Please help: poor images in rendered video - can I relink?

MatthewJ · Post by **MatthewJ** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 11:55 pm

I have been working on an (eventual) DVD of family videos for the holidays. Each "title" I have been creating as a separate project in VS, but until recently I had not rendered any of them. Big mistake! Now, after many hours working on the videos, I have a problem I am frantically trying to fix at the last minute before I'm supposed to give this video as a gift ...

My projects contain a mix of digital video and still images. When I previewed the videos in project mode, I noticed that the image resolution was not very good, but I chalked it up to the fact that this was only a preview. Well, when I rendered my first video, the poor resolution problem remained in nearly every image.

I did some poking around on these boards and found that I probably screwed things up by thinking I could make use of the VS functionality to zoom in / crop my JPG photos, which I have done for most of them. This threads seem to indicate that doing anything other than plopping the photos into VS can cause a problem:

http://forum.corel.com/EN/viewtopic.php ... jpg+photos

OK. So now I know that any image editing should be done outside of VS (e.g. in Photoshop) and then just plop the image down into VS. This is VERY annoying, but OK ...

QUESTION #1: My first question is -- is there any way for me to "re-point" an image that in a VS project file? For example, let's say I have the following sequence:

PHOTO1-->transitionA-->PHOTO2-->transitionB-->PHOTO3

Can I "repoint" PHOTO2 to a new image file without deleting PHOTO2 from the timeline and then reinserting a new photo? The problem with that option is that when I delete a photo it messes up the transitions I have on either end, and I becomes a major hassle to set everything up again.

I just want to, say, repoint PHOTO2 from picture2.jpg to croppicture2.jpg. This way, I can go and edit the photos in Photoshop or some other photo editor and then repoint them in VS without messing with the transitions or the locations on the timeline.

Please tell me there is a way to do this?

QUESTION #2: What setting should my digital camera be on so I can avoid (as much as possible) these problems in VS?

This thread ...
http://forum.corel.com/EN/viewtopic.php?p=119526#119526

... indicates I should use 720x480 for a "regular" TV (i.e. not widescreen). Is my understanding of that correct?

Is there a way to programatically resize existing digital photos so that they're in a desired size? Or is that really only something I can do going forward?

Any advice would be appreciated. I'm really feeling stupid for waiting to render my first project until after I created so many projects, but I'm hoping there is a way I can recover from this and still make a decent quality video without starting from scratch.

Thanks!

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:20 am

It is a matter of re-linking.
Cut and paste all the photographs you ant to resize to another folder on your hard drive. Resize or replace them giving the new photograph the same name as the old one.
Return the photographs back to the original location.
VideoStudio will probably ask you to relink the photographs - just point to the new replacements.

MatthewJ · Post by **MatthewJ** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 4:00 am

Thanks SJJ - that is a great idea (which is why I didn't think of it!)

Trevor Andrew · Post by **Trevor Andrew** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 10:36 am

Hi

Can I "repoint" PHOTO2 to a new image file without deleting PHOTO2 from the timeline and then reinserting a new photo? ---- Please tell me there is a way to do this?----

Yes
Select the photo in the timeline, File-Re-Link, browse your hard drive for an image.

MatthewJ · Post by **MatthewJ** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 8:23 pm

trevor andrew wrote:Select the photo in the timeline, File-Re-Link, browse your hard drive for an image.

Thanks Trevor. I haven't had a chance to try it yet but hope to get some free time to sit down and work on this later today.

And it sounds like what I should be doing is:
(1) first resizing each photo to 720x480
(2) then doing whatever cropping/zooming I want to do

It almost seems like what I want to do is take a 720x480 "cookie-cutter" overlay in an image editor and mark the cropped/zoomed/whatever image I want, so that the dimensions are correct for a normal (i.e. non-widescreen) TV. Right? Is there any good program to do this?

Guess I'll have to fuss around with it tonight, hopefully I can fix all of these images quickly ...

Thanks again for the advice!

Trevor Andrew · Post by **Trevor Andrew** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 9:49 am

Hi

Ntsc video uses 720 x 480 frame size but this is not 4:3, (use a calculator)
Video uses a process called Non-Square Pixel Rendering, this literally stretches the video to 4:3.

When we use still images these use Square Pixels, so we need an image size at 4:3 ratio.
640 x 480 is the default size for images using Ntsc.
If you are to use pan and zoom then the advice is to use larger images, doubling the size to 1280 x 960.
Any size will probably do provided they are 4:3 aspect ratio.

MatthewJ · Post by **MatthewJ** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:40 am

I understand that VS apparently can't handle zooming in on images, but I don't understand why the "default size" for the JPGs inserted into my project is so small.

