If you want to reduce noise then there are various noise reduction plug-ins out there.
'Neat video' for video. Photoshop has build-in plug-in for reducting noise in images.

http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/reduce-noise/

If you want to give stills/photos extra dimension you can seperate some elements animate it to give it depth and movement. Also called 2.5D Effect.

You can cut out elements from the photo (like a person) and move it seperatly (as layers) with the background giving it a video-like feel.

Tutorial:




Detailed tutorial:




VMP

You could also go back to the place where the footage was taken and get additional footage. A good place to start is the outside of the building. Movement is always good whether its a flag blowing in the breeze on the outside on a shot that shows the building sign, or staff rushing around inside. The venue and staff are part of the story.

A bonus is that these shots can be perfectly exposed because you have some time to set it up.

In this case, returning for footage is almost impossible -- a very remote location.

Specifically these are stills of landscapes so there aren't moving elements in them. I just want to match the look of video shots (some on tripod, some not) with stills of the same, static nature scenes.

When you say match scenes, you are probably asking for more than you are going to get. Match implies that the still camera and the video camera can be matched in color space and gamma which is probably not likely. Matched suggesting just putting a scene on the timeline is really no big deal but it all depends on your intention.
A still does not have motion - all video regardless of whether the camera is locked down on a tripod has motion- look at the wind in the grass, an occassional bird in the sky.
So, a still must be a still of certain type - perhaps the backdrop for an inserted title, logo, animated lower third etc. This is called creating organic motion on your timeline irrespective of the "match" to your video. Also still can be treated as a graphic, with off-color, or I like to use charcoal etch for an artistic render.

I have used the old Disney "multiplane camera" technique on stills in the past with some success. It might work well on landscape images. Separate a few layers (foreground / midground / background) and you should be able to get some nice, subtle motion out of the static images.

Here's a video showing the technique (using Affect Effects and Photoshop, but Vegas should handle the motion just fine.)

I don't think one would ever be able to do something so that the audience wouldn't notice the difference. Perhaps a better idea is to do something where the audience recognizes they are stills but won't find jarring or amateurish. For instance, say, a series of stills at the beginning with simple Ken Burns-type zooms and pans. Even a series of stills in the middle would feel okay to me. I'd probably not do stills at the end, but maybe that would work out, too.

Audiences see a LOT of program material. They have pretty good calibration in what looks well-done and what doesn't.

Hi VMP, for some reason your embedded tutorial (links) are gone. Is it possible to repost them? Thanks!

Sometimes your browser needs to load it.
Here are the links as text, you can copy paste them in the url field.

http://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/reduce-noise

Tutorial:


Detailed tutorial:


VMP