As some of you may or may not have seen, I've recently had a rather lengthy thread going in the "Wedding / Event Videography Techniques" forum and had a lot of help with getting some pretty good video to work with for the DVD Production. Here's a link to that thread...

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/495672-amateur-recital-video-production.html

Now I am in the editing phase and am pretty new to using Vegas (Pro 10) so I am looking for some help in this Vegas forum. We started some editing discussions in the other forum, but thought I would move the editing questions to a new thread here since my questions would fit in better.

*******************************************************************************
Here is my latest question from the "other" thread...

"I finally sat down last night to review the video that I captured with the CX160 cam. This cam was unmanned in the balcony so I didn't get a chance to immediately make adjustments once the curtains opened and the lights came on (another lesson learned). I manually set the exposure to a level I thought was going to be good but after reviewing last night I found it was too high (during playback the data code on the screen showed 12dB). About 2 hours into the show, I finally got a chance to go check this cam and noticed the exposure was too high so I took it down a few notches. The picture quality during playback improved drastically (now 3dB in data code). About an hour later, I went back to this cam again to swap media and felt that the exposure could still be adjusted down a litltle more, so made one more small adjustment. At this final exposure setting the picture was PERFECT (now 0dB in data code).

So in summary, the first 2 hours of footage from the CX160 is not useable in its current state. The next hour is good and can be used as is. The last 2 hours are perfect from my perspective.

Is there an easy way to have Vegas correct the exposure for those first two hours of video with the exposure set too high? I've done some searches in the forum on this topic and I can't find anything that an inexperienced user like me can easily understand."
********************************************************************************************

I am looking for advice here on how to possibly make some corrections to take away some of the "brightness" specifically from the dancers. I've tried several FX on my own, but I'm not getting anywhere with it.

The following is a sample clip (YouTube - ‪CLIP‬‏ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0eVj7teKBc)) and the clip can also be downloaded in it's original format from here (clip.m2ts (http://www.mediafire.com/file/nh9jjj9pg2c3lug/clip.m2ts)).

The video does not look too bad on on my PC monitor, but the dancers are REALLY bright on my plasma TV when played back in HD.

Try the levels control and then you may have to change color a little. In future you may find it better to set the CX160 at AE shift -3 or 4 with spot focus set on the center stage. It should be good for most things. Not sure if the CX160 has that range of AE shift but the SR11 and XR500 I have will do that but the newer CX700 I just got will not change that much.

Ron Evans

Hi Brad

The clip isn't that bad!!! Remember that the camera is looking at a very very dark background so it wants to lift the camera gain.

I'm guessing here but I assume that you have tried basic plugins like Sony Brightness and contrast????

Try dropping both sliders down to around -10 and then adjust the last slider so the FX is pretty much centered .... I find that sometimes you get a much better result by setting brightness to say -10 and then "play" with the contrast...you probably won't need as much contrast adjustment as you think.

Chris

Interesting, had a play with the original clip for about the last half hr.
I agree, its not that bad, but, I can see why you may want it to be a bit better.
The bottom line is (as always) you cant unburn a chicken.
The details in the highlighted areas are gone, and you cant get them back,
but,
if you wanted to retrieve as much as you can, here's one way-
If you have Cineform render to that first,
If not, open your scopes to RGB parade, View-Video scopes.
Apply a colour corrector, what you are aiming to do is bring any clipped highlights down,
Lift your Gamma, Lift your contrast, drop your Saturation, Drop your gain.
watch your scopes, aim to get a very soft image in the middle of the spectrum.
Render it out to something lossless when you think its as good as its going to get.
Bring it back in, add some sharpen, add some colour, add some contrast.
You will end up with something different than what you had, whether its better or not is subjective.
If you were going to apply a film look or some diffusion, this process is worthwhile as you will stop anymore clipping than whats already happened.
But really..... its not that bad.

forgot the pics

Thanks guys for the input! Maybe I am being a little picky here, but I'm not sure what to expect as this was my first time ever doing something like this. I agree that on my PC monitor, the picture is not that bad. However, when I watch it on my plasma TV, it looks a lot worse to me. Maybe it's my TV settings as Dave has mentioned in the other thread. Also, the final video will be delivered in DVD format, so I'm not sure how different the picture may look once I get the final output to that level. I guess I should try a sample to see.

The footage from this CX160 is only going to be used to cover up my mistakes that I made with the XR500 which was my main cam. The CX160 was fixed at the angle in the clips for the entire 5 hour show. The CX160 doesn't have the AE shift that Ron mentions, it only has a slider bar on the view screen to manually adjust the exposure. If I would have been manning this cam, I would have noticed right away that the exposure was too high and lowered it as needed (like I did when checking the cam after 2 hours). With the XR500, I did have the AE shift set to -4 and I got a great picture from that cam. However, with me being new to this world of videography, I made a lot of mistakes with XR500 that I would like to fix by cutting to the CX160.

