<p>This is the explanation for the four quality modes, as provided by Vegas tech support long ago:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Quality: Best</p>
  
  <p>Scaling: bi-cubic/integration</p>
  
  <p>Field Handling: on</p>
  
  <p>Field Rendering: on (setting dependent)</p>
  
  <p>Framerate Resample/IFR: on (switch dependent)</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <p>Quality: Good</p>
  
  <p>Scaling: bi-linear</p>
  
  <p>Field Handling: on</p>
  
  <p>Field Rendering: on (setting dependent)</p>
  
  <p>Framerate Resample/IFR: on (switch dependent)</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <p>Quality: Preview</p>
  
  <p>Scaling: bi-linear</p>
  
  <p>Field Handling: off</p>
  
  <p>Field Rendering: off</p>
  
  <p>Framerate Resample/IFR: always off</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <p>Quality: Draft</p>
  
  <p>Scaling: point sample</p>
  
  <p>Field Handling: off</p>
  
  <p>Field Rendering: off</p>
  
  <p>Framerate Resample/IFR: always off</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <p>Scaling:</p>
  
  <p>These methods come into play when conforming sources that differ from
  the output size. They are also used when panned, cropped or resized in
  track motion.</p>
  
  <p>Bi-Cubic/Integration - Best image resizing algorithm available in
  Vegas. Quality differences will be most noticeable when using very
  large stills or stretching small sources.</p>
  
  <p>Bi-linear - Best compromise between speed and quality. This method
  will produce good results in most cases.</p>
  
  <p>Point Sampling - Fast but produces poor results.</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <p>Field Handling:</p>
  
  <p>This refers to the field conformance stage of Vegas's video engine.
  This includes Interlaced to Progressive conversion, Interlaced to
  interlaced output when scaling, motion or geometric Video FX and
  Transitions are involved. Skipping this stage can sometimes result in
  bad artifacts when high motion interlaced sources are used.</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <p>Field Rendering:</p>
  
  <p>When the output format is interlaced, Vegas will internally render at
  the field rate (twice the frame rate) to achieve smooth motion and FX
  interpolation.</p>
</blockquote>

<hr>

<blockquote>
  <p>Frame Rate Resample / IFR (Interlace Flicker Reduction):</p>
  
  <p>Frame Rate Resample:</p>
  
  <p>This kicks in when speed changes are made through Velocity Envelopes
  and/or event stretching. In can also be used when up-converting low
  frame rate sources. This only kicks in if the resample switch is
  turned on <em>and</em> quality is set to good or best.</p>
  
  <p>Interlace Flicker Reduction:</p>
  
  <p>This kicks in if the event switch is turned on and quality is set to
  good or best. See Vegas' documentation for a description of this
  switch.</p>
</blockquote>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T16:33:13.003Z
Thank you. Very valuable information. Since Preview and Best differ by three of the four settings, which do you suppose was causing the issues?
user3643
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T16:44:40.687Z
My guess is field rendering. Can you post your render and project setting screenshots?
Gyan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T18:36:19.160Z
I've added snapshots of the render settings to the question.
user3643
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T18:45:10.917Z
Post project settings as well.
Gyan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T18:45:52.187Z
Mind you - 2 mbps is very low for 1080p output. It should be ~5x that. If you want a final output around 2 mbps then you should recompress the Vegas exported file with a tool like Handbrake or ffmpeg.etc
Gyan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T19:09:11.723Z
Added project settings. I've been told that before about the bitrate and use Handbrake of ffmpeg to recompress. Two things. 1) I don't really notice a quality difference, 2) This would add significant processing time to my workflow.
user3643
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-30T05:20:26.380Z
Why is your project settings so odd? For one thing, if you're working with NTSC widescreen footage, you want 720x480 with the appropriate pixel aspect ratio. And if you need the output to be 1080p, then the external encoder route is recommended even more, as you can select a scaler like Lanczos, which is higher quality than the bicubic/bilinear available in Vegas and preserves thin lines and edges better than them.
Gyan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-30T06:43:26.690Z
It's HDV footage. I don't know why the settings are that way.
user3643
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-30T07:03:00.877Z
I don't know, in Vegas 8.5, if the rightmost icon on the Template line in Project settings is 'Match Media'. If it is, click that and select one of the footage files. If it's not, right-click on one of the footage files, check its resolution, frame rate, field handling, pixel aspect ratio and set those in Project Settings.
Gyan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T12:47:47.073Z
2015-12-29T12:47:47.073Z
Gyan
<p>I have created a video with Sony Vegas Pro 8.5 with an intro that includes graphics, pan/crop events, and generated text. There is also a "lower third" banner right after it.</p>

