BD Rebuilder Beta - Bug Reports Only

[MrVideo]

MrVideo thinks we don't know about hard telecine. Pedantry!
My response was to your posting about how true 1080i should not be IVTC. That is a very false statement.

I did not say that you, or anyone else, does not know about hard telecine. True 1080i has hard 2:3 pulldown telecine and the only way to remove the 2:3 pulldown, and return the video back to 23.976p, is to IVTC it. That directly contradicts your statement about it.

If you have some other magical way to return 1080i29.97 2:3 pulldown telecine video back to 1080p23.976, without using IVTC, I'm sure that we would all like the read about it.

[videoh]

True 1080i has hard 2:3 pulldown MrVideo believes true interlaced video must be hard telecined film. Nonsense!

[MrVideo]

MrVideo believes true interlaced video must be hard telecined film. Nonsense!
Explain your statement. Provide examples.

[geheim]

Hey jdobbs,
do you have any plans for adding UHD support to BD Rebuilder??

[Sharc]

@MrVideo
Unless I misread your posts it seems to me that you are putting "True interlaced" and "Telecined" somehow into the same "interlaced" basket.

True interlaced
Each frame consists of 2 fields taken at different points in time. Typical for footage shot with video cameras.
It can be re-encoded as interlaced, de-interlaced or bobbed, but NEVER IVTCed.

Telecined
It is NOT true interlaced. It may just use interlacing techniques for framerate conversion (e.g. 24fps film to 29.97fps).
Telecining can be done by
- "Soft telecining" using control flags (like RFF and TFF) which instruct the player how to play the fields and frames during playback (pulldown)
- "Hard telecining": The progressive and "interlaced" frames (with fields form differenst pictures of the original source) are hard coded in the stream.
- A "dumb" variant of telecining is simple frame repetition with horrible judder when played back at 29.97.
Telecined material can be converted to the original film sequence by discarding the flags or by applying IVTC (field matching + decimation). It shouldn't be deinterlaced, (and bobbing is not supported by BD-Rebuilder).

In short: "Telecined" (hard or soft) is totally different from "True Interlaced" and require different treatment. Tools however report hard telecined material typically just as "interlaced" and one needs to analyze the video manually to find out what this really stands for. (Therefore the warning in BD-Rebuilder against forcing IVTC on all "xxxi" sources and to invoke IVTC only when one is 100% positive that the video is telecined, i.e. not "true interlaced". In case of doubt it is better to re-encode hard telecined material as interlaced.)

[Glarioo]

Hey jdobbs,
do you have any plans for adding UHD support to BD Rebuilder??

And how do you rip your UHD Disc to your hard drive? That new copy protection (AACS 2.0) is still not cracked...

[geheim]

And how do you rip your UHD Disc to your hard drive? That new copy protection (AACS 2.0) is still not cracked...

I know that, but I'm not only talking about retail backups. I do have some UHD TV recordings which I'd like to burn to a UHD BluRay via BD-Rebuilder's Import feature.

I don't know any other software for simple UHD authoring, that's why I asked about adding UHD file support to BD Rebuilder.

[Sharc]

Too me it would seem correct to use IVTC_1080i=1 when the source is 1080i with 2:3 pulldown at 29.97 frames/sec. I have no idea what setting the option to 0 would do.
As I understand it, hard telecined material would be encoded as interlaced, unless one forces a deinterlacer to kick in (not recommended). You can however force IVTC for hard telecined material AND add the Deinterlacer_Type=3 (smart deinterlacer) in the .ini for "cleaning up".
Soft telecined 2:3 material can optionally be IVTCed (Settings menu).

