Did you apply a computer to studio levels filter to the vegas video before rendering? I assume that would fix it.

No, it's just rendered as it is, without any level filter. For me it's very confusing and probably also for newbies that depending on the input you have to put a filter on to get a correct output as seen in the preview.

Here. Vegas Preview. 0-255 RGB. Same as it's always been. Don't Blow Smoke. Learn instead.

https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/new-users-consult-the-tutorials-first-please--118014/

Musicvid.
I sincerely apologize. You're right.
Vegas displays Full Range 0-255.

My problem is that I have 2 analog VGA monitors and one Panasonic projector.

If I read correctly elsewhere, then analog VGA monitors cannot display Full Range. That's why, for example, photos displayed on the Windows desktop and in Vegas look the same. That is, 16-235, although this is not true.

The video player is probably the only one where the Full Range can be viewed.

If I want to see reality in Vegas, I need to enable Full Range in the graphics card settings for each monitor.

https://pcmonitors.info/articles/correcting-hdmi-colour-on-nvidia-and-amd-gpus/

If I allow it on the projector, then the contrast of Vegas will unite with the video player and the windows desktop.
Even the "Adjust level from studio RGB to computer RGB" option has no effect on the result.

Do I get it right this time?

Claim? No.

I state that Vegas displays 0-255 in the preview window.

OP has now fundamentally misstated this fact seven times in this thread.

.

...........

 

 

I personally don't like Premiere, so this is not my style :-)

Please be patient for a while and try to relax.
Can you please explain this to me ......

You say Vegas shows 0-255. If I render the video and reopen it in Vegas, it's RGB the same. It is well!

If I open the video in the player, where I set 0-255 and in the nvidia setting it is also 0-255, then the video has a higher contrast.

If I change the value on nvidia to 16-235, the video looks the same as in Vegas.
 

I think that's what people have been dealing with for years.

If Vegas displays and renders 0-255 and the player and nvidia settings are also set to 0-255, why does it have higher contrast?


I think the problem with the whole case is here:

The Video Preview window shows 16-235!
That's true, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Video scope shows 0-255. The video render is also 0-255, but Video Preview window shows 16-235.

If I activate this option here and change the video to Full screen, the image in Vegas looks the same as in the player with a value of 0-255. So as it should !!! Correctly!

It is literally written - do you want to convert from 16-235 to 0-255 in the preview?
So from the Studio to Computer RGB.

This means that Video Preview shows 16-235 and if I check this option, I will see 0-255.
That is a fact and there is no reason to discuss it further.

The mistake is, this function does not work in the classic small Video preview but only in an external full screen monitor.

That is the reason for years of controversy and speculation. People usually cut in a small Video window, which is 16-235, and then they are very surprised.

 

It's good that Vegas is the only one that doesn't change RGB automatically for photos or videos, as some suggest here.Such suggestions are the way to hell and must be categorically rejected!

And now everyone please take a breath, go for a walk and give it a try.

 

Repair for the Vegas team. Derek, please read.

Enable the "Adjust level from studio RGB to computer RGB" option even for a small Video preview.

And believe me, this case will end once and for all.

 

Although I know how to work around this issue; I do agree. If they turned the preview window to full range By default; those with 0-255 media ie. (gopro). Would see how their levels look blown out and at least know to apply the filter prior to rendering.

The Preview window (when not in full screen) is 16-235. The FAQ says it itself.

The internal preview window "is" neither 16-235 nor 0-255. The internal preview window of an 8 bit project maps decoded 8 bit sources and project levels 1:1 (regardless any level meta data if given at all). Few exceptions only.

The FAQ is correct. Nick and I published concurrent solutions, and consulted heavily during that time.

Nick's solution is contingent on the user being smart enough to pull the clipped values back inside the preview space with the Levels filter before rendering. That's why I developed an alternate output method, and thanks so much for validating my specific concern.

I am certain that my alternate method, a Computer->Studio RGB filter on the final output stage will be easier to understand for you.

And it's still fifth grade math. See you in the fall.

