2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 Pulldown

[Undead Sega]

Hi, i dont know if this is the right place to ask this, but i was looking around the whole net and i couldnt find the exact topic for this subject on 2:3 Pulldown or 2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown, which from what ive read, it a way of making 24p film frame rate to PAL 25p frame rate without thr speed up and that i assume many studios who produce DVDs for the European market uses this method.

when i was searching for this requirement, alot was speaking of 3:2 Pulldown which is ought to be making 24fps to 29.97fps for the NTSC market (even though there is a way of having an NTSC DVD with 23.976 which is abit unfair), and that i get confused, even with reading an article in Wikipedia (before it was edited recently), the real term of it i assume is actually 2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown for making 24p to 25p. and around here even i cannot find this.

i am confused between 2:3 and 3:2 Pulldown, and i want to kbnow how to do this and make 24p to 25p without the speedup.

i would really appreciate this if anyone can help me. thanks look forward seeing your replies.

:D

[Guest]

i want to know how to do this and make 24p to 25p without the speedup. DGPulldown can do 24->25.

[Undead Sega]

DGPulldown can do 24->25.

oh okay, but in what way does that work? does it speed up or slow down? ord does it actually uses the method of placing or repeating fields in every single certain place?

how may i ask? does it follow the usual way of it usually done? (if u knoew what i meant there :D)

thanks though.

[Guest]

It uses the MPEG2 RFF flags to repeat fields as required. That is soft telecine.

I don't know what you mean by "the usual method".

[Undead Sega]

well, what i meant was, since u mentioned it uses MPEG2 RFF flags and its soft telecine, is that the method or the only method of 2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown, to make 24p to 25p?

or another way of 2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 pulldown?

[scharfis_brain]

sure there is another way:


xxxsource("24p.xxx")
selectevery(12, 0,0, 1,1, 2,2, 3,3, 4,4, 5,5, 6,6, 7,7, 8,8, 9,9, 10,10, 11,11,11) #go from 24p to 50p with dupes
resize(to-PAL-conformity)
assume?ff() #set desired fieldorder
separatfields().selectevery(4,0,3).weave() #reinterlace to 50i

but: you have to encode interlaced, thus reducing encoding efficency and quality!

It is better to encode a progressive(!!!) MPEG2 - Video with the following properties:
???x576@23.976 fps or 24 fps
then apply DGpulldown on it to make it virtually 50i.
This is technically the best processing you can do!


But remind:
- nearly all major film studios do speedup for their PAL releases. (2:2 Pulldown)
- Studios that either are to lazy, stupid, or want to retain the original speed of the movie will most likely to a blend-conversion to PAL from the NTSC-master.
- Only a very few studios will apply a proper 2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 Pulldown.

[Undead Sega]

- Only a very few studios will apply a proper 2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 Pulldown.

and this is what i intend to do, it cant be that hard for them, to even gain the oringal 4K masters on thier computer clusters and load it into DGPulldown, makes me wonder what is the film speed im watching here in UK cinemas.

anyways, thanks scharfis_brain for that, but i dont think i iwll go there, as i just want it to directly go to 25p and not excessing to something like 50p (dont know if it will actually be a nice true 50fps video).

anf from what u said there:
It is better to encode a progressive(!!!) MPEG2 - Video with the following properties:
???x576@23.976 fps or 24 fps
then apply DGpulldown on it to make it virtually 50i.
This is technically the best processing you can do!

does DGPulldown make it to 50i so i will have to deinterlace it to 25p?

also, from you speakings, what is the prefered method of :2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:2:3 Pulldown? retaining quality of this and that throughout.

[Didée]

Reminder: using pulldown for 24 -> 25, your resulting video will stutter two times every second. If you're sensitive to motion fluidity, this can drive you nuts.

[Undead Sega]

then that means i can do literally the same thing in TMPEGEnc by just inputting a video that has a 24fps and just set the Frame Rate to 25. right?