[MrVideo]

@MrVideo
Unless I misread your posts it seems to me that you are putting "True interlaced" and "Telecined" somehow into the same "interlaced" basket.
Yes. And here is why:
True interlaced
Each frame consists of 2 fields taken at different points in time. Typical for footage shot with video cameras.
It can be re-encoded as interlaced, de-interlaced or bobbed, but NEVER IVTCed.
Ah, now I see where you are coming from. Our definitions of true interlaced are different. I can find no definition online that indicates that interlacing is reserved for only video from cameras and cannot contain 2:3 pulldown material. Many examples shows 2:3 pulldown telecine being saved to interlaced video. I actually have been capturing video from a company that is using repeat frame conversion to interlaced video, i.e., every 4th frame is repeated. I have no idea why they do that. The AVISynth IVTC plugins will work on that material as well, but I prefer to use SelectEvery() as that takes less processing time (therefore quicker).

Actually, for today's television and movie production, film is hardly ever used anymore. There are some films still shot on film, but no TV shows that I know of. So, telecining isn't done anymore, at least via the definition of telecining. The conversion of 23.976p video to 29.97i video is all done electronically. But, you already know that. IVTC is an old term that will stick around, as "inverse 2:3 pulldown" (I23P) isn't really going to stick. :D
- "Hard telecining": The progressive and "interlaced" frames (with fields form differenst pictures of the original source) are hard coded in the stream.
There is zero, I repeat zero, progressive frames in broadcast video. The video is 100% interlaced, i.e., true interlaced. Out of every 5 frames, it just appears that 3 of the interlaced frames are progressive. The same holds true for most of the DBS/Cable 1080i channels. As such, the true interlaced video contains 23.976 2:3 pulldown material. Video which I IVTC all the time.

HBO is the only one that I know of that tends to use "soft telecining." Those posted captures show up in VideoReDo with special markers showing where the pulldown flags are.

[MrVideo]

As I understand it, hard telecined material would be encoded as interlaced.
Correct. The only way that 23.976 2:3 pulldown can be done on 29.97 frame/s video is when the video is true interlaced. 720p59.94 video, on the other hand, has 2:3 pulldown applied to the progressive frames, where every 10 progressive frames contain 4 source 23.976 frames.

[malves]

Just click on "Donations" in the signature block below.

Thanks for thinking about me...

[Edit] I'm late with my answer again... this is becoming a habit.

There is a site for internet business that you can use other then Paypal. It is called Stripe at stripe.com. They get good reviews and handle large or small business accounts. Take a look and see what you think.

[AmigaFuture]

The BD I'm processing is called "Monty Python: Almost the Truth - The Laywer's Cut"...

I went back a few version of BD-RB using the same Config. Each did as I replied with until 50.14 which doesn't have IVTC_1080i=n added.

[06/09/17] BD Rebuilder v0.50.14
[07:48:15] Source: MONTY_PYTHON_D2
- Input BD size: 42.62 GB
- Approximate total content: [04:05:23.675]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE and MENUS mode enabled
- Quality: High-Speed Option (BD-25+), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [3-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=1 HD=0 Kbs=640
[07:48:17] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [07:48:17] Processing: VID_00000 (1 of 39)
- [07:48:17] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00000]
- [07:49:37] Reencoding video [VID_00000]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 29.970fps, 97,163 frames
- Inverse Telecining in effect (IVTC)
- Bitrate: 11,287 Kbs
- [07:49:37] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 1 of 2
- [07:49:37] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 2 of 2
- [08:13:28] Video Encode complete
- [08:13:28] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
- Track 4353 (eng): Keeping original audio
- [08:13:34] Multiplexing M2TS
- [08:13:34] CreateBDFiles() 00063 2004
[10:07:28]PHASE ONE aborted by user request

Which does the same thing. So, I'm checking into it more as I create the time to do so.

[ggtop]

Only if you want to give up 40fps. Don't worry, be happy.

Thank you for your Feedback.

ggtop

[ggtop]

Quote:
Originally Posted by ggtop View Post
Maybe you came across a regression issue...DGDecNV...

Or not. No indication of a DG problem. DG has nothing to do with multiplexing. If the poster doubts it, test DG stuff manually, outside of BDRB. Or not. No indication of a DG problem. DG has nothing to do with multiplexing. If the poster doubts it, test DG stuff manually, outside of BDRB.

