60i, 24p, Vegas Pro 9.0, Output

[Patrick Hess]

I have a client who is asking that I stop shooting in 24p with XH-A1 and switch to using 60i. I have always shot 24p since I've bought my XH-A1 and HV20's and HV30's. I've used Vegas since version 2. I am ignorant about the reasons why I would or wouldn't want to shoot in 60i when it comes to how my edited and rendered video is output.

At present, the media viewing is only online at my client's website. They have three different video companies producing videos for them and all three of us deliver our edited videos via upload to a conversion website which takes our videos and converts them to whatever format their site uses in its player.

My questions are:

1) Does shooting in 24p or 60i make a difference with the rendered video or is it mainly the settings I have in Vegas that make the difference?
2) The client thinks my videos are soft and blurry compared to the vividness of the other companies videos. While I know 24p inherently gives a "film soft" look, they are wanting a more LIVE VIVID look to the end products... does 60i shooting fix this?
3) Can I have B-Roll from my HV20/HV30 match the 60i the XH-A1 gets?
4) When in Vegas and outputting to the best "vivid" quality file, what settings do you recommend?


I'm not so sure their conversion process isn't also degrading the quality of my end product, but I don't output to MOV files like the other video companies. I was told they output to MOV and then convert it for their website, but I don't know if my standard definition preset from Vegas going to MPG2 is making a difference or not.

Help me please understand at least some foundational issues I'm having. I fully realize there's a ton of ways to achieve "looks" but as it stands right now, my future with this client is depending on my ability to adjust my preference of 24p to their VIVID look (as they describe it).

[Patrick Hess]

The subject and content in the videos is primarily one on one camera interviews in a lighted set. I take my light kits to locations and simply have a one-on-one interview in front of the camera with the subjects. It's not like I'm shooting auto-racing or running herds of buffalo.

[Seth Bloombaum]

There are lots of potential issues with what you're describing, testing will help narrow in.

The difference in 24p vs. 60i shooting and editing is mostly seen in the representation of motion. More motion, more motion artifacts that might indicate we're watching 24 or 60 or 24 embedded in 60.

But, as I read it, the bigger problem is that your client is able to see the final version(s), and you're not? Aren't you supposed to be the video expert in this relationship? Getting to see the final versions as the end-viewer sees them is step one, in my book.

Maybe your videos are softer and less vivid - this could be 100% accounted for by the client's conversion process. Or, your mpg conversion. Or, your color correction. Or, the bitrates you're using, or, so many other things.

So, I'd prep some test files with the same content, something like:
What you're doing now.mpg
60i.mpg
24p SD MP4.mov at 4Mbps bitrate
60i.mov

And, maybe something like 720pMP4.mov at 5Mbps bitrate.

Then, see for yourself what these look like when they come out of the other end of the client's conversion and distribution processes. Any other method I can think of is gonna' take a lot of time while you change something and the clients says "no, that's not it either..." Sooner or later they're going to run out of patience.

MPG2 is not a good choice for an intermediate file format - too lossy. MPG4 is much better, but you still have to have a pretty healthy bitrate. WMV can also be an excellent choice, if their conversion will accept it.