[Guest]

No, because then you will get frame duplication rather than field duplication. Frame stutter is much more objectionable than field stutter.

[Undead Sega]

but what is the difference really between the two?

and if major studios use the pulldown, wouldnt there be complaints on the stutter? either way, is there a way to fix that?

[Guest]

If you duplicate a frame you get one big jump every second (for 24->25). If you duplicate fields, you get two smaller jumps every second.

In North America, we get 3:2 pulldown for movies and I've never heard anyone complain about the field stutter. I've heard it said that Europeans can notice it when they come here, but I think it's an urban myth. :)

[scharfis_brain]

I've heard it said that Europeans can notice it when they come here, but I think it's an urban myth.

No it isn't.
Europeans complain a lot about 3:2 judder.
This is why the industries now produce 24p-capable devices.


btw.: I prefer 2 judders per second over 12 judders per second...

[Undead Sega]

Europeans complain a lot about 3:2 judder.

but isnt that making 24p to 29.97? usually, thats alot of interlced video there. :(

but the gfood point to this, is that the video still retains original audio quality and pitch, as well as length, thus progressive frames can be recovered using IVTC back to 24p (23.976 as it is an NTSC source) and from there, create a 25p video file :D

so using DGPulldown (which every studio sould use cause its free!:D) i can create this pulldown to making 25p (or 25i?) from 24fps films?

[Guest]

so using DGPulldown...i can create this pulldown to making 25p (or 25i?) from 24fps films? You cannot make real 25p or 25i using DGPulldown. What you can make is a *telecined* 25 fps stream, that is, a stream with the right amount of fields duplicated so that the frame rate is increased to 25 fps.

Example:

a b c d e f g ... (top fields)
a b c d e f g ... (bottom fields)

Now duplicate a field:

a b c c d e f g ...
a b c d e f g ...

The frames after the field duplicate will appear combed (but the next duplicate will line the fields up again, etc.). But the resulting stream is not interlaced, it is telecined.

[2Bdecided]

No it isn't.
Europeans complain a lot about 3:2 judder.Agreed!This is why the industries now produce 24p-capable devices.

btw.: I prefer 2 judders per second over 12 judders per second...Like most, I prefer 25p created by speeding the content up, rather than duplicating frames or fields. I hate smooth pans to have stop-start motion - it looks like a fault. (And yes, 3-2 pulldown looks like one long continuous fault!).

Worst of all is 60i 3-2 converted to 50i via a dumb conversion. I have one done without blending, just hard switching mid-field. The movement is so weird it looks like the camera was hand-cranked circa 1910!

Cheers,
David.

[Undead Sega]

ohh i see then.

well, DGPulldown is easy to obtain, but is it possible Avisynth to do this method?

also, who thinks of the idea of using MSU Frame Rate Conversion Filter and encode it at 25p? worth a try i guess.

[Guest]

well, DGPulldown is easy to obtain, but is it possible Avisynth to do this method? As has already been posted, you can do hard telecine in Avisynth, but not soft telecine.

also, who thinks of the idea of using MSU Frame Rate Conversion Filter and encode it at 25p? worth a try i guess. Have you thought that through? How would you do it? What is your script for it?

[Undead Sega]

As has already been posted, you can do hard telecine in Avisynth, but not soft telecine.

oh that, sorry about that, but i am not sure exactly what is the difference between soft and hard telecine?

Have you thought that through? How would you do it? What is your script for it?

well, its simple, take a script like this for example:

AviSource("video.avi")
ConvertToYV12().MSU_FRC(2, "slow")from that, it will do a decent job of interpolating frames doubled (from 24p to 48p) but your only encoding or capturing 25 frames, thus u would retain motion fluidility, quality, and having a video running at 25p.

[Guest]

It's already mentioned here that using RFF flags is soft telecine. Using the script scharfi gave is hard telecine. In the former case, the stream does not contain actual field duplicates but only flags telling the display process to present fields twice. In the latter case, the fields are actually duplicated in the stream.