Hi,

I have full respect of your work on DGDecNV and I use it personally with great results, but for the records: You are not understanding and quoting me incorrectly. I didn't say with any word it could be a problem with DGDecNV itself. I highlighted a potential issue with MULTIPROCESS and the way DGDecNV is called within BDRB.

ggtop

[videoh]

Thanks for the clarification, ggtop. Just wanted to avoid possible confusion. You've made great contributions!

[Sharc]

There is zero, I repeat zero, progressive frames in broadcast video. The video is 100% interlaced, i.e., true interlaced. Out of every 5 frames, it just appears that 3 of the interlaced frames are progressive.

Sure, and this is why I wouldn't call it "true interlaced" because the 2 fields of the "progressive looking" frames are taken from the same original film picture i.e. from the same point in time.
And yes, "true interlaced" may not be an official term. Nevertheless I like it and use it to distinguish "true interlaced video" from "progressive video using interlacing principles", like telecining.

[MrVideo]

Sure, and this is why I wouldn't call it "true interlaced" because the 2 fields of the "progressive looking" frames are taken from the same original film picture i.e. from the same point in time.
And yes, "true interlaced" may not be an official term. Nevertheless I like it and use it to distinguish "true interlaced video" from "progressive video using interlacing principles", like telecining.
You are going to love this. There is widespread industry use of 1080i 29.97 progressive segmented frame (psf or pf), where they shoot 23.976 onto 1080i29.97, not using 2:3 pulldown, but psf. So, your "progressive video using interlacing principles" is the industry's term for psf.

There are several professional editing systems that can deal with psf video.

You and I will never see psf video in the consumer arena.

As far as the industry is concerned, 1080i29.97 is interlaced, no matter if the video is from a 1080i/p camera, 2:3 pulldown of 23.976p video or repeat frame from 23.976p video.

[MrVideo]

The BD I'm processing is called "Monty Python: Almost the Truth - The Laywer's Cut"...
BTW, it is Lawyer. :eek:

Is this the U.K. or U.S. release?

You will not be able to IVTC this because the source of this is from the BBC documentary, which was shot at either 1080i25 or 1080p25.

The U.K. release will be interlaced @ 50 fields/sec., as required by the Blu-ray specification.

The U.S. release might be either 1080i29.97 or 1080p29.97. depending on how the documentary was shot.

IMHO, your only choice is to leave it at whatever format is on the Blu-ray.

[videoh]

You and I will never see psf video in the consumer arena. There are many consumer-grade cameras, ranging from DV to AVCHD, that shoot PSF. Canon makes several of them and we even have threads about them here.

[MrVideo]

I wasn't googling PsF. I was talking about 1080i23.976 PsF (sometimes labeled on tape slates as 23.98 PsF).

But, I did do a little looking and Canon seems to only use PsF on their 29.97p frame rate. If the camera is switched to 24p, it is true 24p.

Is there a consumer 23.976 PsF camera?

[AmigaFuture]

BTW, it is Lawyer. :eek:

Is this the U.K. or U.S. release?

You will not be able to IVTC this because the source of this is from the BBC documentary, which was shot at either 1080i25 or 1080p25.

The U.K. release will be interlaced @ 50 fields/sec., as required by the Blu-ray specification.

The U.S. release might be either 1080i29.97 or 1080p29.97. depending on how the documentary was shot.

IMHO, your only choice is to leave it at whatever format is on the Blu-ray.

U.S. release. Yeah, it was a typo I missed and I usually notice them all before clicking Submit Reply. Oh, well, the Earth is still spinning...and there are still many cellphone users who don't use any capitalization or punctuation in the world, hehe.

I started using IVTC_1080i=1 because I was testing it before checking if it's truly Interlaced or not. It wasn't a big deal, and I wasn't sure if it was BD-RB or not. But then I noticed the bug / problem and I'm trying to find what's causing that.

Since all the files are showing their sizes correctly...and if I have BD-RB exit, and start again...it still stops because of that error. I'll clean by BD LG drive and see if that produces a better rip, if that's it.

