As JohnyRoy has indicated, this is one of the reasons why you need to crop. It is unfortunate you thought the suggested solution I provided the other day was unnecessary and tedious.

"Since you mixed HD and SD in the same project, you need to crop all of the HD events to Match Project Aspect. "

No, I never mixed HD and SD in the same project; I always work with EX HQ 1080/25p material in 1920x1080/25p Vegas projects. Usually, I render out from such projects using BD templates for DVDA; this time I used DVDA template for PAL widescreen video.

"As JohnyRoy has indicated, this is one of the reasons why you need to crop"

I experimented with all possible combinations of cropping/ not cropping / stretching to fill frame ticked / stretching to fill frame cleared, and - while indeed cropping (to a vale LOWER than 1920, and not HIGHER as you suggested) - can squeeze the resultant DVD picture horizontally, NONE of the above combinations seems to be getting rid of those edge gaps that have been the original subject of this post.

It seems that on a full HD monitor (especially with pixel-to-pixel mapping capability), an SD picture will show those see-through edges no matter how it was downconverted to from full HD project/events.

I first noticed it when checking some cut-ins from a track above the main track (both HD in a HD project, downconverted to widescreen PAL). But while inspecting my DVD further, I noticed this very same phenomenon even in portions where no cut-in's were done.

As I said earlier, they are way outside the DVDA "safe area" frame, which implies on a standard SD TV it's not a problem. Since many people watch DVD's on HD TV's / computer monitors, it may be a problem - but frankly, the only way to avoid it completely would be panning and scanning a 720x576 window (for PAL) on the full HD source, and saving this in SD format.

Anyway, my own and Bob's experiment prove that when downconverting from HD to SD, only leaving the "Stretch to fill frame, do not letterbox" checkbox cleared (OFF) will yield correct aspect ratio. The thin black bars at the sides might have something in common with the main problem in this thread when watching the SD output on a HD monitor, full screen.

"As JohnyRoy has indicated, this is one of the reasons why you need to crop. It is unfortunate you thought the suggested solution I provided the other day was unnecessary and tedious"

Robert, please elaborate on the theory behind the numbers you provided (1971x118.5), and I might trying this procedure again.

Because the thing is that those numbers only make my SD picture even more distorted (i.e. stretched horizontally). For experiment purposes, I tried 1791x1108.5 instead - and these indeed squeezed my output, but definitely too much.

In other words, your method might be very good, but only if one knows how to derive the mathematically proper numbers fro cropping.

If you're only getting a tiny leak at the edges would it make sense to simply apply a black border fx to the entire video at the project level? Would this not avoid the need to resample all the video during cropping?

Oh, now we find out that there's a mixture of SD and HD on the TL!!

There's no simple, totally foolproof solution to this problem, I've been there and dealt with these kinds of issues before. You need to be very careful otherwise what you end up with are wandering black bars on the sides of the frame. There is no such thing as Unsafe Areas in a frame. You have to assume all pixels could be visible. Static black bars on the sides most viewers will not notice, ones that move when there's a cut or a fade are quite distracting.

I'm surprised this wasn't noticed before this late stage. It would be quite obvious in the internal preview monitor.

Had I know the project involved such a mixture my advice would have been to conform everything to either SD or HD before beginning the edit. It's now not simple to fix, sorry. You can try adding a track of black under the upper track. Cut it to match the vision on the upper track so the black fills the gaps on the sides. This fails if you have fades from the upper to lower track.

Bob.

Bob,

I was misunderstood, and already made it clear in one of my posts above - there is NO HD/SD mixture in my projects!

Pure EX HQ 1920x1080/25p, in all couple of hundreds multi-take events.

To comment on your further remarks: NONE of these leaks were/are visible when previewed hundred times in Vegas, or at the later stage, in DVDA.

But, they are noticeable from time to time in the final DVD playback, and on full HD monitors only.

Piotr

I don't have a cure, but this is a weird situation, and one I have never experienced, and I would like to check some basics.

1. Were project properties in Vegas set to 1920 v 1080?
2. Was any form of Pan/Crop applied to the upper track.?
3. If you play the rendered MPEG 2 in Media Player, do you see the edge problem?
4. If you open the rendered MPEG2 back in Vegas, do you see the edge problem?

I have always believed that the frame previewed in Vegas, and DVDA was exactly what was rendered - the notion that something different ends up on the burned DVD is a shock.

edit > ... and, that a track which has identical properties and settings to a track below always completely hides the lower track.

I don't have any 1920x1080 loaded at the moment so I'll have to shoot some to check this out.
That said I think I have noticed something wierd happening with the very last and first horizontal pixel during downconversions. I've not paid any attention to it as apart from monitors with underscan it wouldn't be seen. However that's with Stretch On. With it Off it could well become visible and a nuisance.

Quickest fix would be to add just enough mask at the sides to cover the edge pixels.

Bob.

Quickest fix would be to add just enough mask at the sides to cover the edge pixels.

Bob, I'd need to either add the mask to those leaking-through events in my main video track in the HD project (out of question), or to the downconverted mpg (second recompression required).

Peter, to answer your points:

1. Yes, all my projects are always set to full 1920x1080, as I only put EX HQ clips in them (plus perhaps some graphics here and there, but NO 4:3 DV)

2. No panning/cropping was applied to the events in the upper track (I already mentioned that in one of my earlier posts here)

3. Yes - the final SD MPEG does show the edge leaking problem in any player, as long as the monitor/TV resolution is high enough so that the bezel doesn't cover it

4. Yes, when I open the final MPEG in Vegas, the edge leaking is also visible.

I have always believed that the frame previewed in Vegas, and DVDA was exactly what was rendered - the notion that something different ends up on the burned DVD is

Absolutely agree :(

Piotr

Adding a mask is pretty simple, I'd add it to the entire project.
Add two tracks on top of the rest. Both filled with legal black. Then Use track motion to move one track of black to the far left and the other to the far right so just the offending area of the frame is covered.

