Vegas incorrectly interpreting aspect ratio of .WMV file

[Melodious]

I'm in a time crunch here with $1000 on the line.

A printing press owner (who's related to a friend of mine) asked me to create a training DVD for a carpet company. (This is something I've done for them each year for the past 5 years). I've had no issues in the past, but this time there's a weird problem.

The videos I were provided with have an aspect ratio that I can't for the life of me figure out. Normally I'm provided with true widescreen DV videos (720x480). However, when I playback the WMVs they gave me, it seems like there are thin black bars on the sides of the videos. It's neither 4:3 nor 16:9.

When I drop it into Vegas and make the project properties match the media settings, this is what comes up:


Consequently, the black bars on the sides become thicker (it thinks that it's a NTSC DV). Even though when you play the original video, the video is much wider than NTSC DV: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26626325/tom-jennings-6-the%20-home-field-advantage-546.wmv

Can anyone tell me why this video is getting squashed in Vegas and how to just process it in its native aspect ratio, height and width?

I asked the owner to ask them for new video files with proper widescreen dimensions, but they're being stingy about it. They expect me to use what I have and get them organized onto a DVD the exact way they are.

Help.

Thanks

[El Heggunte]

[ intentionally left blank ]

[smrpix]

Assuming the footage you posted is your source, your setttings are correct -- 720x480 29.97 pixel aspect ratio 0.91 (D1/DV). It looks like someone before you has hardcoded letterboxing into the material.

The "live" video part is oddly 1.66:1, which is an old standard for European cinema.

There are other issues such as bad deinterlacing, but leave that be for the moment.

It's up to you to decide whether you want to crop the top and bottom to make a 16:9 DVD, or leave it as-is to make a 4:3 DVD.


edit: was this shot on a phone, or a point and shoot camera?

[jagabo]

I don't use Vegas but I believe you can override what it thinks about the source's aspect ratio by right clicking on the video in the timeline and selecting Source Properties -- or something like that.

For the main video I think someone took an ITU 16:9 DAR video and letterboxed it in a 720x480 1:1 PAR frame (hence the ~720x396 picture with 42 pixels of letterboxing top and bottom). So the PAR is actually very close to 1:1*. The titles were added with no understanding of what they were doing and are completely distorted.


* With an ITU capture the 16:9 DAR image is contained in the inner 704x480 portion of the frame. So the full 720x480 frame is slightly wider than 16:9. The slightdifference (~2 percent) is often ignored.

[budwzr]

Use the "Crop Tool" in Vegas to solve the problem.

Whoops, I just looked at the video, and you're gonna have to upsample it, sharpen, render, then crop out a 4:3 section. Somebody really screwed it up before you got it.

[sanlyn]

If the aspect ratio of the original image is 0.66:1 European movie standard, it will not display with the proper image aspect ratio at 16:9 if the letterbox is removed. Whether you are encoding to 4:3 frame or 16:9 frame, a 0.66:1 image will not completely fill a 16:9 screen (it will be letterboxed on display whether the bars are hard-coded or not) without distorting the original image. The frame displayed in the Vegas image appears correct to me.

[Melodious]

Assuming the footage you posted is your source, your setttings are correct -- 720x480 29.97 pixel aspect ratio 0.91 (D1/DV). It looks like someone before you has hardcoded letterboxing into the material.

The "live" video part is oddly 1.66:1, which is an old standard for European cinema.

There are other issues such as bad deinterlacing, but leave that be for the moment.

It's up to you to decide whether you want to crop the top and bottom to make a 16:9 DVD, or leave it as-is to make a 4:3 DVD.


edit: was this shot on a phone, or a point and shoot camera?

It was shot on a point and shoot, from what I gather. Last year, they gave me HDV 1440x1080 vids. And the person in charge of the carpet company's dvd project thinks these wmv's look better than those hd vids (driving me nuts).

[jagabo]

Crop 42 pixels off the top and bottom. Resize what's left to 720x480. Encode as 16:9 NTSC DVD.