[Sharc]

....I started using IVTC_1080i=1 because I was testing it before checking if it's truly Interlaced or not. It wasn't a big deal, and I wasn't sure if it was BD-RB or not. But then I noticed the bug / problem and I'm trying to find what's causing that.....
So you are positive that the source which fails after IVTC during multiplexing is (hard)telecined, right?
Something which comes to my mind: Is it possible that the telecine cadence is badly broken or otherwise borked (e.g. by poor editing after telecining) and hence the IVTC algo is fooled leaving a stream which no longer is in synchronism with the audio, and hence the muxer throws an error? Just speculating.....

You could also change the IVTC algo and see if this makes a difference. In the .ini:
IVTC_METHOD=n #n = 0/1 = Default=1, 1=Use TIVTC for IVTC, 0=Use DECOMB for IVTC

Can you upload a few seconds of the source?

[Sharc]

You are going to love this. There is widespread industry use of 1080i 29.97 progressive segmented frame (psf or pf), where they shoot 23.976 onto 1080i29.97, not using 2:3 pulldown, but psf. So, your "progressive video using interlacing principles" is the industry's term for psf.
Oh yes, I love it. So there is an official term "PSF" for what I tried to
describe. I added it to my video vocabulary. Thanks!

Edit:
And how would you call and process this clip for playback on a progressive monitor?
http://www.mediafire.com/file/b770wew9m5rrc7b/ma_576i25.mkv

[MrVideo]

Is it possible that the telecine cadence is badly broken or otherwise borked
See my post above about this BD release. There is no telecine. The source is 25 frames/sec., from the BBC. It is standards converted to 29.97 fps.

As a side note: I try and buy anything that I want that was produced overseas at 25 fps, from amazon.co.uk, so that I get the original frame rate. That specifically includes all Doctor Who releases: BD and DVD.

[MrVideo]

Oh yes, I love it. So there is an official term "PSF" for what I tried to
describe. I added it to my video vocabulary. Thanks!
Actually it is PsF. My bad for using "psf" before.
And how would you call and process this clip for playback on a progressive monitor?
The source is 576/50i. Personally I would leave it alone and let the monitor do the work. If you deinterlace it and delete the original, you can never go back. There are those that I know that cannot stand the "jaggies" as a result of interlacing and deinterlace the video.

So, if you keep the original, you can deinterlace it yourself and produce a 576p25 video. The AVISynth plugins will handle it just fine.

[Sharc]

The source is 576/50i. Personally I would leave it alone and let the monitor do the work. If you deinterlace it and delete the original, you can never go back. There are those that I know that cannot stand the "jaggies" as a result of interlacing and deinterlace the video.

So, if you keep the original, you can deinterlace it yourself and produce a 576p25 video. The AVISynth plugins will handle it just fine.
Well well well ...... hold your horses and save your breath. :D
It's actually what one may call "field shifted progressive video" (or similar, if there exists an official term for it).
The ONLY correct way to restore the original is to apply Field Matching, for example TFM(), without decimation. Such material should NOT be deinterlaced (although some deinterlacers may produce more or less acceptable results, but try yourself).
To be honest, I recently fell terribly on my belly when I wanted to test and compare various deinterlacers on such "interlaced" footage, until a forum member (guess who) asked the question whether I am positive that this is really "True Interlaced".....

I posted this crap just to demonstarte how misleading "interlaced" alone can be..... But never mind (hopefully) ;)

[AmigaFuture]

@Sharc

Along that line "..how misleading 'interlaced' alone can be.." which is why I was using IVTC_1080i=1 with Setup's IVTC active. That was it, I didn't change any other settings. I figured that would probably result in what I was expecting. Then I noticed the other error, and thought it was related.

