[Bob Peterson]

If the pixel size is changing when you change PPI (Again, it is NOT dpi. Note that photoshop shows the measurement as pixels/inch or PPI), then you have the resample box checked. That will cause an increase or decrease in pixels when you change ppi. However, you will be better to begin ignoring ppi. If you are in the resize dialogue, change the pixels demensions directly (i.e. the upper portion of the resize box). Note that, if you do that, you will need the resample box checked.

You can also type the number of horizontal and vertical pixels directly into the cropping tool. That will provide a predetermined, fixed size for the image after it is cropped. That setting can then be saved as a preset. Consider how many pixels your desired video format displays. Once you know that, I would set the photo size to no more than 2 or 3 times that size. I always then save the image as a PNG. Vegas works well with PNGs.

[Bob Peterson]

PNG files are the best format. They do not create compression losses and artifacts, and Vegas handles them without resorting to third party software. Jpgs are NOT a very good idea.

[Bob Peterson]

You have not yet answered the basic question. How big are the photos? Give us an average or typical size in terms of number of pixels both horizontally and vertically. Photoshop will give you this information if you use Image => Size. Further, Photoshop will resize or crop the image using the number of pixels on the horizontal and vertical dimensions. PPI (not DPI) is irrelevant for images used in a video. The only consideration is the number of horizontal and vertical pixels. Vegas will not bog down if you use reasonably sized PNG images.

[Bob Peterson]

I see it now. Thanks for pointing it out as I had never noticed it before. The presence of the option suggests that Vegas is aware of color management. I was taught that, when an application is color management aware, you pick the color space within the application that you prefer to use. You DO NOT turn off color management at the OS level when you do this. I believe that the theory is that the monitor, controlled by the OS, is displaying the image correctly. You pick a preferred color space that will allow you to see what the image will look like within that preferred color space. Your choice of preferred color space, such as Adobe RGB 1998, is guided by the end use of the image. I’m not sure that it make sense to pick the monitor’s icm as your preferred color space.

sRGB is probably used more widely. It is the assumed color space on the Web. I suggest rendering and, if necessary, burning a short video. See what it looks like on your target device (i.e. a TV?). Then, see if one of the color space choices matches that look.

Perhaps someone who understands Vegas color management will comment further on this topic.

BTW, all this assumes that your monitor is accurately calibrated. I do not have much confidence in Adobe type tools that adjust gamma. Accurate color calibration requires the use of a hardware device, coupled with its software, that “reads” the colors that your monitor is displaying, and builds the profile accordingly.

[Bob Peterson]

Perhaps you can point out where you are seeing this option. I do not see it in Vegas Pro 9d. I have looked through the preferences and other menu items in Vegas Pro and found nothing which mentions a “color management” option.

Invoking, or not invoking, color management on a PC does not mean that what you will eventually see on a TV or other display device will match what you see on the PC. Video technology seems to use a different color standard. That said, the main difference I see between a properly calibrated display and a TV is difference in luminance. I have not seen significant color differences.

[Bob Peterson]

There is no such thing as a “standard all purpose monitor” except, perhaps, in marketing claims. If you do not correctly calibrate your display (that requires a dedicated hardware device plus an OS that accepts the correction file), you can never be sure that anything will be accurately displayed on your monitor. Your problems do not originate in Vegas. Without proper calibration, you cannot have any confidence in what your monitor is showing you. It also means that you will have even less chance to adjust the video so that it displays correctly on video devices.

[Bob Peterson]

There is an option called “Quantize to Frames.” Turn this off. You will then be able to position audio to the precise point where you want it. Don’t forget to turn the “Quantize to Frames” options back on when you begin working with your video again.

[Bob Peterson]

It is not a Vegas problem. First of all, is your monitor correctly calibrated for still images? If it is not, you do not know whether or not they are accurately adjusted for luminance. In my experience, Gamma is not usually a consideration in a correctly calibrated display for still images.

If your monitor is correctly calibrated for still images, video WILL look like it is too dark. That is due to the fact that you have moved into a different set of standards. However, when you render and burn the video and display it on something like a TV, it will look significantly brighter. It is the difference in standards which causes the difficulty, but it is not a problem within Vegas.

[Bob Peterson]

I’m not sure what your current problems are, but I can tell you that your earlier problems did not come from Vegas. They came from your XL1s. It took me awhile to figure out what the problem with that camera was even after I began seeing the difference between it and the GL2. In short, the XL1s has pathetic resolution. The difference in sharpness between it and the GL2 (I was using both in two camera shoots) made that quite obvious. So, it was the camera rather than Vegas.

You can, of course, also be making other errors. I suggest posting more details regarding file formats and processing. I am quite happy with the image Vegas produces. I have not seen noticeably superior results from software such as FCP, Premier Pro, and AE.

BTW, I have found that a substantial boost in sharpness produced by the sharpness filter reduces the visible difference between the old XL1s video and the GL2. I am also now shooting with an XH-A1, and I’m quite happy with the results.

[Bob Peterson]

I use multicam to figure out where the cuts are and which camera is displayed after each cut. I then transfer (manually) that information to composite envelopes. That process helps me find the best cut/camera points while preserving the option of corrections to the underlying video. Obviously, it takes more time to do this.