Rendering HD Files to Standard Def Look Really Bad

Desdinovah wrote on 8/20/2008, 1:49 PM

I'm working on a project that was shot in 1920 X 1080 in 24p on an EX1 and I'm having some render issues. When I render the final file to an AVI, the quality is excellent, but when I render separate m2a and m2v streams, the video is very smeary and soft. Even taking into account the loss going to standard def, it should at least look as good as every other DVD out there but alas, the quality just ain't there. I've tweaked and rendered with every codec option Vegas affords and I just can't get it to look good.

Can anyone recommend some preferred settings for rendering that will get me closer to better quality?

Thanks!

Comments

JohnnyRoy wrote on 8/20/2008, 2:44 PM

I would use the the DVD Architect 24p NTSC Widescreen video stream rendering template. I use the DVD Architect NTSC Widescreen video stream template with footage from my Sony Z1 and it looks spectacular on DVD.

~jr

Desdinovah wrote on 8/21/2008, 4:38 AM

Thanks, I'll give it a try!

bsuratt wrote on 8/21/2008, 12:53 PM

johnnyroy-

I tried your DVD ARCH 24p widescreen and it noticeably improved the apparent sharpness of the image... but 24p on fast moving subjects (water skiers), really looks jumpy because of lower frame rate. Tried it with 29.976p and looks no different than with interlaced? Would love to get the sharpness without the 24p judder. Any suggestions? Would 30p be any different?

I am coming from 1440x1080i and have the interlace set to "blend".

Robert W wrote on 8/21/2008, 3:06 PM

Bsurrat, the original poster had shot in 24p, so a 24p template would be the obviosu choice. What format did you shoot in?

EDIT:

I should be more explicit:

1) What is the resolution?
2) What is the ratio?
3) What is the frame rate?

johnmeyer wrote on 8/21/2008, 3:30 PM

Tried it with 29.976p and looks no different than with interlaced? If you don't shoot in 24p, then DON'T use the 24p template. This is not a good idea.

Bill Ravens wrote on 8/21/2008, 4:33 PM

It's rather curious...I've noticed that for progressive footage, a lot of codecs seem to be throwing away one of the fields, effectively reducing the resolution to 1/2. I know, it's hard to believe they would be doing this, but, these programmers don't seem to be users. They don't know what the fxxx they're doing. The work around that seems to work is to keep the interlaced setting., even for progressive footage...sigh.

farss wrote on 8/21/2008, 4:40 PM

That would happen if you specified the wrong de-interlace method in your project's properties. Set to Merge I've never seen it happen with 25PsF.
Bob.

bsuratt wrote on 8/21/2008, 7:29 PM

Footage shot with Sony HDR FX7 HDV
(29.970 fps interlaced, 1440x1080x12)
M2t clips on the timeline. Project settings for HDV 1080i UFF
Deinterlace set to "Blend"

Let me preface by saying the picture quality at 29.976 interlaced is very good. However, there is a small degree of "fuzz" on distant moving objects, ie: wavelets on the water surface, and a small degree of interlace artifacts on horizontal objects, ie ski ropes.

When I tried the suggestion above rendering to 24p I was surprised that the video looked cleaner and sharper with less of the artifacts mentioned. Granted, you should shoot at 24p if that is to be your target output.... but my experience surprised me. I was even more surprised when I tried it at 29.976 progressive and saw the apparent improvement seen with 24p go away! I thought the improvement was due to using progressive rather than interlaced... perhaps not.

Again, the improvement is not night and day... but it is noticeable. If my subject matter were stationary this would work. The judder problem with 24p is not the skiers, but rather the trees and buildings in the background appearing jumpy as the camera pans past while following the skiers.