions.  How do I find out the exact dimensions that the Ken Burns effect finishes with?

Instead of using a Ken-Burns-type crop to create the effect, I did it using Transform effects, setting a Keyframe at the beginning and the end of the zoom.  I think the relative rates of zoom and pan may be a little different with this method, but it works for my purposes.  It should be possible to tweak the settings to create a steady zoom/pan.
So now I can just click on the final keyframe in the Transform row of the Video Animation display for that section of video to get the final X, Y, and Scale values.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Request for Camcorder and Tripod Recommendations for Occasional Amatuer Usage, With Emphasis on Good Sound Quality
The title just about tells all about my question, but for a few more specifics, I want to record some monologue rehearsals (of myself) in an empty hall, and will later probably have some live performances recorded, too.
As I may periodically "update" my video "resume", it's probably cost-effective to purchase rather than rent the equipment, I am looking to buy both a camcorder and a tripod.
The key features/qualities I'm looking for in these devices are:
Camcorder:
1) Good audio quality (the audio is probably actually more important to me than the visuals)
2) Ease of use (I just want to be able to record, stop recording, zoom in, zoom out, pan, and then download the "files" to my laptop)
3) Price/Value (I don't want to spend a king's ransom for something that will only be used once in awhile, but then again this may be my chief marketing "agent" (YouTuberizing segments of the rehearsals/performances)
Tripod:
1) Stability/Solidity/Reliability
2) Price
Any recommendations?

90% of good sound quality is mic placement.  The remaining 90% is the microphone.  The 90% that remains of that is the preamp.  Because mic placement is so important, you either have to accept putting the video camera where the microphone sounds best, or you have to disconnect the two, placing and pointing the mic where it is best and then placing pointing the lens (and camera) at what looks best.  Alas, there is no "ease of use" when it comes to capturing good sound--you actually have to listen and adjust until it's right.  Which is almost impossible to do by oneself.  But perhaps you will find that putting a smartphone in a cradle arms-length from your face gives you both acceptable sound and video quality.  In which case, there's a no-cost answer to that part of your question.
As for tripods, if you are not using the camera for active pans or tilts, you don't need a fluid head.  All you need is something that is no so ridiculously flimsy that it will start to move when a whoosh of cold air makes it's way across the room from supply to return.  A typical margin of error is to read the rated weight of a brand you can actually look up on the Internet (Manfrotto, Gitzo, Slik, etc), cut that rated weight in half, and compare it to your load.  If your camcorder is 3 lbs, you need at least a rating of 6 lbs of capacity.
Note, of course, that recording a live performance may require as obtrusive a placement of microphone and/or camcorder as you had in rehearsal, which may be unacceptable.  Fixing that requires a whole new strata of cost and expertise.


text:
Apply scale and fade effect to Images together
I am using below commands to overlay two images with scaling in video :
String command="ffmpeg -i /sdcard/videokit/input.mp4 -loop 1 -i /sdcard/videokit/first.png -loop 1 -i /sdcard/videokit/second.png -filter_complex [1:v]scale='if(gt(a,4/3),320,-1)':'if(gt(a,4/3),-1,240)'[img1];[2:v]scale='if(gt(a,4/3),320,-1)':'if(gt(a,4/3),-1,240)'[img2];[0:v][img1]overlay=(main_w-overlay_w)/2:(main_h-overlay_h)/2[bkg];[bkg][img2]overlay=(main_w-overlay_w)/2:(main_h-overlay_h)/2 -c:a copy -preset ultrafast /sdcard/videokit/output.mp4";

String command2="ffmpeg -i /sdcard/videokit/input.mp4 -loop 1 -t 2 -i /sdcard/videokit/first.png -loop 1 -t 2 -i /sdcard/videokit/second.png -filter_complex [1:v]trim=duration=2,fade=in:st=0:d=0.5,fade=out:st=1.5:d=0.5[img1];[2:v]trim=duration=2,fade=in:st=10:d=0.5,fade=out:st=11.5:d=0.5[img2];[0:v][img1]overlay=(main_w-overlay_w)/2:(main_h-overlay_h)/2[bkg];[bkg][img2]overlay=(main_w-overlay_w)/2:(main_h-overlay_h)/2 -preset ultrafast -c:a copy -preset ultrafast /sdcard/videokit/output.mp4";

First command works perfectly but I want to apply fade in fade out effect to both images for certain time.
I have tried with command2 after referring other answers but it doesn't seem to be working, any help would be appreciated!!!
Aim to achieve : Basically I have video of 12 seconds, first image has to be appear for first 2 seconds and last image for last 2 seconds with effect.

@Mulvya   Any help for this??

Try
String command2="ffmpeg -i /sdcard/videokit/input.mp4 -loop 1 -t 2 -i /sdcard/videokit/first.png -loop 1 -t 2 -i /sdcard/videokit/second.png -filter_complex "[0]boxblur=enable='lt(t,2)+gt(t,10)'[vid];[1:v]format=rgba,fade=in:st=0:d=0.5:alpha=1,fade=out:st=1.5:d=0.5:alpha=1[img1];[2:v]format=rgba,fade=in:st=0:d=0.5:alpha=1,fade=out:st=1.5:d=0.5:alpha=1,setpts=PTS+10/TB[img2];[vid][img1]overlay=(main_w-overlay_w)/2:(main_h-overlay_h)/2[bkg];[bkg][img2]overlay=(main_w-overlay_w)/2:(main_h-overlay_h)/2" -preset ultrafast -c:a copy /sdcard/videokit/output.mp4";

Thank you so much, Its perfect :) and small issue is first image is slightly appearing after 2 seconds?

Either increase the t of the first image slightly, like to 2.5 or decrease the duration of the fade out.

Yup it worked and my video size is 25mb currently it takes 2-3 minutes to process, can we reduce it?

Speed? No. Size? Yes - change preset to medium or slow.

I meant processing time?

No, ultrafast is fastest possible.

Okay fine, can we apply blur background behind first and second images when they visible?

Add [0]boxblur=enable='lt(t,2)+gt(t,10)'[vid] to the filter_complex and use [vid] for first overlay.

Can you update your answer with that?

I have applied rotation to video, can you guide me for images in above command?

You want to rotate the pics? Which direction?

Yes pics, I want to rotate pics as per video orientation

Insert the transpose filter after the format filter for each image. e.g. transpose=1 for 90 deg clockwise 2 for CCW.

Okay let me try


text:
ffmpeg - H264 vs. H265 codec parameters?
When i try to run following command:
ffmpeg -y -loglevel info -threads 0 -f lavfi -i aevalsrc=0 -framerate 60 -i image.png -start_number 000000 -apply_trc bt709 -framerate 60 -i seq1.%06d.exr -start_number 000000 -apply_trc bt709 -framerate 60 -i seq2.%06d.exr -r 60 -preset medium -codec:v libx264 -profile:v high -tune fastdecode -c:a libfdk_aac -ac 2 -vbr 5 -shortest -strict experimental -sn -vsync 1 -pix_fmt yuv420p -b:v 62914560 -movflags +faststart -x264-params high-tier=0:pmode=1:wpp=1:tune=zerolatnecy,fastdecode::bitrate=62914:fps=60:keyint=600:min-keyint=60:vbv-bufsize=62914:vbv-maxrate=62914:scenecut=00 -filter_complex "[2:v]crop=5120:2560:0:0, scale=4096:1152, rotate=0[input_num0];[1:v][input_num0]overlay=0:0[output_num0];[3:v]crop=5120:2560:0:0, scale=4096:1152, rotate=0[input_num1];[1:v][input_num1]overlay=0:0[output_num1];[output_num1][output_num0] vstack [result]" -map "[result]:0 -map "0:0"" output.mp4 2>&1 | tee -a log_file.log

I get the following error:
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] Error parsing option 'high-tier = 0'.
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] Error parsing option 'pmode = 1'.
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] Error parsing option 'wpp = 1'.
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] Error parsing option 'tune = zerolatnecy,fastdecode'.
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] Error parsing option ':bitrate = 62914'.
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] using SAR=9/16
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] MB rate (2211840) > level limit (2073600)
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast SSSE3 SSE4.2 AVX FMA3 AVX2 LZCNT BMI2
[libx264 @ 0x7fd8fa003600] profile High, level 5.2

Is it because those parameters are not recognized by H264 or?..
Thanks!

Some of those options don't belong to x264.
Use
-b:v 62914560 -bufsize 62914560 -maxrate 62914560 -movflags +faststart -x264-params keyint=600:min-keyint=60:scenecut=00


text:
ffmpeg concat introduces a/v sync problem
I have one 2-hour video file and want to add a 10-second title sequence to its start. The long file has perfect a/v sync from start to finish. However, when I use ffmpeg -f concat -i mylist.txt -c copy outfile.mp4 to concatenate the title file to the long file, the audio in the long file gradually goes out of sync, progressively becoming worse until at the end of 2 hours, the audio is a full second or two behind the video.  I can understand why the concat might break the synchronization, but I don't understand why it would  cause the synchronization to become progressively worse.
I want to avoid re-encoding the long file to maintain quality. If necessary, I can re-encode the title file because it's just white text on a black background.
I'd greatly appreciate any suggestions. I'm a digital video semi-noob and have faced a steep learning curve, but I am learning. I'm using Ubuntu Linux 16.04 and ffmpeg 2.8.6-1ubuntu2, which I think is the latest ffmpeg version.  I have about 20 old 2-hour family video cassettes that I am digitizing.
File background:

The long file is an MP4 file using H264 and AAC. It originated as a .ts file and I use ffmpeg to encode it into the mp4 format. Before concatenating the title file, it is in perfect a/v sync at all times. It's 720x480, with 127 audio bitrate.  I captured the video from a Sony Handycam Video8 tape using a Hauppauge Live-2 USB converter, using the VLC CLI to generate the original .ts file. It's about 120 minutes long.
The title file I created in Blender, and tried to duplicate the long file's format: 720x480, 127 audio bitrate, MP4 containing H264 and AAC. It actually has no audio, as it's just two "slides" of text. (I know that there probably is actually an audio track generated by Blender, but it's just silence as I don't add any audio tracks to the simple titles.) It's only 10 seconds long.

