Note that there _are_ some (possibly relevant?) similarities...

1. The OP (JoeBoyd) has taken an arbitrary .JPG image and used it as the menu background by picking it from the gallery in the title editor
2. The previous poster (Saby) has referred to the non-motion menus that are part of Studio's "Standard menus" set; the background is associated with the menu in exactly the same way (at the time the menu template was first created within Pinnacle its background would have been picked from the gallery in the title editor).

I am aware that Studio 9, later versions of Studio 10, and Studio 11 have TWO completely different ways of rendering menus depending upon whether there *might* be any motion in the menu...

(a) If the menu is totally static:
i. has no Thumbnail Buttons
and ii. Has a solid colour or still-image background set from inside the title editor
and iii. Has nothing added to the overlay video track that could find its way into the frame as a background to the menu...

Studio will create two DVD-resolution (720 x 480 (NTSC) (or 576 (PAL))) bitmaps in the auxiliary files folder for each menu page during the "rendering menus" stage.One bitmap is an image of the menu as it will appear with all configured buttons/ captions, the other is a mask showing where the button highlights will be placed. When this menu is compiled into the final DVD, it will appear to be encoded as a _single_ frame of MPEG-2, with the frame-rate/duration settings defined such that one frame lasts for the entire menu duration.

(b) If the menu has any motion component (or any component that potentially could include motion or video effects
i. Has any Thumbnail Buttons
or ii. Has a video file as the background (picked from the Gallery in the title editor)
or iii. Has anything overlaid onto or underneath it

Studio will render a video file + a bitmap for each menu page. If the current BG render codec is "DV" a .DIF file will be created; if the current BG render codec is MPEG-2, then a .MP2 file will be created. However the bitrate used for that encoding is completely outside user control (but I think it is done at the project's selected bitrate). The bitmap file is a mask showing whwre the button highlights will be as per (a) above). When the menu is compiled onto the finished DVD it will appear as GOPs of regular MPEG-video frames with a frame rate of 29.97/25

 

So there is the opportunity to examine the auxiliary files (look closely at all the .BMP, .DIF or .MP2 files relating to the menu) to determine where any degradation first appears; and if one of the rendering methods (a) or (b) above is found to be worse, it is easy to add/remove something to/from the menu that causes the other rendering method to be used instead.

HTH
Richard

jjn:

If you compare this last post with the first of this thread, two completely different methods are being used to generate these "poor quality" menus.

Ok, but if you apply my method (selecting a transparent background by editing the menu an inserting the still background on title track) it solves the problem.

Anyone can confirm ?

culpanr:

1. The OP (JoeBoyd) has taken an arbitrary .JPG image and used it as the menu background by picking it from the gallery in the title editor

Guys, help me. Does OP mean Original Poster ?

 

culpanr:

(a) If the menu is totally static:

i. has no Thumbnail Buttons
and ii. Has a solid colour or still-image background set from inside the title editor
and iii. Has nothing added to the overlay video track that could find its way into the frame as a background to the menu...

Studio will create two DVD-resolution (720 x 480 (NTSC) (or 576 (PAL))) bitmaps in the auxiliary files folder for each menu page during the "rendering menus" stage.One bitmap is an image of the menu as it will appear with all configured buttons/ captions, the other is a mask showing where the button highlights will be placed. When this menu is compiled into the final DVD, it will appear to be encoded as a _single_ frame of MPEG-2, with the frame-rate/duration settings defined such that one frame lasts for the entire menu duration.

(b) If the menu has any motion component (or any component that potentially could include motion or video effects
i. Has any Thumbnail Buttons
or ii. Has a video file as the background (picked from the Gallery in the title editor)
or iii. Has anything overlaid onto or underneath it

Studio will render a video file + a bitmap for each menu page. If the current BG render codec is "DV" a .DIF file will be created; if the current BG render codec is MPEG-2, then a .MP2 file will be created. However the bitrate used for that encoding is completely outside user control (but I think it is done at the project's selected bitrate). The bitmap file is a mask showing whwre the button highlights will be as per (a) above). When the menu is compiled onto the finished DVD it will appear as GOPs of regular MPEG-video frames with a frame rate of 29.97/25

Yes. That's what I discovered by myself and explained here. Sorry for the french link.

For a 1 minute background :

In "a)case" we get a 42 Ko file called studiosequence 00_menu.bmp.m2v in F:\Render\My film 1F3C0266\DVD\StudioSequence\temp\ plus a studiosequence 00.mpa, 1.5 Mo (audio part of the menu even if there's no audio). The resulting VOB is called VTS_01_0.VOB and is about 1.6 Mo which is very low for a VOB. Rendering of the menu is very fast, as if Studio didn't calculate anything.

