Comments

Chienworks wrote on 11/1/2010, 12:37 PM
Try it with no deinterlacing at all. Leave it entirely interlaced. Vegas will resize each field independently, leaving you with all the upper field lines still in the upper field and lower field lines still in the lower field.
tunesmith1801 wrote on 11/1/2010, 1:37 PM
I checked and did not have any de-interlacing on, I did have fill frame checked, so I said no to that. I'm assuming de-interlacing is selected or cancled in the crop window of the selected video track. There is not another setting someplace is there?

One other question in field order is there a preference I should use. Upper, lower, or progressive?

Thanks - Jim
Laurence wrote on 11/1/2010, 1:52 PM
This is a common problem when you are resizing interlaced video (16:9 to 4:30 is a resize and crop). what you need to do is set the project properties to match the interlaced 4:3 format you want to render to and make sure that the deinterlace method is not set to "none". You can select either "blend fields" or "interpolate" for your deinterlace method. It doesn't matter because you aren't going to actually deinterlace. Then you need to match the aspect ratio of all your footage to the render format. The easiest way to do this is with a script. Render to 4:3 interlaced and your end render should be fine.

What you are seeing is the result of resizing interlaced footage as if it was progressive. The interlace comb is being resized, and because the interlace artifacts are so small, they are aliasing into a new size of wavy line that is visable every time there is lateral movement.

What setting a deinterlace method will do is to let Vegas know that you are working with interlaced footage. This will cause Vegas to do the following on a resize: separate the even and odd fields, resize them separately, the refold the two resized images by even and odd lines into a new resized but still interlaced image.

Some variation of this problem comes up every month or so, but it is hard to search for it because it seems to be expressed with different words each time.
tunesmith1801 wrote on 11/1/2010, 2:14 PM
So is it possible to resize to 16:9 from 4:3. I'm making DVD's of our school events. I would think most families have widescreen TV's. If they don't change the format, and play a 4:3 movie will it not look stretched?

Thanks - Jim
tunesmith1801 wrote on 11/1/2010, 2:45 PM
Is there some Vegas training information, video or book that would be helpful in dealing with issues like this?

Thanks - Jim
farss wrote on 11/1/2010, 3:30 PM
"So is it possible to resize to 16:9 from 4:3. I'm making DVD's of our school events. I would think most families have widescreen TV's. If they don't change the format, and play a 4:3 movie will it not look stretched?"

A DVD player if setup correctly will playout a 4:3 DVD and a 16:9 DVD to a 16:9 TV correctly.

The best way to make 16:9 out of 4:3 is to pillarbox it. That means there'll black bars at the sides. If you crop the 4:3 frame to 16:9 you may need to make certain you don't cut off heads or other vital parts of the frame. There will also be some loss of vertical resolution.
Personally if it's old footage I'd go with the first approach and maybe fill in the sides with something. As its old footage the viewer would accept the different frame size. It's generally a good idea to put something to fill the frame as by default Vegas will fill it with superblack. I just run a bottom track of legal black (16,16,16) using generated media under the whole project.

Bob,

[edit] Regarding your other issue generally I prefer to set the de-interlace method to Interpolate. You also need to render at Best.