progressive or interlaced ?

[xabat]

Hello,

Do the DVDx and Xmpeg program encode to SVCD using progressive or interlaced??

I am using LSX, and yes I have seen that people have posted the error before.

BUT if one is using progressive you wreck the SVCD standard. BUT NERO do not seem to care, and I would very much like to keep the SVCD standard.

So is DVDx and Xmpeg doing it's converting by progressive or interlaced ?

xabat

[Infinite_stupidity]

Originally posted by xabat
BUT if one is using progressive you wreck the SVCD standard.

Whoa, hold it right there. Are you saying that svcds cannot be 23.976 progressive? Becuase if you are I would have to TOTALLY disagree with that statement, the svcd standard does provide for progressive video with pulldown flags in the video.

[xabat]

Yes that is what I am saying.....

Try using LSX plugin or LSX Encoder and choose SVCD with Progressive.

Then you'll get an error message from LSX saying that when doing SVCD, output must be intelaced, or you'll break the SVCD standard.

xabat

[Infinite_stupidity]

Then LSX is wrong, NTSC svcds can be 23.976fps progressive as long as the pulldown flags are included in the video. Maybe your doing pal?? Anyway, I am fairly certain of this as the few retail svcds I own are all 23.976 progressive, and are 'guarentied to play in any SVCD player, or your money back'. Besides if you insist on using interlaced format (and losing more quality as the bitrate gets spread over more frames), pretty much any encoder you try will function in both interlaced and progressive formats...

Well, its your choice (and frankly none of my business) so im very sorry if I came across a little strongly:)

[Antonio S.]

Originally posted by Infinite_stupidity.

"Besides if you insist on using interlaced format (and losing more quality as the bitrate gets spread over more frames) "

This is not true... When you are encoding in interlace mode you are creating half frames in the same time ( First frame- line 1,3,5,... , Second frame 2,4,6,...) so you really are encoding less information per time. This was develop originally for NSTC television back in 1950 to allow broadcast in a limited bandwidth. Sadly we are dealing with that system, but things had change do to the popularity of computers and HDTV. Interlace is more efficient but have the side effect of softening the picture when movie is in movement. NSTC standard allows 29.97 fps. If you encode interlace or progressive you will always have 29.97 fps, the diference is half frames or full frames. When you encode in NSTC FILM, you are encoding at 23.976 fps and your player makes the 2:3 pullback for proper playback on NSTC sets. Progressine encoding is better...So encode in progressive format...

Antonio S.


:) :)

[Infinite_stupidity]

Whoopsy, your right Antonio, I just got so used to using progressive=23.976 and interlaced=29.97. Just pulled out my history of ntsc paper i did back in 10th grade, and thats some of whats in there. Sorry xabat, I gotta go back and make sure I understand all the basic terminology again:(. Sorry all...

[xabat]

Thanx for all your answers.

And just so you know I am doing Pal convertions.

So if I have understod everything correctly then basicly its progressive for NTSC and interlaced for PAL right ?;

thanx again for all that information ;)

It is nice to get some help...


xabat

[Tessai]

I remember reading one of the many, many IVTC articles (I believe Doom9 has a link the article I'm speaking of) and one mentioned a 2:2 pulldown for 24fps (FILM) to 25 fps (PAL) conversion. Going on this idea, you would have to either encode in progressive mode (inserting some sort of 2:2 pulldown flag in the video) or encode in interlace mode.

Let me know if I'm right or that I'm suffering from lack of sleep.