You think decimating 48 to 25 is going to be smoother than field duplication? Try it and see.

[Undead Sega]

It's already mentioned here that using RFF flags is soft telecine. Using the script scharfi gave is hard telecine. In the former case, the stream does not contain actual field duplicates but only flags telling the display process to present fields twice. In the latter case, the fields are actually duplicated in the stream.

fair enough then, but would the results be the same though?

You think decimating 48 to 25 is going to be smoother than field duplication? Try it and see.

well, its worth a shot. im going to try it out on a 1080p trailer (MOV file, which some odd reason has like 600fps but reckoncs the actual moving frames are 24p) and will decimate it to 24p or 23.976 by cutting it down (or even use IVTC). from there, i will post an MPG or M2v of the decimated video and one will come after it showing the results.

[Undead Sega]

okay everyone, the trailer i was going to use was to the film The Dark Knight (sequel to Batman Begins), and as i have mentioned:

which some odd reason has like 600fps but reckoncs the actual moving frames are 24p) and will decimate it to 24p or 23.976 by cutting it down (or even use IVTC).

i have found out that internally, it is actually 20fps, because, when i have dumbed it down, i still see a further 4 frames inbetween moving ones at are static, thus made me think further on how studios release HD trailer in a compressed format, and that they even dumbed down the frame rate as well.

this however will give me a challenge, to take a source at 20fps to 25p. i am asking now if you would still recommend me to do this practice, cause now its a further 5 frames instead of 1 from the begining.

what do you think?

[Guest]

fair enough then, but would the results be the same though? I don't understand your question. The differences between the two processes have been clearly explained.

[Undead Sega]

I don't understand your question. The differences between the two processes have been clearly explained.

what i meant was, the results between the soft and hard telecine methods of pulldown.

also, do u think i shall go ahead from what i have posted earlier?

[Undead Sega]

okay, i have just discovered the true frame rate of the trailer, which is actually 23.917fps, which is a strange frame rate for an editor to compress a video to, but without a doubt using Total Video Converter, and using all the settings to keep the original parameters of the video has uncovered the frame rate when i outputted it to a lossless avi (which is what i will work from, looks beautiful as well).

so because of that, i have now the true frame rate, which is very close to 23.976 and from that to 24p.

[foxyshadis]

what i meant was, the results between the soft and hard telecine methods of pulldown.

also, do u think i shall go ahead from what i have posted earlier?

Soft telecine are just flags can be ignored by the decoder or changed at any time. Hard telecine has to be IVTC'd to completely recover progressive frames, and has to be completely re-encoded to change.

[Undead Sega]

okay, throughout the process, i have learnt that the filter seems to be a prototype from their WIP version of the current commercial filters of the frame rate conversion.

also, to gain better results (even with it being unstable), the filter requires the source to be absolute progressive and framerate has to be a whole number. So if u were thinking of bumping up from sources like 23.976 or from what ive been doing 23.917, u can sort of forget that, because this what courses to make alot of artifacts when creating an interpolated frame from a minor sortage of the frame itself (as it been not being a complete frame i.e Frame:1, 2, 3 not 1, 1.5, 1.75 etc).

either way, i sort of cheated by just trying out, thus i made the source from 23.917 to 24p (there was only a 1 frame stutter throughout, still not exactly perfect but very close) and from there, i frame converted it to 48p. the results was outstanding, as even though it didnt look perfect, the motion was very smooth and the frames itself was not bad, from there i downconverted it to 25p.

in the 25p video now, it obviously cut most of all the dodgy looking frames but still remaining a few, but despite that, i have more or less created a 25fps from a source that is near 24fps, but will do more practice.

-because the filter was a beta, this could be the reason why it isnt as perfect as the commercial filters they have on there site, thus a way to improve on this is to obtain a more stable version of the filter (the commercial filters) and im sure results will look alot better.

