I'm struggling with this as well, and have found the same thing as Jerry with DVDs.

The same file rendered to MPEG looks great on DVD, but when broadcasted its crushed and clipped. So before sending a file for broadcast, I just add a computerRGB-studioRGB filter, and that helps.

But I think I'm tripping up and would get better quality if I could sort everything out properly.

As I understand it there are many things that you have to get the colorspace right for, and I would love some help with them.

1. Input (camera-in my case either HVX or Sony HDV)
2. Intermediate codec (raylight or cineform)
3. Vegas Preview
4. External Broadcast monitor for preview (calibrated JVC TM-H150C)
5. Vegas Scopes
6. Output format (DVD, Internet and Broadcast)

Here are my "trip" points:
1. On the external monitor, everything looks washed out until I adjust the levels. Is that because the monitor and preview is decoding to computer RGB? In that case, if I add a studioRGB-ComputerRGB filter to the preview window, would this fix the preview but not change the file?

2. Is the DVD automatically bringing all levels into line? Or does rendering an MPEG from Vegas convert the levels? And if there is any converstion going on, then shouldn't we leave everything in computerRGB?

3. If I print to tape, should I add a computerRGB-studioRGB filter, or will DV automatically be within the legal levels?

kairosmatt

Hi all..

This is complex stuff. Complex to those who don't know all about it.

And aparrently equally complex to explain by those who *do* know it...

Why not stick to my simple test scenario above? If every new post will include a new scenario we will have problems. We need to do this from the very first step and then carefully get through it...

Let's take this from scratch... start right at the beginning of the chain.

What do you say?

---------------------------------
Glenn, for instance, how would you go about the "SCENARIO A" that I described in my post above? How would YOU set up the project in Vegas 8 and why?
---------------------------------


Best
Lars

1- The 5D2 footage might have something funky going on with its levels... though I think Cineform got that fixed??

see their blog:
http://cineform.blogspot.com/

It may be recording non-standard levels.

2- I've updated my page with some example workflows.

Here is to the one relevant to your situation:

Example Workflow - 8-Bit Vegas project with mostly video clips

If you really want to use the Windows Secondary Display (I wouldn't recommend it for SD), then check both the color management box and the studio RGB box under its settings.

Some other points:

----Ignore Vegas' scopes for now. They aren't going to help you figure out what's going on.

----please pay attention to units and don't get confused.

Think of it like this:
A says that water boils at 100.
B heats the water up to 100 degrees Fahrenheight and is wondering what's going on, not realizing that A is talking about Celsius.

The same thing is going on here. The broadcast standard is for video formats to have the legal values from 16-235 Y'. In any case, this is irrelevant because you can't manipulate Y' values in Vegas. You need to send the right levels to the codecs so that they encode your video with the right Y' values.

"QUESTION: Any thoughts about the settings here in order to acconplish the final result (web production + broadcast production)?"


"Use studio RGB (16-235): UNchecked"

This should be checked.


"I now introduce a fade from black to the beginning of this clip. I do this by dragging the left upper corner of the clip and dragging it 5 seconds towards the right."

Here's a problem.
You are not using a fade from black. You are going from 0% opacity to 100% opacity and Vegas has an invisible bottom track of superblack. Fix this by adding a bottom track of legal black. You can create this using Generated Media. I have a preset gen media called Legal Black for this task.

"What about Vegas own black vs the black in my nice footage?"

Vegas doesn't really have it's own black or anything else for that matter. It can generate media the same as PS etc. It's up to you to get it right although admittedly the presets could be better.

Bob.

Hi Bob,

HAPPY BROADCASTERS?
Your advice assumes that the output is going to be a 16-235 production for TV broadcast right? So if I use these settings that you suggest and render that to an AVI file, then a TV-station will be happy?

WHEN PLAYING ON A PC & FOR WEB?
What about getting that same edited production for 0-255 now?

The settings you are suggesting cannot satisfy *both* a 16-235 requirement and a 0-255? Or?


Best
Lars

"Your advice assumes that the output is going to be a 16-235 production for TV broadcast right?"

Yes.

Bob.

So what do I do when wanting "the full" 0-255 for web etc?
Lars

Would the following be true and correct?

For a video producer producing 40 productions for the web and 15 for TV a year and need to mix things and freely jump between project and take something here and put there etc... Just simply have everything set up for 0-255 and feel free to work with text video graphics stills etc that are all 0-255 stuff.

*THEN* when delivering to a TV-station, you first render your 0-255 project to an AVI file. Your 0-255 master. Then you put that file on the timeline and then compress the dynamics so that it fits the needs of the TV-station 16-235.

In other words. Forget about 16-235 until you need to deliver it.

What are the drawbacks with this philosophy?

(assuming that I don't monitor on anything else than my PC screen)


Best,
Lars

Nest your project in another one and apply a StudioRGB to ComputerRGB conversion. Render that out.

Or take your previously rendered 'video' output and bring that into a new project and apply the same FX.

Bob.