I've already tried playing around with some FX in Vegas - level controls, brightness and contrast, etc. I couldn't come up with anything better than the original myself. Thanks to Gerald for making some adjustments on my clip and posting some samples. I like what you've done, but I think overall the entire scene got too dark and would be too much of a contrast when cutting from the XR500 to this.

I think I will just live with the picture the way it is and just make as little cuts as necessary to this cam.

Yes, it does get dark,
If you move to After Effects (if you had access to it)
you can do this in about 90 sec with a Luma matte and then correct that without darkening your whole scene.

"However, when I watch it on my plasma TV, it looks a lot worse to me. Maybe it's my TV settings as Dave
has mentioned in the other thread."

Might well be the tv settings if the unit has not been calibrated. Manufacturer and store settings are often pretty bright. They think it gives the tv "punch." Do you have access to another tv? Also, try it on an LCD tv.

I think I will just live with the picture the way it is and just make as little cuts as necessary to this cam.

For this first project I think that is a wise choice. I would just play with the levels a little in the 160 footage where you cut to that camera so that it matches the footage from your XR500. It doesn't have to match perfectly but just to make sure it doesn't become shockingly overexposed. With the change in angle or focal length it should be unnoticed to the average viewer.

-Garrett

Hello everyone - it's been a while! After a nice vacation, I'm deep into the editing of my recital video and obviously back looking for advice!

I have created titles which I want to appear at the beginning of each performance. Below is a link to a sample. My intention is to have the sparkling stars and the phrase "Studio L - Dancing with the Stars - 2011" at the beginning of every dance and the name or title of the dance will change just below accordingly. Is my banner and title too big? Is it too redundant to keep using the same banner on every performance. I am personally pretty pleased with how it looks, but this is my first attempt at such a task and I am looking for opinions of those with experience.

YouTube - ‪Banner Sample.m2ts‬‏ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoAhH8V715I)

Thanks!

Hi Brad

Downloading the clip now, I think it's an easy "save", let me see what my typical tweaks can do, it's not that bad on my calibrated monitors.

The banner looks pretty good, but you might want to consider a traditional "upper thirds" all the way across to make it look a bit more pro? It's still "cool" <wink>. Watch a few news or sports broadcasts for ideas.

I would suggest you look at deinterlace options... the "combing" is pretty distracting IMO, also might try rendering your output to 24p, that's my typical final render - makes for a more filmic look, and smaller file sizes. You may or may not like the cadence of progressive, but I've found Vegas seems to render out 24p fairly clean - you may want to test a short clip and see if you like it or not.

There are a few blown out areas, but try "brightness and contrast", playing with the contrast center - you can use multiple FX instances with different centers. The other FX is Sony Color Corrector - fiddle with the gain and gamma slider settings, they might help a bit. I didn't get great results as the framing is a tad wide, and there's definitely a few spots where there's just too much blown out, but it was possible to improve it a bit. If it's only for cutaways, it's not quite as critical, and hopefully you won't need it much, IIRC you mentioned you got it tamed down later in the show, so perhaps you'll have to just tweak certain parts...

I kind of agree with Dave about putting the banner all way across the frame. Also, I might dial down the opacity of the banner (making the dark background more translucent) and would probably just give the name of the dance and the dancer(s) rather than repeating the name of the whole show for each dance. Those are just personal preferences, though, and I do not see anything wrong with what you've chosen. Frankly, if you are pleased, then it is good enough.

Not sure why redundancy would be a problem. Seems to me that it would be necessary with as much video as you have, plus it ties things together.

Because this is a dance recital (high motion, high contrast), and because you will be supplying the video on DVDs, I'm not sure I understand Dave's suggestion about rendering for 24p. For dance recitals, I render to interlaced DVD formats. While I've experimented with 24p and 30p for my own entertainment, I've never been happy with the results for recitals on DVD.

I suspect that the combing is an artifact of web video and, for that, Dave may well be correct. If you will be posting some of it on, it may be a good idea to do a separate progressive render for that.

Are your titles in the title safe zone? I try to format my titles so they are still easily visible when the DVD is played back in panscan mode on a 4:3 CRT television.

If the DVD is intended to be played in the lobby of the dance studio for promotional purposes, then it makes sense to put the title "Studio L - Dancing with the Stars" everywhere. In this case, one might arrange tiny 10 second highlights of each performance along with b-roll, special effects, sound bites and other advertising in a near random sequence that repeats for an endless loop.

If the DVD is intended for home viewing I would only put "Studio L - Dancing with the Stars" at the beginning, intermission and end, or maybe just at the beginning.

Interlaced 60i on DVD is good for dance.

