-- Best General NTSC Project Properties?

Soniclight wrote on 8/31/2006, 9:44 AM
Hi,

Now that I've spent some time learning how to use Vegas by doing a slew of test mini-projects, trying out features, etc. it's time for me to start doing the real project..

I live in the U.S. and thus is what I believe that NTSC 29.97 is the best format. However I do wish it to be versatile for any PAL conversion since I'm hoping this project will get some exposure outside the U.S..

Here are the basic things I'm shooting for:

--- Wide-screen look, so i.e. 720x480 of which actually 720x360 will be the viewing area, the rest letter boxed in black.

--- Video project length: probably not more than 30 min. if that (more like 15).

--- Output: as versatile as possible, incl. DVD to streaming .wmv and Flash versions.

--- To HD or not to HD: I don't have an HD camcorder, and on my limited budget, could not afford any HD stock clips, but still would like the end product to be HD-translatable if/when.

--- Many Stills Also: It's a complex project and the higher the resolution, the better since I have to do alot of 2D and 3D Alpha pan/cropping/track motion with these images to match the rest of the projects fluidity.

And that need for high resolution brings me to...

All things above considered -- as well as not overtaxing Vegas even though I have a stand-alone Pentium D 2.8 Ghz, with 2 Gb DDRAM2 and 2x 4 Gb of extra pagefiles on separate hard drive:

---- A) Template (standards or customized): What would be the best project size above 720x480 (if necessary) that would provide higher resolution/possible HD compatibility but not unnecessary overkill?

---- B) Other Factors: What other specs should I choose, i.e. field order, pixel ratio, full-resolution (render-quality), motion blur type, deinterlace method.

---- C) Video Rendering Quality: I've read that "Best" instead of "Good" isn't worth it and just bloates file sizes. Final output may profit from "Best", but what about work-in-progress renders of project media -- which can vary according to source file formats?

Thank you for your input.

Comments

GlennChan wrote on 8/31/2006, 11:08 AM
In Vegas, you can change the project properties on the fly to whatever's appropriate. You have to watch out for pixel aspect ratio though, as Vegas handles it "weird". Vegas by default will try to maintain the pixel aspect ratio of all your clips, even if it's not sure what the right PAR is.

For web export, Vegas may put black bars on the sides. If you don't want this, there's a setting in the file-->export dialogue box which will stop this. It has the word lettebox in the setting name.

2- Alternately, you can nest your master veg into another veg.

3- Sometimes, you need to convert color spaces. For web output, apply the stuido RGB to computer RGB preset if your footage is DV or HDV video (video usually comes in as studioRGB, as long as you use the default codecs).
Soniclight wrote on 8/31/2006, 12:37 PM
OK, thanks. I'll try to decipher that information :)

Since you brought up RGB, when should one use the "Broadcast Colors" plug-in for final -- or even in-progress output so that it is ready for general TV viewing/broadcasting?

Since I like bright colors, I can get a bit carried away -- which is fine for sub-720x480 output .wmv and web stuff. In my old days of being an airbrush artist, I liked to make things glow and stand out.

But in terms of professional broadcast quality, a computer's output can vastly differ in saturation and contrast from a regular, run-of-the-mill, non plasma, non HD TV. Please let me know if this plug in and/or other "keep TV friendly" modality should be used.

Think basic network or cable TV viewing compatibility.

Any other feedback/opinions on original question also welcomed.
GlennChan wrote on 8/31/2006, 4:48 PM
The following article has a little more information on levels:
http://www.vasst.com/resource.aspx?id=a7a8c403-64dc-420d-97d0-90d2f8de9fc1

On top of that, you have to pay attention to transmission limits later down the line.

Broadcast is the most limiting, since broadcast is designed with limited bandwdith. The appropriate thing to do would likely be:
Apply the Broadcast colors plug in
luma min 7.50
luma max 100.00

chroma max 100

composite min -20
composite max 115.0

Check both 7.5 IRE setup and Studio RGB (16 to 235).

2- DVD is less stringent. You can change composite max to around 130.00.



?

The signal should look about the same. You just need to make sure your color space conversions are being done correctly. Transmission limits may limit your range of colors... you can't have extremely saturated colors.

*There are some subtle differences in the transfer functions (between sRGB, rec. 601, rec.709) but that's of little practical significance.
Soniclight wrote on 9/1/2006, 5:03 AM
Now, what about the overall size as per overall goals stated in the opening post regarding resolution?

My guess is to stick to NTSC 29.97 and nothing above 1280x720 -- anything higher would get pretty CPU intensive for a single station computer. Aside from there being more pixels the larger one gets, what are the pros/cons of the choices in this range:

-- NTSC DV/DV Wide screen (720x480, 29.97)
-- NTSC Standard (720x486, 29.97)
-- HDV 720-30p (1280x720, 29.97)

I'd like to have it HDV 720-30p (1280x720, 29.97) for that would give me the larger pixel real estate, but never having worked at that size on a real project involving mixed source content, I could be setting myself up for problems down the line.

One drawback I see is that whatever extra footage I may get may only be in 720x480 -- stretching it to fit the 1280x720 would lead to grainier resolution for those segments.

And also, we in the U.S. can get a bit tunnel vision about the rest of the world:

--- Most of Earth's population does not have wide screen or plasma TVs and all the electronic gadgets we so value. Yes, HD is rising in popularity and applicability, but to assume it will be the norm for the average home viewer in a few years seems a bit arrogant to me.

Looks like I'm talking my way out of 1280x, eh? No, I still would like more pixels to work with, but all things considered, maybe or maybe not the way to go.

If not, I'm still puzzled by the DV 720x480 vs. Standard 720x486.

So, oh ye great vid-gurus, thy wisdom would be appreciated on this base size issue. What would you do in my situation?
Soniclight wrote on 9/1/2006, 6:53 PM
bump