In "b)case" we get a 10 Mo file called studiosequence 00.m2v in F:\Render\My film 1F3C0266\DVD\StudioSequence\temp\ plus a studiosequence 00.mpa, 1.5 Mo (audio part of the menu even if there's no audio). The resulting VOB is called VTS_01_0.VOB and is about 17 Mo Mo which is correct for a VOB. Rendering of the menu is normal, as if Studio was compressing something.

saby:

Ok, but if you apply my method (selecting a transparent background by editing the menu an inserting the still background on title track) it solves the problem.

So that's a valuable observation; it suggests that the degradation is occurring when Studio is using Bitmaps within the "rendering menus" step and not when it's using video .M2V files.

By examining these auxiliary file bitmaps it should become apparent whether the degradation is creeping in when these are created by the title editor's render engine during the "rendering menus" stage, or by the final conversion to MPEG-2 during the "writing final file" stage.

C'mon Pinnacle - over to you!

Richard

I've been going back & forth with support about this issue.  I've tried installing Studio 12 onto several different machines and they all have the same pixelated dvd menus - as well as not so high quality images in the slide show.

I used just one of their sample menus and linked it to one jpg picture and the menu looks awful (background image & text are pixelated).   When I changed the dvd menu background to one of my images, the picture is so pixelated that you can't hardly recognize the faces).

I even tried the new montage feature.  Linked a simple dvd menu to 4 montage frames (where I put in still pictures and some text into the template).  After I render the project, not only is the dvd menu pixelated, but the slideshow with the new montage  theme is also pixelated (the pictures, and the text)....

All I get from support is that it must be my configuration or the type of pictures that I'm using.  I keep trying to tell them that I can reproduce the problem with their stock dvd menus that ship with studio...

I'm glad that I'm not the only one experiencing this problem...

 

S12Rookie:

I've been going back & forth with support about this issue.  I've tried installing Studio 12 onto several different machines and they all have the same pixelated dvd menus - as well as not so high quality images in the slide show.

--snip---

I'm glad that I'm not the only one experiencing this problem...

Rookie,

WELCOME to the forum. 

A great question to ask would be, "Do they have the problem or not?"  Sadly, the support people probably don't have Studio installed on their computer, and might not know how to run it if they did.  A person has to break through the first layer of defense support at any company before you talk to someone who actually knows what's going on.

I sorry you've been having such problems.  I hope that this problem has been recognized by Pinnacle and that a patch is in the works.

Hang in there.

I have abandoned this issue for a while and checked back in to find all these additional posts.  I had posted about it very early on (maybe 2nd poster?)  Anyway, mine was a homemade menu, with a still background, high-resolution jpeg.  I reproduced it with a solid color background.  I don't know about all the technicalities of how this is being rendered, but I have NEVER been able to get a good menu in 12, only in 9.  So IS THERE or ISN'T THERE a patch in the works for this?  It is definitely their problem, and not with our configurations.

I have the same problem.

Created a clip with a 4 sec menu from scratch with still pictures and 4 sec still picture HDDVD video. In Studio 11 Ultimate I get a great looking HDDVD menu,  whereas in Studio 12 Ultimate the quality is very poor.

The size of   HVDVD_TS file created is an indication of the difference, 12.8 MB (13,471,744 bytes) in Studio 11  versus 4.99 MB (5,238,784 bytes) in Studio 12.

I have read all the blogs on this subject and tweaked the settings as some suggsts but the results remain the same.
I hope this will get addressed by Pinnacle.

Toni

got an email from Support.  They've been able to repro and isolate the problem.  They are working on a fix - but there's not ETA.

 

S12Rookie:

They've been able to repro and isolate the problem.  They are working on a fix - but there's not ETA.

That's very encouraging.  It's a big first step.  At least there's hope.  Thanks for the update. 

Hey guys,

I've been using Studio since version 9 (currently on v 12) and I just joined the forum. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one that has had this problem with the awful looking menus. It's very frustrating to spend so many hours on a video just to have the viewers first impression be that of a menu that looks like it was made on a calculator screen. Has anyone also experienced the wonderful phenomenom of having the text on the menus and overlays shift upwards after you save it?

Thanks for the help.

Well I checked back after a long absense and wow, what a thread! Yes I used a homemade menu with a still captured from the video but I get the same result from a stock menu from pinnacle.

 

Putting the jpg on the title track wont help. I might help that particualr jpg, i haven't tried, but the text and the buttons and the thumbnails all still look like crap.

 

I too fought with live chat and email support. The final word I got from them was, "there is no quality button for menus at this time." I asked about informing developers: I got no comment.

 

Glad to hear the problem has been isolated and being worked on. Really would like that from an inside source though. Hate to pin my hopes on rumors.

 

Hang in there. We "professionals" can still output quality DVDs, we just have to use someone else's software to do it. I love Studio for the ease of working with clips and for the transitions available. I have accomplished a great deal with Pinnacle and will continue to use it.