HI Brad,

Good to see that you are coming along with your recital video. It looks pretty good. I consider bringing the banner down to the lower thirds. For me it's what is more often done and has a more familiar feel. I'd consider replacing the "Studio-L..." in the larger font with the dancers name and if you can get the name of their dance or song title I'd put that in the second line. I agree to only have the Studo-L... at the beginning, intermission and end. I'd also have the date come up at the beginning. It's always good to have that so when people watch it a few years from now they can recall when it was. For the way the titles appear, rather than having the top line fade in and the lower line fly in from the left, consider having the top line fly in from the right as the lower flies in from the left. Have them start and finish at the same time. Then have them fade out the same way, either a uniform dissolve or both continue across the way they came in.

I'd also play with having the black background opaque. Maybe make it about 70%. that will lighten things up a bit and give a higher end feel. For the lettering I'd also experiment with using a drop shadow to give it some dimension.

As Jay brought up this being a dance recital and there being a lot of high contrast and movement is the exact reason you'd want a progressive frame rate. I'd usually suggest 30p for dance recitals. But I have shot and produced 24p videos for them too. It really depends on the mood and feel the studio wants. But the key is to start out with the frame rate you want to end up with. If you shot the video in 60i, unless you have a good converting software I would not deinterlace it. Vegas does not do a good job nor do many other NLE's out there, including Premier or FCP. The reason you want to use progressive for high motion or high contrast events is that the interlacing becomes more noticeable and is even more pronounced with the larger screen LCD's now. Most later model DVD players output progressive video and it's what LCD screens really look better with. With the faster motion, the difference between the alternating fields becomes more noticeable. if there were no motion it wouldn't matter. And here's the best part, if you shoot in a progressive frame rate, then interlace the final output, when it's shown on an interlaced tv or progressive tv it will look exactly the same. It's the same as PsF. That's how you get a 1080/60i Bluray to essentially be a 1080/30p video. But again, the important thing is to shoot for your final delivery. I don't think I've shot 60i for a couple of years now.

I'm now in the thick of getting a recital punched out that I shot over this last weekend. Two shows on Saturday and Sunday so I'm currently sitting on 220GB of raw footage that's getting transcoded into Cineform AVI's now. Then it's a quick edit and master the DVD's. Gotta get it don't quickly because I've got another show to do this Saturday. I hate how all the dance studios like to have their recitals around the same time. Here, we have at least three shools who have their recital on the same weekend every year.

Well, good luck and keep us posted on how things are going.

-Garrett

Thanks for the input on the titles. I'll play around with them some more. My wife was the one who told me that she didn't think the "Studio L..." portion of the title should be on every title. I wasn't sure if I agreed hence my posting here for advice from you pros. I think I will remove that portion as it can be part of the Menu screens at the beginning and part of a credit roll at the end. Plus the DVD cover and label will also contain that information so I too am now thinking that it's a little overkill.

I really like the flashing stars in the title, but I'm having a hard time resizing and playing with its properties because it is an animated gif. Maybe I'll shoot for another option. Most titles are only going to show the name of the song being performed. I have about 12 solo dances and then another 45 group dances and I won't be able to list the names of all the performers in the larger groups. I'm learning as I go so it took me a long time to create the title in the posted clip. So far, I've only gotten through editing those first 12 solos so I've still got a lot of work to do and not a whole lot of free time to do it.

I haven't thought a whole lot about the rendering part of this project as I was thinking that would be one of the final steps. I know nothing at all about interlaced vs progressive. I believe all my video was shot at 60i. I think I rendered the clip that I posted on youtube as Sony AVCHD (mt2s) with output setting the same as original (not sure though) but I'm not sure what YouTube did to it as it was uploading.

The final output of this project needs to be DVD format for home viewing. The dance studio has nothing to do with the video. I have about 60 orders for the DVD which I am assuming came from family of performers and staff at the studio. My goal was to create this as a 2-disc set. I am hoping I can maintain some good quality and still be able to fit about 5 hours worth of footage on 2 discs. Right now I have the entire performance broken up into 5 segments each as individual projects in Vegas. I will be outputting them from Vegas and bringing them in DVD Architect to create menus and then ultimately to the DVD format. I haven't really played with any rendering settings from Vegas yet, but was hoping to experiment with some smaller clips at some point. I've read a lot on this forum about this and I can honestly say I'm confused and have no idea where to start so if anyone has any good suggestions on render output settings to DVDA, please let me know.

For dance you will need smooth motion so in my opinion the slower frame rates do not cut it at all. Your video is of an event and that is what the people will expect. As close to the live experience as possible. I would stay with 60i all the way which is what is the standard for DVD. I do dance and theatre and have no titles on the video so that the show plays through as if one is in the audience with chapter marks at all the dance numbers or other events in the program.. All dances names and credits etc are in the DVD authoring. For tape, titles were necessary on the tape but since everything is now disc I stopped putting titles on the video itself other than the titles at the beginning and final credits.

