John Sieber
Forum Replies Created
-
Thanks John. That’s what I was afraid of… seems like it would be an easy thing to implement and would be widely used – but then again, I’m not a software engineer…
So as far as rendering to a new file, is the Sony mxf route my best choice for quality and file size still (from Vegas)?
-
Thanks John. I couldn’t find those specs for Youtube, so that is very helpful to know. I do intend to upload 1080p video, and the source video is from a Canon XA-10 mostly (capable of 24Mbps AVCHD), so I would think the minimum I should render at would be 8Mbps, thinking that Youtube’s engine will grind away some quality anyway… maybe the 16Mbps setting isn’t such a bad option after all?
Has anyone out there exhaustively tested this to see if Youtube (and Vimeo for that matter) do better with source material encoded at bit rates above those numbers (8Mbps) or is there no perceivable difference?
Thanks again for your insight!
-
Jumping in a little late here, but I have a further question about the bitrates used…
I’ve been using the Sony AVC render, with the internet 1080p template – it’s default bitrate is 16Mbps… Are you saying that is the max bitrate, but Vegas will encode at a variable rate? I’ve been using this setting and have what seem like overly huge resultant files. With the intent of upload to youtube/vimeo, is that setting overkill? And for archiving – would that default rate be a good choice to archive the work?
-
Crud. Well, hopefully it gets added in a future update to Vegas. It seems like a very useful tool that the other editing packages have (or at least FCP which was being used I believe).
-
I think I’ve finally found the soft render issue answer, but I’m surprised I had to dig so hard for it. The entire problem is with the progressive vs interlaced settings for the project and render when dealing with footage from the Canon XA-10 in pf30 mode. It’s not just this camera though – there are many other brands and models that use the psuedo-progressive format, which the NLE software doesn’t tag correctly. See this blog thread:
Why am I the only one asking about this? There must be millions of these cameras out there and the same amount of Vegas users… I can’t be the only one running into this?
So, making sure the Project properties are set to “Progressive scan”, with the Deinterlace method set to “none” seems to do the trick. The default setting when choosing “match media properties” populates these fields as interlaced “Upper Field First” AND “Blend Fields” for the deinterlace method.
But one last thing is still confusing to me – doing the above seems to be correct, but you can also change the media clips “properties” to progressive as well, and I’m not sure if this is a redundant setting at this point or what.. Any ideas anyone?
-
I just found this older thread…
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/24/935501
…where it looks like James was running into the same issues, but also using Neoscene to ingest the clips. You had mentioned a “deinterlace” setting… is that in Neoscene or is there a deinterlace option in Vegas that I’m missing?
Actually, after playing with it for a bit, setting the project properties to “interlaced” vs “progressive” is a lot sharper in the vegas preview, and rendering out as “interlaced” as Sony AVC also plays back much sharper with Windows Media Player… confusing though. What the Hell is that PF30 mode on the Canon cameras supposed to do?
-
Thanks John. Excellent information… I’ll run that by our FCP guys and see if they are down with it.
I had a part 2 of the question which is more concerning to me – the loss of sharpness after renders from Vegas. Any idea why that might be happening? Anyone else notice this?
I’m starting to think that it may be a progressive vs interlaced thing… or how vegas previews this… I’m shooting with a Canon XA-10, which has the option of shooting in “PF30” mode or 60i… I had assumed I wanted to choose the PF30 setting for progressive video since I am mostly editing video for web use and distribution. From Canon’s manual:
“PF30 – shooting at 30 frames per second, progressive*. Use this frame rate to easily edit your recordings, for example, to post them to the web.
*Recorded as 60i”I’m not clear on what Vegas is doing with that. If I want the best quality progressive video to send on to others, what settings should I be using? Should I actually render out at interlaced? Am I even getting a progressive file at any point during this? Sorry about the confusion, but there are so many settings options within Vegas and there seems to be no detailed manual or help file of what they do or best settings…
-
You might want to edit with DV Widescreen proxies using a tool like VASST GearShift to create them. GearShift allows to yo edit in SD and then switch back to HD before you render. You can even render with the DV Widescreen footage of your not making HD output. There is a free 15-day trial so download it and see if you like the workflow.
Thanks John. I’ve seen quite a few posts mention Gearshift in this regard… what format of files does it create as the SD proxies? Are they compressed, uncompressed, etc? And they get along well with Vegas? The only format I’ve found that plays nice in Vegas is the Sony YUV. I’ve rendered the native 720p MOV files to NTSC widescreen 720×480 using the Sony YUV Codec and they play back great and edit easy at the full fps. Any other format seems to get Vegas stuttering. Well, the standard DV format works ok, but loses a ton of quality (due to compression I assume).
Yes you can change the template but that doesn’t mean you should. The DVD spec was written many, many years ago in the 1990’s and it supports 60i, 50i, and 24p. If DVD Architect allows you to burn 25p or 30p without re-encoding them, then I’m not sure how some DVD players will handle it if they weren’t expecting it. It’s not part of the spec so it may not be supported by DVD players
So when I choose the MainConcept NTSC widescreen template (not the 24p one), I’m presented with the 29.970 frame rate and interlaced (lower field first) settings… so what then is eventually getting coded to the dvd in DVD Architect? Is it converting that 29.970 into 60i to conform with the DVD specs? Since my material is originating as progressive video, shouldn’t I somehow stick to a final format that is progressive? Is the 24p option the only way for me to have dvd’s that play as progressive on our dvd player (and blueray player and other peoples dvd players, etc)?
-
Do you mean it prevents you from working with the “same” media that your project is made from or “any” other media on your system? This sounds like a good clue. I’ll try it tonight…
-
But you said: “A few got into trouble for it.” Are you referring to corporate video or wedding video?
I did? I know nothing personally about who has been busted and what that entails, though I’ve read about content being removed at the request of the copyright holder… and a few cases of Indy film makers having to cough up cash after their films had been shown and done well.
I think the corporate clients are keeping things legit – they have liability. Plenty of wedding videos appear on the sharing sites with commercial music, and I’m sure most of the rest of the videos out there in the world that have been produced for brides and grooms contain their favorite pop tunes – those photographers/videographers are just smart enough not to publish them online (unless the bride and groom figure out how to do that…). In all honesty, if a bride and groom hand over CD’s of music that they bought (I know they don’t technically own the music) and want their images and video overlaid with this, I think there should be nothing wrong with that – they would most likely play that music on their stereo while they ran a slide show. Trying to charge them for a “performance” license is ridiculous and impossible to police. Extending that penalty to the photog/videog that mixed it with their software is stupid as well. Just my opinion.
Anyway, I think this is all quite simple – it’s just that most people are not aware of copyright. They all have free movie software on their new computers and they start uploading. I’ve been fighting to educate people about copyright uses of my photography forever… people just don’t get it – or worse, they just don’t care.