<p>What is odd to me is that there are quite a few issues when I render it with "best" video rendering qualtiy, while "preview" gives me no troubles. While on "best" the problem is that the text, most of the images, and anything with a pan/crop event are blurred and/or wiggle. You can especially see the wiggle on the portrait images once the next image starts scrolling up and on the third slide for the duration it is showing.</p>

<p><a href="https://youtu.be/2UlEdiXXCi8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Here is a "best" sample of the video on YouTube.</a></p>

<p><a href="https://youtu.be/RiyNJiWl4eA" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Here is a "preview" sample of the video on YouTube.</a></p>

<p>This makes no sense to me. Why is the "preview" setting better than the "best" setting? What exactly does this setting do? Vegas Pro 8.5, if it matters.</p>

<p>Sample Render settings:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/Hcuoc.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/Hcuoc.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/L1h7R.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/L1h7R.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>Project properties:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/X4lHL.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/X4lHL.png" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>Here are some snap shots that show it looks crisp with "preview" but not "best".</p>

<p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Crisp "preview" snapshot on left &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Not crisp "best" snapshot on right.</strong>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/Uaf1J.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/Uaf1J.png" width="320"></a>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/0jZMK.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/0jZMK.jpg" width="320"></a>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/45wN6.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/45wN6.png" width="320"></a>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/leqid.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/leqid.jpg" width="320"></a>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/vnp5A.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/vnp5A.png" width="320"></a>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/cYGCJ.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/cYGCJ.jpg" width="320"></a>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/9hns8.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/9hns8.jpg" width="320"></a>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/HC4Rt.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/HC4Rt.jpg" width="320"></a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T07:16:20.923Z
Hypothesis : the preview mode uses uncompressed video whereas your export is in MPEG-2, which even at it's best settings will produce artifacts such as those observed.
audionuma
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-12-29T07:18:04.680Z
@audionuma I should mention that these artifacts are consistent across all formats tried. mpeg-2, mp4, HDV, etc. I wasted a lot of time this evening realizing that it was this setting. I tried it last because "preview" implies lesser quality than "best". My question was originally "How to fix this" but tried this as a last ditch so I can say I tried everything. I was not expecting it to fix it.
user3643
<video-quality><vegas-pro>
What exactly does the video rendering quality option do in Sony Vegas Pro?
user3643
# What exactly does the video rendering quality option do in Sony Vegas Pro?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-12-29)

I have created a video with Sony Vegas Pro 8.5 with an intro that includes graphics, pan/crop events, and generated text. There is also a "lower third" banner right after it.

What is odd to me is that there are quite a few issues when I render it with "best" video rendering qualtiy, while "preview" gives me no troubles. While on "best" the problem is that the text, most of the images, and anything with a pan/crop event are blurred and/or wiggle. You can especially see the wiggle on the portrait images once the next image starts scrolling up and on the third slide for the duration it is showing.

[Here is a "best" sample of the video on YouTube.](https://youtu.be/2UlEdiXXCi8)

[Here is a "preview" sample of the video on YouTube.](https://youtu.be/RiyNJiWl4eA)

This makes no sense to me. Why is the "preview" setting better than the "best" setting? What exactly does this setting do? Vegas Pro 8.5, if it matters.

Sample Render settings:

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/Hcuoc.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/Hcuoc.png)

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/L1h7R.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/L1h7R.png)

Project properties:

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/X4lHL.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/X4lHL.png)

Here are some snap shots that show it looks crisp with "preview" but not "best".