Downconverting is difficult to achieve and Vegas( or any of the other NLE's) does not do a good job of that at the data rate you will need to get everything on 2 discs. I would render from Vegas as an uncompressed HD file format then downconvert/encode in TMPGenc T5. In my testing this has the easiest and best downconvert and will just then go into DVD Architect for authoring either SD DVD or Bluray encodes. If you do not have TMPGenc there is a full functional trial so time things so that you can do all your encodes within the trial. If you like it you can then buy.

That was some long dance show though. Mine are normally over in about 2 1/2 hours or so at most. There are Junior and Senior version though.

Ron Evans

Ron... My intention all along is to try to keep this "as close to the live experience as possible." I am cutting very little from the original footage and allowing the flow to follow the actual event with awards and recognitions between performances, etc. With that being said, I may just take your advice on leaving out the titles as I would be including all that information in the authoring anyway as you stated. I was having fun though learning how to create "lower thirds."

Thanks also for the advice on downconverting. When you say "render from Vegas as an uncompressed HD file format," what is the best format you would be referring to? Also, if I do the downconverting / encoding in TMPGenc T5, I assume I will need to plan well to make sure the content will fit onto 2 discs at this stage. I am assuming I don't want DVD Architect to do any further compression to fit to the DVDs? Also, how much additional time/space will the authoring in DVD Architect require? What format would I convert to from TMPGenc T5 (MPEG-2 DVD)?

I apologize for probably not using correct terminology and asking so many questions, but I am so inexperienced at this and that's why I am here looking for help. All the help I have received thus far is MUCH appreciated.

This is where preferences will come into your mix and it's up to you to decide what you think is best. I actually find more distracting motion blur from 60i than 30p. People get confused and think that 60i is giving the a higher frame rate but it actually is not. with 60i you still have a frame rate of 30 frames per second (really 29.97fps but for ease of reference we'll just call it 30fps). I'm sure all here know that but when you look at the footage you'll actually see more blurring and you loose some detail when interlacing the frames back. Now if you could shoot 60p that would give you a higher frame rate but as of now no standard system will play 1080/60p. Bluray can only play 720/60p.

When I produce dance shows I don't try to recreate the live experience. My reference is actually the live dance shows that you see put on by professional dance troupes. Unless it's a ballet I add lower thirds that usually have the name of the dance, class level or group name, and sometimes the style of dance (jazz, hip-hop, lyrical, etc.). I also cut out the extra pauses that occur between numbers. For some shows that can be a substantial amount of time and taking it out allows me to up the bitrate. or fit it all onto fewer discs. In addition I have a credit roll at the end. My goal is to make the DVD or BR as close to what they would buy if they went out and bought a disc of River Dance or something like that. It makes the dancers and family feel like it's something special. In today's market you have to make your product stand out or they'll feel like they could just go and video it themselves and throw it onto a DVD. There are two ways to stand out, either by having superior quality in the picture, which is possible through equipment and technique. Or, you have to make your DVD's look more professional than what someone could do at home. Again that's just my way of thinking.

But as a quick example, last year I did the school my son attends a favor and produced the DVD of their school talent show. It's a pretty big deal for them and they sell the DVD's to help the PTA. I did my usual minimal setup. Two main cameras, one for group stage acts and one only to pick up a piano that was not brought up on stage for each act but was off to the side. I created the DVD with usual lower thirds. This year, they had another company to it with three cameras. The quality of the video this year was not very good and the DVD was pretty much what they've had in the past. Almost a straight replica of the performances with chapter marks at each act but no lower thirds, no credits, opening was very blah, and really no menu's. Believe it or not the school has gotten a lot of negative feedback from this year's DVD and have asked if I could do their show next year. They wanted to book me almost a year in advance. Unfortunately I can't commit that far in advance for pro bono work. I really didn't think what I did was great because I couldn't put a lot of time into it but it was enough to really set it apart from what other production companies have done. And remember this will be a calling card of sorts.

For rendering TMPGenc is a good way to go and will give you better results than Vegas for downresing. I'm cheap and didn't want to spend the money so I use VDub to do the scaling and then render the mpg2 in Vegas. That gives me the same quality as the real killer is in the scaling. Also, for the amount of footage you have if you render to an uncomperssed HD AVI you're going to have huge files. You may want to render to a good intermediate codec. Lagarith is a good intermediate AVI codec that is free so it's worth giving it a try. If you google it you'll find it and be able to install it on your system.

Don't let DVDA recompress your files. Create a DVD compliant mpg2 in either Vegas or some other program such as TMPGenc and an AC3 audio track. try to keep your total bitrate under 8Mbps. The DVD spec allows you to go over that but I've had trouble with older players with bitrates over that. I'll push upwards of 2 hours to maybe 2:15 if there isn't a lot of fast motion. If there is, I keep it at 1:45 per disc. Lowering the bitrate enough to fit over 2 hours on each disc for something like a dance show will most likely give you some really bad compression artifacts.

Again, just my way of doing things which isn't necessary the best but it works for me.