"apply a StudioRGB to ComputerRGB conversion"

Well, that changes the colors/gamma of the footage and makes it not look quite ok... The Neo and the Vegas StudioRGB to Computer RGB are unfortunately not mirror images of each other....

Lars

"What are the drawbacks with this philosophy?"

1) Most ovideo sources are 16-235.
2) If you're using an external CRT monitor it may have a fit and loose sync (i.e. the picture will roll) if fed levels below 16. This does not inspire confidence in clients who want to watch.

I have done one project from start to finish in 0-255. Mainly because it was only going to be seen on LCDs fed from a computer and much of my source material was CYMK. Video was converted to conform to ComputerRGB.


Bob.

OK, ;) Let's say for the sake of the argument that I'm *ONLY* producing videos that are to be shown on PC computer screens. And that in my studio there are no TV-monitors. Just one single PC screen for me to work with and produce on.

Would 16-235 have any role there?

Lars

"1) Most ovideo sources are 16-235."

Well, if you're having a 5D2 camera and that's 100% of your footage and working with text generation such as Vegas is defaulting to, and working with "normal" images JIG/TIF that are sRGB then really no source material at all is 16-235.


2) If you're using an external CRT monitor it may have a fit and loose sync (i.e. the picture will roll) if fed levels below 16. This does not inspire confidence in clients who want to watch.

True. Of course feeding 0-255 into and input that expects 16-235 doens't work. If 16 is 0 mv black and 235 is +700 mV then it is quite clear that feeding black that is inteferring with the sync and white that is choking that monitor (way above the max 700mV...) But then the reason to set up your project for 16-235 is that you have an external CRT monitor and no other means of adjusting the dynamic range of the signal feeding that monitor right? If you were using an LCD PC screen that worked fine with 0-255 then setting up the project to 16-235 wouldn't be necessary?

"I have done one project from start to finish in 0-255. Mainly because it was only going to be seen on LCDs fed from a computer and much of my source material was CYMK. Video was converted to conform to ComputerRGB."

CMYK still images are very rare, they are used for printing and rarely distributed for anything else. Mixing CMYK into the video world is something I don't understand the reason for.

--------------------

The philosophy I want to test here is that if you ONLY have PC screens in front of you and no 16-235 equipment then it really isn't so useful having a conversion utility such as NEO changing your 0-255 dynamic range or setting up Vegas for 16-235. Then you're living an easier life my going 0-255 all the time and then when a TV statiosn *asks* for a delivery you convert your project into 16-235. But only then. 16-235 is nothing you as a PC guy or LCD screen really need to think about is it?


best
Lars

PS. I'm not trying to say what is "best" here, I don't know enough about it yet. Please excuse my stubborness in trying to identfy whjat really wors here - or rather my stubborness to understand this myself... I may become an advocate for 16-235 once we're thruogh here, who knows.. ;)

I'm trying to learn what works and what doesn't by laying out different scenarious... 16-235 may show up to be the way to do everything... Let's see...

My background in video comes from analogue Beta SP and then life was a lot easier.. Now there are myriads of formats and standards and a much more complex workd...

The 5D2 may be an oddball case if it records with levels that are different that other cameras.

But in general, almost all DV and HDV cameras record stuff above 235(Y')- these are illegal values (also called superwhites). In 8-bit projects, you ideally want the Y'CbCr values decoded to studio RGB. This avoids problems where you have a cross dissolve... the video before and after is simply copied over with superwhites, but the transition would be rendered without superwhites if everything was decoded to computer RGB. Whereas working with studio RGB avoids that, and lets you map/lower the superwhites into legal range for less noise / more highlight detail.

If 16 is 0 mv black and 235 is +700 mV
You're omitting units.
And if we are talking about 16 RGB in Vegas, it could be different things when converted into analog... it really depends on what the codec is doing.

----------------
In your situation, converting everything to computer RGB levels would probably work.

"The philosophy I want to test here is that if you ONLY have PC screens in front of you and no 16-235 equipment then it really isn't so useful having a conversion utility such as NEO changing your 0-255 dynamic range or setting up Vegas for 16-235. Then you're living an easier life my going 0-255 all the time and then when a TV statiosn *asks* for a delivery you convert your project into 16-235. But only then. 16-235 is nothing you as a PC guy or LCD screen really need to think about is it?"

Within those narrow confines then I can't think of any reason why not to stick with 0-255. Certainly as far as I know nothing will blow up on you. Of course you should always test, test and test again.

I will say again though your levels are not the only issue you may have to wrangle, they could well be only the tip of the iceberg. Shooting 1080p on a high resolution camera can create much harder to wrangle issues if it ever has to become SD 60i. Having a CRT to check for the problems is a very wise move as they're easier to wrangle up front than once a project is completed and months later someone wants to put it to air.

I've done several commercial DVDs, all images from a DSC and getting levels correct was very trivial but I spent days wrangling aliasing and line twitter problems. I now shoot with an EX1 and in 1080p have the same problems at times.

I'd also suggest you not make too much of what Vegas has as defaults. I'd say on average most of the defaults are whacked and a constant source of newcomers asking questions here.

