Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > Capturing and Editing Video > Avisynth Usage

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd September 2015, 07:35   #21  |  Link
feisty2
I'm Siri
 
feisty2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 2,119
Better my ass
Even 4k doesn't actually hit the limit of human vision of spatial resolution, and 1920x540??? You gotta be kidding me
And yet 24fps already looks kinda smooth to human eyes
__________________
If I got new ideas, will post here: https://github.com/IFeelBloated
feisty2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 07:48   #22  |  Link
kuchikirukia
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 385
30fps doesn't come close to the limit of human visual temporal resolution.
540 lines spaced 1 pixel apart and with two references just 16.6ms on either side can be interpolated to 1080p60 better than a 1080 line frame with nothing on either side within 33ms. We can bridge a pixel. Things tend to get lost across 33ms, though.
kuchikirukia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 07:51   #23  |  Link
feisty2
I'm Siri
 
feisty2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 2,119
Yeah, and movies are 24fps PROGRESSIVE, cuz 48i is just way too fancy for movies
__________________
If I got new ideas, will post here: https://github.com/IFeelBloated
feisty2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 07:53   #24  |  Link
feisty2
I'm Siri
 
feisty2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 2,119
How about we take one line out of 4 lines and make it 120fps?
__________________
If I got new ideas, will post here: https://github.com/IFeelBloated
feisty2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 07:53   #25  |  Link
Sharc
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 3,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by kuchikirukia View Post
30fps doesn't come close to the limit of human visual temporal resolution.
Absolutely. The "remedy" was controlled motion blur .....
Sharc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 10:16   #26  |  Link
DarkSpace
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 204
This seems to have devolved into a thread about how evil interlacing is when the source is progressive. While I agree about that, in general, this is only on the assumption that you have a choice between e.g. 60i and 60p. Once it comes down to 60i vs 30p, I have no clear opinion on the topic (I'd need to either read some papers on it, or conduct some tests myself), because in that case, you actually lose something in either case (spacial resolution for 60i, temporal resolution for 30p) while in 60i vs 60p you only lose in the case of 60i (spacial resolution).
About BD not supporting 60p: I have no sources on this at the moment, but I think I've read that BD does support 60p video, but only 720p60, not 1080p60. I may be wrong here, though, but 720p60 vs 1080i60 is something where I can easily imagine preferring the 720p version.

Anyway, you're all missing the most important part: johnmeyer suggested using pulldown flags on the final encode (which may well already be the source file). This means that the discussion about how the evils of interlacing is actually rather meaningless, because when using pulldown flags, what's encoded is a progressive video at a certain framerate, and the flags (which may, of course, be ignored if the player wishes to do so) only tell the player how to output the video in a framerate (fieldrate?) that is compliant with the playback medium's spec (e.g. 60i for DVD). And that, in my opinion, is a very good and very sensible suggestion, because it makes the video compliant to the DVD spec while still keeping it in its original progressive framerate. So there's no destruction going on at all. And restoration to its original form is also simple - just ignore the pulldown flags.

Edit: If you're using x264 for encoding (e.g. because your target is not DVD, but BD, and you want to convert 25p to 60000/1000i (as opposed to 60000/1001i), you can also use --pulldown euro, I believe. That should set the flags properly for this case. (I may be wrong, or misremembering things, though. Check this before doing it, lest you waste a lot of time!)

Last edited by DarkSpace; 22nd September 2015 at 10:21.
DarkSpace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 10:59   #27  |  Link
Music Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 1,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolak View Post
I've been told that there is a pro solution which does 25p to 60i conversion over 13 steps cadence.
I assume this is can be done with avisynth as swell?
You can make interpolation to get 60p then interlace to get 60i (actually 30i, see below why*) with a script like this ;
Code:
source(25p...)
assumefps(25)
InterFrame(NewNum=60000, NewDen=1001, cores=2)#to get 59,94... fps
assumeTFF()#or ComplementParity()
separatefields()
selectevery(4,0,3)
weave()#29,97i (also called 30i and 60i)

* The term 60i is a nonsense widely spread, 30i (or 29,97i) should be used instead because the number should always refer to the framerate and not the fieldrate to avoid confusion, then the i or p is enough to tell if it's interlaced or progressive.


About 60p in 1080p : it's not officially supported by BD but I've read on another forum that a guy made a 1080p60 (or 1080p50) BD with Pinnacle Studio 17 and read it successfully on a Sony BDP-S4200.
But there is another solution that will work with more Blu-ray players : AVCHD, because AVCHD supports 50p and 60p in 1080p since 2011 (AVCHD 2.0) ;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD#...28AVCHD_2.0.29
I tested it successfully on 2 players (h264 @ 28 Mbps in 1080p50 burnt with ImgBurn on dvd+rw in AVCHD format created with TSMuxer).