-Garrett

Well 60i has the temporal motion of 60 exposures a second. The camera is actually taking shots every 1/60 a second but only recording fields, half the vertical resolution. The 29.97 frames comes from the fact that the time code refers to frames, so 60 fields is 30 frames, 2 fields is one frame. In drop code this is 29.97. These fields are of course 1/60sec apart and do not belong to each other. Unfortunately 29.97fps does not relate to the motion at all just the time code.

30p is 30 frames a second so has the temporal motion of 30 exposures a second, half the exposure rate of 60i. On a CRT 60i will be smooth, that was the system it was designed for. On a LCD or plasma the 60i has to be deinterlaced and presented at 60P for the display which has a refresh rate of 60hz. Every time one views an interlaced video on a flat panel one is dependent on the capabilities of the deinterlacing algorithm and the scaling algorithm used in the panel. They will all be different. Higher refresh rates give the deinterlacing and scaling algorithms more data to work with in creating the progressive image the display needs. As an aside the only way to truly see 24P is on a set that has a refresh rate a multiple of 24 ie 48, 72, 96, 120 etc. 60hz refresh must always use 2:3 pulldown so one is then watching a 2:3 cadence not 24P. This is currently only possible from 24P Bluray over HDMI for players that understand 24P and TVs that have a refresh rate a multiple of 24 AND respond correctly to the HDMI input.

As to export from Vegas, Garrett recommendation of Lagarith will work though you may want to really see how big some of the other choices may get. For me editing in Edius I use Canopus HQ which produces files about 4 times the size of the original. TMPGenc has a preset for DVD and allows you to see how much your file is filling the disc and I make sure that I set limit of 8000 and do not fill disc beyond about 4G, AC3 audio. Select separate video and audio as encode choice and you can use in DVD Architect without any re-encodes. I found that although VDub does do a good downconvert I needed to add some sharpening and chroma to get an image I was happy with and then encode to MPEG2 for DVD. TMPGenc does it all in one go but does cost.

Ron Evans

<Unfortunately 29.97fps does not relate to the motion at all just the time code.>

Not sure what you are intending to say there, but of course the frame rate is 29.97 precisely -- the description as 30 is a convenient but wrong label. So the fields are actually 59.94 per second, as you'd expect.

This is why there is 'drop frame' nomenclature -- by dropping some periodic frame address labels, though not any actual frames, the timecode can be used to describe the passage of time without applying some sort of corrective formula. In effect, the corrective formula is applied as part of the naming convention so that a timecode of 5:30 does in fact describe a duration of 5 minutes 30 seconds, despite the fact that the actual frames are actually just a little over 1/30th of a frame each .... Clear as mud?

Sorry to be a pedant, but you seemed to be saying something rather different.

Resume normal behaviour ...

Cheers,
GB

The drop frame time code for 60i is 29.97 so from a time code point of view there are 30 frames a second non-drop. But one must not confuse this with exposure rate. 60i has 60 exposures a second, not 30, they just happen to be fields not full frames so only count as half a frame. But they are real pictures with half the vertical resolution. That is what gives 60i the smooth motion as the temporal motion is the same as 60P. Not as clean as 60P because the only way to watch it is either on a CRT or dependent on the de interlacing and scaling of the display.

30P is not the same as 60i though from a timecode point of view both are 29.97 drop frame. This was the main point I wanted to make. 30P is truly 30 frames a second in exposures and timecode. 60i is 60 exposures a second and 30 frames a second timecode.

Ron Evans

...or dependent on the de interlacing and scaling of the display.


This is perhaps why I don't find 60i very pleasing on modern LCD or Plasma screens. The loss in resolution is more noticeable on the larger screens. The "half" frame idea was a concept based on the perceptible number of scan lines that it was thought that people could process. I don't find the motion blur from 30p as much of a distraction as the loss of resolution.

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly with regard to 29.97fps. It is in fact not 30fps. It is only 29.97fps. Drop frame or Non Drop Frame is only a method of keeping track of time. Drop frame refers to dropping one frame out of every 1000 to keep track of time for editing purposes. Drop frame timecode or non drop frame has no bearing on the actual frame rate. Maybe we're saying the same thing but I just don't want to get people confused as there is an actual 30 fps and 29.97fps settings when rendering.

Dear Brad,

This discussion about how to create the best quality DVD is excellent and indeed there are many better quality methods to master a DVD than what's built into Vegas. However, Vegas and DVD Architect actually do a pretty good job on their own. To keep things simple for this first project, I would suggest

1. Render from Vegas using one of the 1080i blu-ray disk presets.
2. Import these high-definition files into DVD Architect.
3. Adjust DVD Architect so it will encode each project to fit on a 4.7GB DVD.
4. Watch each disk on both an LCD and a CRT type television before duplicating.