Interestingly, I loaded VideoTV Suite V5 and drug the 00000.m2ts from the ripped but not yet processed D2 on it and VideoTV Suite crashed. I thought that interesting, so loaded it again and drug the same file from a rerendered BD25 (without IVTC_108i=n), and it read it in fine. It might not mean much, I was surprised it crash since it handles most stuff very well.
Anyway, BD-RB handles the Monty Python BD files fine when I don't have IVTC_1080i=1 in use and doesn't present that error. Not meaning IVTC_1080i=n IS the error, I don't know what is at the moment. All file sizes are fine..

[MrVideo]

It's actually what one may call "field shifted progressive video" (or similar, if there exists an official term for it).
The ONLY correct way to restore the original is to apply Field Matching, for example TFM(), without decimation. Such material should NOT be deinterlaced (although some deinterlacers may produce more or less acceptable results, but try yourself).
Damn, that is very hard to see in the editing program that I use. Very easily missed.
To be honest, I recently fell terribly on my belly when I wanted to test and compare various deinterlacers on such "interlaced" footage, until a forum member (guess who) asked the question whether I am positive that this is really "True Interlaced".....
As pointed out in other postings, there really isn't a term called "true interlaced," other than to say that the video is 100% interlaced, no matter to content. VideoReDo declares it as interlaced (MBAFF). There is progressive video, and there is interlaced video. There is no inbetween.
I posted this crap just to demonstarte how misleading "interlaced" alone can be..... But never mind (hopefully) ;)
Progressive video converted to interlaced video, poorly, is still interlaced video. It is very unfortunate that the user that has the video has to know that it is screwed up. You just can't tell by quickly looking at it.

I have a bunch of DVCAM tapes that were recorded Sony DSR-20 decks. The sync detection was screwed up to the point that if I wasn't watching correctly, the A & B fields of a frame would get placed across two frames. While the video would play correctly at speed (downshifted one line), editing was a bitch because originally the edits were on frame boundaries, but now that boundary was spread across two consecutive frames. If I ever need to use the video on any of those tapes, I'll have to run it through AVISynth in order to correct it. But, at this point in time I have no need.

I do not know what the exact settings for TFM() would be to restore this video. If you have them, I'd like to try it in order to see the results.

[MrVideo]

BD-RB handles the Monty Python BD files fine when I don't have IVTC_1080i=1 in use and doesn't present that error. Not meaning IVTC_1080i=n IS the error, I don't know what is at the moment. All file sizes are fine..
As pointed out, since the source is 25 fps, IVTC_1080i=1 should not be there, since there isn't any 2:3 pulldown to IVTC. Using it should only result in video that just doesn't look right. It certainly shouldn't cause any errors.

[videoh]

It is very unfortunate that the user that has the video has to know that it is screwed up. You just can't tell by quickly looking at it. You want some metadata that declares "this video is screwed up"?

Actually, one can tell quickly by looking at it. You have to separate the fields and step through by field. Then, people with experience can immediately recognize the patterns.

With all due respect, it's pretty clear that you are lecturing us without that experience. Blind leading the blind! I wish I had time to correct more of your misconceptions.

[MrVideo]

Actually, one can tell quickly by looking at it. You have to separate the fields and step through by field.
The video editing software that I have does not allow stepping through by fields, only frames. At first glance it looks like a video that was produced @ 59.94 fields a second.

Hell, I don't even think that Adobe Premiere allows field stepping. It never did when i was using it way back when.

And what makes you think that you do not have misconceptions?

[AmigaFuture]

As pointed out,

Then why point to it again?

I decided to use IVTC_1080i=1 because I wanted to confirm something for myself. Weird stuff and all that is possible. I disabled all SUP. This is what happened.