[hello_hello]

I'd be fairly confident the original video is not 4:3. It's aspect ratio when played looks correct to me..... 3:2 using square pixels. I've never used Vegas but if it's getting it wrong can you correct/change the "input display aspect ratio" or the "input pixel aspect ratio"?
I'm not seeing any thin black bars down the sides of the video as the OP described. It sounds to me like the player is adding the "side" black bars when the original video is run full screen on a wide aspect ratio monitor, but they're not part of the video. Not being familiar with Vegas it seems like the OP might be correcting what Vegas decided although he shouldn't be, and that's what's stretching the picture, but I'm not sure. Anyway....

I agree with jagabo. Someone seems to have taken a 4:3 image and put it in a letterboxed frame, but they didn't use the correct (or usual) pixel aspect ratio for a 4:3 DVD. They seem to have resized it to 720x480 worth of square pixels (3:2 display aspect ratio).

Personally (and I've never used it so I have no idea how to do it with Vegas), I'd be cropping the black bars and putting what's left in a 720x480, 16:9 aspect ratio frame, just as jagabo sauggested.

Or alternatively, adding an extra 30 pixels of black border top and bottom (total 60) then resizing to 720x480 while using a 4:3 aspect ratio looks about right to me too (note the top and bottom black bars at the beginning in my sample which weren't there before). The assumption being if the wmv's current 3:2 aspect ratio is correct, adding 60 more pixels of black gives you 720x540, which is 4:3 worth of square pixels, which you'd then resize to 720x480 for a 4:3 DVD. If you wanted ITU resizing..... my brain won't do it today.... anyone?.

You must be able to do something like the above with Vegas, surely......

[Melodious]

Crop 42 pixels off the top and bottom. Resize what's left to 720x480. Encode as 16:9 NTSC DVD.

I did what you said. I don't mind the resulting letterboxing, but the picture is so much blurier than the original.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26626325/Tom%206%20sample.mpg

[Melodious]

I'd be fairly confident the original video is not 4:3. It's aspect ratio when played looks correct to me..... 3:2 using square pixels. I've never used Vegas but if it's getting it wrong can you correct/change the "input display aspect ratio" or the "input pixel aspect ratio"?
I'm not seeing any thin black bars down the sides of the video as the OP described. It sounds to me like the player is adding the "side" black bars when the original video is run full screen on a wide aspect ratio monitor, but they're not part of the video. Not being familiar with Vegas it seems like the OP might be correcting what Vegas decided although he shouldn't be, and that's what's stretching the picture, but I'm not sure. Anyway....

I agree with jagabo. Someone seems to have taken a 4:3 image and put it in a letterboxed frame, but they didn't use the correct (or usual) pixel aspect ratio for a 4:3 DVD. They seem to have resized it to 720x480 worth of square pixels (3:2 display aspect ratio).

Personally (and I've never used it so I have no idea how to do it with Vegas), I'd be cropping the black bars and putting what's left in a 720x480, 16:9 aspect ratio frame, just as jagabo sauggested.

Or alternatively, adding an extra 30 pixels of black border top and bottom (total 60) then resizing to 720x480 while using a 4:3 aspect ratio looks about right to me too (note the top and bottom black bars at the beginning in my sample which weren't there before). The assumption being if the wmv's current 3:2 aspect ratio is correct, adding 60 more pixels of black gives you 720x540, which is 4:3 worth of square pixels, which you'd then resize to 720x480 for a 4:3 DVD. If you wanted ITU resizing..... my brain won't do it today.... anyone?.

You must be able to do something like the above with Vegas, surely......

Outstanding. I'm going to see if this can be done in Vegas.

[jagabo]

Crop 42 pixels off the top and bottom. Resize what's left to 720x480. Encode as 16:9 NTSC DVD.

I did what you said. I don't mind the resulting letterboxing, but the picture is so much blurier than the original.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26626325/Tom%206%20sample.mpg

There should be no pillarboxing. The video should fill the 720x480 frame. Start with a 16:9 DVD template. Convince Vegas not to letterbox or pillarbox after the crop and resize.

To get a sharper picture you can try resizing with a sharper resizing filter. Or sharpening after resizing. You could also make a 4:3 DVD -- downsizing will give you sharper restuls. You can do that by cropping 42 pixels top and bottom, resizing to 720x360, adding 60 pixels of letterboxing top and bottom, then encode as 4:3 NTSC DVD.

[hello_hello]

Outstanding. I'm going to see if this can be done in Vegas.

Have a look at the samples I attached to my previous post. The 16:9 sample should be the result jagabo is describing.

For a 4:3 output, I'd assume (hope) Vegas would be clever enough to do it for you. If it knows the input video has a 3:2 aspect ratio and it knows you want a 720x480, 4:3 output aspect ratio, I'd imaging it'll add the extra black bars for you.

I still think though, cropping the black bars and using a 720x480, 16:9 aspect ratio would be a better option. It may only look more blurry because it gets resized (enlarged) more on playback if the monitor/TV is 16:9.

[Melodious]

I'd be fairly confident the original video is not 4:3. It's aspect ratio when played looks correct to me..... 3:2 using square pixels. I've never used Vegas but if it's getting it wrong can you correct/change the "input display aspect ratio" or the "input pixel aspect ratio"?
I'm not seeing any thin black bars down the sides of the video as the OP described. It sounds to me like the player is adding the "side" black bars when the original video is run full screen on a wide aspect ratio monitor, but they're not part of the video. Not being familiar with Vegas it seems like the OP might be correcting what Vegas decided although he shouldn't be, and that's what's stretching the picture, but I'm not sure. Anyway....

I agree with jagabo. Someone seems to have taken a 4:3 image and put it in a letterboxed frame, but they didn't use the correct (or usual) pixel aspect ratio for a 4:3 DVD. They seem to have resized it to 720x480 worth of square pixels (3:2 display aspect ratio).

Personally (and I've never used it so I have no idea how to do it with Vegas), I'd be cropping the black bars and putting what's left in a 720x480, 16:9 aspect ratio frame, just as jagabo sauggested.

Or alternatively, adding an extra 30 pixels of black border top and bottom (total 60) then resizing to 720x480 while using a 4:3 aspect ratio looks about right to me too (note the top and bottom black bars at the beginning in my sample which weren't there before). The assumption being if the wmv's current 3:2 aspect ratio is correct, adding 60 more pixels of black gives you 720x540, which is 4:3 worth of square pixels, which you'd then resize to 720x480 for a 4:3 DVD. If you wanted ITU resizing..... my brain won't do it today.... anyone?.

You must be able to do something like the above with Vegas, surely......

I'm trying to imitate what you did for 16:9 output, but I'm still having trouble. Even when I crop the picture down to 720x396 and then render it as a 720x480 16:9 frame, it still adds black bars to the sides.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26626325/Tom%20720x480%2016-9.mpg

[hello_hello]

Anyone know how to use Vegas? Sorry but I don't, so I don't know how to stop it pillarboxing.

Is there a way to confirm it knows the input video has a 3:2 aspect ratio and it's not 4:3?

[jagabo]

Anyone know how to use Vegas? Sorry but I don't, so I don't know how to stop it pillarboxing.

I don't use Vegas so I can't help there.

Is there a way to confirm it knows the input video has a 3:2 aspect ratio and it's not 4:3?

Though I don't use Vegas, from what I've read, you can right click on the video on the timeline, then from the context menu select Properties, Video Properties, Source Properties, or something like that.

[Melodious]

Anyone know how to use Vegas? Sorry but I don't, so I don't know how to stop it pillarboxing.

Is there a way to confirm it knows the input video has a 3:2 aspect ratio and it's not 4:3?

As we await an answer, can I ask you what software you used to adjust the video? I have such little time to assure the printing press owner that I can do this correctly before she ends up consulting a company that does video work.

[Melodious]

Anyone know how to use Vegas? Sorry but I don't, so I don't know how to stop it pillarboxing.

I don't use Vegas so I can't help there.

Is there a way to confirm it knows the input video has a 3:2 aspect ratio and it's not 4:3?

