FORUMS: list search recent posts

interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it...

COW Forums : DVD Authoring

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
chicagoEditor
interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it...
on Jan 10, 2006 at 12:43:28 pm

Hi guys,
I've struggled for months to make pretty dvd's. My biggest issue is making ones that look good on both computers and tv's. Luckily, my shooters are shooting everything progressive now and it's going great. Now I have a client who gave me a 20 minute Beta tape and asked for a dvd of it. We did some nice menus in Adobe Encore, and all that's left is the video. I captured 30i in Avid, then compress with Sorenson Squeeze. But when I tell sorenson to make it progressive, it doesn't seem to. I.E. looks great on a TV, but I get the horizontal lines during motion on the computer. But if I tell Sorenson to deinterlace, then the parts of the video that have cg's, looks all jagged and cruddy.
Is it not possible? I thought making it progressive would be the answer...would play smooth on a computer and fine on a progressive scan dvd player.
Any thoughts would be appreciated. I'm to the point where I have to tell my client, "sorry, can't be done."


Return to posts index

chicagoEditor
Re: interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it...
on Jan 10, 2006 at 1:37:56 pm

Also...will it help if I run the footage through a deinterlacer like Magic Bullet or ReelSmart Fields Kit? Then treat it like progressive footage?

Also, is the problem the Avid-Sorenson-Encore workflow? One crazy idea i had was to layoff the program to a DV tape and digitize via firewire into my other PC which has premiere. From there I can export right to Encore. I've done that many times and never had field issues, but there will be a quality loss going from Beta to DVCam.

Just a thought.


Return to posts index

eric
Re: interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it...
by
on Jan 10, 2006 at 4:30:47 pm

NEVER deinterlace your footage if it was shot interlaced..you lose half your temporal information. The perfect situation would be to have all progressive footage then to set the P flags during the encodes. This would look great on both computers and set tops.

Players actually add the 3:2 cadence when going through the composite output.


Return to posts index


chicagoEditor
Re: interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it...
on Jan 10, 2006 at 4:46:59 pm

Yes, ideally the footage would be progressive, but in this case it is not. It is a program edited somewhere else and sent to me on a Beta tape. I am captuing into the Avid at 2:1. It is definitely interlaced to begin with. So is it right to tell the client that they CANNOT have a dvd from that that will look clean on both a TV and a computer?

Or do you mean that if they send it from their dvd player to their tv via a different cable (svideo, composite rca, component) they will see different results? Because it actually looks fine on the TV, just not on the computer which is how most of the end users will be viewing it.

Sorry for all the questions, I'm lost. Would using the FCP-DVDSP workflow solve my problems?


Return to posts index

eric
Re: interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it...
by
on Jan 11, 2006 at 3:09:06 am

If your main concern is that you need it to looks good on a computer then I would go with Progressive. This case is definetly am exception though. Alot of deinterlacers out there do a good job. I guess it all depend on how your end users are going to use your DVD.


Return to posts index

Arniepix
Re: interlacing vs. progressive-i almost get it...
on Jan 12, 2006 at 5:54:57 pm

If you can deinterlace by either blending or blurring the 2 fields, then you might be able to get a DVD to look ok on both computer & video. I've had moderate success using Apple's Compressor 1.x & DVDSP versions 2 & 3.

Arnie

http://www.arniepix.com


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]