[06/10/17] BD Rebuilder v0.50.23
[16:12:38] Source: MONTY_PYTHON_D2
- Input BD size: 42.62 GB
- Approximate total content: [04:05:23.675]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE and MENUS mode enabled
- Quality: High-Speed Option (BD-25+), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [3-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=1 HD=0 Kbs=640
[16:12:40] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [16:12:40] Processing: VID_00000 (1 of 39)
- [16:12:40] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00000]
- [16:14:56] Reencoding video [VID_00000]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 29.970fps, 97,163 frames
- Inverse Telecining in effect (IVTC)
- Bitrate: 11,287 Kbs
- [16:14:56] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 1 of 2
- [16:14:56] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 2 of 2
- [16:48:26] Video Encode complete
- [16:48:26] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
- Track 4353 (eng): Keeping original audio
- [16:48:31] Multiplexing M2TS
- [16:49:39] Processing: VID_00001 (2 of 39)
- [16:49:39] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00001]
- [16:52:05] Reencoding video [VID_00001]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 29.970fps, 90,158 frames
- Inverse Telecining in effect (IVTC)
- Bitrate: 11,302 Kbs
- [16:52:05] Reencoding: VID_00001, Pass 1 of 2
- [16:52:05] Reencoding: VID_00001, Pass 2 of 2
- [17:21:13] Video Encode complete
- [17:21:13] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
- Track 4353 (eng): Keeping original audio
- [17:21:19] Multiplexing M2TS

[...]

- [19:09:50] Processing: VID_00083 (39 of 39)
- [19:09:50] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00083]
- [19:09:55] Reencoding video [VID_00083]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 29.970fps, 98 frames
- Inverse Telecining in effect (IVTC)
- Bitrate: 1,895 Kbs
- [19:09:55] Reencoding: VID_00083, Pass 1 of 2
- [19:09:55] Reencoding: VID_00083, Pass 2 of 2
- [19:09:58] Video Encode complete
- [19:09:58] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
- [19:09:58] Multiplexing M2TS
[19:10:02]PHASE ONE complete
[19:10:02]PHASE TWO - Rebuild Started
- [19:10:02] Rebuilding BD file Structure
[19:10:05] - Encode and Rebuild complete
[19:10:05] JOB: MONTY_PYTHON_D2 finished.


Then the only change is, enabled all English...SUP.

[06/10/17] BD Rebuilder v0.50.23
[20:23:17] Source: MONTY_PYTHON_D2
- Input BD size: 42.62 GB
- Approximate total content: [04:05:23.675]
- Target BD size: 22.95 GB
- Windows Version: 6.1 [7601]
- MOVIE and MENUS mode enabled
- Quality: High-Speed Option (BD-25+), Two Pass
- Decoding/Frame serving: DGDecNV [3-way]
- Audio Settings: AC3=0 DTS=1 HD=0 Kbs=640
[20:23:19] PHASE ONE, Encoding
- [20:23:19] Processing: VID_00000 (1 of 39)
- [20:23:19] Extracting A/V streams [VID_00000]
- [20:25:35] Reencoding video [VID_00000]
- Source Video: MPEG-4 (AVC), 1920x1080
- Rate/Length: 29.970fps, 97,163 frames
- Inverse Telecining in effect (IVTC)
- Bitrate: 11,287 Kbs
- [20:25:35] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 1 of 2
- [20:25:36] Reencoding: VID_00000, Pass 2 of 2
- [20:58:59] Video Encode complete
- [20:58:59] Processing audio tracks
- Track 4352 (eng): Reencoding audio to AC3...
- Track 4353 (eng): Keeping original audio
- [20:59:05] Multiplexing M2TS
- [20:59:05] CreateBDFiles() 00063 2004
[20:59:23]PHASE ONE aborted by user request


All files look to be there and all sizes look to be valid.

[Sharc]

I decided to use IVTC_1080i=1 because I wanted to confirm something for myself. Weird stuff and all that is possible. I disabled all SUP. This is what happened..............

So it looks like the subtitles caused the conflict with the falsely (your experimentally) applied IVTC which changed the framerate of the video (decimation).
Anyway, I understand when you run BD RB with its default settings all is ok, right?

As a sidenote, if the BBC original was produced as 25i there is actually no need to convert it to 29.97i because 25i is perfectly blu-ray compliant even when upscaled to 1080i. So I wonder how the movie "benefited" from this unnecessary framerate conversion. But apparently the industry still locks some blu-ray players from playing 25 fps material. Oh well .....