For example, I have an image that says its 2448 x 3264 (this must be width x height because the photo is taller than it is wide). This is of course not in 4:3 ratio. When I insert this photo into my project, the default size doesn't even take full advantage of the height of a 4:3 screen, it just centers a very small photo on the screen with tons of blank space above, below, and on either side of it.

Assuming that I want to have the entire image displayed on the TV screen, it would seem that the easiest way to get the image into 4:3 ratio would be to convert it to 4352 x 3264, with the extra pixels added consisting of nothing but black space. So, for example, the photo would extend to the top and bottom of the 4:3 TV screen, but would have blank space on either side of the image.

Is there is a program I can use to do this?

Should this even be necessary, assuming I am OK with blank space on either side of the image shouldn't I be able to make the height of the image fit the max height of the 4:3 screen in VS's editing view without causing VS to choke on rendering a decent quality image?

Post by **Ron P.** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:55 am

Sounds like you're placing them in an overlay track. Right-click on one of the images in the Preview Screen, and select Fit to Screen or Original size.

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:58 am

MatthewJ
When your images are not 4.3 - or even 16.9 in fact - there is no need to worry. Do not try and resize the picture to 4.3 or 16.9 causing either a squashing or stretching effect. Simply use the "Ken Burns" effect. Doing so will bring your photographs "to life" and make them much more interesting to your audience.

See this link.

MatthewJ · Post by **MatthewJ** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 2:33 am

Ron P. wrote:Sounds like you're placing them in an overlay track. Right-click on one of the images in the Preview Screen, and select Fit to Screen or Original size.

Fit to screen stretches and distorts the image, so that's no good.

Original size makes the image so huge, all I see in the preview window is a close up of a very small portion of the original photo (e.g. a patch of someone's shirt).

sjj1805 wrote:MatthewJ
When your images are not 4.3 - or even 16.9 in fact - there is no need to worry. Do not try and resize the picture to 4.3 or 16.9 causing either a squashing or stretching effect. Simply use the "Ken Burns" effect. Doing so will bring your photographs "to life" and make them much more interesting to your audience.

See this link.

Problem is, the "default size" for some reason is very small, it doesn't take advantage of fitting at least one of the photo dimensions to the maximum real estate of the screen. Obviously I realize that if I have a photo that is not in 4:3 ratio, at most only one of the dimensions (e.g. height) will max fit the screen, while the width will leave extra space on either side. But VS is unable to handle even this most basic of image "manipulation" without massive distortion of image quality in the render. I really don't understand why this is even manipulation, i.e. why the default size doesn't make the photo a decent size by taking full advantage of at least one dimension of real estate on the screen. Instead, I get a tiny image centered with tons of empty space above, below, and on either side of the image. And if I try to enlarge from there it seems this is too much "manipulation" for VS and it craps out on the image quality.

I am really gobstopped by how terrible VS is at handling something very basic like setting JPG images to music in a simple video!

Black Lab · Post by **Black Lab** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 5:26 am

Fit to screen stretches and distorts the image, so that's no good.

After you fit to screen click Keep Aspect Ratio.

Post by **Ron P.** » Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:13 pm

When rendering, VS must do something with the photos in the project. If you're rendering to a video file that meets the DVD standards, then only 720 x 480 pxs is all that is going to be utilized. VS just has a way of using the enlarged, zoomed-in parts of a video, tweening or morphing either smaller or larger depending on the pan/zoom action called for.

Starting with images larger than what's needed for DVDs, provides VS more data to work with when it has to do the pan/zooms. More pixels better quality correct? If you take a relatively small image, 320 x 240px and then zoom in, what happens? It gets bad real fast, because there's not much to work with.

I guess another way to look at it, is the video is a window, that window is 720 x 480. Now lay some material that is 3264 x 2448 over it. Look through the window and how much of that huge sheet are you going to be able to see? VS just scales down that large sheet from its 100% size so that if fits inside that window. That is unless you instruct VS to do something different, like zoom in. It then scales it up..

In VS's Preferences dialog, on the Edit tab, under the Image section Image resampling option, do you have it set to, Keep Aspect Ratio or Fit to Project Size? This can have an affect on stretching and distorting your images. Also if you're building a 4:3 project and your monitor screen is like most of what's currently used, a wide-screen, then the images may not fill the preview screen. This is due to your monitor, not the project, and not the program. VS adjusts the preview playback screen to your monitor. It took me s little time to get used to this, when I switched from my old CRT monitor to my LCD. Try adjusting the preview playback area of VS (what little we can), with a clip in the timeline or library and selected so it is displayed in the preview window, and see how things change.

Finally when you're viewing your rendered project, are you viewing this on your PC, or a TV? Various software players can affect the quality of your video, and if your TV is a wide-screen, and not set properly 4:3 can be stretched or not appear very good. I've also recently learned that there's a big difference in some LCD, Plasma TVs. Some that are made for HD, do not display SD video very well.