The results of ffmpeg -i longfile.mp4 is:
Metadata:
major_brand     : isom
minor_version   : 512
compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41
encoder         : Lavf56.36.100
Duration: 01:17:06.58, start: 0.013000, bitrate: 2134 kb/s
Stream #0:0(und): Video: h264 (High) (avc1 / 0x31637661), yuv420p,
720x480 [SAR 32:27 DAR 16:9], 1997 kb/s, 29.97 fps, 29.97 tbr, 29971
tbn, 59.94 tbc (default)
Metadata:
handler_name    : VideoHandler
Stream #0:1(unk): Audio: aac (LC) (mp4a / 0x6134706D), 48000 Hz, mono,
fltp, 127 kb/s (default)
Metadata:
handler_name    : SoundHandler

The results of ffmpeg -i titlefile.mp4 is
Metadata:
major_brand     : isom
minor_version   : 512
compatible_brands: isomiso2avc1mp41
encoder         : Lavf56.40.101
Duration: 00:00:10.01, start: 0.012000, bitrate: 421 kb/s
Stream #0:0(und): Video: h264 (High) (avc1 / 0x31637661), yuv420p,
720x480 [SAR 1:1 DAR 3:2], 284 kb/s, 29.97 fps, 29.97 tbr, 30k tbn,
59.94 tbc (default)
Metadata:
handler_name    : VideoHandler
Stream #0:1(und): Audio: aac (LC) (mp4a / 0x6134706D), 48000 Hz,
stereo, fltp, 127 kb/s (default)
Metadata:
handler_name    : SoundHandler

Run
ffmpeg -i titlefile.mp4 -vf setdar=16/9 -video_track_timescale 29971 -ac 1 newtitle.mp4

and then run concat with the new title video.
Modern containers like MP4 have Presentation TimeStamps, which are denominated with reference to a timebase. So, if the timebase value is 1/500 and a frame's PTS is 200, then that tells the video player to show that frame at 200*(1/500) = 0.4 seconds. The tbn values shown in the readouts are the reciprocals of this timebase. Now, the concat demuxer, due to a design oversight (or choice!?) does not rescale the PTS values so that all inputs have frames with PTS using the same timebase. Your two videos have different TBs, and so the long video after the concat is being sped up. The difference is perceptually invisible - except for the audio drift. That tbn value is for the video stream. Audio streams have their own timebase, related to the sample rate, which is the same here.

That works!  Thank you so much! Also, thank you for the many comments on similar threads you have contributed. It's greatly appreciated.

Nice, this helped alot with my similar problem. Could you elaborate on the audio timebase a bit? How do I check that they are on the same timebase? (I can't see a tbn value in the output). And do I correct it in the same way?

Audio timebases are usually the same as the sample rate. You can run ffprobe -select_streams a -show_entries stream=time_base -of compact=p=0 video.mp4 to get the value.For audio, I'd just recommend re-encoding with an explicit sample rate specified i.e. -ar 48000.


text:
Why is Olympic slow motion footage sharp with little motion blur?
Do the 'broadcast quality' cameras used in the 2016 Olympic Games have higher than normal frame rates? It seems that their slow motion footage is smoother, sharper, and less motion blurred than typical day-to-day productions from local stations.

The lack of motion blur depends on the shutter speed more than just frame rate. While a higher frame rate will mean a faster shutter speed, you can increase the shutter speed without necessarily increasing the frame rate.

The MacCAM (used in Tennis back in 2004) used a 1000 fps frame rate and had just enough resolution to capture a tennis ball hitting (or missing) a line with reasonable resolution.  Today, a Phantom Flex 4K can do 1000 fps with UHD or 4K resolution.  Many high-end broadcast cameras can do 120 fps at FullHD or UHD resolution, which is probably what they were using at the Olympics.  That's 4x slow motion for NTSC-land and nearly 5x slow motion for PAL-land.  That is a great frame rate for anything but the fastest sports (badminton, ping pong, etc).
The Panasonic Varicam HS is a broadcast camera that does 240 fps.  I wasn't watching these Olympics closely enough to see whether this was the camera used for the gymnastics event, but wouldn't be surprised if it was.

The official local broadcast equipment supplier is Panasonic. Most countries take the local broadcast partner's feed of the games. Looking at footage of athletics, swimming, rowing and team sports I didn't see a lot of different broadcasters' equipment in the background. Basketball is good for spotting cameras.

Panasonic Corporation provides the Olympic Games with state-of-the-art digital audio/video equipment, such as flat screen TV, digital video camera, DVD recorder, and professional audio/video equipment. https://www.olympic.org/sponsors/panasonic

Panasonic is providing P2HD Series cameras.
NBC managed to get their own broadcast capability in Rio.

NBC Olympics will also use Sony’s HDC-4300 4K high frame rate camera system for HD replays - https://blog.sony.com/press/nbc-olympics-selects-sony-to-provide-broadcast-and-production-equipment-for-its-coverage-of-the-2016-olympic-games-in-rio/

So state-of-the-art high frame rate 4K cameras.
The Sony HDR-4300 does 479.52 fps at 60Hz (400fps at 50Hz).
I think the P2HD frame rate is 240 fps.
I don't think either of those cameras will do those frame rates in 4K, but I haven't got the specs handy.


text:
How to identify i-frame from idr-frame in the ffprobe show frames output?
The ffprobe show frames output shows the following details:
[FRAME]
media_type=video
key_frame=1
pkt_pts=42
pkt_pts_time=0:00:00.042000
pkt_dts=42
pkt_dts_time=0:00:00.042000
pkt_duration=N/A
pkt_duration_time=N/A
pkt_pos=799
width=1920
height=1080
pix_fmt=yuv420p
sample_aspect_ratio=1:1
pict_type=I
coded_picture_number=0
display_picture_number=0
interlaced_frame=0
top_field_first=0
repeat_pict=0
reference=3
[/FRAME]

I was reading this article and was wondering how to differentiate between the two types of frames from the above output.

Frames with key_frame 1 (will have picture type I) are IDR frames.
I frames with key_frame 0 are not.

It doesn't seem to work exactly like that -- non-IDR frames with the Recovery Point SEI set are also reported as keyframes

Those types aren't common unless you work with transport feeds.

I'm working a lot with .MTS files from JVC camcorders; they're full of them. But indeed I have no knowledge on how much they appear "in the wild"

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Every other frame corrupted when rendering with Adobe Media Encoder
I'm trying to render a video from Adobe Media Encoder, created in After Effects. We first had this problem is a larger file, so I reduced it down to a simple file the results of which can be seen in this gif.

Any thoughts as to why this might be happening?
Specs:

Media Encoder, 2015.4 Release, Build 10.4.0.26 (latest)
After Effects, 2015.3 Release, Version 13.8.1.38 (latest)
MacBook Pro Retina 15-in, Mid-2014, OS X 10.11.6 (latest) - 16 GB Ram, 2.5 GHZ i7
Source Comp; px 1.0, 29.97 fps, Progressive
Output, H.264 Match Source, High bitrate (VBR 1 pass)
Also exported as PNG sequence but the corruption was still there

Turn off CUDA rendering, as per here.

@Mulvya that was it! Thanks a bunch. You want to put that in an answer and I'll accept it?

As answered in this Q/A, the problem looks to be caused by the use of the CUDA renderer ("Mercury"). The solution is to switch to CPU-only rendering.

This was it. In case anyone else can't find it it's in Media Encoder > Preferences. Change Video Rendering to “Mercury Playback Engine Software Only"


text:
Would rendering After Effects project in Premiere Pro decrease quality?
I have created a motion logo using After Effects. Now, I want to render it in H.264 or MP4 format. Now, there are 3 ways for it:
1. Using Media Encoder
2. Export as Premiere Pro Project in After Effects and Use it in Premiere Pro
3. Save the Project as After Effects project and Import it in Premeire Pro
Now, what I want to ask is about quality of the video. Would all ways yield same quality for same format? Or There's difference between them in terms of quality? If yes, what would be best?
My 2nd question is: I'm making a short video like a Movie trailer. I would create the scenes in Pr and the Motion Logo (which I've already created in After effects) in Ae. In what way should I render them (I need MP4 video)? Import the Motion Logo project in Premiere Pro and render both Logo and Video OR both Video scenes and Logo in Media encoder?
NOTE: I'm asking these questions in terms of quality of Motion Logo and Video scenes, not in terms of ease of usage.
Thank you.

Importing from AE using dynamic linking and rendering in Premiere or Media Encoder will yield the same quality, but it does give you a little less control over the render settings.
While in AE you can choose whether to render with frame blending , motion blur, draft settings and so on, Premiere will always render your AE comp with the current settings. So when you're setting up your final render in Premiere, make sure you jump over to AE and turn on motion blur and frame blending and check that all your layers are rendering at full quality, not draft. Most of the time you won't want these on while you're editing because they slow down the preview so much.
As far as quality goes I believe that it uses the same render engine, so don't obsess about it. In fact re-encoding from an After Effects render is probably more lossy than importing using dynamic linking, because of the two compression stages. But you will never ever notice the difference one way or the other, trust me. Any miniscule losses due to things like quantisation errors and so on are going to pale into insignificance with quality lost in the compression to MP4.
Use the way that makes it much easier for you. For me that's importing via dynamic linking, allowing me to change things in the AE project without re-rendering all the time and having great big render files all over the place.

I created the images for the Motion logo in Illustrator. But after rendering I don't see the logo as cool and perfect as it was in Illustrator and saved image as PNG of that logo. Can there be some settings problems? Or I would always lose the quality after rendering?

Did you turn on continuous rasterisation for the vector layers? Have you tried comparing renders done in AE vs Premiere?

For experiement, I created a simple text in After effects and rendered it as QuickTime with RGB and RGB+Alpha settings. Then I saved the project as Aep. Then imported in Pr and when rendered it gave me Quality say X. And finally, I rendered the same text in After effects as Lossless AVI format and then imported in Pr and rendered with original settings and it gave me quality say Y. Now, when I compared them, the Quality was like this: .mov (RGB) > .mov (+Alpha) > Y > X. What can be the issue. I don't understand. I think same is happening with my original logo created using Ai.