In addition to being simple, this method allows DVD Architect to encode with the maximum bitrate that fits on the DVD as well as giving you the ability to easily master a blu-ray disk later.

If the DVDs will be sold for more than 10 dollars each, I would suggest full color artwork on the disk surface as well as packaging the disks in standard DVD boxs with full color covers. If you don't have your own disk printer, there are many duplication houses which charge about 2 or 3 dollars per disk. Good disk and cover artwork have an amazing effect on customer satisfaction and can be very effective marketing even if you only plan to do this as a hobby.

-Eric

30P is not the same as 60i though from a timecode point of view both are 29.97 drop frame. This was the main point I wanted to make. 30P is truly 30 frames a second in exposures and timecode. 60i is 60 exposures a second and 30 frames a second timecode.

No, there are 29.97 FPS in both 30p and 60i -- the latter has 59.94 fields per second. You seem to be suggesting that 29.97 is just some sort of timecode detail ... it is in fact the real frame rate. I won't continue this as it really doesn't address the OPs questions, but note that 29.97 is the actual frame rate, not just some sort of naming oddity.

Cheers,
GB

For rendering TMPGenc is a good way to go and will give you better results than Vegas for downresing. I'm cheap and didn't want to spend the money so I use VDub to do the scaling and then render the mpg2 in Vegas. That gives me the same quality as the real killer is in the scaling. Also, for the amount of footage you have if you render to an uncomperssed HD AVI you're going to have huge files. You may want to render to a good intermediate codec. Lagarith is a good intermediate AVI codec that is free so it's worth giving it a try. If you google it you'll find it and be able to install it on your system.

I tried rendering a one hour section of my project last night as an uncompressed HD AVI and I didn't have enough disc space on my 500 Gb drive. I got a "disk full" error when the AVI file reached 400 Gb. I may try the Lagarith codec tonight. After installing Lagarith, will I have an option in Vegas to render using it or is there some other workflow that I will need to consider?

I always edit dance shows per section, and then compile these into the finished product - much easier to manage, and quicker in terms of any rendering time. Files are smaller, and system demands lower. A multi cam short sequence is better than an entire hours worth. I also find it less difficult to mess up!

No, there are 29.97 FPS in both 30p and 60i -- the latter has 59.94 fields per second. You seem to be suggesting that 29.97 is just some sort of timecode detail ... it is in fact the real frame rate. I won't continue this as it really doesn't address the OPs questions, but note that 29.97 is the actual frame rate, not just some sort of naming oddity.

Cheers,
GB

I will not continue either but I suggest people look up the detail on Wikipedia and see the real source of drop and non drop time code and the reason they were introduced. The reason we have 29.97 and 59.94 is purely in NTSC colour to keep the timecode aligned with the real world clock. It is a time code detail that is very important for sync to other sources like audio that do not have the same issues. In non drop time code there are in fact 30 frames or 60 fields of video. Flags are imbedded in the video signal to tell the timecode counters in decks etc to drop frame counts to keep the video timecode in sync ( or close) to the realtime clocks.

Ron Evans

Here's a brief PDF that goes through the history of timecode and how it's applied in the NTSC video environment.
It is an older PDF but the underlying principles remain the same to this day.

Thanks for the link Mike. The dropframe nomenclature is necessary precisely because the frame rate is not 30Fps but rather is 29.97 ...

Think of it this way: The original video signal was exactly 30Fps, then colour was introduced. Each colour frame needed a little more information ... so every frame was extended by a fraction, resulting in only 'room' for 29.97 frames in a second. That is and remains the proper framerate, and is what all video devices use as their baseline. The difference is modest, and in many instances irrelevant -- but it is an absolute fact that the frame rate is 29.97 not 30.

Dropframe naming was designed precisely because of this -- both dropframe and non-drop video use the same rate of 29.97, but dropframe naming makes for easier planning of the actual length of something. The same program, using non-drop naming, will not be the length implied in the timecode ... because the frame rate is 29.97 not 30!

HTH
GB

Makes me glad I live in a PAL area guys! :-)

I lived & worked in the UK for a while too -- and frame rates there are certainly easier to grasp! It did annoy me to no end though that movies on television were typically just played back at 25Fps from their original 24Fps source; though I have nothing like 'perfect pitch' it did sound odd to have familiar macho actors speaking in voices that were just a little too high-pitched ...

Cheers,
GB

Yes PAL doesn't have this problem.

Another reference

SMPTE time code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMPTE_time_code#Drop_frame_timecode)



Ron Evans

Uncompressed 1080i video is about 420GB per hour and completely unnecessary if you are going to be mastering to DVD. Render with one of the 1080i blu-ray presets for 11GB per hour.

