Interlaced video with CG material?

[Longinus]

I'm making a video clip for a friend's band. So I captured all the live scenes with a miniDV camera (http://www.panasonic.com/PBDS/subcat/Products/cams_ccorders/f_ag-dvc7.html), and will include a LOT of 3D animation in it.

I tried everything to get a good progressive video from the original interlaced raw material. But the quality is bad, and I can never get rid of some "jagginess". I used a Sony VX2000 in the past, and I could de-interlace easier.

My question is... should I edit the video in interlaced mode, and put the 3D stuff in progressive mode? This video is going to be on TV and in a DVD, so I guess it will work anyway.

I just don't feel good about doing this!! I hate this "mixed" modes. And when (and if) someone grabs the DVD, and tried to make a ripp, he will probably have some nightmares.. :devil:

[neuron2]

Better to encode the whole thing as interlaced if it is only going to be displayed on TVs. Let the rippers worry about it.

[vidiot]

Have you tried to get interlaced material from your 3D Tool?

I also mixed some 3D stuff in my videos sometimes - and to make it look smoother (for moving objects) it may be a good idea to render in fields and not in frames.

(If it´s possible - I use Truespace 4.3, but any other software like Max, LW, Maya or SI should do...);)

[Longinus]

Vidiot, the only problem is that the guy who is making the 3D already rendered a lot of stuff. Now I could ask him to stop and start rendering interlaced, or have the whole 3D thing progressive.

The thing I could do, but I'm not sure how, is to convert the 3D videos to interlaced.

[vidiot]

Originally posted by Longinus
The thing I could do, but I'm not sure how, is to convert the 3D videos to interlaced.

Of course you can...
But imagine a ball roling along/across the screen - depending on its speed it would be smoother on tv by using fields. Because if you just split your frames into fields you have two fields with the same position of the ball.

And as far as my imagination goes -> most work is done with modeling and animating -> the final rendering is "just a click" (if you´re not having jurassic park-like animation).
... Of course -> the rendering can take a while (from hours to days or weeks), but normaly the "machine" can do it on its own...

[scharfis_brain]

you may interpolate the pregressive framerate (24 , 25 or 30 fps) 3D-Clip to 50 or 60 fps (depends on TV Standard) with Motionperfect.
And then reinterlace this 50/60fps Progressive stream.

[Longinus]

Well, it's not Jurassic Park like, but I takes 10 minutes/frame (On a XP 1800 machine).
Stupid Environment (sky) Lightning that makes it look wonderful, but takes forever to render. And I have limited time for this, and re-render would be really harmfull..

Anyway, I decided to go progressive with the video too. I stacked the video with a LOT of filters after the deinterlace, and now I can get something good enough.. Very smooth, but with sharp smoothed lines (instead of the old jagged ones). Maybe to much for some people, but I was after this look anyway. The movement is not very fluid I'm afraid, but since It won't have a lot of fast movements, it's no problem.

I'll post some images of my findings, if anyone is interested..

And btw, Did any of you guys every had problems with miniDV tapes? Problems like CORRUPTING the video? I got some big white blocks in 2 occassions, that last about 1/2 second, in a panasonic tape. Since I filmed with 2 cams, and the other had a sony tape, I can't be sure if it was a tape or cam problem.

Thank you all for your help.