The RGB mov and the RGBA mov shouldn't vary in quality if they're using the same codec and quality settings, and if you're using a lossless quicktime codec it should be identical to the lossless AVI (after all, that's what lossless means). Either your render settings are wonky, or something else is going on. When you compare the quality are you just looking at the Premiere preview? Premiere often drops quality a lot during playback.

No. the quality after rendering in Premiere Pro to MP4.

I request you to answer this question as well. It's totally related to this problem and I've described it in a better way. Here's it: http://video.stackexchange.com/questions/19288/why-do-i-get-different-qualities-of-video-in-different-adobe-products


text:
How to change cameras in After effects
I am creating some 3D sences but i am taking one shot from left side but how i can then choose other camera to view from other sides. Like changing cameras that are on different sides.
http://www.videocopilot.net/flightschool/flight_control/
If you look at 0.34 you can see that he made same plane shot from different sides. ( He didnt explained it in video )

This is not a duplicate of that question. That question is about AE rendering the active camera instead of a camera layer - this question is specifically about rendering multiple camera angles together.

If you want to render different views at the same time, drag the comp into another composition. Make it a 3D layer and turn on continuous rasterisation or whatever it's called (the little sun icon). Add your new camera to this comp and it will see the contents of the nested comp from its own viewpoint. Rinserepeat, then you can render as many views as you like.

If you want to jump from one camera to another just split the camera layer shift-ctrl/cmd-d and reposition the new camera.

One way to do this is to export by clip - i.e., set your camera to angle 1 and export your first X frames (where 'X' is how many frames you want that shot to last for). Then, adjust your camera to angle 2 and export the next set of frames (however long you want that shot, etc.). These clips can then be combined in Premiere Pro (or After Effects) and you can easily add sound effects, etc. They are easy to timeline edit this way because they'll be already rendered and thus, you can work with the project in a much quicker way.


text:
How to cutting a video and keep all format and metadata
I want to cut long videos into several smaller parts without changing any format and metadata from the original video.

I used these commands

ffmpeg -i input -ss 00:00:05 -t 100 -c:a copy -c:v copy output
ffmpeg -i input -ss 00:00:05 -t 100 -metadata "major_brand=mp42, minor_version=0" -c:v copy -c:a copy output
ffmpeg -i input -ss 00:00:05 -t 100 -map_metadata 0 -c:v copy -c:a  copy output
ffmpeg -i input -ss 00:00:05 -t 100 -map_metadata 0 -b:v 460k -c:a  copy output

but still get different results from the original video.
Is there another command that I can use for cutting the video with metadata results identical to the original one ?
Thanks

Which metadata do you wish to preserve?

@Mulvya i want to keep Major Brand and minor brand, is that possible? and could you tell me what the meaning of handler_name :IsoMedia File Produce by Google. Thanks

FFmpeg only allows you to alter/override the major brand, not the minor.
Command is
ffmpeg -i input -ss 00:00:05 -t 100 -brand mp42 -c:v copy -c:a copy output

MP4box will allow you to override both.
mp4box -brand mp42:0 file.mp4

If you want to change the handler name as well, use
mp4box -brand mp42:0 -name 2="IsoMedia File Produce by Google" file.mp4

(2 is the track index i.e. the 2nd track)


text:
How to align a shape to stick to another in AE?
I'm new to After Effects but I did some work with Photoshop in the past.
I'm trying to create a diamond with AE (and make a gif later so it rotates).
To be super clear - I'm trying to convert the image below into 3D:

I'm sitting here for 12 hours and trying to perform some basic operations in 3D and I'm totally stuck. For now I have two shapes in my composition, a simple rectangle and a polygon (polygon to make things easier):

I'm trying to align the triangle to the polygon somehow in a 'smart' way, not by moving the x/y/z position by 1/10 of the pixel each time, rotating the camera and checking if it fits.
Is there any tool in Adobe AE which will help me do this?
I just need to fit the triangle's basis to one of the polygon's edges so it matches perfectly like this:

Thanks for any help! :)

This may not be the answer you are looking for but I suggest doing the 3d modelling in another program like blender, then importing it into after effects.

The tool you need is Maths (or Math, if you like), specifically that most beautiful of mathematickal arts: trigonometry.
First set the width of the base of your triangle to be the same as the sides of your polygon. Since you know the radius of the polygon, and it's a hexagon, that's easy - a hexagon is basically six equilateral triangles so the sides are the same as the radius.

So once you've made your hexagon, make a triangle with it's base the same as the radius of your polygon. Hmm, that's a bit more tricky. The measurement for polygons is always the outer radius, and the base of a triangle is not the same as the radius. We're going to need Pythagoras, and his Persian mates.

Since we know the base (labeled b) and we know the angles (it should be obvious that the acute angle is half of the outer angle of the equilateral triangle - 30˚), we can use the law of sines to work out the base. Wikipedia states as did Abu Mahmud Hamid ibn Khidr Khojandi (but in Persian):

where a, b, and c are the lengths of the sides of a triangle, and A, B, and C are the opposite angles (see the figure to the right), while d is the diameter of the triangle's circumcircle.
We're in luck. The circumcircle of an equilateral triangle is its radius, so we can use d as our radius, and since we know b = half the radius of the polygon–lets call it p–and the angle B we can write:
(p/2)/sin(B) = d

filling in the numbers for B
d = (p/2)/sin(60) = p/1.73205080756888

where p is the radius of the hexagon. Now you can work this all out with a calculator, but if you change your hexagon you'll have to do it all again. Machines will do the work: use expressions to do the heavy lifting. alt/opt-click the stopwatch next to the outer radius property of the triangle and we put in this expression:
var p = thisComp.layer("Shape Layer 1").content("Polystar 1").content("Polystar Path 1").outerRadius;
0.5 * p/Math.sin(Math.PI/3)

Hopefully you can see that this is the same operation as above, but since expressions use radians instead of degrees we're using π/3 instead of 60˚. Now no matter what size you make your polygon the side of the triangle will always match it.
Onwards and upwards. Now we need to attach the triangle to the edge of the hexagon. First, we'll make the hexagon the parent of the triangle, so that if we want to transform the hexagon all the triangles will follow. It also means that we can calculate the position of the triangle relative to the hexagon, avoiding having to do a lot of unnecessary transforms.
So for the right side of the hexagon, we can work out how far along the x axis the triangle has to be to be lined up with the edge exactly. Once again trigonometry is the key. There's a right angle triangle who's hypotenuse is the outer radius of he hexagon and whose base is the distance we need to offset the edge of the triangle.

b/sin(60) = r/sin(90) = r

because sine 90˚ is 1, so
b=r*sin(60)

So in the position property of the triangle we put
r=thisComp.layer("Shape Layer 1").content("Polystar 1").content("Polystar Path 1").outerRadius;
[r * Math.sin(Math.PI/3), 0]

Now you can see that the anchor point of the triangle aligns perfectly with the edge of the hexagon.

Problem is, we want the base of the triangle to be the part that is aligned. So we'll offset the anchor point from the centre to the base. How do we work out how far that is. Yes, you already know, some more trig.

We know r, we worked it out before. and we knwo the angles so we can just give the Law of Sines another thrashing.
a/sin(30) = r/sin(90) = r
a = r*sin(30)

Look familiar yet? So to get r for the triangle into this equation we just grab the radius value (or you could put in the formula, that's probably more precise, but it's unlikely to make a difference). The easy way of plugging in the correctly worded value of the triangle's radius is to use the pick-whip:

With the expression editor for the anchor point active, delete the contents, then type [0, to open some square brackets and provide 0 as the X value, don't forget the comma, then to provide the Y value drag the pick-whip to the radius value, then type in * Math.sin(Math.PI/6)], don't forget to close the square brackets. The expression should be something like:
[0, content("Polystar 1").content("Polystar Path 1").outerRadius*Math.sin(Math.PI/6)]

Now we just need to rotate the triangle 90˚ to line it up.

Ok, now it's time to enter three dee land. Turn both layers into 3D layers. Everything should stay as it is, but now we can fold the triangle up.

If you activate the rotate tool you'll see the rotation handles for the triangle coming out of its anchor point. As you can see the one we need to rotate is around the x axis. Give it a try with the rotate tool and you'll notice that is actually affecting the Y rotation. This is because we've rotated the triangle 90˚ on the Z axis already. The reason I used the rotate tool is that trying to work out rotation transforms like that makes my head hurt too much. Now I know what property I need to add our next expression to, I just have to work a couple of things out.
Firstly, the triangle can't stay as an equilateral triangle, because it won't make a diamond shape that way, it will just fold perfectly flat on to the hexagon. we need to increase its scale, then we have to do some more trig.
Let's scale it an arbitrary amount. Whatever looks good for you. Imma just grab the drag handles with the move tool and stretch.

Now we have to work out what angle we need to rotate to get the tip of the triangle above the centre of the hexagon. Here's a screen shot from custom view, where I've approximated it by eye, and drawn the triangle we need to solve to work out our angle.

We know b, we don't know a, and we have to work out h. h will be the height of the triangle once it has been scaled up.
The height of the triangle can be worked out with the Law of Sines, or if you're bored of that you can also use the fact that we know the distance from the center to the base - it's the amount we offset the anchor point - and we know the distance from the centre to the tip - that's the outer radius. Multiply it by the scale/100 to get the final, scaled height. In expression form:
h = (transform.scale[1]/100)*(transform.anchorPoint[1] + content("Polystar 1").content("Polystar Path 1").outerRadius);

So, again with the Law-o-Sines, and the previous diagram. We know b, that's the distance from the centre of the hexagon to the base of the triangle, and we know that the angle A that we want to find out will be 90-B (the sum of the angles in a triangle being 180˚). So:
B/sin(B) = h/sin(90)  = h
sin(B) = b/h

so B is arc-cosine(b/h) arc-cosine being the inverse of sine, AKA asin.
in expression form:
h = transform.scale[1]*content("Polystar 1").content("Polystar Path 1").outerRadius/(100*Math.sin(Math.PI/6));
b = transform.position[0];
90+radiansToDegrees(Math.asin(b/h))

The 90+ in the last line is because it was 90˚ out when I tried it, there's probably a sound mathematical reason, like I should have used acos instead of asin, but whatevs, it works.
So now our triangle will always have the tip in line with the midpoint of the hexagon, no matter what you scale it. Here's how it looks from side on:

A thing of beauty. Now to avoid doing a whole lot more thinkination for the other sides, let's use a hack. Make a new null, make it a 3D layer and set its parent to the hexagon, placing its centre at the centre of the hexagon (hold the shift key while you drag the parenting pick-whip).