[videoh]

The video editing software that I have does not allow stepping through by fields, only frames. MrVideo does not know about Avisynth and VirtualDub.

[Sharc]

Just to mention shekh's VirtualDub FilterMod based on 1.10.5 with some very useful extensions, e.g. wrt. video formats
https://sourceforge.net/projects/vdfiltermod/

[Sharc]

I do not know what the exact settings for TFM() would be to restore this video. If you have them, I'd like to try it in order to see the results.
It's as simple as this for this clip:
TFM()

alternatively, you may also want to try
telecide()

or in case you are using DGDecNV
DGTelecide()

[MrVideo]

As a sidenote, if the BBC original was produced as 25i there is actually no need to convert it to 29.97i because 25i is perfectly blu-ray compliant even when upscaled to 1080i. So I wonder how the movie "benefited" from this unnecessary framerate conversion. But apparently the industry still locks some blu-ray players from playing 25 fps material. Oh well .....
AFAIK, this was a 1080 production, not 576 upscaled to 1080.

I do not know of any Blu-ray players that are locked from playing 25 fps material. That said, I've not researched it either. I buy Samsung players. There are some monitors that do not, so that can cause an issue. But, pretty much anything these days will handle 25 fps material. That still doesn't stop the companies that release material that was originally 25 fps as 29.97 fps for the U.S. That is why I buy the U.K. releases so that I can keep the original frame rate.

[MrVideo]

MrVideo does not know about Avisynth and VirtualDub.
I just haven't used that combo in years. Never thought to use it in this case. I should have suspected something fishy as to why that video was being offered up for inspection. :D

[MrVideo]

Just to mention shekh's VirtualDub FilterMod based on 1.10.5 with some very useful extensions, e.g. wrt. video formats
Thanks, I've downloaded it. I hoping it can deal with H.264/4.2.2 video. CBS/CW network is now in the process of changing over their network feeds from MPEG2/4.2.2 to H.264/4.2.2. I can view the video with VLC, but can't currently edit and convert to H.264/4.2.0.

[MrVideo]

It's as simple as this for this clip:
TFM() [...]
I thought that not having any options (other than the defaults), was too easy. So, I asked.

[videoh]

CBS/CW network is now in the process of changing over their network feeds from MPEG2/4.2.2 to H.264/4.2.2. Please cite your source for this. Thank you. Are you possibly confusing internal feeds with what is actually broadcasted? If you are talking about internal feeds, it's hardly relevant to the average person capturing video from a broadcast.

I can view the video with VLC, but can't currently edit and convert to H.264/4.2.0. I suppose again you never thought to use Avisynth with an appropriate source filter.

[Sharc]

I just haven't used that combo in years. Never thought to use it in this case.....
How could you survive in the video world without these? :eek:

[Sharc]

Thanks, I've downloaded it. I hoping it can deal with H.264/4.2.2 video.....
Menu Video/Decode format .....

[videoh]

Simply cropping the first field will also match the fields on that sample, because the field shift is constant throughout.

[MrVideo]

Please cite your source for this. Thank you. Are you possibly confusing internal feeds with what is actually broadcasted?
Key words: network feeds.

This means the satellite transmission from NY to the affiliates. I receive those feeds on my 12' BUD. Yes, it has a limited scope of users.
I suppose again you never thought to use Avisynth with an appropriate source filter.
The nVidia card that I have doesn't support H.264/4.2.2, so I can't frame serve it to AVISynth via DGDecNV.

[MrVideo]

How could you survive in the video world without these? :eek:
Ever heard of VideoReDo?

[videoh]

I can't frame serve it to AVISynth via DGDecNV. There are other source filters.

[MrVideo]

There are other source filters.
I've never needed to have to look into them before. If you have any suggestions, please pass them along.

[videoh]

If you have any suggestions, please pass them along. Take up knitting?

[MrVideo]

Take up knitting?
I guess I needed to be more specific in my request. :eek: