-
Trouble rendering two video tracks.with altered time…
(Using Vegas Pro 10 with an Intel Quad Core PC running WinXP SP3 32 bit)
While trying to create an imaginary seascape I found myself having rendering issues with two tracks. One track had its time stretched to the limit (4x). It was cropped so that it only appears in the lower part of the screen to act as some sort of ocean or sea. The second track had its time compressed. This track has a shot of a drop of water forming from melting ice. It is shown upside down and was cropped to occupy the upper portion of the frame. Both tracks were key framed to move together down the frame as if there was a camera tilt in progress.
The problem was when I tried to render this, the result was an awful strobing of the top track. Once I removed the compressed time (sped up) to normal time, the render was just fine.
Here is the final result (8 sec):
vimeo.com/21074958Is my conclusion correct?
You can not render two or more tracks with differing amounts of altered time in Vegas Pro 10.
If this is not correct, please help me identify what I am missing.
Thanks,
-Phil Loarie aka schmuey -
13 Replies
-
I haven’t had a problem with this type of rendering before.
What is the frame rate of the source footage?
Did you try changing undersample rate?Daniel Hughes
Amateur Writer, Director,
Director of Photography
United Kingdom -
Thank you Daniel for diving in.
I don’t have this info handy right this minute as this is on my studio machine which is “never” networked (for security reasons which helps me stay sane). I will take a look tonight and report back with accurate info, for now I am guessing that the frame rate is 30p. I haven’t messed with the undersample rate before–“ah ha” something to learn.Like I said I’ll take a look at the configuration and report back tomorrow.
Thanks again for taking a look.
(I am relatively new to Vegas Pro 10)-Phil
-
Hi Phil!
If your footage was 30p that is definitely the reason you’re having that strobing problem!
I have a pretty good idea to solve this but I’ll wait for your configuration report, if you wish.
Daniel Hughes
Amateur Writer, Director,
Director of Photography
United Kingdom -
Hi Daniel,
Here is the info I culled from project (.veg):Both clips (top and bottom) have the same source properties:
‘smart resample” (default)
1920x1080x12 AVC 29.970 fpsThe project properties:
1920×1080 29.970 fps
progressive
full res…quality set to ‘Best’
motion blur set to Gaussian (default)
de-interlace method set to noneRender configuration:
main Concept mpeg-2 (m2t)
HDV 720 30p
high video quality
output HDV
1280 x 720 (w x h)
I frame 15, B frame 2 (default)
rate set to 29.970
field order, progressiveHope this helps, Not sure if I got the ‘resample or undersample’ thing identified correctly.
Thanks again,
-Phil -
You need to set the deinterlace method to something other than “none” if your source is interlaced and your output format is progressive. Experiment with the deinterlace options to see which works best – Blend or Interpolate.
-
Thank you Matt and Daniel for your advice.
I’ll try that out.
BTW: Just curious, if my camera (Sony HDR-CX500v) is transferring
AVCHD 1080i to the computer, and I am asking it to render in progressive, am I really getting a progressive render?Also, I thought I had the camera set to do 1080p maybe it can only
do 720p and 1080i ? Anyone know more about this camera’s specs?One last thing, although I was not able to render the original content, as I mentioned I altered the top clip to normal time and it did render the whole thing nicely. Did you look at the scene?
(it’s only 8 seconds).Ok thanks again all,
-PhilSome contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Vimeo framework” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
It could well have been the interlace setting that was making the water drop clip go strange. I guess you shot that using the smooth slow camera mode? Looks pretty cool.
I had a quick look at the camera specs, and it looks like it only records 60i frame rate (normal for AVCHD), except in the smooth slow mode – but even then the output video is still 60i although it would probably be captured as 240i.
If you render as progressive, you’ll get a progressive video (typically 30 frames/sec), but each frame will be the product of combining 2 fields (60 fields/sec) from the original interlaced video. How they get combined is determined by the project’s De-interlace setting.
-
Hi Matt,
Actually the original clip was shot at normal speed and in the render posted, it’s normal too–just cropped and upside down. Weird things happen to the focus and the exposure when I use the ‘smooth slow mode’ on this camera when the macro is engaged or if I am using manual focus in a shallow depth of field. So I generally only use that when I am shooting with lots of light, and more depth of field.Thanks for the kind words and thanks too for explaining the process of going from interlace source to progressive render with all the ‘gotchas’.
So my original conclusion is not correct, and I have a path to understand where things went goofy.
Great forum–less than a day and I have something positive to work with.
-Phil
-
Sorry! Hi again.
Didn’t you want this footage in 4x slow motion?
Daniel Hughes
Amateur Writer, Director,
Director of Photography
United Kingdom -
If your footage isn’t of high enough frame rate you can interpolate if you have after effects, if not there are great programs like MotionPerfect and SlowMotion that are worth trying out.
They will generate the missing gaps between your sparse frames of your .AVI for you to achieve smooth slow motion.I’ve used MotionPerfect before – ’tis excellent.
I actually 4x slowed down some 24p footage to 5.994fps, and interpolated with MotionPerfect to ~1000fps. Three seconds of 1080p footage: 17GB! But it was so excellent and smooth and gave me huge fidelity to slow it down.That would probably be for future reference, as your composition looks great as it is!
Daniel Hughes
Amateur Writer, Director,
Director of Photography
United Kingdom
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up