-another thing to point out is to literally have a source that is progressive and has a frame rate that is a whole.

if anyone has something (a video clip or whatever) that is what i was saying, i would like to use that as an example to try it out. hope all this helps, it is still going on. might upload the examples as well.

[2Bdecided]

There are plenty of other ways of changing frame rate - mvtools (for AVIsynth) comes with a very good function to do so: MVFlowFps2.

The point is that most people don't use these tools to go from 24>25 because a simple speed up or frame/field duplication is vastly preferable to the extremely slow and artefact prone result from such tools.

If you want to go the slow, difficult method which messes the picture up, that's fine - just understand that everyone else (including almost every TV broadcaster and DVD producer throughout the whole of Europe) uses a different method for several very good reasons, including speed and quality.

Cheers,
David.

[2Bdecided]

btw, there's another "method" that I didn't mention - speed 24p up to 25p because it was actually filmed at 25p in the first place. This is true of most European made-for-TV stuff, but also of some film, e.g. check the pitch of the audio of The Beatles film A Hard Day's Night and compare with the LP and CD - that film should run at 25fps - 24fps is 4% too slow.

Cheers,
David.

[Undead Sega]

btw, there's another "method" that I didn't mention - speed 24p up to 25p

i am very aware of that, something similar or i mentioned earlier on here, nad that it was soemthing i want to oppose on atm.

however, i have tried out DGPulldown and made a m2v that was 23.976 to set it to 25. and im sure u all realise that there really hardly is stutter or a difference.

is it really that difficult for studios to even do this?

[2Bdecided]

however, i have tried out DGPulldown and made a m2v that was 23.976 to set it to 25. and im sure u all realise that there really hardly is stutter or a difference.

is it really that difficult for studios to even do this?
It's not difficult - it's probably done the way it is because that's how it's always been done, and whether you think so or not, the stutter is noticable.

If you insert extra fields (as opposed to frames) you also have field-shifted video for half the time. In a broadcast environment, unless you have an intelligent final encoder, that's going to reduce quality and increase bitrate. It'll also reduce the quality on some flat panel TVs which will simply bob such content, approximately halving the perceived vertical resolution compared to the original progressive frame.

Cheers,
David.

[Undead Sega]

i see, but in a broadcast, and having them do this pulldown, isnt it usually the hard telecine? where most of the time quality does get reduced?

and also, regarding that, in TMPEGEnc, u can create an MPEG on 24p or 23.976p. may i ask, when doing so, does it physically create a 23.976fps file? or does it simply input flags while encoding for it to playback a film-look?

[2Bdecided]

Which country are you talking about? In the USA, it's usually hard telecine (as far as I can tell) - but I've read about intelligent encoders that can convert hard > soft.

In the UK, it's all 25p frames wrapped in 50i (apart from occasional field shift mistakes). So no quality reduction.

Cheers,
David.

[scharfis_brain]

commonly good DVB PAL-encoders are clever enough to encode the frames in progressive mode if th video is
- 2:2 Pulldown in correct phase
or
- slow motion/still

so we have quite acceptable image quality at 3 mbps AVG (DVB-T) with anamorphic 16x9 25 fps movies.

I guess, that hard telecined NTSC movies will look much worse at this bitrate.

[Undead Sega]

thats all good, but to let you know, i am from the UK.

and from what i know, TMPEGEnc Xpress is a very good encoder, infact, one of the best ive used, much more effiencent than TMPEGEnc Plus, but not quite many options as its predecessor, however, it has many more features.

afar from that, the reason why i ask this is because, i had the thought of taking a soft telecine video file and input it to VirtualDub, where i will frameserve it to TMPEGEnc Plus and encode it to another video file in which the frame rate is set to 23.976 or 24p. and from there, i was wondering if the final file would be soft or hard telecined.

also, can DVDs be hard telecined? or has to be soft telecined?

[Guest]

i had the thought of taking a soft telecine video file and input it to VirtualDub If it is soft teleconed, that means it is MPEG2. VirtualDub cannot read MPEG2.