🙃

@Marco. @Musicvid

"The internal preview window of an 8 bit project maps decoded 8 bit sources and project levels 1:1 (regardless any level meta data if given at all). Few exceptions only."

Peer review in its finest form happens when people on different continents, machines and languages arrive at the same conclusions.

Using the

INTERNAL PREVIEW

INTERNAL PREVIEW

INTERNAL PREVIEW (Yes, I'm shouting)

Vegas does nothing to materially change the levels of still images or video.

Disclaimer:

With the preview on separately attached hardware possessing different requirements and different software switches to set levels for a particular purpose, another discussion could follow. Probably will.

It is easy to understand. But for new users coming to Vegas Pro; its not. Which is why theres a FAQ and multiple threads about the the same thing every month.

A preview that matches final export and perhaps an auto level of 0-255 content would be a great fix.

Most people use Vegas Pro for the great layout and ease of use much like myself. Math is not a fun. 😂

I have said that it would make a great feature request for Movie Studio, but not as a default.

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

Here's the explanation I promised you: A simple linear I/O table, with Studio->Computer mapped to fill the RGB space. You need to think about it this way 🙃

A preview that matches final export and perhaps an auto level of 0-255 content would be a great fix.

For goodness sake how many times do we have to explain to you that it DOES match final export. It only looks different to you when you play it on a player that is set up to process 16-235. Import your exported file into a new track in your original Vegas project and switch the track off and on. You should not see any difference in your preview confirming that there has been no change.

I have said that it would make a great feature request for Movie Studio, but not as a default.

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

As a VMS user I agree. I'd like to see something at render stage alerting the consumer user to the fact that video players usually work on 16-235 and provide the option to convert to Studio RGB. But it needs to be optional as there are occasions when users want full 0-255 export.

I have said that it would make a great feature request for Movie Studio

+1

It would make editing with VMS a lot easier and understandable for newbies. No need for adding level corrections without scopes control to VMS generated Media, like Text, Gradients etc or to 0-255 recordings which are becoming more and more common. Just WYSIWYG.

The false part in the FAQ mentioned above is that Vegas Pro would decode video formats like AVC to limited levels so it would shrink 0-255 down to 16-235, while actually it is a 1:1 mapping of the source levels.
The tip given in the FAQ solely is to mimic what most software players do or do if configured that way and it is exactly same what the SeMW Preview Levels Extension does.

In the dozens of discussions like this we meanwhile had during the last two decades there always is a mixture of too much simplified information which in the end leads to misinformation.
People tend to repeat interpretations of single lines of Wikipedia content about rec. 709 instead of studying the ITU R. BT.709 source document (Anybody noticed only forbidden video data is 0 and 255? Anybody noticed in R. BT.709 there is no EOTF (output gamma) defined? Anybody noticed when it's about rendering/output/distribution the R. BT.709 is just useless without the reference to ITU-R BT.1886 and ITU-R BT.2035?).
Often a false assumption of source levels is taken for granted, but the real video world provides 16-235 levels in many but not in most cases (common cameras tend to provide 16-255, screen recordings and almost any kind of scientific recording gear usually use 0-255 (if 8 bit), professional compositing often is based on 0-255 levels (or 0-1 to relate to other depths) and even high end studio broadcast productions meanwhile use a certain amount of data beyond the reference levels (e.g. a common CCU preset provided by the BBC and often used in the EBU defines the range of -1 – 105 %. And EBU R.103 which defines the video signal tolerances recommends the preferred min./max. range to be from 5-246 (with a total video signal range from 1-254). Thus an automated "correction" of source levels is fordoomed in many cases (and no, other NLE do not do a good job here in many cases, I've seen hundreds of videos which suffered from a too much simplified automated level correction which is good for speed in work only but not for quality production).
Then apple and orange comparisons start by using different kind of players and/or previews with unknown level process settings to compare signals which real ranges are suspected but actually unknown, overseeing how many processes might be involved which may affect the result while neglecting a proper gamma setting most of the time.
Also what some think what most ones want or use or do may differ a lot in the real world.

