In addition to musicvid's comments and checklist:

You can improve the test sharpness by increasing the default raster size in the text generator clip. If you open it you can see both horizontal and vertical pixel counts. Try to exactly double these figures for each text clip. This producer crispier output in general. I run all my texts at double the default raster size, and are happy with the outcome.

Be moderate on colors (don't use oversaturated ones), since mpeg2 cannot reproduce all colors you are able to choose in the text generator.

Christian

So you're saying that in a 720x480 project, to set the text media to 1440x960, and then let the render downsample?

Interesting idea, I'll play with it.

in a 720x480 project, to set the text media to 1440x960

I tried it. Looks significantly better here. Thanks for the tip, Christian.

i'll take a stab and guess that the text is white. Don't go above 235,235,235 rgb for white and that will help prevent "bloom"

Due to the 4:2:0 color sampling of MPEG2 encoding of DVDs, it really doesn't like highly saturated text of any color on a solid color background. This is almost guaranteed to give you blocky artifacts. It's even much worse if you render to DV .AVI format, which is 4:1:1, and then let DVD Architect or some other third-party encoder encode to MPEG2 at 4:2:0. It ends up being 4:1:0 and that can get really ugly.

"It's even much worse if you render to DV .AVI format, which is 4:1:1,"

Except Dunkwood and I are in PAL land where it's 4:2:0. Certainly our video when rendered to mpeg-2 seems to look better than anything shot on NTSC DV however it doesn't explain the problem us PAL users seem to have with text.

I can read all the text in a Hollywood produced DVD. Same player, same connection to the same TV and the same sized text out of Vegas / DVDA is just a blur. Over the years I've tried everything, some tricks improve it a bit and all the obvious things mentioned that will make it look really bad certainly do.
Obviously the Hollywood DVDs use a better encoder than most of us can afford plus those encoders are generally hardware fed over SDI. However we're feeding uncompressed RGB into the MC encoder. Maybe it is as bad as some say, I'm inclined to doubt it myself.
I do know one local Vegas user who still uses the old Inscriber text generator and his TVC's text look great over the air.
I should point out that the Vegas generated text only looks bad on a glass TV. Played back on a PC etc it looks just fine, whatever the problem it's related to how Vegas is handling text in interlaced. Come to think of it with the VASST NTSC DVDs I have the text looks better than the PAL DVDs I've made. Same software, same everything so maybe, just maybe no ones properly jigged some of the code for PAL. If I can find the time I'll try authoring the exact same text to a PAL and NTSC DVD and see how it stacks up.

Bob.

In addition to the other comments, it is important to keep your text colors in the sRGB range. They default with a cRGB white of 255,255,255 (RGB values). I immediately bring this down to 235,235,235 so that the whites aren't too bright and don't blow out on a regular TV. You can do different colors, but no RGB value should go over 235 or under 16 if it is a TV or HD TV render.

Hi Musicvid and Everyone else. Thanks for the input and ideas.

The project is a variety of Footage edited together. All DV 720 x 576 (that's PAL).

The Font is ARIAL and the colours can vary but all the colours end up with the same Blotchy and unsharp issue. White is a colour that is okay colour wise but not sharp enough.

As Farrs says it doesn't hold up anywhere near text on and PRO DVD's etc.

Render settings are the standard DVD ARCHITECT PAL Video stream only.

YES DVDA doesn't RE RENDER as I have used it's template, so bitrate etc is what the TEMPLATE is. Project properties are Standard DV PAL 720 x 576.

So all the ducks are in a row but still not good enough Text.

I will try a couple of the other suggestions mentioned here as well.

Thanks again.

Duncan (DUNKWOOD)

so bitrate etc is what the TEMPLATE is.

The bitrates are all adjustable in Vegas Pro templates and should be optimized to your program. Are you really using Vegas Movie Studio by chance?

Hi Musicvid..

No I am using VEGAS PRO 9 latest release.

I thought the template would give you the best BITRATES etc.

I do push quality up sometimes to best in the template to see if it makes a difference but no go.

Thanks

Duncan

OK, now that I understand better where you're at with this, let's back up a bit. I really am trying to help you, so thanks for being patient.

1) Media Properties. You have indicated that the source media is all PAL DV-AVI. Is that correct? Are they PAL 4:3 or PAL Widescreen? There is a free utility called MediaInfo that will give you (and us) a ton of information about your source media properties.

2) Project Properties. You didn't answer this, yet it is a critical factor when using generated media including text. There is a Project icon on your toolbar, or you can go to File->Properties. Is the Project the same as the Media (PAL DV [or Widescreen] (720x576, 25.000 fps)) ? If different, you will have a blurring issue without a doubt. Don't make any assumptions about this, because Vegas defaults to NTSC, which is smaller in vertical size, as well as different PAR and framerate.