Last edited by Music Fan; 22nd September 2015 at 11:11.
Music Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 11:26   #28  |  Link
colours
Registered User
 
colours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Music Fan View Post
* The term 60i is a nonsense widely spread, 30i (or 29,97i) should be used instead because the number should always refer to the framerate and not the fieldrate to avoid confusion, then the i or p is enough to tell if it's interlaced or progressive.
I take it that you're into prescriptive linguistics, which unfortunately (or fortunately!) isn't how English works. In my opinion, "60i" is more appropriate a description when there are 60 temporally distinct pictures than "30i", convention be damned. I'd spell out "30 frames/s" or "60 fields/s" if there was any risk of confusion, though.
__________________
Say no to AviSynth 2.5.8 and DirectShowSource!
colours is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 12:04   #29  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
It's not about liking interlaced or not, but be able to deliver "NTSC" friendly masters from 25p sources.

I don't like interlaced at all, but try to create high quality 23.976p, 29.97p master from 25p source (without speed change!) with motion adaptive technique. Not a single solution can do it at acceptable level for a random source, that why people use 60i.
There is a huge need for it in a real world! It's for broadcast, which is crap quality anyway. The problem is that motion adaptive artefacts are visible, where a bit jerky video is more acceptable.

Last edited by kolak; 22nd September 2015 at 12:15.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 12:06   #30  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Music Fan View Post
You can make interpolation to get 60p then interlace to get 60i (actually 30i, see below why*) with a script like this ;
Code:
source(25p...)
assumefps(25)
InterFrame(NewNum=60000, NewDen=1001, cores=2)#to get 59,94... fps
assumeTFF()#or ComplementParity()
separatefields()
selectevery(4,0,3)
weave()#29,97i (also called 30i and 60i)

* The term 60i is a nonsense widely spread, 30i (or 29,97i) should be used instead because the number should always refer to the framerate and not the fieldrate to avoid confusion, then the i or p is enough to tell if it's interlaced or progressive.


About 60p in 1080p : it's not officially supported by BD but I've read on another forum that a guy made a 1080p60 (or 1080p50) BD with Pinnacle Studio 17 and read it successfully on a Sony BDP-S4200.
But there is another solution that will work with more Blu-ray players : AVCHD, because AVCHD supports 50p and 60p in 1080p since 2011 (AVCHD 2.0) ;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVCHD#...28AVCHD_2.0.29
I tested it successfully on 2 players (h264 @ 28 Mbps in 1080p50 burnt with ImgBurn on dvd+rw in AVCHD format created with TSMuxer).
I know about interframe, but it's way not good enough for 25p source. 50i or "better" in terms of motion source is ok, but anything <30p is far from being solid.
Everyone here knows what 60i is- it's quicker to type

I'm after a pattern which will do 25p to 60i by 13 steps (used in pro solutions) cadence. Because 25p already has a "limited" motion apparently using this technique doesn't really make it much worse after conversion.

Last edited by kolak; 22nd September 2015 at 12:14.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 12:16   #31  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by colours View Post
I take it that you're into prescriptive linguistics, which unfortunately (or fortunately!) isn't how English works. In my opinion, "60i" is more appropriate a description when there are 60 temporally distinct pictures than "30i", convention be damned. I'd spell out "30 frames/s" or "60 fields/s" if there was any risk of confusion, though.
I agree with this, but try to convince BBC guys They use i29.97, which is is apparently the correct way.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 12:17   #32  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by colours View Post
Anything involving interlacing is evil and you should not use interlacing ever. That said:

Code:
source
ChangeFPS(60) # or ChangeFPS(60000, 1001) depending on what you need
AssumeTFF() # or AssumeBFF
SeparateFields()
SelectEvery(4, 0, 3)
Weave()
As I said- way not good enough for a random source. To many motion adaptive artefacts! I've used interframe a lot, but only for 50i+ sources in terms of motion.

I need irregular pulldown- apparently something with 13 steps.
Would file with frame count converted this way help?

update: sorry I saw interframe word here Yes, something like this. I this the best what can be done?

Last edited by kolak; 22nd September 2015 at 14:13.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 13:01   #33  |  Link
colours
Registered User
 
colours's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolak View Post
As I said- way not good enough for a random source. To many motion adaptive artefacts! I've used interframe a lot, but only for 50i+ sources in terms of motion.