**Crisp "preview" snapshot on left                     Not crisp "best" snapshot on right.**
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/Uaf1J.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/Uaf1J.png)
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/0jZMK.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/0jZMK.jpg)
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/45wN6.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/45wN6.png)
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/leqid.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/leqid.jpg)
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/vnp5A.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/vnp5A.png)
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/cYGCJ.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/cYGCJ.jpg)
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/9hns8.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/9hns8.jpg)
[![](https://i.sstatic.net/HC4Rt.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/HC4Rt.jpg)

**Tags:** video-quality, vegas-pro

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Hypothesis : the preview mode uses uncompressed video whereas your export is in MPEG-2, which even at it's best settings will produce artifacts such as those observed.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 I should mention that these artifacts are consistent across all formats tried. mpeg-2, mp4, HDV, etc. I wasted a lot of time this evening realizing that it was this setting. I tried it last because "preview" implies lesser quality than "best". My question was originally "How to fix this" but tried this as a last ditch so I can say I tried everything. I was not expecting it to fix it.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2015-12-29. Score: 2 | Accepted answer

This is the explanation for the four quality modes, as provided by Vegas tech support long ago:

> Quality: Best
>
> Scaling: bi-cubic/integration
>
> Field Handling: on
>
> Field Rendering: on (setting dependent)
>
> Framerate Resample/IFR: on (switch dependent)

---

> Quality: Good
>
> Scaling: bi-linear
>
> Field Handling: on
>
> Field Rendering: on (setting dependent)
>
> Framerate Resample/IFR: on (switch dependent)

---

> Quality: Preview
>
> Scaling: bi-linear
>
> Field Handling: off
>
> Field Rendering: off
>
> Framerate Resample/IFR: always off

---

> Quality: Draft
>
> Scaling: point sample
>
> Field Handling: off
>
> Field Rendering: off
>
> Framerate Resample/IFR: always off

---

> Scaling:
>
> These methods come into play when conforming sources that differ from
> the output size. They are also used when panned, cropped or resized in
> track motion.
>
> Bi-Cubic/Integration - Best image resizing algorithm available in
> Vegas. Quality differences will be most noticeable when using very
> large stills or stretching small sources.
>
> Bi-linear - Best compromise between speed and quality. This method
> will produce good results in most cases.
>
> Point Sampling - Fast but produces poor results.

---

> Field Handling:
>
> This refers to the field conformance stage of Vegas's video engine.
> This includes Interlaced to Progressive conversion, Interlaced to
> interlaced output when scaling, motion or geometric Video FX and
> Transitions are involved. Skipping this stage can sometimes result in
> bad artifacts when high motion interlaced sources are used.

---

> Field Rendering:
>
> When the output format is interlaced, Vegas will internally render at
> the field rate (twice the frame rate) to achieve smooth motion and FX
> interpolation.

---

> Frame Rate Resample / IFR (Interlace Flicker Reduction):
>
> Frame Rate Resample:
>
> This kicks in when speed changes are made through Velocity Envelopes
> and/or event stretching. In can also be used when up-converting low
> frame rate sources. This only kicks in if the resample switch is
> turned on *and* quality is set to good or best.
>
> Interlace Flicker Reduction:
>
> This kicks in if the event switch is turned on and quality is set to
> good or best. See Vegas' documentation for a description of this
> switch.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thank you. Very valuable information. Since Preview and Best differ by three of the four settings, which do you suppose was causing the issues?  
> **username_2**: My guess is field rendering. Can you post your render and project setting screenshots?  
> **username_0**: I've added snapshots of the render settings to the question.  
> **username_2**: Post project settings as well.  
> **username_2**: Mind you - 2 mbps is very low for 1080p output. It should be ~5x that. If you want a final output around 2 mbps then you should recompress the Vegas exported file with a tool like Handbrake or ffmpeg.etc  
> **username_0**: Added project settings. I've been told that before about the bitrate and use Handbrake of ffmpeg to recompress. Two things. 1) I don't really notice a quality difference, 2) This would add significant processing time to my workflow.  
> **username_2**: Why is your project settings so odd? For one thing, if you're working with NTSC widescreen footage, you want 720x480 with the appropriate pixel aspect ratio. And if you need the output to be 1080p, then the external encoder route is recommended even more, as you can select a scaler like Lanczos, which is higher quality than the bicubic/bilinear available in Vegas and preserves thin lines and edges better than them.  
> **username_0**: It's HDV footage. I don't know why the settings are that way.  
> **username_2**: I don't know, in Vegas 8.5, if the rightmost icon on the Template line in Project settings is 'Match Media'. If it is, click that and select one of the footage files. If it's not, right-click on one of the footage files, check its resolution, frame rate, field handling, pixel aspect ratio and set those in Project Settings.  

---

