Vegas 6 and PAL render

Laurence wrote on 5/21/2005, 12:43 PM
Has anyone else noticed how much better NTSC to PAL is in Vegas 6? Whereas it used to look pretty mediocre, now PAL rendered footage looks about the same quality as a 24p render (which is pretty darned good)!.

I just did an experiment. Since 60i to 24p in Vegas 6 looks so good, I did a 24p render and changed that to PAL using DVFilm Atlantis. I did it with Atlantis because it automates the typical "get rid of the 3:2:2:3 pulldown, speed up 4% and expand the image to fill the PAL 756 x 480 frame. The resulting PAL looked pretty much perfect. I was quite excited until I decided to render the same project directly to PAL from the NTSC timeline. To my surprise, aside from the speed change, both renders looked about the same, which is to say almost identical to a perfect 24p render.

I'm convinced. NTSC to PAL in Vegas 6 looks incredible. Does anyone know if going the other way around: PAL to NTSC looks this good too? I imagine that it does, but I have no PAL source material other than the stuff I've converted.

Comments

farss wrote on 5/21/2005, 4:16 PM
I've always found the PAL to NTSC conversion in Vegas (even 5) to be very good. To get any better you need something that does motion compensation during the de-interlace phase. Only negative apsect then of the PAL->NTSC conversion is motion blur, hardly a big issue, some may even prefer it.
Bob.
Laurence wrote on 5/21/2005, 10:29 PM
You have to try it in Vegas 6. The motion blur used to bother me but I honestly can't see it in version 6. I used to hate things like fast pans and shakey camera shots where the resolution really seemed to drop in version 5 and below. I don't see any of that now.
farss wrote on 5/21/2005, 10:37 PM
My Vegas 6 machine is having a holiday for a week but I'll try it when it gets back to work.
Bob.