If you use VirtualDubMod to read the file, then you will lose the telecining because VirtualDubMod ignores the soft telecine flags.

If you use VirtualDub MPEG2 to read the file, then you can either ignore the flags as above or you can "honor" them, which means the soft telecine will be converted to hard telecine.

where i will frameserve it to TMPEGEnc Plus and encode it to another video file in which the frame rate is set to 23.976 or 24p. and from there, i was wondering if the final file would be soft or hard telecined. See above. If you serve hard telecining at 29.97 into TMPGEnc Plus and set a frame rate of 23.976 or 24, you will get a mess.

also, can DVDs be hard telecined? Yes.

[Undead Sega]

If you serve hard telecining at 29.97 into TMPGEnc Plus and set a frame rate of 23.976 or 24, you will get a mess.

i am nto that clumsy to do that, but was ought to do was to serve a soft telecine of 23.976 and then serve it into TMPEGEnc, set at a framerate of 23.976, will you get a hard telecined file? and one probably with no mess and quality loss (lossless codec)?

Quote:
also, can DVDs be hard telecined?

Yes.

so would thatmean the DVD player would be reading them properly and not doing any sort of ignoring or pulldowns?

and in order to read a soft telecine file to serve, you would suggest VirtualDub MPEG2, instead of VirtualDubMod (which is what i use all the time, cause it is the best :D)

[Guest]

but was ought to do was to serve a soft telecine of 23.976 and then serve it into TMPEGEnc, set at a framerate of 23.976, will you get a hard telecined file? and one probably with no mess and quality loss (lossless codec)? You cannot frame serve a soft telecine stream. i.e., the frame served output cannot carry soft telecine. Furthermore, by definition, 23.976 is not telecined, so how could the result be hard telecined if you encode at 23.976? You are apparently confused about basic concepts.

so would that mean the DVD player would be reading them properly and not doing any sort of ignoring or pulldowns? Hard telecine has no flags so there is nothing to ignore. The player just plays it at 29.97 as per NTSC spec.

and in order to read a soft telecine file to serve, you would suggest VirtualDub MPEG2, instead of VirtualDubMod Again, you cannot frame serve soft telecine. My answer is clear from my previous post. If you want to ignore the soft telecine you can use VirtualDubMod. If you want to honor it, you can use VirtualDub MPEG2 (or DGMPGDec). But in no case can the soft telecine flags be preserved in the frame served stream. You can make hard telecine and frame serve that by honoring the soft telecine flags.

[Undead Sega]

okay then, so basically wat you saying is, is when u 'honor' the soft telecine in a program like VirtualDub MPEG2, does that mean you are making the program read the file as it was instructed in the flags from it being a soft telecine? and from there, you serve it to another encoder?

[Guest]

If you honor the flags in VirtualDub MPEG2 you create an internal hard-telecined stream at 29.97fps that can then be frame served to another application.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

VirtualDub cannot read MPEG2.
That's not 100% true :p

VirtualDub 1.7.7 supports Input Plugins and there is a MPEG-2 Plugin available.
The VirtualDub-MPEG2 mod is based on VirtualDub 1.6.19 and most likely won't be updated (as it's obsolete with the new Plugin system).
So I'd go with VirtualDub 1.7.7 and the latest MPEG-2 Plugin...

http://fcchandler.home.comcast.net/~fcchandler/Plugins/MPEG2/index.html

[Undead Sega]

If you honor the flags in VirtualDub MPEG2 you create an internal hard-telecined stream at 29.97fps that can then be frame served to another application.

so, if i create a M2V and soft telecined it by using DGPulldown at 23.976 from 29.97 which will now create another M2V but having flagged by the pulldown, from which i will input that into VirtualDub MPEG 2 and honor the flags, what will happen then?

That's not 100% true

i see, but i wish they continue work on VirtualDubMod, why did that ever stop?

