Doom9's Forum - View Single Post

akupenguin · 9th October 2006, 22:14

My intuition is: no.
There will be a very few macroblocks where interlaced coding is better than progressive coding. i.e. if the content happens to contain textures that look combed.
But this is offset by the costs of mbaff: a fraction of a bit per macroblock to say "this block is progressive", and odd rows are unable to use the top-right neighbor for mv or intra prediction, and the resolution has to be mod32 (rather than the normal mod16), and the characteristic quantization artifacts of field coding tend to add combs (though this might be hidden if field coding is used only in the blocks that already contain such features).

Foreman isn't just aliased, it's deinterlaced. So it doesn't count as even abnormal progressive content.

9th October 2006, 22:14	#15 \| Link
akupenguin x264 developer Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,392	My intuition is: no. There will be a very few macroblocks where interlaced coding is better than progressive coding. i.e. if the content happens to contain textures that look combed. But this is offset by the costs of mbaff: a fraction of a bit per macroblock to say "this block is progressive", and odd rows are unable to use the top-right neighbor for mv or intra prediction, and the resolution has to be mod32 (rather than the normal mod16), and the characteristic quantization artifacts of field coding tend to add combs (though this might be hidden if field coding is used only in the blocks that already contain such features). Foreman isn't just aliased, it's deinterlaced. So it doesn't count as even abnormal progressive content. Last edited by akupenguin; 9th October 2006 at 22:20.