View Single Post
Old 16th January 2013, 17:38   #16941  |  Link
madshi
Registered Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jong View Post
what I was trying to do was compare the Reclcock resampler, which is at least a defined formula, calculated to high internal accuracy, with the option to upsample, with pitch correction, which involves chopping audio up into time slices and the processing those 2-channels at a time with loads of potential for both audible artefacts at slice boundaries and loss of phase coherence between each channel pair, e.g. Fronts and rears. IMO the resampling in Reclock has the potential to be inaudible, if not precise(!). Pitch correction, not so much.

And the point about 0.01% was that the temp change of this small adjustment should be in audible (possible artefacts aside). Not that the artefacts, such as they exist, would be less because the adjustment was small.
Ok, fair points, I have to agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonQ View Post
If that was deinterlaced in "video mode", as long as it was correctly detected as BFF, it'd just be output as 50p with every other frame being a repeat of the previous one, surely? In the same way that playing 25p content on a normal TV would actually be 50p/75p/100p with repeated frames. If not, then I've never seen that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevcairiel View Post
Video Mode deinterlacing of telecined PAL just results in 50p, even if it would be supposed to only be 25p, so usually we never notice any such problems.
Yes, running this through a video mode deinterlacer (e.g. YADIF) should produce acceptable image quality with 50 different progressive frames being the result, but image quality would not be as good as properly done IVTC, of course.
madshi is offline   Reply With Quote