[LoRd_MuldeR]

i see, but i wish they continue work on VirtualDubMod, why did that ever stop?
There simply was nobody willing to continue working on that project.

Also VirtualDubMod is based on an extremely old version VirtualDub!
Porting all the mods to a recent version of VirtualDub would be a bunch of work! Maybe more work than starting from the scratch.
I guess this is the primary reason why the development got stuck and finally was stopped.

Also what do you need VirtualDubMod for nowadays? Most of it's "additional" features are obsolete anyway:
MPEG-2, ASF/WMV and even FLV input is available in VirtualDub 1.7.7 through Input Plugins.
Furthermore the MKV support in VirtualDubMod is so outdated, I wouldn't use it today. Even the Matroska site says so!

Last but not least: Did you ever check out Avidemux as an alternative to VirtualDub?

[Guest]

so, if i create a M2V and soft telecined it by using DGPulldown at 23.976 from 29.97 which will now create another M2V but having flagged by the pulldown, from which i will input that into VirtualDub MPEG 2 and honor the flags, what will happen then? Consider it a test of your understanding to figure that out for yourself based on what I have already said (twice). :)

[Undead Sega]

i know i may sound stupid there, but sometimes i can be quite slow, thus why i asked twice and wanted to get an answer from a summed up question, hoping people here wouldnt mind, cause of my condition.

sorry:(

[foxyshadis]

Why would you even load it into virtualdub if you've already made the m2v and flagged it? Just import it into the authoring software.

[500 Kip]

@Undead Sega

I'd like to try and help clear up some of the confusion here!

All of the 'television' video formats suffer from these problems. (Computer playback of video with arbitrary resolutions and framerates is so much more straightforward!)

An NTSC TV displays video at 29.97 FRAMES per second, usually with a vertical resolution of 480 lines. Video sent to an NTSC television must match the NTSC standard or there will be no picture!

Video is sent to an NTSC TV at 59.94 FIELDS per second, these fileds have a vertical resolution of 240 lines.
A single NTSC video FRAME is made by combining 2 of these fields. If you consider a single FRAME then counting down from the top of the frame, the odd lines 1, 3, 5, 7 etc. come from the first field and the even lines 2, 4, 6, 8, etc. come from the second field.

2x240 line FIELDS at 59.94 FIELDS per second = 1x480 line FRAME at 29.97 FRAMES per second.

If your source material is from a television camera which records at 29.97 FRAMES per second then this is just saved at 29.97 FRAMES per second in the MPEG-2 stream, these are sent to an NTSC TV at 59.94 FIELDS per second and displayed at 29.97 FRAMES per second, easy.

But, if the source material is a motion picture film recorded at 23.976 FRAMES per second (films are actually 24fps but they are slowed down very slightly to make the numbers work for NTSC conversion) then this needs to be converted to 29.97 FRAMES per second in order for it to display at all on an NTSC television. This could be done by simply repeating one video FRAME every four FRAMES but it is usually done by repeating fields instead.
This FIELD repeating conversion is called telecine and is done by making 2 FIELDS from each frame and re-combining them in a repeating pattern to generate 29.97 FRAMES per second where there were only 23.976 before.
If an MPEG-2 stream contains 29.97 FRAMES of video per second then it must be from a TV camera or a hard telecined film source.
If an MPEG-2 stream contains 23.976 FRAMES of video per second and it has flags in the stream to indicate that certain FIELDS within those FRAMES should be repeated during playback (to generate an NTSC 29,97 FRAMES per second video) then it is 'soft' telecined.

So if your MPEG-2 video contains 29.97 FRAMES per second video, from a TV camera or a hard telecined film source then it is just decoded by the player and each frame is sent to the TV as is, it will display fine.

If your MPEG-2 contains 23.976 FRAMES per second video and RFF flags (soft telecine) then the player needs to decode the FRAMES, make FIELDS from them and then honor the RFF flags to generate the output FRAMES at 29.976 FRAMES by combining different combinations of FIELDS for each FRAME.