Bob.

It seems that workarounds such as Bob's suggestion are necessary ... as a stop-gap measure, but this shouldn't obscure an obligation to answer a question, based on Piotr's experience - I haven't noticed this myself on any projects yet - (Piotr, have you written to Support about this?)

"How can a track which has identical properties and settings to a track below it not completely hide the lower track?"

If the answer is "Not possible", then something needs isolating and identifying as the cause of Piotr's problem.

Megabit,

As I said before the only way you could have been cropping by making those numbers smaller would have been if you were changing the event pan/crop settings rather than the track pan settings, and that will not work.

One of the problems you have here is that you are neither giving us all the information or paying attention to the information you are given. You seem to be panicking because you are near your deadline. The result is that it has probably taken you much longer to get nowhere than if you had stepped back, followed the advice you had been given to the letter and got the job done properly. If you had followed the detailed instructions I gave you, I suspect you would have avoided all of these problems.

> In other words, your method might be very good, but only if one knows how to derive the mathematically proper numbers fro cropping.

There should be no math involved:

(1) Start a new DV Widescreen project
(2) Drop your HD project onto the timeline
(3) Open Pan/Crop on the new event
(4) Right-click the Frame and select Match Output Aspect

You're done. Render your project as DV Widescreen and there should be no black borders. I do this all the time.

As I said, SD widescreen is a slightly different aspect than HD widescreen. You can crop or stretch to match aspect. Those are your options.

~jr

Dear Robert W,

I'm very grateful for you willingness to help, but you seem to still thinking about the correct aspect ration problem - while this thread is about something else.

Dear Bob,

Thanks, adding the masking bars at the main project level (thus doing it with a single re-compression) is worth trying.

Dear Peter,

Yes, I'll certainly ask the SCS Support about it - when I only get some time to enter all my data into their forms (which should be remembered in my profile in the first place:) )

Piotr

> "Yes, I'll certainly ask the SCS Support about it - when I only get some time to enter all my data into their forms (which should be remembered in my profile in the first place:) )"

Yes Piotr, I and others have raised this annoyance before. It's a real disincentive to using support ........ maybe that's why they do it!

JohnnyRoy,

Theoretically, your method should yield results identical as rendering out straight from HD project with downconversion to wide-screen SD, and wit the option Stretch to fill frame enabled. With the difference that for some reason, it's 4 times slower (just 25% CPU utilization vs 100% when downconverting from HD project).

The problem is that I can see the picture stretched horizontally, when using this method (confirmed by a "circle experiment" both Bob and myself have conducted independently). To Robert W: yes, I'm aware I could use your cropping window method to avoid that.

But what's even stranger - and this will most certainly make all of you scratch your heads in disbelieve - now that I'm looking for it, I can see those artifacts also the right and left edges even without any cut-in's; it's enough to display the video (either the HD source or the resultant widescreen SD output) on a monitor capable of showing the whole frame...

If you don't want black borders and you want the correct aspect ratio, cropping with the track/pan settings is the only option you have. The problems are completely related. Black bars are a symptom of the different size and aspect ratio for the target format. If you fit the whole of the available horizontal resolution into the screen and retain the aspect ratio, you will have black bars no matter what. You have to use the track pan settings to remove some of the horizontal aspect. There is no other option.

Did you even try my suggested solution on a small portion of video?

Yes of course Robert - and with your numbers, the picture got even more stretched horizontally.

Just to make sure: we're talking the Tools->Video->Track motion with the desired video track selected, right?

Well, with 1971 (instead of 1920) I got even more stretching; I thought you might have meant "1791" and tried that as well - this time getting the right direction (squeezing), but too much.

Not knowing the theory behind those numbers, I gave up due to lack of time.

Dear Robert W.,

I have asked you already 4 times for the theory behind your cropping procedure details. You never answered; it's OK with me - you are not obliged to answer; however considering, please refrain from commenting what I have or not have done, and what I'd have achieved following your incomplete advice... Thank you; with Best Regards

Piotr

Sorry to jump in so late, and because I don't do HD yet, I have no idea if this is relevant, but I have experienced this several times with SD shot from different camera makes.

I never took the time to determine whether the horizontal anomalies were due to subtle differences in pixel aspect or actual image pixel count, and my solution was just to mask the edges of the slightly wider image to match.

If I read your posts right, and it only shows up after render, it may be due to subtle differences of PAR interpretation. Of course, if your cameras are the same make and model, my theory is useless.

There have been several approaches offered for an interim fix to the symptoms, but I can see you are equally interested in knowing the source of the problem. Again, I have only experienced it with SD from different camera makers.

Thanks musicvid for your input.

Indeed, this particular project was all shot with three identically set-up EX1's ...

Oh, well, back to my SD . . .

It's probably too late for your current project, but one fix for the future might be to do your editing in Multicamera Edit Mode -- that way, you won't have another track "hanging out" (pun intended) underneath your B-roll take. (In this case, the only places you would have to take corrective action are where you are compositing.)

I did all my edits in Multicamera mode :)

The reason I still have a couple of B-rolls above my multitake, main track is that - even though the main track already contains the proper take sequences of the main subject (the musician) - I want to add some audience or venue's architecture cut-ins. Of course, theoretically this could also have been done in Multicamera Edit mode - but only after putting together the whole concert, was I able to decide on which, when, and for how long those B-rolls should be cut-in (to correspond with the musical atmosphere)..

Thanks,

Piotr