Now change the parent of the triangle to the null. Select the null and the triangle and duplicate them. Rotate the newly created null 60˚ on the Z-axis, and voila, your second facet. Rinse, repeat four more times. I'll leave you to work out how to get the bottom half of the diamond. Ok, all right, hint: rotate the seventh null 180˚ on the x or y axis.
Oh, WAIT Stop, before you do this, just one thing you might want to do. Link the scale of the new triangle you made when you duplicated the original one to the scale of the original triangle. That way you can scale them all easily. Do that by alt/option-clicking the scale stopwatch on the second triangle and dragging the pick-whip to the scale property of the first. Use this second layer as the source of all succesive clones and they will follow the scale of the first layer, meanign you could easily animate that.
Add some lights and fiddle around with the material options of the layers until it looks super special, and you're gold. Maths: it works, suckers.

TL;DR
Download the project file here.
Also, yeah, do this in a proper 3D program like C4D (since you've already got it with AE) or Blender (since free), unless you're nuts like me.

If you were a women I would definitely marry you. Are you a woman?

We could build 3d things and have kids that would build them too

Best comment I have seen yet ^

You could try moving shapes around in 3D in AE, but I think the free version of Cinema 4D included with AE would be a much easier tool for the job. Look up cinema 4DLite and after effects integration.


text:
DJI Osmo X3 vs Canon 5D Mk III for easier chroma green screen keying
Everything I've read indicates I'll get better green screen footage using a 4K camera rather than an HD camera as the increased resolution helps. But what about other factors such as the noise on a cheap 4K camera like the DJI Osmo 3, sensor side, cheaper lens etc vs the better noise, bigger sensor and changeable lenses on the Canon 5D Mk III.
I'm trying to work out which camera I should use for the easiest green screen keying experience, assuming I can control the lighting for best ISO setting.

The key to pulling a good key is a clean separation between key and subject.  All things being equal, higher resolution will give a sharper edge between key and subject, which is good.  But that's just one consideration.  Chroma subsampling is another.  Chroma recorded at full bandwidth (at least 10-bits and 4:4:4) will give a cleaner key than chroma recorded at reduced bandwidth, such as 4:2:2, or worse, 4:2:0.  Chroma recorded at 4:2:0 is 1/4 the total resolution of chroma recorded at 4:4:4.  This not only fattens up the key's edge, but averaging of four chroma samples creates mystery colors that never existed in the original image, further confusing the key.  The EOS 5D Mk III can be rooted and rebooted with Magic Lantern software to create truly great RAW video, but the stock camera's video uses 8-bit 4:2:0 Chroma subsampling.  It is possible to use HDMI out to record 8-bit 4:2:2, but you have to record audio separately in that case.
The thing to remember about green screen is that unless you have a major sound stage with 60' ceilings and 100'+ wide scrims, you will probably be doing all your work against a small background in a small room, which means very little flexibility in terms of both working distance and focal length.  Which also means that a fixed-lens camera like the DJI Osmo 3 will either qualify for that environment or be radically unqualified.  But the 5D Mk III is a very expensive camera not terribly well-suited for green screen work.  You can go much cheaper with a GH4 (which can record 10-bit 4:2:2 1080p internally).


text:
Unable to get T3i to shoot video in manual mode
I am sure I am missing something here. I have a host of cameras but bought a T3i recently. I am trying to get it to shoot video in Manual mode but as soon as I click the "Live View" button to start recording, it turns off live view and I get a blank, black screen.
Here is what I do from start to finish. Please tell me what I am missing:

I switch on my T3i by sliding the On/Off slider to the On position on the top of the camera.
I turn the dial on the top to M to go into manual mode.
I click the Live View button that's next to the LCD panel. It starts to show me whatever is in the front of the camera on the LCD screen.
Next, I want to start recording, so I hit the "Live View" button again, assuming that is how it will start recording. But at this point, the LCD screen shuts itself off.

If in step 4, instead of pressing the Live View button, I hold down the shutter, it clicks a picture instead of shooting video.
I'd just like to shoot video on this camera in Manual mode. What am I doing wrong?

Ok, I figured it out. It's a bit quirky little trick.
You do not turn the dial to M but turn it to the little picture that shows the video camera.
Now, though you'll be able to set the shutter speed and aperture, you won't be able to change the ISO.
To be able to change the ISO, click the Menu button to the top-left of the LCD screen, then from the menu, select Manual as the value for the Movie Exposure setting.
Now, you can change the ISO as well.
I figured it out by looking here and here.


text:
Is 8k UHD or even 4k UHD actually necessary?
Hello I'm new to StackExchange so I apologize if I'm asking this in the wrong place.
My question though, at what point does the resolution of a tablet, monitor, television etc. make no difference to the human eye? Will the standards ever stop or will companies keep on milking our wallets forever (silly question really)?

I work at a museum. Very high resolution screens offers great scope for large interactive displays that can contain more than just picture content. If you're displaying video on a wall that people are interacting with at close range, HD starts to look fairly shabby. Now if only we had the money to actually afford an 8K projector.

It all depends, of course, on what you are watching and where you are watching it. For instance, if you are showing something on a huge screen in a movie theater, you could definitely perceive a difference between 1080p and 4K. If you are looking at your phone, perhaps not as much. For standard computer monitor sizes, it's still fairly easy for many to see a difference at 4K, purely because we sit so damn close to our monitors.
Also keep in mind that there are scenarios in which you need to shoot in 4K in order to distribute in 2K or 1080p. You may need to zoom into one part of your shot and crop most of it out, which you can get away with if the footage you shot was a higher resolution than what you need to output at. This also applies to any footage that you may need to stabilize (i.e. windy drone footage) since stabilization requires cropping your frame. So in these situations, we not only need cameras to shoot in 4K+, but also monitors and devices that can play them back in their full resolutions.
While there are certainly diminishing returns on ever-increasing resolution on small consumer devices, there are people who absolutely perceive the differences between 4K and lower resolutions. Up to 8K and beyond, I'm not so sure, but for the moment, we have not actually crossed that threshold.

Thanks. Are there not artifacts produced when converting from 4k to 1080p, and if so do these artifacts become less noticeable when using higher resolutions... say 8k to 4k.

Actually @TomSmale in filmmaking it has been preferred for years to shoot at a higher resolution and then scale down. When done correctly (which isn't difficult), you should actually have far fewer issues with artifacts than if you had shot in the same resolution that you're delivering in. This is because camera sensors and glass lenses aren't flawless, and usually come with a few visual abnormalities of their own. When you have a ton of resolution to work with, you can correct those issues. We're also very good at scaling these days, so that process doesn't generally introduce new issues.

There's also the fact that 4K video shot at 8-bit with 4:2:0 colour becomes essentially 10-bit 4:2:2 when downsampled to 1080p, due to the way four pixels are averaged to make one pixel. So you get much better dynamic range and colour resolution, even on prosumer level cameras.

You can tell the difference between 4K and 1080 when watching it at 1080.  When I edit content, and have to mix media from say my RED Epic, shot at 4K or 5K, with 1080P from an A7S, when you watch the output, the 1080 content... looks blurry, because the 4K content is just really really sharp.

It depends on viewing distance / angle and pixel pitch, but it's a rare circumstance when 4K will actually be a benefit. In terms of user experience, contrast ratio and color fidelity are more important than resolution.
I don't know of any studies that deal with tablets, but for general viewing anything over 1080p is probably wasted unless you're right on top of the screen: perhaps counter-intuitively, more resolution is wasted unless you move closer to the screen, because the eye can't distinguish more than about 60 pixels per horizontal degree of arc in the central fovea, less outside it.
Take a look at this blog post for more information.

Interesting link. It seems like the most that you would ever reasonably need for consumer electronics is 4k, or maybe 8k.

My experience in viewing a lot of 4k and some 8k, is that 4k will be the threshold... thank god.
This upgrade pattern over the last 10 years has been crazy. We went from SD which was the standard for eons, to 720 to 1080 to 4 in like under a decade.
Theaters, use 4K. So if 4K projected on a screen 24 feet high is high enough quality, it's certainly going to appear sharp as hell on a 72" home screen.
I viewed a 4K and 8K side by side, I did not see any perceivable difference, in terms of sharpness, from a few feet away.


text:
Align multiple videos with the same static background
I've got 20 videos with the same static background. Unfortunately during filming the camera was nudged so the background doesn't line up exactly across all the videos. Is there a way I can automatically crop, rotate and move the videos so the videos lineup precisely?

Try this: load all clips on a timeline one after the other without gaps. Next this sequence in another sequence and apply the Warp Stabilizer to the nested sequence. Although if the camera is fixed in each shot, I would just keep a reference clip on V0, and then overlay all of the other clips one-by-one with some lower opacity and manually adjust.

To easily see the alignment between two layers put them above one another and use difference transfer mode. Where they are the same it will be black. Nudge the layer you want to align by using the arrow keys, tweak rotation with the + and - keys on the numeric keyboard and adjust the scale with cmd/ctrl and the + and - numeric keyboard keys until it goes as black as you can get it. This won't work perfectly if there are perspective shifts of course, but it's a quick way to get as close as you can.