I need irregular pulldown- apparently something with 13 steps.
Would file with frame count converted this way help?
The only Google search result for "13 steps cadence" is just this thread, so I'm not entirely sure what exactly you mean, but if you meant 3:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2, that's for converting 24p to 50i, not for converting 25p to 60i.

The pattern for 25p to 60i pulldown is 3:2:3:2:2, which is what the script does. For 60000/1001 fields/s output, you can either convert to 60 fields/s first then slow it down by a factor of 1.001 (watch out for audio desync, etc.), or just convert to 60000/1001i directly.
__________________
Say no to AviSynth 2.5.8 and DirectShowSource!

Last edited by colours; 22nd September 2015 at 13:03.
colours is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 13:08   #34  |  Link
Music Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 1,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolak View Post
I know about interframe, but it's way not good enough for 25p source.
What did you expect ? Of course there are artifacts with interpolation, but how do you hope to transform 25p in "60i" without interpolation or duplication and without creating artifacts ?
Music Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 13:36   #35  |  Link
Music Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 1,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by colours View Post
I take it that you're into prescriptive linguistics, which unfortunately (or fortunately!) isn't how English works. In my opinion, "60i" is more appropriate a description when there are 60 temporally distinct pictures than "30i", convention be damned. I'd spell out "30 frames/s" or "60 fields/s" if there was any risk of confusion, though.
I understand that the word frame can have a larger signification and may refer to the number of instants captured by a camera, which are thus fields in the case of cameras making only interlaced videos.
But in the video encoding world, it's confusing ; all videos have a framerate, and as its name stands for, framerate is about the number of frames (which include top and bottom fields), not the number of fields (I mean for Avisynth, Virtual Dub, MediaInfo and all tools that display the framerate).
If it contains interlaced material, just type 30i, there is nothing more shorter and easy to type than this when speaking about a video containing 30 frames with 60 fields (I mean with the fluidity of interlaced videos, because we can of course also separate the fields of progressive videos).
I don't find good reason to speak in framerate about progressive videos and in fieldrate about interlaced videos, especially when calling it framerate in both cases.
60i is kind of pleonastic.

Last edited by Music Fan; 22nd September 2015 at 13:43.
Music Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 14:01   #36  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by Music Fan View Post
What did you expect ? Of course there are artifacts with interpolation, but how do you hope to transform 25p in "60i" without interpolation or duplication and without creating artifacts ?
Duplication is different than artefact. Duplication only affects motion, it doesn't break frame itself. It's about minimising visible artefacts. Interframe and other solutions create way to many for low fps sources at the moment, so not very usable in this case. You may find some 25p source which convert quite well, but we're talking about 'universal' conversion.

The only way is to play with pulldown- make it as smooth as possible.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 14:03   #37  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by colours View Post
The only Google search result for "13 steps cadence" is just this thread, so I'm not entirely sure what exactly you mean, but if you meant 3:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2, that's for converting 24p to 50i, not for converting 25p to 60i.
No, I need 25p to 60i to be as smooth as possible.

What about this one:

https://www.wetransfer.com/downloads...2130743/cd3e12

Is this not 3:2:3:2:2?

Last edited by kolak; 22nd September 2015 at 14:25.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 14:22   #38  |  Link
Music Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 1,643
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolak View Post
Duplication is different than artefact. Duplication only affects motion, it doesn't break frame itself. It's about minimising visible artefacts. Interframe and other solutions create way to many for low fps sources at the moment, so not very usable in this case. You may find some 25p source which convert quite well, but we're talking about 'universal' conversion.

The only way is to play with pulldown- make it as smooth as possible.
Ok, but I believed you wanted to avoid duplication too.
So actually you want to find a good duplication pattern.
I don't believe in miracle, if the new framerate is not a multiple of the original framerate, you will see judder (I mean with duplication).
Music Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 14:23   #39  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
I know, but this is better than all motion artefacts.
Question is: can it be done in many ways or just 3:2:3:2:2 (I think this is what I have been told as 13 step cadence)?

Last edited by kolak; 22nd September 2015 at 15:06.
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd September 2015, 15:16   #40  |  Link
kolak
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 2,265
Quote:
Originally Posted by colours View Post
Anything involving interlacing is evil and you should not use interlacing ever. That said:

Code:
source
ChangeFPS(60) # or ChangeFPS(60000, 1001) depending on what you need
AssumeTFF() # or AssumeBFF
SeparateFields()
SelectEvery(4, 0, 3)
Weave()
This will cause problems on some scene changes, no?

Is there a way to avoid it?
kolak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:54.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.