Upgraded to VMS6 - Where's 24p NTSC?

Steve R H wrote on 10/15/2005, 8:32 AM

I just upgraded from VMS4 to VMS6 Platinum. The new features look great, however, I was very disappointed to see that there is no template "DVD Architect 24p NTSC" for rendering to MPEG-2. Apparently 24p NTSC is not supported in VMS6.

I use VMS mainly to create DVDs of still JPEG images and short AVI videos (the video is 640x480 30fps progressive MJPEG). I use the pan & zoom features to add interest to still images and using VMS4, after much experimentation, I found that the smoothest DVD viewing resulted from the 24p NTSC rendering. Other methods tended to produce some "shimmering" or ugliness at times associated with the "movement" from panning or zooming. The 24p produced results so superior that all other methods were by comparison unacceptable. The 24p also worked great with the MJPEG AVIs.

Now, after just a little experimenting in VMS6, it appears I may need to settle for "unacceptable" or else revert back to VMS4. That would be too bad because the new features (especially pan & zoom) in VMS6 look real promising.

To make matters worse when I installed VMS6 I kept VMS4 installed "just to be safe". Problem is I installed VMS6 to the same SONY program folder where VMS4 resides. Obviously the new Mainconcept plugins overwrote the old ones during installation because now when I run VMS4 I no longer have the 24p template option - the mpeg choices are the same as in VMS6. So if I decide to "regress" back to VMS4 it appears I will need to uninstall both and reinstall VMS4.

I can't believe there is no way to get equivalent quality from VMS6 - but I am no expert. I've only had the upgrade for less than a week and I have a lot to learn. Does anyone have suggestions to help achieve results similar to 24p with VMS6?

Sorry for the long post, if more details would you help me, please ask. Thanks.

Comments

jimmyz wrote on 10/15/2005, 11:00 AM

Sometimes Sony gives with one hand and takes with the other.
I found in the help where it says 24fps is full vegas only and I can still do 24fps in vms4. Both are installed in the default directories.

Jose M. Estrada wrote on 10/19/2005, 8:57 PM

Well, I tried to do 24fps. Everything is good,but, when i click OK the following message appears:"The Template "NTSC DV 24(Inserting 2-3 pulldown)' cannot be loaded. VMS4 and VMS 6 Platinum.

djcc wrote on 10/20/2005, 6:25 AM

Never heard of anyone using 24p - I personally never understood why anyone would want 24 fps vs. 30. You noticed a reduction in "shimmering" of still photos? Are there any other advantages of 24p?

I have not yet upgraded to version 6, but I plan to.

djcc wrote on 10/20/2005, 2:17 PM

I took one of my mostly still photo slideshows and rendered it in version 4 with the 24p NTSC template. I thought it looked much worse, and didn't reduce "shimmering" at all. I also read a white paper on 24p from this Sony site. While most of it was over my head, it seemed to have more of a ramification with high definition than anything. Regardless, seems strange that a previous template would be removed in version 6, especially since that version claims to support HDV. Then again, could be deliberate to entice HDV users to upgrade to the full Vegas.

Hopefully, someone more intelligent than I can explain what it is all about.

Jose M. Estrada wrote on 10/20/2005, 3:33 PM

djcc, do you own VMS 6 Platinum? Or just VMS 4.

Steve R H wrote on 10/20/2005, 5:27 PM

Yes djcc, 24p reduced - or rather eliminated - the shimmering. But this is only during the "movement" associated with a panning or zooming still photo. Photos that are static don't seem to be affected and there seems to be no difference. Odd that you got opposite results from me. Did you try this on slideshow with panning or zooming of stills - or just static photos?

I don't know why the 24p works better - I don't understand this well enough and I agree one would think 30fps would be better. Also don't know what other uses one would have for 24p. All I really know is I can't get results as good with VMS6 without the 24p. Maybe it's a progressive vs. interlaced phenom. Or maybe I'm doing something else wrong. But I (and my wife) can see the difference very distinctly when viewing DVDs on SD CRT, on PC, and on our Infocus X1 front projector being fed by either 1080i upconverted or 480i from the DVD player. Haven't tried 480p.

eyethoughtso wrote on 10/21/2005, 10:21 AM

24 fps is what is used by the film industry. Any slower and the eye would catch the flickering. 30fps is used on video tape. Alot of audio MIDI apps like Cakewalk and Cubase line up the tracks to 30fps.

Superman wrote on 10/24/2005, 5:13 AM

If you search google, you'll see many sites where people believe that 24p gives video more of a film quality. I've tried it on a couple of home movies, and I would have to say I agree. It's not as sharp or vivid as digital vid, but neither is film. It gives it a really filmic look, and allows for longer movies on a disc (fewer frames per second).

djcc wrote on 10/24/2005, 6:50 AM

Searched the Vegas forum for more info, and also saw the "more filmlike" comments.

I was not overly thrilled with the results in the single test I did on a photo slide show. I would have to load up more material from backups to test anything else.

The test I did was on a slideshow with pans & crops. If there has ever been one major cause to "shimmering" I have noticed, it is when I have sharpened a photo in photoshop. Certain images look much better if sharpened while displayed as a still, or in print, but set that same image into motion in a show, and it tends to get this "shimmering" effect. Once I did a quick test between VMS & Windows Movie Maker - the "shimmering" seemed to be unique to VMS.

I need to do some video transfer soon and will try it again on video rather than stills and look for a difference.

If the 24p template is gone, could you render your show to AVI, then load it up in version 4 and re-render it using the 24p MPG template, or would that defeat the purpose? Again, I do not know enough about it, and do not personally see the advantage.

Shaz wrote on 10/24/2005, 6:58 AM

Um, isn't this all dependent on whether you used a 24p camera? Does 24p rendering mean anything at all if the original footage wasn't shot on a 24p camera? I don't think so, but I'm curious if that's what you're doing.