20 videos is not very many videos, and if the nudge happened between takes rather than during takes, the best approach is to align them manually, either by using the difference mode of a compositor or setting the opacity of each video to 50% and nudging them until all the backgrounds line up.
If you had 20,000 videos, I would suggest starting with Hugin, a tool for processing HDR and panoramic photos.  The HDR problem concerns aligning multiple images so that a tone-mapping can be applied.  The alignment heuristics for HDR would also align your videos (especially if you only compute the alignment parameters for the portion of your videos that are reliably background).  You could play around with parsing the output of the Hugin control point finder.

This isn't specifically Premiere-oriented, but I would concatenate all of the videos into one and use the MELT framework with video stabilization. You might need to play around with the parameters a bit, so I would suggest cutting a 1min section with the nudge in the middle in order to fine tune your settings before running it over the entire video.


text:
How to help warp stabilizer focusing on the right object?
I'm making a time lapse video. Due to the specific circumstances, the camera is shaking a little when taking the time lapse photos, which is slightly noticeable in the video. In order to remove the shake, I'm using warp stabilizer effect in Adobe Premiere Pro, which works very well.
In one scene, the primary object—a flower—is shaking under the effect of the wind: this movement is expected. What should be still, on the other hand, is the background: a field and some trees which are far enough from the camera for the wind effects to be noticeable.
However, warp stabilizer imagines that it's the object which should be stabilized, meaning that once the effect is applied, it's the background which is now moving relative to the object.

That creates a very weird, crazy looking scene, but aside its artistic value, I want warp stabilizer to focus on getting the background still, while letting the foreground object move because of the wind.
How do I tell warp stabilizer what zone should not move in the final video?

If warp stabilizer effect doesn't have this feature, how can I help the effect to get it right if I have to shoot the time lapse again? For instance, would it help to include a ruler in the photos as a reference of a stable object (the ruler then being cropped after applying warp stabilizer effect)?

You'll need to do this in After Effects, using the Tracking feature, where you add tracking points to specific points and then it crops in a bit and does the same magic.
The issue with your footage is going to be the fact that your background is outside of the hyperfocal, by far. So I can't see even AE being able to track that.
To solve, for your next shoot, put a stick in the ground, with a dot, like a piece of bright spike tape.
Then mat it out in post.
But Premiere won't do this well, and because your shot requires the background to be stabilized, which is a total blur, it's going to be tough, if not impossible.

I use long workaround in Premiere and it works for all sorts of stabilizers not only for warp (I use 3rd party).
What I do is masking out unwanted object. But you cannot do that on same clip, since Premiere will serve naked frame to the stabilizer tool. So what I do is put some effect on clip that masks moving parts. It can be title, power window, crop, or draw a mask in newer Premieres. Whatever suits you and track with a shot.
Then you make Nested sequence out of this clip and put stabilizer on that. It will be served with image that is masked out. Not track clip. When done, just go back to original clip inside Nested and tick masking effect off (disable png, or whatever). It will be clean image again and properly done. If You need to change something and re-process it, just enable the underlying effect again.
It is dirty and fiddly but that is how I did it well before Warp was added to premiere with other tools. I would like that would be implemented in the tool itself. Free tools on internet all have masking, but premiums do not bother to serve us better.


text:
Why can't modern video cameras be used for live streaming without a capture card?
I'm just curious what the physical limitation is now-a-days that connectors like USB-C and thunderbolt exist. In the past I thought the issue was that the encodings that video cameras put out (probably mostly some variant of h.264 or h.265) required more throughput than USB could offer but now that doesn't really seem to be the case. What's the issue?

You mean stream from camera directly to internet without a laptop or whatever?  My guess is lack of demand.  Average joe types will just use a cell phone.  Professionals will either connect to a dedicated box via hdmi/sdi or use something like this:  https://livestream.com/broadcaster . But I'll admit, I'm not really up to date with what's available in the prosumer arena lately.

@JasonConrad No, I mean take an arbitrary video camera, plug it in via USB-C or thunderbolt to a PC and use it like a webcam.

It's theoretically possible, so there is no longer a physical limitation owing to bandwidth as you mentioned. However, it is costly and time consuming for the camera manufacturer.
It would require them to choose from one of a few options for delivering video live and on-demand which would impact quality, cost and user experience. One method is to use the standard USB camera device protocols that webcams typically use. A very different technique would be to encode H264 into an Internet based streaming protocol and send that through USB. Yet another is to use WiFi with a proprietary app which some cameras use. Each have their advantages and disadvantages.
There are products that span all of these options and others that have HDMI or SDI outputs. It seems like output method is more of a question of use case and product specialization than it is a physical limitation anymore.

The image out of the camera is already being encoded to h.264. I'm curious why that can't be shipped over some protocol to a PC. Maybe it simply requires more hardware which would make cameras more expensive, and larger like you suggest.

Yeah definitely possible since it's already H264, there is simply the additional components hardware cost and then support and testing of those components. There is an interesting effort underway to standardize video delivery over IP so someday this could be as simple as plug-n-play just using an ethernet cable for everything: http://www.newtek.com/ndi.html

I am not 100% sure but I think that there is a need for a minimal system managing the Internet Protocol in order to enable streaming. So it means there would be a need for a CPU, an OS, and a interface to setup all the related settings to the camera too.
I think the computing power needed for video compression would be possible thanks to a recent processor like the one embedded in smartphone. And of course the rate is no longer a problem for new connections. USB-C would even be able to stream raw video 4K 60fps = 12Gbps. Which is fine for be DisplayPort 1.2a available on USB-C


text:
Convert high frame video to slow motion video
I recorded a "slow-motion" video with my Android phone and transferred it to my Windows computer. Now I have an MP4 file with a frame-rate of 240 fps. But when I play the video, it plays at normal speed.  I want to create a video that I can upload to YouTube or Facebook that plays at 1/8 speed (30 fps).
I thought I could do that with the free Movie Maker that comes with Windows. But when I select 1/8 speed it comes out chunky. It looks like the software converted the video to 30 fps when it loaded, and is now playing back that 30 fps video at 1/8 speed.  I'm guessing that Movie Maker can't do what I want.
How do I create a video so that when someone plays that video they see it in slow-motion?

If your Movie Maker software converted the 240fps video to 30fps when it loads it into a project, then you have exactly what you want.  You then only need render it out at 30 fps and you have a slow-motion video.  Of course the ffmpeg answer is also valid, but you may wish to make other adjustments, some of which are easy to do with ffmpeg (cropping, scaling, etc), others which benefit from having an interactive GUI (color correcting, etc).

Sorry, Michael, I wasn't clear.  When I say Movie Maker converted the video to 30 fps, I mean that it threw away the other 210 frames, resulting in a real-time 30 fps video.

You can use ffmpeg, a free command-line tool, to do this:
ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -vf setpts=8*PTS -r 30 -crf 18 output.mp4

This slows down the video 8 times and output is 30 FPS.

I am using a gopro 5 video that in file properties indicates:
duration 3 minutes
framerate 120 fps

I run the command
'ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -vf setpts=4*PTS -r 30 -crf 18 output.mp4'

and the new file properties indicates:
duration 12 minutes
framerate 30 fps

The problem was that I imported the new video in a Kdenlive new proyect, and skiping frame by frame with the arrow I see 3 continuous identical frame then change the image that repeats again and change every 3 or 4 frames.

Upload the readout of ffprobe goprofile to pastebin or similar and share a link.


text:
Is there a rule of thumb for transitions in video production?
I'm a software engineer but as the junior member on the team I was tasked with making a looping demo for our product that will be played continuously at an upcoming convention.  The video is not only an advertisement for our software but also for some of the hardware platforms that it runs on, so I have to introduce a number of products and logos.
After a month of working on this I've trimmed and snipped down to a tight 4 minutes, but some transitions between clips and stills just feel off to me.  I've tried a one-size-fits-all-but-not-really with "Cross Dissolve".  I've also tried a spectrum of slides, wipes and dissolves but it feels like someone's PowerPoint presentation from the late 90's (minus the stock sound effects).  Does this community have any guidelines that they follow when creating transitions in their own projects?

I don't want to add an answer but - being a self-taught video editor over the last few years - I've found cuts and dissolves/fades are the only ones that don't draw attention to themselves, otherwise it just looks like one of those documents when some discovered they had access to 100 fonts for the first time. Sometimes I do want a transition to draw attention to itself, when the transition itself is content. But I find the hardest work is actually leading to the transitions so that they feel a natural progression and are not noticeable.

What's a movie do, and you never notice? Simple cuts,  fades, and crosses. Everything else is show.

A while back I ran some introductory video editing workshops. I used to tell the participants about a particularly cool effect that I once found in Pinnacle; it was a pinhata that came swinging into the first video along with a stick that hit the second video out of it and it unfolded across the screen.
The point of this anecdote is the following: Don't use transition presets. Like, at all. Sure it looks cool in the preview reel, but all those fancy swipes, wipes, slides et c. are just distracting and ugly. Of course it depends on what kind of video you're making, but I would always try if it works with no transitions at all first (i.e. hardcuts). If it doesn't, maybe try a simple, short cross dissolve (like, 0.5 seconds max) or maybe a dip to black. But keep your hands off all the other transition presets.
My rules of thumb are the following:

Don't use transitions.
If you have to use transitions, use as little as possible and be consistent.

The second point is particularly important, even if you're a fan of transitions. Be consistent with (a) what type of transition you use and (b) when you use them. For example, if you use a transition to visually seperate two scenes for the first half of your movie and then suddenly start using a transition for every cut in a scene, it's confusing and distracting. And if you drop different transitions every time, it looks like a crappy Youtube AMV made by a 12 year old.
For example, watch Star Wars (the prequels). They use those swipes and slides with soft borders all over the place. I don't really like those, but at least they're consistent with it.

but some transitions between clips and stills just feel off to me

This may be opinionated, but in my experience a transition looks weird as soon as you notice it. The best possible transition is the one you don't notice, because a transition is a tool to better tell your story, not a story element itself. And the easiest way to have a transition that you don't notice is to not use one at all.