What might be useful for the VP users is just an option to switch the internal preview to mimic players/preview devices with different reference levels and gamma settings (again – this is what SeMW Preview Levels Extension offers and you could modify the settings to your own needs both for the peak levels and gamma).
The given setting of the internal preview is perfect to control source levels and output data (btw which is right what a class-1 reference video production display is meant to offer as an option, too), while it's not what most players usually do. But it is the straightest and the most unbiased reproduction of your source and output levels (if 8 bit).

Educational psychologists tell us that 40% of people will never reach Piaget's fourth stage of intellectual development -- abstraction, generalization, deductive skills, metacognition.

Without it, things like indirect proof, problem solving beyond two steps, and inverse relationships become almost impossible to conceptualize. The frontal cortex just isn't up to the task.

If this sounds like a case for a PhD Button in Movie Studio, I won't argue with the notion.

Let's hope for the other 60 % because there is no proper automation mode for it. :D It's learning each and every day.

Since there is no proper automation mode for it, how should VMS users get proper results, can you explain?

@Musicvid

@Marco. said:

"The false part in the FAQ mentioned above is that Vegas Pro would decode video formats like AVC to limited levels so it would shrink 0-255 down to 16-235, while actually it is a 1:1 mapping of the source levels."

Nick's FAQ is not the first place that that information was shared.

http://www.glennchan.info/articles/vegas/v8color/vegas-9-levels.htm

Maybe, it's semantics, but what was described doesn't match Vegas Pro behavior as shown in my last video.

"Since there is no proper automation mode for it, how should VMS users get proper results, can you explain?"

By color correcting while either watching over an external preview or using a studio swing to full swing level conversion for the internal preview. If the output pleases, it should be fine for private usage. And if you think you need to avoid super black/white, use one of the "Zebra" FX Chains I and Musicvid shared or simply use a Color Curve limiting preset.

If I'm reading this correctly, what @john_dennis and @Marco. are saying about the FAQ is actually one of my objections to the method itself and was a big motivator for me to publish an alternate method that does not involve limiting the visible range during editing.

The thing that I saw as being implicit in the FAQ the way Nick wrote it is that the editor would then bring the desired delivery levels into delivery range during the normal course of informed editing, before removing the filter just prior to rendering. It was the "informed" part I was trying to spare Movie Studio users.

So the error in the FAQ, I guess, is just one of omission? If I've missed something else, It's because when I read something too many times, I see only the words in my head, not what someone sees for the first time.

Again, my preferred method, and the one I promote, is the Computer->Studio RGB filter on the output just prior to rendering.

"Again, my preferred method, and the one I promote, is the Computer->Studio RGB filter on the output just prior to rendering."

In cases the source levels set reference black to 0 and white peak to 255 and it hasn't been modified by color correction and grading and if also there is a need to avoid super levels for the output (e.g. because it is meant for players doing a studio swing to full swing conversion), then I'd do the same.

If else my sources really are studio swing only and again there is a strict need (or another advantage like saving compression bandwidth) to avoid super levels, I even tend to use a limiter in the end.

But a common case is the source levels are 16 up to 255. Without caring for the levels within a proper color correction, if you'd then use a Computer-to-Studio-RGB filter for the output, you'd finally had your reference black set to 32 and probably have raised all the shadow noise up to the visible level.

I'd usually take care to have my reference black level set to around 16 via color correction, have pleasent reflected whites below 235 and don't care to much for the white peaks caused by reflections, bright emitters or aliasing like CG or sharpening fx (if such one would clip later, let it go …).

@john_dennis
"Maybe, it's semantics, but what was described doesn't match Vegas Pro behavior as shown in my last video."

Actually what was described in the original source never matched my own experiences, I never agreed with it, though that one lasts back into the days of SD where maybe several cases would have really matched. And of course there were/are some rare exceptions (WMV, that XAVC Long QHD bug and - in the past - some Quicktimes aberrations).
In current times for every kind of source footage I usually use for editing, it would not match. All of the file formats and codecs I usually use map 1:1 in Vegas Pro, no change in luma levels in any way.