3) Generated text properties: You answered that "The Font is ARIAL and the colours can vary but all the colours end up with the same Blotchy and unsharp issue. White is a colour that is okay colour wise but not sharp enough. That is nonspecific. A specific answer is to list what colors and at what levels were used for the fonts and the backgrounds. For instance, is "White" at 235 or 255 RGB? Are the other colors <16 or >235? Are you viewing on an sRGB or cRGB monitor? This is all very important!! What are all the colors and their levels? Please be specific in all of your responses.

4) Render Properties: You have made a lot of assumptions about this one. Like any good software, the templates are preset to nominal, not optimized settings such as you have presumed. You must take the template settings as a starting point, which explains my confusion over which version of Vegas you are using. A bitrate calculator such as http://www.videohelp.com/calc.htm will give you some very good indications for ABR or CBR bitrates, depending on the length of your video. If you you are using VBR, a minimum bitrate of 1,500,000-2,000,000 bps should always be used, and two-pass should always be selected. This is one place where the defaults fall woefully short of optimal, and will affect your titles if they contain fades or transitions. I always leave my render properties at "Best" so I don't get caught unguarded.

5) Render again in DVDA? If your video (duration x bitrate) is too large to fit on the disc (you didn't say how long it was) OR your DVDA Project Properties do not match your rendered video properties, then it will render again. That's why I asked, because the results of a 2nd render in DVDA will be mush.

If you will take the time to investigate and answer all five initial questions definitively, then some meaningful responses will be forthcoming. If you are feeling a bit overwhelmed at this point, there is some good basic information and specific definitions in my beginning tutorial here: http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/forums/ShowMessage.asp?ForumID=12&MessageID=660127

That all being said, you are dealing with Standard Definition and a packaged MPEG-2 encoder, and Bob's mention of that fact is spot on. The CinemaCraft basic encoder starts at about $2,000 US iirc.

Bob:

Im with you on wanting/wishing Vegas output text to be as clear as a Hollywood produced DVD. It would sure make the productions look better. And for that matter, it seems the source video would be somewhat clearer too.

With all the helpful suggestions in this thread, I would guess we can make Vegas text look as good as it can get.

I wonder if disabling smart resample has any effect on text? It sure seems to wreak havoc on anything it does effect.

"I wonder if disabling smart resample has any effect on text?"

I doubt it has any effect. That switch relates to Vegas automatically deciding if Resampling ( frame by frame interpolation) should be performed. Hardly seems relevant to static text.

Bob.

The biggest problem with text in Vegas is that, IMO, the titler was an afterthought that has never been improved since it was developed.
I was getting better text out of the Toaster on my old Amiga and that was over 20 years ago :-(
It was a 3rd party program that did true anti-aliasing on the text and it looked damn good.
Cayman Graphics (they make excellent and inexpensive titler software) did develop a plug-in for Vegas a few years ago (around $300 as I recall) but not enough folks bought it to make it's continued development worthwhile.

edit: scroll down Adam Wilt's Video Tidbits page to the section titled Character Generators & Titling for more detailed information on this topic.

Mike

That article by Adam Wilt is excellent.
Keep in mind that at the time the text generator for Vegas was written Sonic Foundry were totally focussed on web delivery only.
To me one of the most significant differences between Vegas and every other NLE that I've come accross is the others force the user to focus on the deliverable when starting a project. That makes a lot of sense because then all the plugins etc can change their processing to cope better with issues such as interlacing.

Bob.

In my experience the problem is the encoder - MPEG2 in this case. Try another encoder and it looks great.

From the article:
Running a simple soften or blur filter over the text will make it look a lot worse on the computer screen — but it will actually improve its appearance going through the codec. Not a lot of softening is necessary, but a little bit almost always helps.

A slight blur help, or try to add slightly soft text border.

Udi

Hi,

Doesn't the Pro Titler then produce better quality text? After all, it is based completely on new code that has nothing to do with the old Vegas titler? It should, at least theoretically if the old titler has such a burden that it was originally written for non-interlaced productions.

If the answer is NO - then this is again another thing that proves that the MPEG2 encoder in Vegas PRO is not very PRO! The mpeg2 output is not as crisp as the source material would make you to expect it to be, especially when down-converting from HD and comparing to commercial DVD's produced from start to end in SD. Be it either video OR texts.

Please do not start with the argumentation that those encoders used by Hollywood are so and so much more expensive. Why can't a "cheap" code produce pristine results. Or did SCS decide not to pay the royalty to MC for the rights to use a better codec?

So this might be a licensing issue - the output from the MC mpeg decoder could be better [degraded on purpose], but the licensing does not allow for better quality) ???

If the answer is yes - then SCS should remove the Pro suffix after Vegas. I always thought that if a video editing & rendering application claims to be pro (for broadcast and similar use) - then it should not comprise the quality because the use of purposely worsened codecs that are not up to par? I have tested the EDIUS 5.5 with same material as I put on the Vegas timeline. Comparing the results it is clear that EDIUS wins in sharpness. Don't get me wrong, I want to use Vegas, but I also would like that the output is as crisp as the Mpeg2 standards allows, without a poorly written (or on purpose compromised) encoder...

Cheers,

Christian