Halving from the default 1 second of transition to .5 was very satisfying, and also got rid of some weird artifacting with "cross dissolve", so I was able to swap out most "film" dissolves for better consistency.  I tried making it all hard cuts, but that just made it more obvious that the source material I'm working with comes in 3 different resolutions with 4 different backgrounds. Thank you.

The least noticeable transition is a cut. Any transition, even a dissolve takes some time and draws attention to itself to some extent. That means a transition (and here I'm using transition to mean anything else but a hard cut) becomes part of the story that you're telling.
For example a dissolve would seem at first glimpse to be a way of merging two shots, but it actually has the effect of separating them, implying that the second shot is occurring later or at a different location; it's a bit like the box in the corner of a comic frame saying "meanwhile…" or "later…". Other transitions draw even more attention to themselves and become part of the look and content of the film. Don't use them just because they look cool, they have to be motivated by the story you're trying to tell if they're not going to look like they've been hot-glued on.
The problem is that cuts can also be noticeable. Any cut from one shot to a similar shot, e.g. two similarly framed shots of an interview subject, will jump - it's called a jump cut. Counter intuitively the way to make a cut less apparent is to make the two shots it separates different from each other. So if you want to cut two shots of the same subject together you go from a close to a wide or vice versa. Another way to motivate a cut is with movement. Matching movement within the frame will often sell a cut that wouldn't work with static content. Entrances and exits to the frame likewise will motivate a cut.
There has been a lot of study done about this; basically what I'm describing is the craft of editing - as opposed to knowing how to use editing software which lots of people mistake for being the same thing. Edward Dmytric's On Film Editing is a good read, as are Walter Murch's books particularly In the Blink of An Eye

Use cuts for most all transitions. Some exceptions...
Use transitions which convey a meaning:

A clockwise wipe indicates the passage of time.
Dreamy blur (with harp music) for a daydream sequence.
Cross dissolve for gentle moments/sensitive topics.

One absolute exception: When doing a kids video (made for kids), add plenty of silly transitions. The more obnoxious the better. Dinosaur transition, use it. Shark transition, use it. Volcano transition, use it. They'll love it.

I will try to categorize some different transitions, and comment on them. Of course, this is not carved in stone.
Cut
Yes, a cut is a transition. It sounds simple, but it has many flavors. The most simple is the direct cut, where you simply put one clip after another.
One of those flavors is the J-Cut, where you do not change the clip at the exact same time as the audio. For example a dialog between two persons, as a viewer you could turn your head to the other interlocutor after you hear he is now talking, so the audio changes before the visuals.
It is the cut that gives more continuity to a sequence, so much that actually you can use it to disrupt it, for example, you change from a battle scene to a calm paradise, this can surprise the audience trying to figure out what happened because they were teletransported without any warning. This is a smash cut.
But a cut can be back and forward between to shots, like in a dialog, this is a cross cut, or it can be to speed up a single shot, like a jump cut.
As you can see it has many variations.
The speed and rhythm could be different aspects of a cut. but you need to leave time for the images to be understood, the simpler the image the faster you can switch, the more elements it has, more time on screen it needs. Some music videos have so much frenetic rhythm that are unwatchable.
Cross dissolve
This normally implies some calm situation, it can add an "elegant" element.
They can be used between clips or between two bigger sequences. It can either link them or distance them depending on the context, but normally it links them despite an intrinsic element of distance, for example, one person thinking about some other across the world.
But it also can show the passing of time.
The duration of the transition itself is another narrative element.
Fade to - fade from
Black or white.
A fade to black is one of the transitions that distance two senes the most, it gives a sensation of closure, for example when some years have passed and the prior situation wants to be forgotten.
A fade to white can have a similar effect, but gives a small relief, implies some hopeful feeling. It can imply some "metaphysical" element, passing by, new beginnings.
It can be used between two scenes or as a final element of a video.
It also has some variations depending on the "blending mode" applied. If a transition has a blending mode that increases the luminosity of the video can be used as an intro to a flashback or something like that. But this variation could look "cheap" as a low budget tv show.
This three are the most often used by far.

Overlay
One element appearing above the two clips as a middle transition element. One example is a "film burn", where this foreign element appears and disappears during the transition. Normally it implies a different blend mode different than just a dissolve.
A film burn is can be used of course to give some nostalgic feeling, but you can be creative.
Seamles
Normally this combined with a camera movement, for example, a camera travels from left to right and a tree is very close to the camera, and now another scene is revealed behind a light pole with the same camera movement. (It is a creative way to use a wipe)
You can approach to a black object, and start the next scene walking away from another black object.
Wipe
It makes an element appear from one side overriding the image underneath. If it is used between clips, it can give a "comics" style. It can imply that the two scenes are occurring in different locations at the exact same time, for example, a telephone call.
But it can also be used to add an element over the existing scene, for example, some text over a video, or an enhanced version of a video over the original.
The edge could be sharp or can have some gradual blending.
Blur
Changing focus, or adding some kind of a gaussian blur.
An obvious usage is a person losing conscience but can be a cheap... or economic way to switch between scenes. It was used when direct cut was the only available tool, turning off a recording and on again. I doubt is used a lot these days.

They need to be combined with other resources
For example with camera movements, lighting conditions, and above all... the story.

But you also can use whatever you have!
Yes, you can throw a "fancy" transition on a kids video, with balloons, stars, and flipping pages. Just keep in mind that this can have a very short-lived style. But probably this is what you need, giving a video a 90's look could be what you need.
Compositing
Keep in mind that "Video editing" and "Video compositing" are two different but related crafts. Some motion graphics or visual effects elements can be considered transitions.
A video being torn by pieces, color bars floating around, geometric shapes, particles appearing, maskings, overlays, 3D movements, glitches... Just remember to have the elements with a context in mind. It is different to make a music video for a Techno music group than a documentary.


text:
Head/Vision Tracking
At the 1:20 mark of this video, the author incorporates a line of sight marker to track the players line of vision. Any suggestions on how he did this? What software he might have used, etc?
I want to try and reproduce in some of my own videos.

Thank you.

Ask Howard Chang, the guy who's video it is. I'm sure he'd tell you.

Thanks, already tried. No reply. Hard to get messages through on youTube.

I finally heard back from the Author:

"I use Adobe After Effects for the graphics in all my videos.  The head tracker is basically a solid line with transparency set to about 50%.  The rotation point on the line is moved to one end of the line, and then you place it on the player's head and set it to follow a null point.  In some of the cases, I had to animate the line manually.  It does take a bit of time, but it definitely highlights the point.  Let me know if you need any other help.  Good luck!"

It doesn't really look like it is actually being tracked.  It looks like a manual overlay of a line on to it based on the head movement.  It really doesn't look particularly accurate either from what I can tell.  Something like Adobe After Effects (paid) or Black Magic's Fusion (free) can easily be used to accomplish this, though they do both have a learning curve.


text:
ffmpeg: is it possible to have a text slideshow with a static image in background?
I am trying to create a simple video with ffmpeg with a single static image in background and a few text lines that change every 10 seconds like a slideshow. However I am not able to do that using ffmpeg options. Is it actually possible?

Use ASS or SRT subtitles. You can make them with Aegisub or manually in a text editor. Then use the subtitles filter:
ffmpeg -loop 1 -i image.foo -vf subtitles=your_subtitles_file.ass -t 60 output

You did not mention your desired output format so I made a very generic example.


text:
Swapping video sides of side-by-side clip with ffmpeg
At the moment i am using handbreak to encode gaming clips made with Fraps while using 3D Vision by Nvidia. It is the only recording app to produce 3840x1080 Full SBS when recording using 3d Display with 1080p.
Sadly the right side is displayed left, and youtube won't allow swapping sides in the settings, only in flash version of youtube the toggle exists.
Using ffmpeg to encode my clips, is it possible to use a command of crop and stack to produce the output?
Option desired are: h.254, PAR width:height=1:2, constant quality: rf=17, framerate same as source

There may be an easy, quick way out, which is to remux to Matroska and set metadata to indicate that the right view is on the left.
ffmpeg -i in.mp4 -c copy -stereo_mode right_left out.mkv

Upload to Youtube and check.

Else, FFmpeg has a filter to handle this directly.
ffmpeg -i in.mp4 -vf stereo3d=sbsr:sbsl -crf 17 -c:a copy out.mp4

The filter interprets the input as side-by-side with right eye view on left side (sbsr) and swaps the halves.

I will try both, concerning aspect ratio, in handbreak I set PAR 2:1 so that the video is squished to display correctly in youtube, how can I set it in FFmpeg? is it setdar=16:9?

So to swap sides and slow down the movie from 45 fps to 30 fps this would be it:
ffmpeg -i 02.m4v -r 30 -filter:v "setpts=1.5*PTS,stereo3d=sbsr:sbsl,setsar=1:2" -filter:a "atempo=0.6667" -crf 19 -q:a 330 out2.mp4


text:
Using ffmpeg, how do I trim and overlay two different time periods from the same input?
I have one input file, and I want to extract the first minute and the second minute, and then recombine them so the first minute is on the top, and the second minute is on the bottom, playing simultaneously.
I cobbled this together, but for some reason, the upper clip freezes after a few seconds, while the bottom clip continues as expected. The input file has the resolution 640x352.
ffmpeg -i input.avi -filter_complex "
    nullsrc=size=640x704:duration=60 [base];
    [0:v] trim=0:60, setpts=PTS-STARTPTS [v0];
    [0:v] trim=60:120, setpts=PTS-STARTPTS [v1];
    [base][v0] overlay=x=0:y=0 [t1];
    [t1][v1] overlay=x=0:y=352 [out]" \
-map "[out]" output.mkv

I suspect this is a problem internally in ffmpeg, and I have to first extract the two clips into separate input files.