Now on your computer you have no such NTSC limitation, so you can watch 23.976 FRAMES per second video at 23.976 FRAMES per second.

If you have an MPEG-2 video that contains a 23.976 FRAMES per second video with the RFF 'soft telecine' flags, then all your player needs to do is 'ignore' those flags and display the MPEG-2 frames as-is.
If you have an MPEG-2 video that contains 'hard telecined' video at 29.97 FRAMES per second that was originally from a film source then you can just display it at 29.97 FRAMES per second with some repeated frames included OR you can use a filter to to an 'inverse telecine', this splits the FRAMES back into FIELDS then compares the FIELDS, removes the duplicates and recreates the 'original' film at 23.97 FRAMES per second.
If you have an MPEG-2 video that contains 29.97 FRAMES per second video from a TV camera (or NTSC camcorder) then you do not have any repeating FIELDS and you should just display it at 29.97 FRAMES per second.

FRAMEsever programs (AviSynth, Virtualdub) have the same limitations as above, they can only serve FRAMES of video, one at a time, to another application, (much as a player 'serves' frames to your monitor!) so you have to decide whether they will be serving those FRAMES at 23.97 per second or 29.97 per second based on your MPEG-2 source.

Glad I kept it short!

500

[2Bdecided]

Analogue video is sent as fields, not frames. But for the subject of soft/hard telecine, good explanation!

If you have an MPEG-2 video that contains 29.97 FRAMES per second video from a TV camera (or NTSC camcorder) then you do not have any repeating FIELDS and you should just display it at 29.97 FRAMES per second.You'd deinterlace it (e.g. bob) and display it as 59.94 new FRAMES (one from each FIELD) per second. You'd never show interlaced content at 29.97 original FRAMES per second on a PC because you'd see the interlacing.

FWIW you can always just bob everything to 59.94 new FRAMES per second and it'll look almost the same on the PC as it does on a TV - just "slightly" lower resolution. Progressive content would look much better handled correctly, but for the lazy, this saves you from thinking.

Cheers,
David.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

FWIW you can always just bob everything to 59.94 new FRAMES per second and it'll look almost the same on the PC as it does on a TV - just "slightly" lower resolution. Progressive content would look much better handled correctly, but for the lazy, this saves you from thinking.

Using a simple Bobber on progressive material will throw away half of the vertical resolution with absolutely no gain in temporal resolution.
I wouldn't call that slightly, but significantly! Also think of the nasty vertical shaking that unavoidably will be introduced by the bobbing filter!

If you want to be lazy, then use a "smart" Deinterlacing filter that will detect an pass-by the progressive frames unprocessed...

[Undead Sega]

Why would you even load it into virtualdub if you've already made the m2v and flagged it? Just import it into the authoring software.

because i want to hard telecine the file and as well to make a DVD that will be hard telecined, so it will display the actual film-look onto my TV set. i do not go for anything else when it comes to films that are released, because it is without doubt they are filmed at 24fps! (with the exception of B&W films, that is understandable) because going throguh all these methods to make NTSC and TV broadcasters happy, is just a mess, thus having this problem in the first place (not a big dealt o me anyways, thought i mention it as some might agree, though not my exact opinion).

i am in a PAL region, thus i do 25p, and if i ever where to film on actual 29.97 (even highly unlikely), i will still deinterlce it to 25p, unless i film on 30p or above, my goal has been acheived as i will dumb that down to 24p or 25p for some people's sake.

thus why studios have to do a good job when wanting to preserve their films when it comes on DVD in PAL regions (because it does stand for 'Perfect At Last' as opposed to NTSC 'Never The Same Colour), and inwhich i don't want to go through the phase of ripping my DVDs all the time and slow them down to 24p from 25p using VirtualDub, and talking about that, i would like to have these files to be hard telecined because for these programs to be read correctly when flagged and yet ignoring them.