-
Sony Vegas pro 10 rendering problems
-
Nope. They are both set to blend fields. Wait, is that the cause?
-
[Jake Butson] “They are both set to blend fields. Wait, is that the cause?”
No, that doesn’t cause anything to be interlaced.
What is the Field Order set to?
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
Turn off resampling by selecting all video events and then right-click, and via “switches -> resampling”.
It’s the single most anyoing feature in vegas that you cannot tell it to start up with resampling forced disabled for a project (or at least change the default).
[Edit] See page 295 on the Vegas 10.0d pdf manual.
-
Thank you so much! The footage now looks much better (to me of course.)
Here is the footage exported but without being progressive, interlaced and re-sampled.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8MnvLT9JZc -
Oh OK. So when you said that the footage is 720 30fps. You literally meant 30 fps and not 29.97fps (which is what I wrongly assumed). I hate the fact that camera manufacturers do that. That is what was causing your problem.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
[Thomas Roell] “It’s the single most anyoing feature in vegas that you cannot tell it to start up with resampling forced disabled for a project (or at least change the default).”
Have you put in a suggestion to Sony’s Product Suggestion page? That’s a good way to request new features.
BTW, the default is to resample because that is what you would want to happen 99% of the time. It’s only when you use footage shot at a non-standard format do you have problems. In this case, the camera shot 30fps instead of the standard 29.97fps and the render was to 29.97fps. Had that not been the case, this never would have happened and resample would not need to be disabled.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
I have not put this onto the suggestions page. Thanx for pointing out.
However I disagree with your 99% assessment. I have had now a lot of footage that was declared to be 29.97fps, but turned out to trigger resampling. Right now I am dealing with 720p @59.94fps that I need to get into the 29.97 format. That triggers resampling as well. To be honest, I have not seen any good logic behind when resampling was triggered vs. not. As a rule of thumb, if it goes to youtube (well, any form of online), I disable resampling resampling.
-
[Thomas Roell] “Right now I am dealing with 720p @59.94fps that I need to get into the 29.97 format. That triggers resampling as well. To be honest, I have not seen any good logic behind when resampling was triggered vs. not. As a rule of thumb”
Right that’s what I was referring to about using a non-standard format. The standards are 29.97, 25.00, & 23.976. For years, and years, and years, these were the only formats. Since you can’t deliver 59.94fps you have to downsample to 29.97. That’s where you get into trouble. It just so happens that 59.94 is double 29.97 and if you disable resample Vegas will throw away every other frame and not blend them. But that’s the ONLY case. Any other conversion where you can’t just throw away frames will require resampling to synthesize the missing frames. This is why resample is the default.
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
No disagreement about standards there. It just seemed to be very non-intuitive that something simple as “throw away every other frame” would trigger “smart resampling” given how much attention vegas pays to the 3:2 pulldown.
The 59.94fps is kind of important. It’s the only way I can come up with to deliver good quality 29.97fps progressive for the web, and 29.97fps interlaced for a DVD.
-
[Thomas Roell] “It just seemed to be very non-intuitive that something simple as “throw away every other frame” would trigger “smart resampling” given how much attention vegas pays to the 3:2 pulldown.”
Agreed. It would be great if Vegas would treat multiples of a frame rate differently. That’s another good suggestion for Sony. “Smart” resample could be a little “smarter”
[Thomas Roell] “The 59.94fps is kind of important. It’s the only way I can come up with to deliver good quality 29.97fps progressive for the web, and 29.97fps interlaced for a DVD.”
It’s certainly becoming more and more popular. I don’t understand how throwing away every other frame could be better than shooting the correct number of frames in the first place but that’s just me. 😉
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up