The parallel processing is happening slow enough that FFmpeg is flushing frames in buffer for the first trimmed clip. You can use the fifo filter to avoid that. Also, you can use vstack and skip the nullsrc/overlay route.
ffmpeg -i input.avi -filter_complex "
    [0:v] trim=0:60, setpts=PTS-STARTPTS, fifo [v0];
    [0:v] trim=60:120, setpts=PTS-STARTPTS [v1];
    [v0][v1] vstack [out]" \
-map "[out]" output.mkv


text:
Tips to start making a little production
So I have to make a little commercial for a class at my college and it is a video of about 1 min. I already have the idea of how all is going to be but I'm worried that at the moment of the edition the quality of the takes sucks. There's no big equipment, just an i5 computer, a GoPro Hero 4 and a couple of phones that record at 4K. No lightning, or anything... I would like to get some tips to make it look as professional as it could be and no too amateur. It's just video, no voice or dialogs. I'm also using a couple of luxury cars, I want to take good takes of them since I want to record 'em at night and I think lightning there is going to be a problem. Any tips?

This question is a little too broad. Try being much more specific. The gear you have is fine. It is what you do with the gear that takes talent.

Story
Your film needs drama. That is normally created by conflict or tension. Keep the story simple. It is better for your first film to be too simple than too ambitious.
But it must have drama.
Shot list or story boards
Work out what your film will look like before you shoot. You don't need to storyboard, but you need to know what shots you want before you try to get them.
The "movie magic" happens when you don't get the shot you expected but work out what to do with the shot you got. So don't do 20 takes of the car turning a corner to get it "just right". Get it "good enough" and move on.
For a commercial style film you want a cut every 1 to 4 seconds. So you'll need between 15 and 60 shots. Do not make exactly 15x 4 second shots. Vary the length of shots.
Resolution
Don't shoot at 4K on the phones, you don't need the file sizes and post production hassles. Shoot 1080 or 2K at the most.
Lighting
You will need some lights if you are shooting at night. Even if it's just to balance the streetlights, headlights or fill a face.
As a minimum you can use an app on 2 or 3 phones to generate light (different colours may be good). These are good for filming the occupants of the luxury cars. It looks really fake but everyone is used to lights in the front seat so you can see the drivers face look
Also consider getting some small battery powered LED lights from a discount store. These are cheap and can help throw some light on a dark shot.
I've used an LED bat light effectively. The wings can be angled, it has a magnet on the spine to stick to a car or metal stand and has a hook to hang it from a wire.
So you've got streetlights, headlights, phone lights and apps and LED's. That should be a start.

for Story. Having a story is so important!

The minute you said "no lighting" you violate the premise of "look as professional as it could be and not too amateur".  Lighting is not only about ensuring there are enough photons to actually record decent image on the camera's sensor.  Lighting defines highlights and shadows, contrast ranges, areas of focus and mystery, etc.  It is almost impossible to overstate how important lighting is to the look of an image.  The understanding of lighting, and use of that understanding in the control of lighting, is perhaps the single greatest factor that separates professionals from amateurs and professional-looking results from amateur-looking results.

I see.. Maybe a way to use really basic lighting or something like that? Maybe from lamps or something

Practicals (lights that are visible to the camera, such as a reading lamp or a dining room chandelier) have their place, but lighting instruments (PARs, China Balls, Fresnels, etc) function like very different paint brushes, each of which gives a character to the light you cast.  A simple work light from Lowes is a bit like painting by just opening up a can of paint and throwing it on the subject.  There are cases where that's ok, but more often than not, you need specific lights with specific lighting modifiers to achieve a professional look.


text:
How can I convert a 3D SBS video to individual left side video and right side video?
Let’s suppose I have a 3D SBS video and I want to convert it such that I get two video files, one for left side video and one for the right. How can I do it? Is it possible to do so programmatically?

You can use FFmpeg, a free commandline tool to do this.
ffmpeg -i sbs.mkv -filter_complex "split[l][r];[l]stereo3d=sbsl:ml[left];[r]stereo3d=sbsl:mr[right]" -map [left] -map 0:a -c:a copy left.mkv -map [right] -map 0:a -c:a copy right.mkv

how do l till it where the fill is

I don't have enough reputation to make a comment on the selected answer, but if you're using a version of ffmpeg with GPU support, you can use the GPU to render the output way faster. This is what I used. I don't know if all the settings are appropriate, especially the bitrate (I used a 45M bitrate in the input video and wasn't sure if halving that is appropriate for the outputs, so I didn't halve it). This took me a while to figure out, so I wanted to leave this here for others.
ffmpeg -i sbs.mkv -filter_complex "split[l][r];[l]stereo3d=sbsl:ml[left];[r]stereo3d=sbsl:mr[right]" -map [left] -map 0:a -c:a copy -c:v h264_nvenc -b:v 45M left.mkv -map "[right]" -map 0:a -c:a copy -c:v h264_nvenc -b:v 45M right.mkv

If you're using hsbs (half resolution side-by-side) like I am, you may also want to change sbsl to sbs2l so the video outputs are at "unsquished" aspect ratios.
ffmpeg -i sbs.mkv -filter_complex "split[l][r];[l]stereo3d=sbs2l:ml[left];[r]stereo3d=sbs2l:mr[right]" -map [left] -map 0:a -c:a copy -c:v h264_nvenc -b:v 45M left.mkv -map "[right]" -map 0:a -c:a copy -c:v h264_nvenc -b:v 45M right.mkv


text:
AE - is there a way to import images via list and add random position to them?
I use After Effects CS6,
I need to add a lot of pictures inside my comp,
they need to have random position
(if I could set the "range of the randomness" that would be great)
is there any way to do that ?
and I'm not looking at a wall image plugin (with these plugins, all pic are in the same plane, but I need randomness on the Z-axis too)
I'm trying to make something similar to the TV Show Person of Interest: how the AI has multiple image when "we" are inside "his mind". link to img
I have already done a big part of it manually, but it just takes too long to do it with new packs of images.
Thanks.

Dump all your images into your timeline. Select one and alt-click the stopwatch on the position property, to add an expression. You need to write a javascript expression that returns an array of 3 numbers that will randomly position the image within the comp. This will do it:
seedRandom(index, timeless = true);
var x = random(thisComp.width);
var y = random(thisComp.height);
var z = random(thisComp.width);
[x, y, z]

IF you right-click the position property and choose copy expression only, you can then paste it to all the other images in your comp and they will scatter to randomly fill a cube the size of your comp (and as deep on the z axis as the width of your comp).
How it works
(read this if you want to be able to hack it to your own needs)
The seedrandom function sets the random seed for the random number generator, and we give it two parameters, index meaning the layer number, and timeless=true. By using the layers' index to generate the random number, each layer will have a different set of coordinates. Timeless=true means that the random number doesn't change over time.
var x = Math.random(thisComp.width) sets the variable x to have a random value somewhere between 0 and the width of the comp. If you wanted this to be a different value you could type in a number instead of thisComp.width. All three variables are set the same way.
The last line puts them into an array, which is what the position property needs.
To refine it you might want to use the guassRandom function instead of random - that will mean the images will cluster towards the centre, like a galaxy. You could also create a null and add three slider effects to it (in effects>expression controls). You could use them to control the width, height and depth of the cloud. To do that select the bit inside the random function that says thisComp.width, delete it and with the cursor inside the brackets grab the pick-whip (the little spiral near the expression twirl down) and drag it to the slider effect control.

The result should be that the line will now look like:
var x = gaussRandom(thisComp.layer("Null 1").effect("Slider Control")("Slider"));

Do that for all three dimensions using a different slider for each and once again copy the expression to all the layers. Now you can control how far they spread with the sliders, and even animate it, by animating your sliders, so for example they could all spread out from the centre over time.

Thanks a LOT. This is perfect, I can do what I want with that (plus some tweak, but this is great already). I'll start learning Js asap.


text:
Is there a 4K action camera solution that does NOT have perspective distortion?
I was looking at alternatives to the GoPro (such as the Sony FDR-X1000V), but they all seem to only shoot wide-angle with significant perspective distortion (fisheye). Are there action cameras which do not introduce this sort of distortion?

I think the reason is that with a wider lens camera shake is much less perceptible and annoying. Given what action cams are used for this makes a lot of sense. With a longer lens you'd need some sort of stabiliser to make the footage watchable if you've got it strapped on to your helmet while you're white water rafting or mountain biking.

@stib well gimbals exist already, they do a good enough job

Yes, but they're a whole 'nother level of complication and cost compared to a cheap plastic lens. I wouldn't put my gimbal on my mountain bike (not the way I ride) it would be a tangled mess of carbon fibre and wire in no time.

@stib gimbals are a proven tech in drones. I don't think they cost that much. their problem is they seem to get confused by bike tilts, that's a problem.

There are two major advantages to recording fisheye distortion rather than rectilinear distortion.  First, it is optically easier to do, which means one can make lenses that are better in other metrics (such as chromatic aberration, resolution, vignetting, etc) while remaining small enough and light enough to fit into the body of an action camera.  Second, the relative size of an object doesn't change radically as its moves from center to edge when the camera is not under tight control.  For that reason, it is possible to define a crop area that follows the subject as it bounces around the full frame and then use motion tracking to create a relatively stable view of the object, which can then be de-fished.  If it were rectilinear, the stabilization process might have to do some major zoom and tilt corrections as well, which would be very distracting.

This doesn't answer the initial question... Are there any such cameras available?

Given that the OP gave me a "this answers my question" green check-mark, I take it that my restatement-and-answer was more valuable than a simple "no" or a "yes" will the many caveats explained in other answers/comments.

Yi Technologies action cameras have lens distortion correction as a built-in feature. The lens does introduce distortion but the onboard processor compensates for it.
I assume we'll see more of this type of compensation embedded in cameras in the future.

It is embedded in my Garmin Virb Ultra 30, but not in 4K mode.

Embedded correction is much much worse than normal lens... You can not fully remove all distortions, sadly.

There are some of them:
1) Hawkeye Firefly 8S/8SE
As from the official web site:

The camera comes with two lens option 170 and 90 degrees lens:

170 degrees wide angle lens for action sports and
90 degree with linear lens for trips with your family.

I think the last variant should do the job.


text:
Better LUT directions for Canon dSLR?
A year ago I came across a web page describing how to set up a better “pro use” LUT on the camera, that would get better shadow detail recorded.  This was a LUT used in more professional situations and is (as I recall) known to Adobe Premiere already.  I understand that this will make watching the as-saved camera files look bad, and it needs the corresponding LUT selected in Premiere.
I can't find that again now.  Can someone point me to what I need?  The web page featured video stills of chickens. I have a Canon 70D camera.