Another reference

SMPTE time code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMPTE_time_code#Drop_frame_timecode)



Your link is absolutely correct -- but it doesn't support your earlier statements, rather it confirms that the framerate is never 30Fps but is in fact always 29.97. The fact that dropframe timecode is designed to 'mask' the discrepancy between the actual framerate of video and the nominal convenience of calling it '30 Fps' doesn't change the fact that the framerate is actually 29.97

Cheers,
GB

Thanks Eric for bringing this thread back to my latest dilemma. I was just about to come on here and ask about what format I could best use for rendering a smaller file that would still work well with TMPGEnc for downsizing to DVD format.

I've been reading the information on the following site for TMPGEnc settings and I'm feeling more comfortable using this program knowing some suggested settings to use. (DVD-HQ : Configuring TMPGEnc for high-quality DVD-compliant MPEG-2 (http://dvd-hq.info/dvd_compression.php)) The question in my mind was still what format to render from Vegas to use in TMPGEnc. I'll try another one tonight.

I tried rendering a one hour section of my project last night as an uncompressed HD AVI and I didn't have enough disc space on my 500 Gb drive. I got a "disk full" error when the AVI file reached 400 Gb. I may try the Lagarith codec tonight. After installing Lagarith, will I have an option in Vegas to render using it or is there some other workflow that I will need to consider?

Hi Brad,

After installing Lagarith, go to render your project as an AVI and then cutomize the setup. One of the options on the video tab will be the codec used. when you pull down the list you should see Lagarith as one of the options. Sorry I'm away from my editing computer right now so I can't give you any screen grabs or confirm all of the nomenclature.

I can't remember the exact size of files but if memory serves me an hour of 1920x1080 video is about 40GB.

-Garrett

Brad, the Bluray preset under Mainconcept MPEG 2 will also work and would give you the HD file ready for making Bluray discs as well.

Ron Evans

Another thought... I've already been doing a lot of editing in Vegas with the original video files and have spent a lot of time adding chapter markers to assist authoring in DVD Architect. If I render out of Vegas to an intermediate file and then downsize with TMPGEnc, am I going to lose all my markers?

Brad I render a Bluray preset with markers and use this in DVD Architect. When I encode an SD version with TMPGenc I just replace the media in DVD Architect and all the markers stay. You have to make sure that the authoring does not have more than 18 buttons on a page which is the limit for SD DVD. That way the BLuray and the SD disc are the same authoring done just once.

Ron Evans

Geof I think we continue to talk at cross purposes focusing on our own view of things. My main issue is not with the fact that NTSC is 29.97Dropframe its with the confusion over interlace and progressive temporal motion. I should have stayed maybe with 59.94 fields a sec to make my point. I have recently got a Sony CX700 which will shoot at 60P. On my Sony 240hz LCD there is no difference between 60i and 60P on simple viewing. There is a difference when extracting stills as would be expected. On the Panasonic Plasma there is a very slight difference. The interpolation of the 240hz Sony makes the 60i and 60p look much the same.

Ron Evans

Following Ron's procedure will allow DVDA to retain the chapter markers. The only thing you have to be careful of when using TMPGenc to create the DVD mpg2 is that the chapter markers have to be on an I-Frame. When rendering in Vegas you can force I-Frames as all markers. With TMPGenc it may not create an I-Frame at the chapter points. If that happens DVDA will show the marker in yellow. That means it is not a legal chapter marker that DVDA recognizes and you will have to manually adjust the chapter point.

-Garrett

Hey Brad,
Too litle too late for this project, but for future reference, I recommend immediately trying color curves to tweak such brightening/darkening circumstances in post. It allows seperate, simultaneous treatment of both the highlights and darks, preserving the one while you mess with the other, or allows you to mess with both at the same time.
I also prefer just a touch of sharpness usually. Even though I leave the slider at zero, I still find it mysteriously makes it better.
FWIW, I've also found that a video that I've shot too dark has way more discoverable information using color curves, compared to one that I've shot that was too bright with blown out highlights. The blown out highlights have zero recoverable info. Consequently, when post-editing is the intention, I prefer to err on the dark side when shooting a difficult scene.

Sam... Thanks for the advice - looks pretty good! It may not be too late because the "bright" clips that I am using are only from my secondary camera angle which I am only using sparingly to cover mistakes with the main cam. I only have about 10 short cuts to this secondary cam on my timelines right now so it shouldn't take too much get them corrected if I can figure out exactly what you did.


Back to the rendering out of Vegas to an intermediate format to use in TMPGenc - I tried a Bluray preset under Mainconcept MPEG 2 and the file format was not recognized by TMPGenc (I think it was an AVC file extension). I am also trying to render as a Sony AVCHD (mt2s) format to use in TMPGenc, but the render for a 1 hour project took just over 8 hours (is this even a good format to use?). I'm really struggling here with what format to render out of Vegas for use in TMPGenc.

