cce newbie question

[gurkan]

Would it be possible to encode truly interlaced PAL with seperatefields() in 50 fps with half the resulotion and then have cce to flag it to play it back up as 25 fps interlaced with full resolution? And would this be dvd-compliant?

[manono]

It's DVD compliant. I've seen a few DVDs where the Picture_Structure was field rather than frame. You can't do it using CCE, though, and, personally, I don't see the point in doing it that way at all.

[gurkan]

I'm probably wrong, but if you'ld be able to encode the material at 50 fps, 720x288 in progressive mode and then pull it down to 25 fps 720x576 interlaced, you would produce as good material as an ordinary 25 fps 720x576 progressive without having to deinterlace and loose detail or movement.
This would also explain the amount of movies that shows up as interlaced when the material looks like it should've been progressive. Using that process it shouldn't really matter how it's encoded since everyother frame is almost identical to the one before.

[manono]

I'm probably wrong...

You're wrong.

This would also explain the amount of movies that shows up as interlaced when the material looks like it should've been progressive.

No it wouldn't.

You don't decrease the output framerate using pulldown. You don't change the resolution or weave the fields back together using pulldown. You can encode true interlaced material as interlaced anyway, without deinterlacing it. You can encode progressive sources as either progressive or interlaced. At the risk of sounding rude, you know not whereof you speak.

[gurkan]

At the risk of sounding rude, you know not whereof you speak.
Well, hence the title "cce newbie question."

You don't decrease the output framerate using pulldown. You don't change the resolution or weave the fields back together using pulldown.
This (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=88031) is the reason why I thought it would be possible to change the output framerate and weave the fields back.
You can encode true interlaced material as interlaced anyway, without deinterlacing it.
I know. That is what I was trying to avoid. Progressive encoding is more efficient than interlaced. Encoding a progressive frame as interlaced would defeat the purpose.


edit:
After doing some searching I found this (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa367729.aspx).
According to what I understand the feature I was looking for is called "singlefield samples".
Quote from the site:
"If a sample contains a single field, the sample height is half the frame height, because the sample contains only half of the scan lines for a frame."