I think this must have been “Cinestyle” by Technicolor, whose home is this page at the Technicolor web site.  The chicken instructions was probably this video

The CineStyle LUT JDlugosz mentioned is one. Another popular one is the ProLost Flat Picture Style. This one just involves adjusting the camera settings. I don't know if Premiere Pro supports it directly (it's mainly just a contrast adjustment), but I do know that Stu Maschwitz (who's blog is linked above) has worked with Adobe in the past, so it wouldn't surprise me if it did.


text:
Video production basics for a noob
I am an iOS developer who wants to create a mobile app for video editing. But I do not know the basic terminology and functionality of video editing and production. Terms like video scrubbing, video ramping etc. leaves me clueless.
Please if anyone could suggest me some resources from where I can start my research about the video editing tools, features, requirements and basic terminology.
Thank you.

I'd suggest teaming up with an editor. Nothing sucks worse than software made by developers who don't understand user's needs.

I recommend you do a few things.

Take an online course in video editing. You can either sign up for one at something like linda.com, or even just go to YouTube and search for video editing. There are thousands of tutorials which can point you in the right direction.
If the above isn't reasonable, take a class at your local community college. Many offer classes in video editing and motion graphics.
Read some books. I can personally recommend In the Blink of an Eye by Walter Murch and The Technique of Film and Video Editing: History, Theory, and Practice by Ken Dancyger. Peachpit Press also has lots of books on a number of applications.
Go to a local video editing user's group and ask basic questions. If you're in a major city in the US, you might try the local Final Cut Pro User Group meetings (SF Cutters, LAFCPUG, CHIFCPUG, BOSFCPUG, etc.) or Adobe Premiere or Avid User Group meetings.
Sit down with a local editor (there are probably editors near you who do commercials, if not TV, film, and music videos). If you can befriend an editor or other video artist, they are a good source of ideas for software to write!

I've been writing such software professionally for over 15 years, and that's how I got into it.


text:
Does 60 fps make sense for YouTube?
YouTube says one should upload videos in the frame rate in which the video has been recorded. But if I have yet to record, what frame rate should I choose?
I noted that videos downloaded from YouTube have mostly 30 fps but some have 24 fps. I haven't seen any frame rather other than these 2 in videos downloaded from YouTube yet.
Will YouTube show 60 fps videos to the user with 60 fps (if it's possible)?
There of course are the downsides:

Raw material is bigger.
Rendering takes longer.
Rendered file is bigger.
Upload takes longer. (My internet connection is very slow.)

So I want to know whether it even changes something in advance.

Google has supported 60fps video since 2014.  YouTube has a page that talks about video formats, codecs, framerates, etc., here.  It is up to the Browser and YouTube to negotiate what format, frame rate, etc., should be served for optimal playback.
If you only care about YouTube as a video display platform, and not at all about any other platform, then you have the freedom to choose any of its preferred formats, depending on what sort of upload traffic you can afford.  If you want to be able to play something on your local computers, TV monitors, etc., then you should pick the format most preferred by your most-preferred platform, and let everything else try to adapt to that.

If you want "live" look and less stutter, then use 60p. If you want film-like motion then use 30p. Use 24p if you want to filmout (no one this nowadays) or you want to make a DVD (DVD support for progressive content is best in 24p mode, and it kinda spotty for 30p). Blu-ray can be made 24p, 30p or 60p, so see the first two points.


text:
I'm totally new to AE. What are some things typically done to clean up video and make it look nice?
I shot some wedding footage for a friend when her video guy was unable to make it at the last minute. I use LR and PS all the time but I have no experience with video at all beyond some basic time lapse stuff. I have AE and PP but know next to nothing about the latter and not much more about the former. What kinds of things are typically done to a video to make it look nice? I shot the ceremony on a handy cam on a tripod while I roamed hand-holding a 7D. I shot the reception with the 7D on a tripod; collapsed, monopod style.
Thanks!

No love? I'm a sad panda. :(

Common postproduction work:

Color Correction
Reframing (crop out unwanted stuff from images, especially viable if shot in a higher resolution then distribution format)
Stabilization
Speed Changes and Speed Ramps

Personally i doubt that you need to use After Effects for this though, as all of that can also be done in Premiere. If you want to learn After Effects in the process, i'd look into making some nice typography animations which you later import into the final video. There are tons of tutorials on that on the interwebs and / or you can download some After Effects templates to get you started.


text:
Is it possible to capture video signal waveform as audio for video replay?
I am an electronic musician. For artistic purposes, I want to be able to record a video signal to a .wav file and replay that signal into a TV as video. It seems like it should be simple--if I reproduce the signal, it should turn out the same. Right?
I have an HDMI to RCA converter which works fine with my tv when used as expected in both NTSC and PAL mode. I take the yellow video cable from that and plug it into my audio interface with an RCA-1/4" adapter and record the signal as audio. When I replay the signal into my TV, it comes out like it's been subjected to Photoshop's motion blur horizontally at maximum, and in black and white. It's completely unrecognizable, looking only slightly better than static. If I use a recording from a black screen, I still get white in there.
If I turn on monitor mode, bypassing, although apparently not completely, the audio interface and just route the signal through, it is still black and white, and while still totally unrecognizable, I notice localized changes if I move my mouse around.
If I just touch the two cables together it works fine.
So I'm wondering, is this a sample rate problem? If so, what sample rate would be necessary? Or is it something else?
Using Komplete Audio 6 interface
Sample Rates    44.1, 48, 88.2, 96 kHz
Bit Resolution  16, 24 Bit

The short answer to your question is "no".  The sample rate of video is typically measured in MHz or GHz.  If you have a 1080p24 signal at 8 bits per pixel, the actual frame is 2750 x 1125 pixels (according to digital test equipment manufacturer Kramer).  Multiplied by a 24 fps refresh rate, this results in 74,250,000 pixels / second.  Multiplied by 10 bits per clock tick per pixel, this is a bandwidth of 0.74 Gbps.  As a "sample rate", that is approximately 1000x higher than 16-bit at 48K.  Hence the answer "no".


text:
Which is better for tracking?
I have access to a camera that is capable of both 1080p60fps and 4k30fps. Which would be easier to track details? The shot I'm using isn't shaky or anything.

1080p60 will give better temporal resolution, which is key for tracking details that move within the scene.  If the scene is ridiculously simple, such as if the only object moving at all is a Mac screen on a swivel, and if you can control the speed of the swivel however you like, then framerate is no longer the sole determinant of temporal resolution.  You can achieve the same temporal resolution shooting a half-speed move at 30fps as you can a full-speed move at 60fps.  In that case, shooting at 4K will give you greater spatial resolution than 1080p.
In the normal case, temporal, not spatial, resolution is the big bug-a-boo for object tracking.

My scene is the camera itself is still, on a tripod. I have a mac in front of the camera with a bunch of tracking dots on it. In the video, I swivel the mac around slightly, and slowly (to where there is virtually no jittering at 30fps) The effect I'm going for is tracking either blender then making it seem as if shattered glass is floating in front of the monitor. This means that I am doing object tracking, not camera. Is 1080p60fps still the wiser choice or 4k30fps?

I changed the answer to reflect the added information in the comment.


text:
What is this effect's name? And how would I be able to do it in Sony Vegas?
I would name this effect a sort of lens flare, but the lens flare tutorials I have seen on YouTube are not what I am looking for... Such as this tutorial
Anyway, this is the effect I am trying to replicate, as displayed in the Galantis - No Money Music Video

 at the following times: 0:17-0:21, 0:27-0:31, 0:35-0:40 and many other places through out the video...
Thank you for any responses I may get :)

Kind Regards
Joshua Lochner

Search Google for "light leaks". Here's free collection: http://vegasaur.com/free-light-leaks
How to use: Place the desired light leak clip on the track above your video and set track's compositing mode to Screen or Add. Adjust the amount of light by lowering the clip or track opacity. You can also add change luminance or color by adding Levels, Color Balance or Hue/Saturation filters.

Here is much bigger collection of free light leaks: https://www.cutestockfootage.com/stock-video-footage/category/7830/light-leaks
Tutorial of using them in Sony Vegas is also there: https://www.cutestockfootage.com/tutorials/


text:
Overlaying transparent video onto base video with custom positioning
I'm trying to add a video intro to my main video. I have the following:
ffmpeg \
    -i main-video.mp4 -i intro.avi \
    -filter_complex " \
        [0:v]setpts=PTS-STARTPTS, scale=2550x1080[top]; \
        [1:v]setpts=PTS-STARTPTS, scale=1920x1080, \
             format=yuva420p,colorchannelmixer=aa=1[bottom]; \
        [top][bottom]overlay=shortest=1" \
    -acodec libvo_aacenc -vcodec libx264 out.mp4

main-video.mp4 -> 2250 x 1080
intro.avi -> 1920x1080
I have 2 problems with the above;

After the intro overlay has finished the main video pauses, however the main video audio continues for the correct duration of the main video (with a paused video frame the entire time)
The intro video overlay is left aligned, ideally I'd like it to be centered, either through auto calculations based on the 2 resolutions, or by nudging the x/y manually

The overlay filter is set to end with the shortest input, which here is the intro. So, the video output stops generating after that, so a typical video player holds the visual on the last frame.
Also, if your intro already has transparency, you can skip the format and ccm filters. In the command you took them from, the inputs did not have transparency in the source.
(Unless you are resizing the videos, you can skip the scale as well.)
Use
ffmpeg \
    -i main-video.mp4 -i intro.avi \
    -filter_complex " \
        [0:v]setpts=PTS-STARTPTS,scale=2550x1080[top]; \
        [1:v]setpts=PTS-STARTPTS,scale=1920x1080[bottom]; \
        [top][bottom]overlay=x=(W-w)/2:eof_action=pass" \
    -acodec aac -vcodec libx264 out.mp4