Titles adversely affect photo resolution

[WestbrookNH]

In my photo slide show, I am using the title track to add captions to the photos.

However, when I render the project and playback the MPEG file, the resolution of the photos having the title tracks is not very good.

Also, there seems to be a lot of aliasing in all photos. In the photos where children are wearing striped shirts, the lines are jagged, even though the features of their faces are smooth.

This would indicate some kind of re-sampling problem, but I have the re-sampling option set to "Best", the quality set to 100%, and "Preserve Aspect Ratio" is checked.

I am using VS 7SE (came with my Benq 1620) with the following projectsettings.

NTSC drop frame (29.97 fps)
MPEG files
24 Bits, 720 x 480, 29.97 fps
Frame-based
(MPEG-2)
Video data rate: Variable (Max. 14000 kbps)
Audio data rate: 256 kbps
MPEG audio layer 2, 48 KHz, Stereo

.

[Ron P.]

I just read your post and noticed one thing the Variable Bitrate Max 14000. That's not DVD spec, try setting it lower to no more then about 9000 max.

As for the stripes, this is a common problem with slideshows. One method to alleviate this would be to apply a slight blur with your image editing program.

[heinz-oz]

Is it only the images with the title or are all images like that? What size in pixel x pixel are your images when you insert them? What format?

VS 7 is an older version and I have never used it. It may still use the old mpeg engine. Until version 7 of MediaStudioPro I used a frame server and TEMPGeng to encode my mpeg2 because of the poor quality of the early Ulead mpeg2 codec. Since MSP 7 and VS 8, if I'm not mistaken, Ulead use the much better Mpeg.Now codec and using the file server for the encoding became redundant.

That could have something to do with it also.

I suspect VS is down sizing the images because they are too big for the frame size. VS is not the best solution to downsizing an image. A dedicated image editor like PhotoImpact, PS etc. will do a much better job with this.

The problem with lines, especially if these are not 100% horizontal and relatively thin, is that the low resolution of the TV display cannot render them smoothly. That's why they appear jagged. Often they may jitter as well because they are shown in alternating fields. If you only got a small number of pixels to show a line which is not aligned to the raster, there will be a noticeable step when this line continues on the next scan line of the TV. Often, horizontal lines as well as vertical ones also show thinner or thicker than what they are.

The fact remains, standard TV is not the best medium to display high res images. Most people make the mistake to go to even higher resolutions (image size that is) in order to get a better looking picture on the TV. Unfortunately, it ain't working like that. The image is going to be down sized to fit the frame of your TV standard, with full frame DVD, either 720 x 576 (PAL) or 720 x 480 (NTSC). Downsizing means discarding of pixel information. Due to that, complete lines can often disappear after a down size.

It is best to have the images close to the frame size and in the right aspect ratio prior to putting them on the time line. It's also advantageous, I found, to use a file format like bmp, tiff or png for images, rather than jpeg. I usually resize my images to 1200 x 900 or 1000 x 750 and save as bmp. They come out crisp and clear in MSP 7 and 8. Since VS uses the same rendering engine for both I cannot see a reason why VS should behave differently.

Don't resize your images exactly to the frame size because that is not exactly 4:3 aspect. The pixels are rendered non square for DVD. Also, if you crop your images to remove unnecessary background from them, don't forget about the title safe area. Your TV will not show the full image. some 10 to 15% of it, on all sides, is going to be missing when viewing on a TV (over scan). That doesn't apply to LCD and Plasma TV's, I believe.
VS 7 is a very old version and, if I'm not mistaken, still uses the old MainConcept mpeg engine. I was using TMPGEng with an AVISync frame server to render my videos until MSP version 7 because of the poor quality of the mpeg2 files.

I¡¦m not sure at what time Ulead went to the new Mpeg.Now codec with their range of VideoStudio. I haven¡¦t used VS since version 5

[blplhp]

Hi heinz-oz,

I know I have visited with you before on this topic, but wanted to ask you another question on this exact topic. You stated...

It is best to have the images close to the frame size and in the right aspect ratio prior to putting them on the time line. It's also advantageous, I found, to use a file format like bmp, tiff or png for images, rather than jpeg. I usually resize my images to 1200 x 900 or 1000 x 750 and save as bmp. They come out crisp and clear in MSP 7 and 8. Since VS uses the same rendering engine for both I cannot see a reason why VS should behave differently.

When in PI 12, and I select the resize option and that dialog box (or control panel, if you like) comes up, there are several ways within that control panel inwhich to resize the image. I believe you can resize by percentage or you can type in the resolution size you want. Which way do you resize within that control panel? Also, I will be starting with images that have a resolution size of 3264 x 2448 (8MP). If I end up at your recommended pixel size of 1200 x 900, how many resizing steps should I use within that resizing control panel to get to the 1200 x 900? Thanks.