Though I don't use Vegas, from what I've read, you can right click on the video on the timeline, then from the context menu select Properties, Video Properties, Source Properties, or something like that.

I tried opening the source properties as you said. It allows me to change the pixel aspect ratio to whatever I type in. I put 1.5. It looks extremely stretched. Is this what you guys are referring to? I'm not very edumacated with this sort of thing.

[jagabo]

The pixel aspect ratio is 1:1 (1.0). The display aspect ratio is 3:2 (1.5). Try starting with a 16:9 DVD template, import the video, crop 42 pixels top and bottom, then encode. Vegas may handle the resizing itself.

[Melodious]

The pixel aspect ratio is 1:1 (1.0). The display aspect ratio is 3:2 (1.5). Try starting with a 16:9 DVD template, import the video, crop 42 pixels top and bottom, then encode. Vegas may handle the resizing itself.

I just changed the 1.5 to 1.0 and wala. It worked. Full 16:9 frame.

[Melodious]

Thank you so much jagabo and hello_hello for your fast and helpful advice. I wouldn't have solved this without you guys. And thanks to everyone else that responded. It means a lot.

[hello_hello]

As we await an answer, can I ask you what software you used to adjust the video? I have such little time to assure the printing press owner that I can do this correctly before she ends up consulting a company that does video work.

I kind of just did it manually, working out the correct aspect ratio (based on the assumption the wmv is 3:2) and the picture inside is roughly 16:9 once the black bars are removed, then I used MeGUI and Avisynth to encode it, but that would take a new (long) thread to explain.

Edit: Well I was slow and you seem to have it sorted. I'd attached another sample to this post originally, but I think it'd confuse the issue at this stage (it was confusing me) so I deleted it.

[smrpix]

Glad that worked for you. Here's another way.

[hello_hello]

Melodious,
Out of curiosity, what was the pixel aspect ratio being displayed when you first opened the video properties? Was it 1:1 or something else? I'm just curious as to what was going wrong in the first place.

[jagabo]

Melodious, you should summarize exactly what you did so that someone else might benefit from this thread in the future.

[budwzr]

Melodious, you should summarize exactly what you did so that someone else might benefit from this thread in the future.

I'm really confused now because the OP's screen shots of "the problem" are different. If the PAR was fakkakted why wasn't the image squashed?

I still say what he has is a 16X9 image baked into a 4:3 frame.

[smrpix]

what was the pixel aspect ratio being displayed when you first opened the video properties? Was it 1:1 or something else? I'm just curious as to what was going wrong in the first place.

The clip he posted was a 5:3 (1.66:1) aspect ratio image letterboxed in a 720x480 frame with DV pixels 0.91:1

I too am curious whether that was his original source.

[budwzr]

I too am curious whether that was his original source.

Yeah, something smells here. Looks like another poser trying to bypass the "Newbie" section. Jag fell in his trap first.

And there was a region marker in that sample file. From Vegas. So it was rendered from Vegas. I'm guessing the Ope already did a bad render.

Whew! Lotta stress for nadda.

OK, men. Go back to DefCon 1. Stand down the bombers. whoop. whoop.

[sanlyn]

Hope it works out. With the original 4:3 video, here's how the logo would display at 4:3 original DAR:

[Attachment 21117 - Click to enlarge]

If I understand what you wre trying to do, with new 16x9 DAR and pixels removes from the video, it looks this way at 16x9:

[Attachment 21118 - Click to enlarge]

The logo's a bit(?) stretched, what? Maybe Tom won't notice. Here's Tom as he looks originally at a 4:3 or 3:2 display:

[Attachment 21119 - Click to enlarge]

If you changed the original image DAR, maybe Tom won't notice that he looks as if he's gained a little weight at 16x9 full-screen:

[Attachment 21120 - Click to enlarge]

That is, if you did what I think you did.

ED: Oops. bud beat me to it. Oh, well, since I spent half an hour on it.....

[budwzr]

Hope it works out. With the original 4:3 video, here's how the logo would display at 4:3 original DAR:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]21117

Nice catch! You score points on that one.