Bob.

Glenn, I think the addition of typical workflows to your article helps alot. Thanks!

Now, here are two new questions.

1. In your table you indicate if the output is MPEG2 DVD, 8 bit projects decode to and want to see studio RGB levels, but 32 bit projects decode to and want to see computer RGB levels. This suggests there are separate MPEG2 codecs for 8 bit and 32 bit projects, with the 32 bit codec expecting to see studio RGB levels, but still producing 16-235 MPEG2s, correct?

2. You mention that the Vegas scopes won't help us - is this a blanket statement, or are there any project types where the scopes can be used?

Jerry

It seems like if working with production ONLY intended for dowload from teh web / to be viewed on PC monitors then 0-255 would be a more practical dynamic range to work with, right..?

If so, then it would actually be good if Cineform and their Neo not forced your footage from 5D2's 0-255 into a 16-235 range.

What they could have done was having a checkbox:

Check here for conversion from 0-255 > 16-235 ____


Right? Agree?

Now I have a camera producing the 0-255 that I want. But I want Neo because it makes the files playable (fps!). But they take away my 0-255 assuming / or deciding on my behalf that I'm going to want 16-235....


Lars

You would think with so much confusion Vegas makes with their StudioRGB display with black at 16, they would have fixed that by now. CineForm is handling this correctly. Personal I like StudioRGB processing, for the extract headroom, but I would prefer black be display at 0, know there are details in the shadows if needed -- this is how we do it in other NLEs.

Look up the Canon 5D and crushed blacks -- you will get many hits. The issue is standard YUV ranges are 16-235 not 0-255 used in the 5D. I've blogged about this at cineform.blogspot.com. Full range YUV causes playback problems for YUV surfaces on graphics cards, as they expect black at 16 -- not other camera source places black at 0. This is what CineForm's Neo Scene fixes -- also the Canon 5D frame rate, now set to the more useful 29.97.

The CineForm codec honors the color space requests from Vegas, it askes for Studio RGB, which places black at 16. It you don't like that, it is a Vegas issue, as the CineForm codec can support either mode as requested by the NLE. Vegas does require the user be aware on this RGB color space, but once you do under stand it, your finished work will benefit.

David Newman
CTO, CineForm
twitter.com/David_Newman

P.S. We do not offer a YUV full range switch for Canon 5D, as that would make the 5D incompatible with every NLE (including Vegas), and it would have the 5D levels incompatible with all other cameras.

Hi David, thanks for the reply.

First, what exactly do you mean by the " Personal I like StudioRGB processing, for the extra headroom" ?


1 - Which PC based editor plays back these NEO converted 5D2 files best and correctly?

2 - Vegas / Exporer windows / see the files / trying to preview. Preview works for many other AVI files but not for the NEO files. Sometimes just a still image but mostly black. Vegas 8.0c.

3 - Performance generally speaking is much better in vegas 8.1. One very good reason for getting NEO is becasue of the playback performance. then it feels kind of backwards to be forced to use a slower version of Vegas on a slower platform. Why not make NEO work in vegas 8.1 in Vista 64?

4 - Is it true that with another Cineform product I can get the same quality of conversion but change the output size so that I can make, let's say 640 x 360 AVI files and use these as proxyfiles - then when rendering I just throw in the full 1920x1080 files.


Best & thanks in advance!
Lars

David:
"P.S. We do not offer a YUV full range switch for Canon 5D, as that would make the 5D incompatible with every NLE (including Vegas), and it would have the 5D levels incompatible with all other cameras. "


Lars:
If all other source material I use is 0-255 and the production is intended for PC screens only / internet, isn't it the opposite: the 5D2 would become extremely compatible...?

What so desirable with 16-235 and having to amplify brights / lower blacks etc and mess with the signal level afterwards...? In a sensitive 8 bit editor...?

Other cameras producing 16-235 would *not* be compatible with the 0-255 PC windows world graphics...

Personally I'd love to have the option here...

Please enlighten me.


Best,
Lars


PS. If the camera turned out still images that were limited to 16-235 no one would be really happy... Only difference here is that the images are moving. I want them compatible in look, range etc for my work...

You really need to think long and hard about what Dan has said.
Headroom is exactly why I was trying to steer you away from your ComputerRGB centric workflow. It's also why I made mention of things like the Cineon colorspace that has a huge amount of headroom i.e. what you see as white could well be much brighter than white with hidden detail that's only revealed in compositing.

I'm not that much of a guru with all things video but I've faced the same kinds of issues with audio where things in the digital domain are a bit simpler. Without headroom applying filters can lead to bad clipping. You'd need to understand the algorithms that filters use to grasp this. I don't know for certain if this applies in the video world or not but when I don't know for certain I stick to what everyone else does so I don't sit on the bleeding edge.

Your concern about loss of dynamic range is BS to be blunt, get it out of your head, accept how things work in the video world and get on with it. Getting so obsessed over what is in reality a trivial matter is distracting you from far more pressing concerns.

Bob.