 

 

Here is something new on the subject. I just did a few experimental tries. Any "motion" on the menu helps the quality overall. I tried a motion menu from the stock menus and I got acceptable quality on the overall look (ie text, buttons thumbnails, etc). Next I tried a still menu with "motion thumbnails". Same result, acceptable quality. It was only when the I used a still menu and still thumbnails that the quality went sour.

 Also I noticed even on the "motion" menus that at the end of the menu duration, ie one minute, the menu freezes just before it repeats. At that moment, the quality appears poor again. When the repeat starts, the quality returns.

JoeBoyd:

Here is something new on the subject. I just did a few experimental tries. Any "motion" on the menu helps the quality overall. I tried a motion menu from the stock menus and I got acceptable quality on the overall look (ie text, buttons thumbnails, etc). Next I tried a still menu with "motion thumbnails". Same result, acceptable quality. It was only when the I used a still menu and still thumbnails that the quality went sour.

Almost something new  :

saby:

Ok, here is a little summary.

Our established facts (2 different users) : the problem only appears with menus from Standards Menus and with still background.

Menus from Premium Contents, or menus with motion backgrounds, or menus with thumbnails or homemade menus have no video quality defects.

Now, a real good news : the problem is solved with the 12.1.0.6480 beta version of Studio.

 

Saby:

Menus from Premium Contents, or menus with motion backgrounds, or menus with thumbnails or homemade menus have no video quality defects.

 

I guess you have to define a homemade menu. If it has no motion there IS a quality defect. Also if menus with thumbnails which do not move, they DO have quality defects. I didn't agree with your "established facts" to begin with.

 

 I guess I'll try the new beta version. However, If I wait til i actually need it, maybe it will be out in an authorized version by then.

I believe you.  I'm having the same problems in version 12 also.

Yes, the menus are very pixelated.  Menu and titles.

So how can I get the beta version?

Huvie:

So how can I get the beta version?

Go to the Beta forum instead of here (the "General" forum). 

They are on the third cut of beta code.  Be sure to get the lates (...6581).

Ok, so I just installed the Studio 12 patch (not the beta, but the one that was posted recently for general use).  I rendered a dvd with similar menus to the ones I was having trouble with before (custom still menu with a jpeg of clouds as background and words as menu buttons).  I am happy to report that it is MUCH better than before; however, still not quite as sharp and clear as in Studio 9.  The background is not pixelated anymore, but the words are not as crisp as I would like, compared with the same menu rendered in 9.  Is this as "fixed" as it's going to get?

I have this same problem. In another thread I posted an interesting effect on my particular system, and Pinnacles response to it.

When I un-check "Use Progressive Encoding" My menus are back to being very sharp, no pixelation whatsoever. However, my video then gets ugly. So unfortunately it doesn't really solve anything but it's another avenue for Pinnacle to look at. When I go back and look at some of DVD's I made way back with Studio 9 and compare those menus to the quality of the same menu in Studio 12, Studio 9 is leaps and bounds better looking - very sharp. Even performing the workarounds doesn't bring the quality up to match what I had in Studio 9. Although it's better than not doing anything at all. I'm thankful to culpanr for discovering those workarounds since I had a project to finish for a client.

This is my 1st response in the Pinnacle forums.

I have Pinnacle 12.1... latest patches. I have both poor quality menu and poor quality video issues. I love the product but if you can't generate the dvd it is all for nothing. I own 2 machines.. xp and vista. I had Pinnacle 11. I have had many bugs and 'quirks'. I am past most of the issues with the exception of the blurry, out of focus, menus and video... both still images and avi and mpg videos. I upgraded to Pinnacle 12.  I tried on both machines. I uninstalled v11 and v12 and started over with just v12 and applied the patches. I tried a short list of photos... all 2meg+ quality. I tried all the workarounds without any success. I would like to try the new beta version. I REALLY want this to work, I love the product and it does do all I want... except for the obvious issue mentioned.

Are you viewing these poor quality videos on your computer with Studio, or are you viewing them as a finished AVI file in WMP or when burned to a DVD. The preview monitor in Studio does not represent the finished product. There is a place in the setup menu for full resolution preview. It's better than not full resolution but again doesn't represent the finished quality. There are many of us using this product and the videos definitely are not sub standard quality.

Don

@Don:  Menus can *definitely* have quality issues (for example).  Titles can as well (link).  And comparing S12's rendering of still images to S9, it looks like S9 still has the edge for "sharpness", as S12 seems to add some antialiasing to the image (good for creating video without "scritters" if you pan-n-zoom your stills).  That being said, I agree about how Studio 12 handles standard-def video--it's as good now as it ever has been, and *much* better than S8 or S9 when handling MPEG source, for example.

Don