Sam... Thanks for the advice - looks pretty good! It may not be too late because the "bright" clips that I am using are only from my secondary camera angle which I am only using sparingly to cover mistakes with the main cam. I only have about 10 short cuts to this secondary cam on my timelines right now so it shouldn't take too much get them corrected if I can figure out exactly what you did..
Check out the veg file I included in my post. Open up the effects applied to the clip on the timeline to see exactly what I did. Hopefully it's accessible there. Use the same clip you posted online as the source.
I'm assuming this will work for you ;-)

Brad,

I would recommend not rendering to an mpeg2 or avc file to be taken into another program or even Vegas which will then again compress the files. mpg and avc are highly compressed codecs. That is why they can create a nice compact file. However, they were never meant to be used in the manner you are using them for. You want to preserve the most information and hence quality that you until you are ready to render your final delivery format. In your case that is your DVD which will be an mpg2 file. For all steps in between you should be using a good intermediate codec. There are several available depending on your NLE and if you want to pay for them or not. working with Vegas are a number of them but the two most common are Cineform if you want to pay for it and Lagarith for a good free alternative. Both will create avi files that are readable in both Vegas and TMPGenc.

Part of the reason your renders are taking so long could be because of a few reasons. If you have a lot of graphics or text it will slow down considerably. Any sharpening or cleaning up of noise through the use of plugins like Netvidoe will really slow down things. And, taking an compressed video and rendering to another compressed video such as and AVC to AVC or MPG will slow the render down as it is having to interpret the compression then reprocess the video to compress it again. Both mpg2 and avc are interframe compression codecs meaning each frame is dependent on one or more adjacent frames. So, to render each frame your computer has to look at adjacent frames and decide what is important to render new or just tell the player to repeat from the previous frame.

8 hours to do a one hour video if heavily color graded and graphics is a little long but not unheard of. I rendered a two hour running time video that had a lot of color correction and had Neatvideo cleaning up some noise with moderate sharpening, that render took almost 30 hours. It also had a some high motion graphics so that's an extreme case.

-Garrett

I am not at my editing PC right now, but I believe Vegas Pro 10 already gives me the option to render using Cineform. I also need to try the Lagarith as suggested.

I am still deep into the editing proces right now, but I am trying to use a 1 hour portion of my project to try different rendering settings for downconversion to DVD. I already have a DVD format directly out of vegas, but I also want to try TMPGEnc to compare the difference in quality. I'm trying to experiment simultaneously as I am editing so when the editing is done, I'm ready to go at it.

Dear Brad,

As an alternative to a two disk DVD set, you could consider a blu-ray + DVD package. Squeeze the entire 4 to 5 hour program onto a single 4.7GB DVD using 352x480 resolution with 4:3 aspect ratio; also master the program in wide-screen high-defintion onto a 25GB blu-ray disk using H264 encoding. The DVD will look fine on an old CRT television and the blu-ray will look better than even the best DVD on an HD LCD television.

-Eric

Check out the veg file I included in my post. Open up the effects applied to the clip on the timeline to see exactly what I did. Hopefully it's accessible there. Use the same clip you posted online as the source.
I'm assuming this will work for you ;-)

Much thanks to Sam for the Color Curve suggestion for cleaning up the "bright" clips!!! Last night I was able to dramatically improve all the cuts on my timelines! I had only used limited cuts because of the brightness, but now I feel more comfortable cutting with the adjustments so I'm probably going to go back and add some more.

Great news, Brad...
I wish I could accept more of the credit, but it's a technique I learned right here on DVInfo, in a much earlier post :-)
Pass it on when it's your turn!
Sometimes a nudge of contrast makes it pop too, but your footage was so close to great, it didn't seem to need it.

Dear Brad,

As an alternative to a two disk DVD set, you could consider a blu-ray + DVD package. Squeeze the entire 4 to 5 hour program onto a single 4.7GB DVD using 352x480 resolution with 4:3 aspect ratio; also master the program in wide-screen high-defintion onto a 25GB blu-ray disk using H264 encoding. The DVD will look fine on an old CRT television and the blu-ray will look better than even the best DVD on an HD LCD television.

-Eric

With only 352 pixels across that DVD is going to look awful on any decent CRT. It is more likely that the
client will watch the DVD on a hi-def LCD panel and when the LCD goes to upsample that 352x480 to
1080P it is going to looking like cell phone video that has had bad interlacing artifacts added.

It is entirely possible that no one will ever look at the Blueray due to lack of BD player or due to bad
experience with the defectively encoded DVD version.

It seems reasonable to make two regular 720x480 DVDs. At two hours per disk one might consider
using Cinemacraft basic as that will probably be noticeably better at 2 hours than the mainconcept
on full quality. I do 10+ hour event videos on a regular basis and these are always four disc sets with
about 2.2 hours per disc but I'd rather be doing 2 hrs even. Cinemacraft is very nice.

At any rate, if you can't give them a functional DVD product then give them no DVD product
and force them to watch the Blueray. If they see a bad DVD they might not take the time
to locate a blueray player and go to the effort to watch the decent HD version.